INTRODUCTION: The impact of pelvic bone structure on fecal incontinence (FI) is unclear. We assessed the association between weight-adjusted pelvic area and FI.

METHODS: This was a population-based analysis of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey in 2005-2006. Participants who completed the bowel health survey and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry were included.

RESULTS: On multivariable analysis of 2,772 participants, the lowest pelvic area quartile predicted increased FI compared with the third (odds ratio [OR]: 2.05, confidence interval [CI]: 1.18-3.56, P = 0.014) and fourth (OR: 1.94, CI: 1.02-3.70, P = 0.045) quartiles. Sex-stratified analyses found similar association among female patients only.

DISCUSSION: Small pelvic area on dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry is a potential risk factor of FI.

INTRODUCTION: The management strategies for eosinophilic esophagitis include proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), swallowed topical corticosteroids (tCSs), elimination diets, and the biologic agent dupilumab, although there remains little guidance on the selection of initial treatment. We performed cost-effectiveness analyses to compare these approaches of first-line therapy.

METHODS: A Markov model was constructed from a payer perspective to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of first-line therapies for eosinophilic esophagitis, including PPI, tCS, and 6-food elimination diet (SFED), with crossover in treatments for primary and secondary nonresponse. The primary outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio at 2 and 5-year time horizons. Secondary analyses included modeling from a societal perspective that also accounted for patient-specific costs, as well as a separate simplified model comparing dupilumab with tCS and PPI.

RESULTS: In the base-case scenario (5-year time horizon), the average costs were SFED: $15,296.81, PPI: $16,153.77, and tCS: $20,975.33 as initial therapy, with SFED being the dominant strategy (more effective/less costly), while PPI offered the lowest cost on a 2-year time horizon. From a societal perspective, PPI was the dominant initial strategy on both 2 and 5-year time horizons. Among pharmacologic therapies, PPI was the most cost-effective first-line option. Dupilumab was not cost-effective relative to tCS, unless the quarterly cost is reduced from $7,311 to $2,038.50 per price threshold analysis under permissive modeling conditions.

DISCUSSION: SFED was the most effective/least costly first-line therapy from the payer perspective while PPI was more cost-effective from the societal perspective. PPI is also the most cost-effective pharmacologic strategy. Dupilumab requires substantial cost reductions to be considered cost-effective first-line pharmacotherapy.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease occurs when the barrier at the esophagogastric junction is weakened, allowing for transient relaxations of the lower esophageal sphincter or disruption of the esophagogastric junction. This leads to the refluxate traveling up the esophagus, and potentially into the pharynx, where it can be aspirated into the airway. The refluxate can cause a range of symptoms, including sore throat, coughing, wheezing, and shortness of breath, which may occur with or without visible airway inflammation. Both experimental and clinical studies have shown that aspirated refluxate can directly damage the airway lining and trigger immune responses that contribute to airway injury and inflammation. While traditional diagnostic tests for gastroesophageal reflux disease can identify abnormal reflux patterns, there is a need for more specific methods to predict airway inflammation or therapeutic outcomes related to reflux aspiration.