Consumption of excessive amounts of added sugars and their effects on human health has been a major concern in the last several decades. Epidemiological data suggest that the incidence of metabolic disorders, such as obesity, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, cardiovascular disease and diabetes, has increased due to chronic surplus consumption of these sugars. While many of these sugars have been isolated and studied for centuries, their health impacts and exact underlying mechanisms are still unclear. In this review, we discuss the pathophysiological role of 6 major simple sugars present in the human diet and the biochemical and molecular pathways related to their metabolism by different organs and gut microbiota, with a focus on the most recent investigations.

There are very few case reports of the diagnosis and management of concurrent oral cavity and parapharyngeal space tumors. We present a case involving a 49-year-old female who presented with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma confirmed by biopsy. Initial diagnostic workup revealed a concurrent parapharyngeal mass. Diagnostic studies and surgical therapy were tailored to account for both pathological entities. The patient was treated with a combination of surgery and adjuvant therapy. The surgical strategy was designed to address both lesions simultaneously. One year post-surgery, the patient had good response to therapy with no evidence of persistent or recurrent disease. This report discusses the outcome and treatment of a rare case of concurrent squamous cell carcinoma with a complicating parapharyngeal space tumor. It explores the diagnostic process, comprehensive workup, and the surgical management.

Background: /Aim: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) training requires varying degrees of staff assistance regarding operation of the fluoroscopy machine via a foot pedal. Efficiency is important to acquire during this training due to radiation risks. In this study, we evaluate the effect of controlling endoscopy and fluoroscopy unit on duct cannulation rates (CRs) and total fluoroscopy time (FT) for fellows in training. Methods: 204 patients undergoing ERCP were randomized to one of two groups: 1) “Endoscopist Driven” group in which the endoscopist controlled the foot pedal for fluoroscopy, and 2) “Assistant Driven” group in which attending or fellow controlled the foot pedal while the other team member controlled the endoscope. Various measures including selective duct CR and total FT were recorded. Results: There was no significant difference in mean procedure duration between the two groups (32 minutes vs. 33 minutes, p=0.70). There was also no statistically significant difference in CR (83.7% vs. 77.4%, p=0.25) or FT (3.27 minutes vs. 3.54 minutes, p=0.48). Conclusions ERCP is a technically challenging procedure which requires extensive supervision. This study demonstrates that CR and FT are not affected by who controls the fluoroscopy.

Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) is a useful diagnostic imaging modality in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). It provides unique information not available from other modalities, however, it is complex. CMR is not a single technique. Instead, it consists of multiple distinct techniques and a lack of understanding of which techniques to perform and how to interpret the findings in combination limits its efficacy and widespread use. Conversely, its multiparametric nature can provide a comprehensive assessment with the potential for higher accuracy than is achievable by other modalities. Moreover, its ability to directly assess myopathic processes often contributes insights that change patient management. In this article we provide a brief technical overview and focus on specific clinical scenarios in patients with known or suspected CAD. We highlight the multiparametric nature of CMR and discuss cases which illustrate the unique information that CMR can contribute.
Coronary Artery Disease* ; Coronary Vessels* ; Diagnostic Imaging ; Humans ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Objective: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy has shown activity against melanoma brain metastases. Recently, promising results have also been reported for ICI combination therapy and ICI combined with radiotherapy. We aimed to evaluate radiologic response and adverse event rates of these therapeutic options by a systematic review and meta-analysis. Materials and Methods: A systematic literature search of Ovid-MEDLINE and EMBASE was performed up to October 12, 2019 and included studies evaluating the intracranial objective response rates (ORRs) and/or disease control rates (DCRs) of ICI with or without radiotherapy for treating melanoma brain metastases. We also evaluated safety-associated outcomes. Results: Eleven studies with 14 cohorts (3 with ICI combination therapy; 5 with ICI combined with radiotherapy; 6 with ICI monotherapy) were included. ICI combination therapy {pooled ORR, 53% (95% confidence interval [CI], 44–61%); DCR, 57% (95% CI, 49–66%)} and ICI combined with radiotherapy (pooled ORR, 42% [95% CI, 31–54%]; DCR, 85% [95% CI, 63–95%]) showed higher local efficacy compared to ICI monotherapy (pooled ORR, 15% [95% CI, 11–20%]; DCR, 26% [95% CI, 21– 32%]). The grade 3 or 4 adverse event rate was significantly higher with ICI combination therapy (60%; 95% CI, 52–67%) compared to ICI monotherapy (11%; 95% CI, 8–17%) and ICI combined with radiotherapy (4%; 95% CI, 1–19%). Grade 3 or 4 central nervous system (CNS)-related adverse event rates were not different (9% in ICI combination therapy; 8% in ICI combined with radiotherapy; 5% in ICI monotherapy). Conclusion ICI combination therapy or ICI combined with radiotherapy showed better local efficacy than ICI monotherapy for treating melanoma brain metastasis. The grade 3 or 4 adverse event rate was highest with ICI combination therapy, and the CNS-related grade 3 or 4 event rate was similar. Prospective trials will be necessary to compare the efficacy of ICI combination therapy and ICI combined with radiotherapy.

Objective: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy has shown activity against melanoma brain metastases. Recently, promising results have also been reported for ICI combination therapy and ICI combined with radiotherapy. We aimed to evaluate radiologic response and adverse event rates of these therapeutic options by a systematic review and meta-analysis. Materials and Methods: A systematic literature search of Ovid-MEDLINE and EMBASE was performed up to October 12, 2019 and included studies evaluating the intracranial objective response rates (ORRs) and/or disease control rates (DCRs) of ICI with or without radiotherapy for treating melanoma brain metastases. We also evaluated safety-associated outcomes. Results: Eleven studies with 14 cohorts (3 with ICI combination therapy; 5 with ICI combined with radiotherapy; 6 with ICI monotherapy) were included. ICI combination therapy {pooled ORR, 53% (95% confidence interval [CI], 44–61%); DCR, 57% (95% CI, 49–66%)} and ICI combined with radiotherapy (pooled ORR, 42% [95% CI, 31–54%]; DCR, 85% [95% CI, 63–95%]) showed higher local efficacy compared to ICI monotherapy (pooled ORR, 15% [95% CI, 11–20%]; DCR, 26% [95% CI, 21– 32%]). The grade 3 or 4 adverse event rate was significantly higher with ICI combination therapy (60%; 95% CI, 52–67%) compared to ICI monotherapy (11%; 95% CI, 8–17%) and ICI combined with radiotherapy (4%; 95% CI, 1–19%). Grade 3 or 4 central nervous system (CNS)-related adverse event rates were not different (9% in ICI combination therapy; 8% in ICI combined with radiotherapy; 5% in ICI monotherapy). Conclusion ICI combination therapy or ICI combined with radiotherapy showed better local efficacy than ICI monotherapy for treating melanoma brain metastasis. The grade 3 or 4 adverse event rate was highest with ICI combination therapy, and the CNS-related grade 3 or 4 event rate was similar. Prospective trials will be necessary to compare the efficacy of ICI combination therapy and ICI combined with radiotherapy.