Humans

Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on Infection Prevention for Healthcare Personnel Caring for Patients with Suspected or Known COVID-19

Author/s: 
Lynch, J. B., Davitkov, P., Anderson, D. J., Bhimraj, A., Cheng, V. C. C., Guzman-Cottrill, J., Dhindsa, J., Duggal, A., Jain, M. K., Lee, G. M., Liang, S. Y., McGeer, A., Varghese, J., Lavergne, V., Murad, M. H., Mustafa, R. A., Sultan, S., Falck-Ytter, Y., Morgan, R. L.

Background: Since its emergence in late 2019, SARS-CoV-2 continues to pose a risk to healthcare personnel (HCP) and patients in healthcare settings. Although all clinical interactions likely carry some risk of transmission, human actions like coughing and care activities like aerosol-generating procedures likely have a higher risk of transmission. The rapid emergence and global spread of SARS-CoV-2 continues to create significant challenges in healthcare facilities, particularly with shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) used by HCP. Evidence-based recommendations for what PPE to use in conventional, contingency, and crisis standards of care continue to be needed. Where evidence is lacking, the development of specific research questions can help direct funders and investigators.

Objective: Develop evidence-based rapid guidelines intended to support HCP in their decisions about infection prevention when caring for patients with suspected or known COVID-19.

Methods: IDSA formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel including frontline clinicians, infectious disease specialists, experts in infection control, and guideline methodologists with representation from the disciplines of public health, medical microbiology, pediatrics, critical care medicine and gastroenterology. The process followed a rapid recommendation checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. Then a systematic review of the peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations.

Results: The IDSA guideline panel agreed on eight recommendations, including two updated recommendations and one new recommendation added since the first version of the guideline. Narrative summaries of other interventions undergoing evaluations are also included.

Conclusions: Using a combination of direct and indirect evidence, the panel was able to provide recommendations for eight specific questions on the use of PPE for HCP providing care for patients with suspected or known COVID-19. Where evidence was lacking, attempts were made to provide potential avenues for investigation. There remain significant gaps in the understanding of the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 and PPE recommendations may need to be modified in response to new evidence. These recommendations should serve as a minimum for PPE use in healthcare facilities and do not preclude decisions based on local risk assessments or requirements of local health jurisdictions or other regulatory bodies.

Evidence-Based Guideline: Treatment of Convulsive Status Epilepticus in Children and Adults: Report of the Guideline Committee of the American Epilepsy Society

Author/s: 
Glauser, T., Shinnar, S., Gloss, D., Alldredge, B., Arya, R., Bainbridge, J., Bare, M., Bleck, T., Dodson, W. E., Garrity, L., Jagoda, A., Lowenstein, D., Pellock, J., Riviello, J., Sloan, E., Treiman, D. M.

CONTEXT: The optimal pharmacologic treatment for early convulsive status epilepticus is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To analyze efficacy, tolerability and safety data for anticonvulsant treatment of children and adults with convulsive status epilepticus and use this analysis to develop an evidence-based treatment algorithm. DATA SOURCES: Structured literature review using MEDLINE, Embase, Current Contents, and Cochrane library supplemented with article reference lists. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials of anticonvulsant treatment for seizures lasting longer than 5 minutes. DATA EXTRACTION: Individual studies were rated using predefined criteria and these results were used to form recommendations, conclusions, and an evidence-based treatment algorithm. RESULTS: A total of 38 randomized controlled trials were identified, rated and contributed to the assessment. Only four trials were considered to have class I evidence of efficacy. Two studies were rated as class II and the remaining 32 were judged to have class III evidence. In adults with convulsive status epilepticus, intramuscular midazolam, intravenous lorazepam, intravenous diazepam and intravenous phenobarbital are established as efficacious as initial therapy (Level A). Intramuscular midazolam has superior effectiveness compared to intravenous lorazepam in adults with convulsive status epilepticus without established intravenous access (Level A). In children, intravenous lorazepam and intravenous diazepam are established as efficacious at stopping seizures lasting at least 5 minutes (Level A) while rectal diazepam, intramuscular midazolam, intranasal midazolam, and buccal midazolam are probably effective (Level B). No significant difference in effectiveness has been demonstrated between intravenous lorazepam and intravenous diazepam in adults or children with convulsive status epilepticus (Level A). Respiratory and cardiac symptoms are the most commonly encountered treatment-emergent adverse events associated with intravenous anticonvulsant drug administration in adults with convulsive status epilepticus (Level A). The rate of respiratory depression in patients with convulsive status epilepticus treated with benzodiazepines is lower than in patients with convulsive status epilepticus treated with placebo indicating that respiratory problems are an important consequence of untreated convulsive status epilepticus (Level A). When both are available, fosphenytoin is preferred over phenytoin based on tolerability but phenytoin is an acceptable alternative (Level A). In adults, compared to the first therapy, the second therapy is less effective while the third therapy is substantially less effective (Level A). In children, the second therapy appears less effective and there are no data about third therapy efficacy (Level C). The evidence was synthesized into a treatment algorithm. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the paucity of well-designed randomized controlled trials, practical conclusions and an integrated treatment algorithm for the treatment of convulsive status epilepticus across the age spectrum (infants through adults) can be constructed. Multicenter, multinational efforts are needed to design, conduct and analyze additional randomized controlled trials that can answer the many outstanding clinically relevant questions identified in this guideline.

