PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Cecilio Azar

Publications and source records attributed to Cecilio Azar.

6 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2007

Clinical epidemiology of inflammatory bowel disease in Lebanon.

BACKGROUND: The objectives of this study were to determine the prevalence and incidence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in a representative Lebanese cohort and to describe practice prevalence trends, disease characteristics, and impact on quality of life (QoL) of IBD patients in Lebanon. METHODS: All of a university-based health program's 2000-2004 computerized records that listed a diagnosis of Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) were reviewed. In addition, data on patients seen in the gastroenterology clinics and data from the IBD registry at the American University of Beirut Medical Center (AUBMC) from the same period were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 15,073 insured individuals, 8 had a diagnosis of CD and 16 of UC, giving an age-adjusted prevalence of 53.1 per 100,000 people for CD and 106.2 per 100,000 people for UC. The mean age at diagnosis for patients with CD and UC was 28.8 +/- 11.1 and 32.0 +/- 13.4 years, respectively, and there was a slight female predominance. The mean annual incidence was 4.1 per 100,000 people for UC and 1.4 per 100,000 people for CD (range, 0-6.9/100,000 for both). Of the 10,383 patients seen in the gastroenterology clinic from 2000 to 2004, 251 (2.4%) had IBD (142 UC, 100 CD, and 9 indeterminate), a ratio that trended upward over time (range, 1.8%-2.7%). The median IBD Quality-of-Life (IBDQ) questionnaire score was 124.9 +/- 30.5, indicating that the disease had a moderately severe impact on QoL. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of IBD in this representative Lebanese cohort falls in the intermediate range of that reported for white populations in Europe and North America. Future studies are needed to examine local risk factors, disease genotypes and phenotypes, and epidemiologic time trends. The psychosocial burden of IBD in Lebanon appears significant.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

A randomized single-blind trial of split-dose PEG-electrolyte solution without dietary restriction compared with whole dose PEG-electrolyte solution with dietary restriction for colonoscopy preparation.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy preparation regimens are poorly tolerated, requiring the use of a large volume of an unpalatable solution and diet restriction for adequate cleansing. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of two regimens of bowel preparation before colonoscopy: a whole dose of polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution (PEG-E), with diet restriction vs. a split dose with no diet restriction. METHODS: A total of 141 patients (ages 20-84 years, 81 men) were randomly assigned to receive either 4 L PEG-E, along with a liquid diet the day before colonoscopy (Group A) or 2 L PEG-E with a regular diet the day before colonoscopy followed by another 2 L PEG-E on the day of the procedure (Group B). The quality of the preparation was graded by the endoscopist (poor to excellent), who was blinded to the type of preparation. Tolerability of the assigned preparation and adverse effects were recorded by an independent investigator by using a questionnaire administered before colonoscopy. Intra- and interobserver variability was studied by using randomly chosen videotapes of colonoscopies performed as part of the study. RESULTS: There were 73 patients in Group A and 68 patients in Group B. The quality of the preparation was significantly better in Group B ( p = 0.011). The tolerability of the preparation regimen was not different overall between study groups in terms of side effects (except for bloating, which was more frequent in Group B, p = 0.039) or willingness to repeat the preparation. There was a nonsignificant trend toward improved adherence to the assigned preparation in favor of Group B ( p = 0.062). Inter- and intraobserver variability analysis showed good to excellent correlation among endoscopists. CONCLUSIONS: Colonic preparation with split-dose PEG-E and no dietary restriction provides better quality colon cleansing than whole-dose preparation, with no significant impact on patient tolerability and side effects.

Adult↗