Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2006;332:276 (4 February), doi:10.1136/bmj.332.7536.276
Stuart McPherson, specialist registrar1, Colin John Rees, consultant gastroenterologist1
1 Department of Gastroenterology, South Tyneside Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, South Shields NE34 0PL
Correspondence to: C J Rees Colin.rees{at}sthct.nhs.uk
Four weeks ago (7 January BMJ 2006;332: 33
Mr Bond presented to our unit two months later with a further variceal bleed. This was successfully treated with injection sclerotherapy and he remained in hospital for 10 days. Measures to prevent further bleeding were considered. Measures available include avoidance of alcohol, drug prophylaxis, obliteration of varices with endoscopic sclerotherapy, or banding and insertion of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt.2 Although the shunt is very effective, the view of the regional liver unit during his admission was that an elective procedure to insert a shunt was inappropriate because Mr Bond continued to drink alcohol to excess and his bleeding had stopped. We were advised that should he have further bleeding his case should be discussed again.
Mr Bond represents a good example of a common problem encountered in our gastroenterological practice. Wider moral questions are raised about how far we go with the care of patients whose condition is due to their lifestyle. Similar issues could be discussed in relation to many other areas of health carefor example, people who continue to smoke or misuse drugs. Recent high profile cases of alcoholic patients undergoing liver transplantation have widened this debate to the media and general public.
In our experience, clinicians' treatment of alcoholic patients varies hugely. How aggressively patients are managed may depend on which unit a patient is admitted to or on which team is on call that day. Within our unit, colleagues have differing opinions about how far treatment should go in alcoholic patients, particularly those with recurrent admissions. It seems appropriate to limit some treatments such as liver transplantation in patients who continue to drink. Here the resources are particularly scarce and continued drinking will reverse the benefit of transplantation. At the other end of the therapeutic spectrum, withholding basic interventions such as fluid resuscitation in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding seems inappropriate. Limiting treatment somewhere between these two extremes may, however, be appropriate. There are no easy answers, but we need to develop clearer guidelines and a more consistent approach so that a patient's outcome does not depend on where and which day they are admitted.
|
Competing interests: None declared.
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?