The frequency and impact of undiagnosed benign paroxysmal positional vertigo in outpatients with high falls risk

Author/s: 
Hawke, L. J., Barr, C. J., McLoughlin, J. V.

Background
The frequency and impact of undiagnosed benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) in people identified with high falls risk has not been investigated.

Objective
To determine the frequency and impact on key psychosocial measures of undiagnosed BPPV in adult community rehabilitation outpatients identified with a high falls risk.

Design
A frequency study with cross-sectional design.

Setting
A Community Rehabilitation Program in Melbourne, Australia.

Subjects
Adult community rehabilitation outpatients with a Falls Risk for Older People in the Community Screen score of four or higher.

Methods
BPPV was assessed in 34 consecutive high falls risk rehabilitation outpatients using the Dix–Hallpike test and supine roll test. Participants were assessed for anxiety, depression, fear of falls, social isolation and loneliness using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Falls Efficacy Scale-International and De Jong Gierveld 6-Item Loneliness Scale.

Results
A total of 18 (53%; 95% confidence interval: 36, 70) participants tested positive for BPPV. There was no significant difference between those who tested positive for BPPV and those who did not for Falls Risk for Older People in the Community Screen scores (P = 0.555), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (Anxiety) scores (P = 0.627), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (Depression) scores (P = 0.368) or Falls Efficacy Scale-International scores (P = 0.481). Higher scores for the De Jong Gierveld 6-Item Loneliness Scale in participants with BPPV did not reach significance (P = 0.056).

Conclusions
Undiagnosed BPPV is very common and associated with a trend towards increased loneliness in adult rehabilitation outpatients identified as having a high falls risk.

Effect of age on treatment outcomes in benign paroxysmal positional vertigo: A systematic review

Author/s: 
Laurent, G., Vereeck, L., Verbecque, E., Herssens, N., Casters, L., Spildooren, J.

Background
Benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) can lead to an increased fall risk in older adults. Therefore, we examined the influence of age on the effectiveness of canalith-repositioning procedures (CRPs) for the treatment of BPPV.

Methods
Pubmed, Web of Science, and the bibliographies of selected articles were searched for studies conducted before September 2020 that examined the effectiveness of treatments for BPPV in various age groups. Meta-analyses were performed to compare treatment effectiveness and recurrence rates for younger and older adults. Odds ratios were calculated in a random-effects model. Mean differences were calculated using a fixed-effects model. A significance level of p < 0.05 (95% confidence interval) was set. The risk of bias and the methodological quality of all included articles were examined.

