Purpose: Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are frequently used to treat gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in children, but recent evidence suggests a potential association between PPI treatment and some types of infections. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) for the prevention of gastrointestinal and respiratory tract infections in children with GERD treated with PPI (omeprazol). Methods: Children younger than 5 years with GERD were assigned by a computer-generated list to receive LGG (109 colony-forming units) or placebo, twice daily, concomitantly with PPI treatment for 4–6 weeks; they were followed up for 12 weeks after therapy. The primary outcome measures were the percentage of children with a minimum of one episode of respiratory tract infection and the percentage of children with a minimum of one episode of gastrointestinal infection during the study. Results: Of 61 randomized children, 59 patients (LGG n=30; placebo n=29, mean age 11.3 months) were analyzed. There was no significant difference found between the LGG and placebo groups, either for the proportion of children with at least one respiratory tract infection (22/30 vs. 25/29, respectively; relative risk [RR] 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66–1.10) or for the proportion of children with at least one gastrointestinal infection (9/30 vs. 9/29, respectively; RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.45–2.09). Conclusion LGG was not effective in the prevention of infectious complications in children with GERD receiving PPI. Caution is needed in interpreting these results, as the study was terminated early due to slow subject recruitment.

Purpose: To compare the effectiveness, tolerability, acceptability, and safety of sodium picosulphate with magnesium citrate (PS/Mg) and polyethylene glycol (PEG) in children (≤18 years) preparing for colonoscopy. Methods: Three electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched till July 2020. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. At least two authors independently selected studies and performed risk of bias assessment and data extraction. Results: Four RCTs (n=390), with overall good quality were included. A meta-analysis of two trials (n=224) found no statistically significant difference between the groups with respect to the proportion of patients who had excellent and good scores (≥6 points) according to the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (relative risk: 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.90 to 1.08). Excellent and good scores were observed in both groups in approximately 90% of children. A meta-analysis of two other trials (n=150) showed no significant difference between the groups with respect to the mean total score for the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale (mean difference: 0.20; 95% CI: −0.74 to 1.14). Both regimens provided a comparable safety profile; however, PS/Mg was significantly superior to high volume PEG in terms of tolerability (abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, bloating/flatulence/fullness) and acceptability (ease of formulation consumption, taste acceptance, need for nasogastric tube, compliance with full dose). Conclusion PS/Mg provides a quality and safety profile similar to PEG for bowel cleansing;however, it has better acceptance and tolerance in children preparing for colonoscopy.

Purpose: The Cow's Milk-related Symptom Score (CoMiSS™) was developed as an awareness tool for evaluating cow's milk-related symptoms in otherwise healthy children. Using a convenience sample of participants, this cross-sectional study aimed to determine CoMiSS™ values of symptomatic infants based on retrospectively or prospectively obtained information. Methods: CoMiSS™ values were determined in infants aged <12 months with symptoms suggestive of cow's milk protein allergy or functional gastrointestinal disorders. The exclusion criteria were previous diagnosis with acute or chronic disease, treatment with a therapeutic formula, and in case of breastfeeding, an elimination diet followed by the mother. Two CoMiSS™ values were assessed. A retrospective collection was defined as the collection of data after initial contact with the medical center but before the first medical consultation. A prospective collection was defined as the collection of data within 24 hours from the time of medical consultation but before starting any therapeutic intervention. The CoMiSS™ total and individual component scores obtained retrospectively or prospectively were compared between groups using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results: This study was performed between August and November 2019. Data of 110 children (62 males and 48 females), with a mean±standard deviation age of 18.2±11.7 weeks, were obtained. The total CoMiSS™ value (p<0.001) and some individual component scores (crying, regurgitation, and stool) were significantly lower when collected prospectively than when collected retrospectively. Conclusion CoMiSS™ values were retrospectively and prospectively determined. Lower CoMiSS™ values were obtained during prospective evaluation. Possible differences should be considered when using CoMiSS™ in clinical practice.

Purpose: The Cow's Milk-related Symptom Score (CoMiSS™) was developed as an awareness tool for evaluating cow's milk-related symptoms in otherwise healthy children. Using a convenience sample of participants, this cross-sectional study aimed to determine CoMiSS™ values of symptomatic infants based on retrospectively or prospectively obtained information. Methods: CoMiSS™ values were determined in infants aged <12 months with symptoms suggestive of cow's milk protein allergy or functional gastrointestinal disorders. The exclusion criteria were previous diagnosis with acute or chronic disease, treatment with a therapeutic formula, and in case of breastfeeding, an elimination diet followed by the mother. Two CoMiSS™ values were assessed. A retrospective collection was defined as the collection of data after initial contact with the medical center but before the first medical consultation. A prospective collection was defined as the collection of data within 24 hours from the time of medical consultation but before starting any therapeutic intervention. The CoMiSS™ total and individual component scores obtained retrospectively or prospectively were compared between groups using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results: This study was performed between August and November 2019. Data of 110 children (62 males and 48 females), with a mean±standard deviation age of 18.2±11.7 weeks, were obtained. The total CoMiSS™ value (p<0.001) and some individual component scores (crying, regurgitation, and stool) were significantly lower when collected prospectively than when collected retrospectively. Conclusion CoMiSS™ values were retrospectively and prospectively determined. Lower CoMiSS™ values were obtained during prospective evaluation. Possible differences should be considered when using CoMiSS™ in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Multiple laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of patients with diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially. APPROACH: An expert committee compiled evidencebased recommendations for the use of laboratory analysis in patients with diabetes. A new system was developed to grade the overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations. A draft of the guidelines was posted on the Internet, and the document was modified in response to comments. The guidelines were reviewed by the joint Evidence-Based Laboratory Medicine Committee of the AACC and the National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry and were accepted after revisions by the Professional Practice Committee and subsequent approval by the Executive Committee of the American Diabetes Association. CONTENT: In addition to the long-standing criteria based on measurement of venous plasma glucose, diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) concentrations in the blood. Monitoring of glycemic control is performed by the patients measuring their own plasma or blood glucose with meters and by laboratory analysis of Hb A1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, C-peptide, and other analytes are addressed. SUMMARY: The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.
Autoantibodies ; Biochemistry ; Blood Glucose ; C-Peptide ; Consensus ; Diabetes Mellitus ; Genetic Testing ; Glucose ; Hemoglobin A, Glycosylated ; Hemoglobins ; Humans ; Insulin ; Internet ; Joints ; Plasma ; Professional Practice ; Proinsulin