- Joined
- Sep 26, 2004
- Messages
- 531
- Reaction score
- 11
Hey all;
Thought I might get some ideas over here in the GI forum for this one. I'm an MS2 trying to wrap my mind around the presentation of patients with liver/biliary disease, and I was just wondering if it's possible for patients to present with acholic stool phenomena (clay colored feces) in the absence of other signs and symptoms of disease (i.e., no fever, jaundice, pruritis, normal PE, etc). Or is the acholic stool something that always happens "downstream" of cholestasis such that you'll *always* see physical evidence of bilirubin in the blood FIRST before you see evidence of lack of bilirubin in the stool?
I've been poking around StatRef, Harrison's and Current Gastroenterology, and couldn't find this issue of "isolated acholic stool" presentation explored at all. It always mentions jaundice first and stool change later.
I appreciate any info on this you all could provide (or a direction to a source that has the answer?).
Thanks!
Thought I might get some ideas over here in the GI forum for this one. I'm an MS2 trying to wrap my mind around the presentation of patients with liver/biliary disease, and I was just wondering if it's possible for patients to present with acholic stool phenomena (clay colored feces) in the absence of other signs and symptoms of disease (i.e., no fever, jaundice, pruritis, normal PE, etc). Or is the acholic stool something that always happens "downstream" of cholestasis such that you'll *always* see physical evidence of bilirubin in the blood FIRST before you see evidence of lack of bilirubin in the stool?
I've been poking around StatRef, Harrison's and Current Gastroenterology, and couldn't find this issue of "isolated acholic stool" presentation explored at all. It always mentions jaundice first and stool change later.
I appreciate any info on this you all could provide (or a direction to a source that has the answer?).
Thanks!