Results
Forty-five studies were retrieved after full-text screening, of which 29 studies were included for a qualitative review. The remaining 16 studies were eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis (3267 participants with BPPV). The success rate of a single CRP was higher in the younger group (72.5% vs. 67%, p < 0.001). An average of 1.4 and 1.5 CRPs was needed for complete recovery in the younger and older groups, respectively (p = 0.02). However, global treatment success did not differ between these groups (97.5% vs. 94.6%, p = 0.41). The recurrence rate was higher in the older population (23.2% vs. 18.6%, p = 0.007).

Conclusions
Although more CRPs are needed, the rate of complete recovery in older adults is similar to that observed in younger adults.

Effect of Amoxicillin Dose and Treatment Duration on the Need for Antibiotic Re-treatment in Children With Community-Acquired Pneumonia: The CAP-IT Randomized Clinical Trial

Author/s: 
Bielicki, J. A., Stöhr, W., Barratt, S., Dunn, D., Naufal, N., Roland, D., Sturgeon, K., Finn, A., Rodriguez-Ruiz, J. P., Malhotra-Kumar, S., Powell, C., Faust, S. N., Alcock, A. E., Hall, D., Robinson, G., Hawcutt, D. B., Lyttle, M. D., Gibb, D. M., Sharland, M.

Importance
The optimal dose and duration of oral amoxicillin for children with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) are unclear.

Objective
To determine whether lower-dose amoxicillin is noninferior to higher dose and whether 3-day treatment is noninferior to 7 days.

Design, Setting, and Participants
Multicenter, randomized, 2 × 2 factorial noninferiority trial enrolling 824 children, aged 6 months and older, with clinically diagnosed CAP, treated with amoxicillin on discharge from emergency departments and inpatient wards of 28 hospitals in the UK and 1 in Ireland between February 2017 and April 2019, with last trial visit on May 21, 2019.

Interventions
Children were randomized 1:1 to receive oral amoxicillin at a lower dose (35-50 mg/kg/d; n = 410) or higher dose (70-90 mg/kg/d; n = 404), for a shorter duration (3 days; n = 413) or a longer duration (7 days; n = 401).

Main Outcomes and Measures
The primary outcome was clinically indicated antibiotic re-treatment for respiratory infection within 28 days after randomization. The noninferiority margin was 8%. Secondary outcomes included severity/duration of 9 parent-reported CAP symptoms, 3 antibiotic-related adverse events, and phenotypic resistance in colonizing Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates.

Results
Of 824 participants randomized into 1 of the 4 groups, 814 received at least 1 dose of trial medication (median [IQR] age, 2.5 years [1.6-2.7]; 421 [52%] males and 393 [48%] females), and the primary outcome was available for 789 (97%). For lower vs higher dose, the primary outcome occurred in 12.6% with lower dose vs 12.4% with higher dose (difference, 0.2% [1-sided 95% CI –∞ to 4.0%]), and in 12.5% with 3-day treatment vs 12.5% with 7-day treatment (difference, 0.1% [1-sided 95% CI –∞ to 3.9]). Both groups demonstrated noninferiority with no significant interaction between dose and duration (P = .63). Of the 14 prespecified secondary end points, the only significant differences were 3-day vs 7-day treatment for cough duration (median 12 days vs 10 days; hazard ratio [HR], 1.2 [95% CI, 1.0 to 1.4]; P = .04) and sleep disturbed by cough (median, 4 days vs 4 days; HR, 1.2 [95% CI, 1.0 to 1.4]; P = .03). Among the subgroup of children with severe CAP, the primary end point occurred in 17.3% of lower-dose recipients vs 13.5% of higher-dose recipients (difference, 3.8% [1-sided 95% CI, –∞ to10%]; P value for interaction = .18) and in 16.0% with 3-day treatment vs 14.8% with 7-day treatment (difference, 1.2% [1-sided 95% CI, –∞ to 7.4%]; P value for interaction = .73).

Conclusions and Relevance
Among children with CAP discharged from an emergency department or hospital ward (within 48 hours), lower-dose outpatient oral amoxicillin was noninferior to higher dose, and 3-day duration was noninferior to 7 days, with regard to need for antibiotic re-treatment. However, disease severity, treatment setting, prior antibiotics received, and acceptability of the noninferiority margin require consideration when interpreting the findings.

