Gastroenterology Consultations in Pregnancy

Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 1685 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI 53705-2281, USA.
Journal of Women's Health (Impact Factor: 2.05). 02/2011; 20(3):359-63. DOI: 10.1089/jwh.2010.2345
Source: PubMed


Training in gastrointestinal (GI) disorders in pregnancy is required for all gastroenterology fellows. Nevertheless, the actual role of the gastroenterologist in the management of pregnant patients is unknown. Establishing the characteristics of GI consultations in pregnancy can help focus trainee education and prepare gastroenterologists for future practice. The purpose of this study was to determine the indications for consultations in pregnancy and the gastroenterologist's role in the evaluation and management of the pregnant patient.
A chart review was performed of all consecutive outpatient GI consultations for pregnant women at a high-volume obstetrics hospital over a 3-year period. Referring source, patient characteristics, indication(s) for consultation, diagnosis(es), change in management after consultation, and need for follow-up were recorded.
We reviewed 370 charts. The mean age (±standard deviation [SD]) at referral was 28.7 years ± 6.5, and mean weeks of gestation (±SD) was 21.3 ± 8.8. Obstetrician/gynecologists requested most consultations (70.1%). New GI symptoms arising in pregnancy comprised 35.4% of consultations, and worsening of a preexisting GI disorder comprised 24.4%. The most common indications for consultation were viral hepatitis (20.2%), nausea and vomiting (18.9%), and nonspecific abdominal pain (13.5%). The most common diagnoses were acute or chronic viral hepatitis (17.8%), hyperemesis gravidarum (15.1%), gastroesophageal reflux disease (14.3%), and constipation (13.0%). Consultation changed the diagnosis in 25.1% of patients and changed management in 78.6%. Follow-up was required in 77.3% of cases during pregnancy and 37.8% postpartum.
GI consultation in pregnancy is sought more frequently for the evaluation and management of GI disorders not unique to pregnancy than for pregnancy-unique disorders. Although GI consultation changed the diagnosis in a minority of cases, it changed management in the majority. Gastroenterologists should be familiar with the most common indications for consultation in pregnancy and be prepared to evaluate and manage pregnant women with GI disorders.

Download full-text


Available from: Sumona Saha, Aug 21, 2014
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The treatment for constipation is symptomatic and must be addressed individually. After ruling out an organic origin, most of the cases can be attributed to a functional chronic constipation, which receives a gradual treatment that starts with some changes on the lifestyle (avoiding a sedentary routine, for example) and some dietary advice. All drugs that cause constipation must be removed or reduced, and a gradual increase in the fiber uptake (either with standard fiber supplements or included into the diet) and an increase in the liquid uptake are recommended. The second step includes osmotic laxatives. The best approach is the use of polyethylene glycol or lactulose. The third step involves stimulant laxatives, enemas and prokinetic agents. On the other hand, the purpose of biofeedback therapy is to learn about the defecatory dynamics, whereas surgery is only indicated for a minor proportion of patients who do not respond to conservative therapies.
    Medicine - Programa de Formación Médica Continuada Acreditado 04/2012; 11(6):337–346. DOI:10.1016/S0304-5412(12)70310-4
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To improve multi-disciplinary care in pregnancy, a gastrointesintal (GI) disorders in pregnancy clinic was created. Patient and referring provider satisfaction with this service was assessed. The first 100 patients and their referring providers were surveyed. Survey scores >3 on a 5-point Likert scale were considered favorable. Descriptive statistics were calculated and open-ended items were analyzed. Fifty-four percent of patients and 32% of providers returned questionnaires. All satisfaction items received an average patient score of >3.6 and provider score of >4.1, demonstrating overall satisfaction with the clinic. Referring providers were particularly satisfied. Patients and providers, in particular, report a high level of satisfaction with a GI pregnancy clinic.
    WMJ: official publication of the State Medical Society of Wisconsin 04/2013; 112(2):65-8.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Nausea and vomiting of pregnancy (NVP) is the most common medical condition during gestation, carrying tremendous health burden, especially for the severe form, hyperemesis gravidarum (HG). The rates of NVP in the USA have not been systematically calculated.Objectives To estimate the rates of NVP and HG in the USA. MethodsA meta-analysis was conducted of all peer-reviewed articles from the USA that provided rates of NVP in early or late pregnancy or HG. Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched from inception through November 2012; reviews and articles were hand searched. Rates were combined across studies using a random effects model. ResultsForty-eight articles were identified; 15 were rejected and 33 were included for analysis. Twenty-three studies of 67,602 women provided rates of NVP which had a meta-analytic rate of 68.6% (CI95%:64.4%-72.8%). Three of them (N=5034) reported nausea without vomiting in 28.6% and two studies (N=136) produced a rate for NVP during late pregnancy of 24.0%. HG occurred in 1.2% of the 2.1 million women in 12 studies. Conclusions We have summarized rates of NVP and HG, which are similar to those found in other parts of the world. Almost 70% of women suffer some form of the syndrome; 1.2% have the severe form, most of whom were hospitalized because of the HG. Future research should address issues of cost and resource utilization.
    The Canadian journal of clinical pharmacology = Journal canadien de pharmacologie clinique 07/2013; 20(2):e163-70.
Show more