Background & Aims Infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which has been characterized by fever, respiratory, and gastrointestinal symptoms as well as shedding of virus RNA into feces. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published gastrointestinal symptoms and detection of virus in stool and also summarized data from a cohort of patients with COVID-19 in Hong Kong. Methods We collected data from the cohort of patients with COVID-19 in Hong Kong (N = 59; diagnosis from February 2 through February 29, 2020),and searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and 3 Chinese databases through March 11, 2020, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We analyzed pooled data on the prevalence of overall and individual gastrointestinal symptoms (loss of appetite, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal pain or discomfort) using a random effects model. Results Among the 59 patients with COVID-19 in Hong Kong, 15 patients (25.4%) had gastrointestinal symptoms, and 9 patients (15.3%) had stool that tested positive for virus RNA. Stool viral RNA was detected in 38.5% and 8.7% among those with and without diarrhea, respectively (P = .02). The median fecal viral load was 5.1 log₁₀ copies per milliliter in patients with diarrhea vs 3.9 log₁₀ copies per milliliter in patients without diarrhea (P = .06). In a meta-analysis of 60 studies comprising 4243 patients, the pooled prevalence of all gastrointestinal symptoms was 17.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.3–24.5); 11.8% of patients with nonsevere COVID-19 had gastrointestinal symptoms (95% CI, 4.1–29.1), and 17.1% of patients with severe COVID-19 had gastrointestinal symptoms (95% CI, 6.9–36.7). In the meta-analysis, the pooled prevalence of stool samples that were positive for virus RNA was 48.1% (95% CI, 38.3–57.9); of these samples, 70.3% of those collected after loss of virus from respiratory specimens tested positive for the virus (95% CI, 49.6–85.1). Conclusions In an analysis of data from the Hong Kong cohort of patients with COVID-19 and a meta-analysis of findings from publications, we found that 17.6% of patients with COVID-19 had gastrointestinal symptoms. Virus RNA was detected in stool samples from 48.1% patients, even in stool collected after respiratory samples had negative test results. Health care workers should therefore exercise caution in collecting fecal samples or performing endoscopic procedures in patients with COVID-19, even during patient recovery.

Objective: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) is associated with worsening of gastric atrophy, particularly in Helicobacter pylori (HP)-infected subjects. We determined the association between PPIs use and gastric cancer (GC) among HP-infected subjects who had received HP therapy. Designs: This study was based on a territory-wide health database of Hong Kong. We identified adults who had received an outpatient prescription of clarithromycin-based triple therapy between year 2003 and 2012. Patients who failed this regimen, and those diagnosed to have GC within 12 months after HP therapy, or gastric ulcer after therapy were excluded. Prescriptions of PPIs or histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RA) started within 6 months before GC were excluded to avoid protopathic bias. We evaluated GC risk with PPIs by Cox proportional hazards model with propensity score adjustment. H2RA was used as a negative control exposure. Result: Among the 63 397 eligible subjects, 153 (0.24%) developed GC during a median follow-up of 7.6 years. PPIs use was associated with an increased GC risk (HR 2.44, 95% CI 1.42 to 4.20), while H2RA was not (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.07). The risk increased with duration of PPIs use (HR 5.04, 95% CI 1.23 to 20.61; 6.65, 95% CI 1.62 to 27.26 and 8.34, 95% CI 2.02 to 34.41 for ≥1 year, ≥2 years and ≥3 years, respectively). The adjusted absolute risk difference for PPIs versus non-PPIs use was 4.29 excess GC (95% CI 1.25 to 9.54) per 10 000 person-years. Conclusion: Long-term use of PPIs was still associated with an increased GC risk in subjects even after HP eradication therapy.

Summary: Background: Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) cannot be completely eradicated due to the presence of covalently closed circular DNA (cccDNA) in the nuclei of infected hepatocytes. While quantification of intrahepatic cccDNA requires liver biopsies, serological markers can be non‐invasive alternatives to reflect intrahepatic viral replicative activity. Recently, hepatitis B core‐related antigen (HBcrAg) has been advocated as a novel serum marker for disease monitoring and prognostication of CHB.Aim: To examine the virological aspect and clinical application of HBcrAg with respect to the natural history and treatment of CHB.Methods: We reviewed all papers published in the PubMed journal list and abstracts from major international meetings that included the keyword “HBcrAg” or “hepatitis B core‐related antigen” until March 2017. Selected studies were compared and summarised on the basis of existing theories, as well as the authors’ experience.Results: HBcrAg exhibited good correlation with intrahepatic (ih) cccDNA, ih total hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA, serum HBV DNA and to a lesser extent HBV surface antigen (HBsAg). In situations where serum HBV DNA levels become undetectable or HBsAg loss is achieved, HBcrAg can still be detectable. This marker is helpful in differentiation of HBeAg‐negative chronic hepatitis from HBeAg‐negative chronic infection, predicting spontaneous or treatment‐induced HBeAg seroconversion, sustained response to nucleos(t)ide analogue (NA), risk of HBV reactivation in occult HBV infection under immunosuppressive therapies, and risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) development as well as post‐operative HCC recurrence.Conclusions: HBcrAg is a potential surrogate marker of cccDNA. It may soon become a useful marker for disease monitoring, predicting treatment response and disease outcome of chronic hepatitis B.

Novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs), which include direct thrombin inhibitor (dabigatran) and direct factor Xa inhibitors (rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban), are gaining popularity in the prevention of embolic stroke in non-valvular atrial fibrillation as well as in the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism. However, similar to traditional anticoagulants, NOACs have the side effects of bleeding, including gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). Results from both randomized clinical trials and observations studies suggest that high-dose dabigatran (150 mg b.i.d), rivaroxaban and high-dose edoxaban (60 mg daily) are associated with a higher risk of GIB compared with warfarin. Other risk factors of NOAC-related GIB include concomitant use of ulcerogenic agents, older age, renal impairment, Helicobacter pylori infection and a past history of GIB. Prevention of NOAC-related GIB includes proper patient selection, using a lower dose of certain NOACs and in patients with renal impairment, correction of modifiable risk factors, and prescription of gastroprotective agents. Overt GIB can be managed by withholding NOACs followed by delayed endoscopic treatment. In severe bleeding, additional measures include administration of activated charcoal, use of specific reversal agents such as idarucizumab for dabigatran and andexanent alfa for factor Xa inhibitors, and urgent endoscopic management.