Trial Registration
ISRCTN Identifier: ISRCTN76888927

Efficacy and Safety of Nonantibiotic Outpatient Treatment in Mild Acute Diverticulitis (DINAMO-study): A Multicentre, Randomised, Open-label, Noninferiority Trial

Author/s: 
Mora-López, L., Ruiz-Edo, N., Estrada-Ferrer, O., Piñana-Campón, M. L., Labró-Ciurans, M., Escuder-Perez, J., Sales-Mallafré, R., Rebasa-Cladera, P., Navarro-Soto, S., Serra-Aracil, X.

Objective:
Mild AD can be treated safely and effectively on an outpatient basis without antibiotics.

Summary of Background Data:
In recent years, it has shown no benefit of antibiotics in the treatment of uncomplicated AD in hospitalized patients. Also, outpatient treatment of uncomplicated AD has been shown to be safe and effective.

Methods:
A Prospective, multicentre, open-label, noninferiority, randomized controlled trial, in 15 hospitals of patients consulting the emergency department with symptoms compatible with AD.

The Participants were patients with mild AD diagnosed by Computed Tomography meeting the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to control arm (ATB-Group): classical treatment (875/125 mg/8 h amoxicillin/clavulanic acid apart from anti-inflammatory and symptomatic treatment) or experimental arm (Non-ATB-Group): experimental treatment (antiinflammatory and symptomatic treatment). Clinical controls were performed at 2, 7, 30, and 90 days.

The primary endpoint was hospital admission. Secondary endpoints included number of emergency department revisits, pain control and emergency surgery in the different arms.

Results:
Four hundred and eighty patients meeting the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to Non-ATB-Group (n = 242) or ATB-Group (n = 238). Hospitalization rates were: ATB-Group 14/238 (5.8%) and Non-ATB-Group 8/242 (3.3%) [mean difference 2.58%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 6.32 to -1.17], confirming noninferiority margin. Revisits: ATB-Group 16/238 (6.7%) and Non-ATB-Group 17/242 (7%) (mean difference -0.3, 95% CI 4.22 to -4.83). Poor pain control at 2 days follow up: ATB-Group 13/230 (5.7%), Non-ATB-Group 5/221 (2.3%) (mean difference 3.39, 95% CI 6.96 to -0.18).

Conclusions:
Nonantibiotic outpatient treatment of mild AD is safe and effective and is not inferior to current standard treatment.

Trial registration:
ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02785549); EU Clinical Trials Register (2016-001596-75)

Living Systematic Review on Cannabis and Other Plant-Based Treatments for Chronic Pain

Author/s: 
McDonagh, M. S., Wagner, J., Ahmed, A. Y., Morasco, B., Kansagara, D., Chou, R.

Objectives. To evaluate the evidence on benefits and harms of cannabinoids and similar plant-based compounds to treat chronic pain.

Data sources. Ovid® MEDLINE®, PsycINFO®, Embase®, the Cochrane Library, and SCOPUS® databases, reference lists of included studies, submissions received after Federal Register request were searched to July 2021.

Review methods. Using dual review, we screened search results for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies of patients with chronic pain evaluating cannabis, kratom, and similar compounds with any comparison group and at least 1 month of treatment or followup. Dual review was used to abstract study data, assess study-level risk of bias, and rate the strength of evidence. Prioritized outcomes included pain, overall function, and adverse events. We grouped studies that assessed tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and/or cannabidiol (CBD) based on their THC to CBD ratio and categorized them as high-THC to CBD ratio, comparable THC to CBD ratio, and low-THC to CBD ratio. We also grouped studies by whether the product was a whole-plant product (cannabis), cannabinoids extracted or purified from a whole plant, or synthetic. We conducted meta-analyses using the profile likelihood random effects model and assessed between-study heterogeneity using Cochran’s Q statistic chi square and the I2 test for inconsistency. Magnitude of benefit was categorized into no effect or small, moderate, and large effects.

Results. From 2,850 abstracts, 20 RCTs (N=1,776) and 7 observational studies (N=13,095) assessing different cannabinoids were included; none of kratom. Studies were primarily short term, and 75 percent enrolled patients with a variety of neuropathic pain. Comparators were primarily placebo or usual care. The strength of evidence (SOE) was low, unless otherwise noted. Compared with placebo, comparable THC to CBD ratio oral spray was associated with a small benefit in change in pain severity (7 RCTs, N=632, 0 to10 scale, mean difference [MD] −0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.95 to −0.19, I2=28%; SOE: moderate) and overall function (6 RCTs, N=616, 0 to 10 scale, MD −0.42, 95% CI −0.73 to −0.16, I2=24%). There was no effect on study withdrawals due to adverse events. There was a large increased risk of dizziness and sedation and a moderate increased risk of nausea (dizziness: 6 RCTs, N=866, 30% vs. 8%, relative risk [RR] 3.57, 95% CI 2.42 to 5.60, I2=0%; sedation: 6 RCTs, N=866, 22% vs. 16%, RR 5.04, 95% CI 2.10 to 11.89, I2=0%; and nausea: 6 RCTs, N=866, 13% vs. 7.5%, RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.78, I2=0%). Synthetic products with high-THC to CBD ratios were associated with a moderate improvement in pain severity, a moderate increase in sedation, and a large increase in nausea (pain: 6 RCTs, N=390 to 10 scale, MD −1.15, 95% CI −1.99 to −0.54, I2=39%; sedation: 3 RCTs, N=335, 19% vs. 10%, RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.03 to 4.63, I2=0%; nausea: 2 RCTs, N=302, 12% vs. 6%, RR 2.19, 95% CI 0.77 to 5.39; I²=0%). We found moderate SOE for a large increased risk of dizziness (2 RCTs, 32% vs. 11%, RR 2.74, 95% CI 1.47 to 6.86, I2=0%). Extracted whole-plant products with high-THC to CBD ratios (oral) were associated with a large increased risk of study withdrawal due to adverse events (1 RCT, 13.9% vs. 5.7%, RR 3.12, 95% CI 1.54 to 6.33) and dizziness (1 RCT, 62.2% vs. 7.5%, RR 8.34, 95% CI 4.53 to 15.34). We observed a moderate improvement in pain severity when combining all studies of high-THC to CBD ratio (8 RCTs, N=684, MD −1.25, 95% CI −2.09 to −0.71, I2=50%; SOE: moderate). Evidence on whole-plant cannabis, topical CBD, low-THC to CBD, other cannabinoids, comparisons with active products, and impact on use of opioids was insufficient to draw conclusions. Other important harms (psychosis, cannabis use disorder, and cognitive effects) were not reported.

Conclusions. Low to moderate strength evidence suggests small to moderate improvements in pain (mostly neuropathic), and moderate to large increases in common adverse events (dizziness, sedation, nausea) and study withdrawal due to adverse events with high- and comparable THC to CBD ratio extracted cannabinoids and synthetic products in short-term treatment (1 to 6 months). Evidence for whole-plant cannabis, and other comparisons, outcomes, and PBCs were unavailable or insufficient to draw conclusions. Small sample sizes, lack of evidence for moderate and long-term use and other key outcomes, such as other adverse events and impact on use of opioids during treatment, indicate that more research is needed.

Genome sequencing as a diagnostic test

Author/s: 
Costain, G., Cohn, R. D., Scherer, S. W., Marshall, C. R.

KEY POINTS
Genome sequencing is a comprehensive genetic test that is being integrated into health care systems internationally.

Test indications include suspected genetic disorders in children and adults for whom a targeted genetic testing approach is likely to be low yield or has already failed.

Analytic validity, diagnostic yield and clinical utility are similar or superior to other clinical genetic tests, such as exome sequencing, chromosomal microarray analysis and next-generation sequencing gene panel tests.

Appropriate adoption of genome sequencing as a molecular diagnostic test in Canada would be facilitated by a cohesive national strategy for genomic medicine.

Genetic testing of patient constitutional DNA (i.e., their genome) is increasingly performed in medical practice. 1–3 Sequencing an entire human genome (about 3.2 billion nucleotides) is now possible to complete in days to weeks, and at a similar cost to some advanced imaging tests or to a brief admission to hospital.3,4 Genome sequencing is being integrated into health care systems internationally, most notably in the United Kingdom.5 Starting in 2021, genome sequencing is being performed as a clinical genetic test in Ontario, Canada.

Extended follow-up of local steroid injection for carpal tunnel syndrome: A randomized clinical trial

Author/s: 
Hofer, M., Ranstam, J., Atroshi, I.

Importance Local steroid injection is commonly used in treating patients with idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome, but evidence regarding long-term efficacy is lacking.

Objective To assess the long-term treatment effects of local steroid injection for carpal tunnel syndrome.

Design, Setting, and Participants This exploratory 5-year extended follow-up of a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted from November 2008 to March 2012 at a university hospital orthopedic department. Participants included patients aged 22 to 69 years with primary idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome and no prior treatment with local steroid injections. Data were analyzed from May 2018 to August 2018.

Interventions Patients were randomized to injection of 80 mg methylprednisolone, 40 mg methylprednisolone, or saline.

Main Outcomes and Measures The coprimary outcomes were the symptom severity score and rate of subsequent carpal tunnel release surgery on the study hand at 5 years. Secondary outcomes were time from injection to surgical treatment, SF-36 bodily pain score, and score on the 11-item disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand scale.

Results A total of 111 participants (mean [SD] age at follow-up, 52.9 [11.6] years; 81 [73.0%] women and 30 [27.0%] men) were randomized, with 37 in the 80 mg methylprednisolone group, 37 in the 40 mg methylprednisolone group, and 37 in the saline placebo group. Complete 5-year follow-up data were obtained from all 111 participants with no dropouts (100% follow-up). At baseline, mean (SD) symptom severity scores were 2.93 (0.85) in the 80 mg methylprednisolone group, 3.13 (0.70) in the 40 mg methylprednisolone group, and 3.18 (0.75) in the placebo group, and at the 5-year follow up, mean (SD) symptom severity scores were 1.51 (0.66) in the 80 mg methylprednisolone group, 1.59 (0.63) in the 40 mg methylprednisolone group, and 1.67 (0.74) in the placebo group. Compared with placebo, there was no significant difference in mean change in symptom severity score from baseline to 5 years for the 80 mg methylprednisolone group (0.14 [95%CI, −0.17 to 0.45]) or the 40 mg methylprednisolone group (0.12 [95%CI, −0.19 to 0.43]). After injection, subsequent surgical treatment on the study hand was performed in 31 participants (83.8%) in the 80 mg methylprednisolone group, 34 participants (91.9%) in the 40 mg methylprednisolone group, and 36 participants (97.3%) in the placebo group; the number of participants who underwent surgical treatment between the 1-year and 5-year follow-ups was 4 participants (10.8%) in the 80 mg methylprednisolone group, 4 participants (10.8%) in the 40 mg methylprednisolone group, and 2 participants (5.4%) in the placebo group. All surgical procedures were conducted while participants and investigators were blinded to type of injection received. The mean (SD) time from injection to surgery was 180 (121) days in the 80 mg methylprednisolone group, 185 (125) days in the 40 mg methylprednisolone group, and 121 (88) days in the placebo group. Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed statistically significant difference in time to surgical treatment (log-rank test: 80 mg methylprednisolone vs placebo, P = .002 ; 40 mg methylprednisolone vs placebo, P = .02; methylprednisolone 80 mg vs 40 mg, P = .37).

Conclusions and Relevance These findings suggest that in idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome, local methylprednisolone injection resulted in statistically significant reduction in surgery rates and delay in need for surgery.

Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00806871 and NCT02652390

Itchy vesicles

Author/s: 
Colom, M., Stulberg, D.

A 58-year-old man presented to the family medicine skin clinic with a 4-month history of intensely pruritic vesicles on his forehead, back, elbows, dorsum of his hands, and knees. The patient also reported lesions inside his mouth; however, they were not visible at the time of the office visit. He had a history of psoriasis and Graves disease and had recently been given a biopsy-confirmed diagnosis of celiac disease.

What’s your diagnosis?

Subscribe to Humans