Fore! (We hear Augusta was nice this year.)

Masters Tournament (April 9-12)

Good morning. You've got five minutes, and we've got the week in medicine.

Here's what we've got for you:

  • 🧬 CRISPR just shrunk small enough to edit genes inside the body

  • 💊 Your gout patients' allopurinol might be protecting their hearts

  • 🤖 81% of doctors now use AI, but there's a catch

  • 🩺 The 3 AM chart that changed how one doctor thinks about documentation

🔬 ON THE HORIZON

CRISPR Just Got Small Enough to Edit Genes Inside Your Body

The biggest limitation in gene therapy just got solved. The best gene-editing enzymes have always been too large to fit inside the viral delivery vehicles (AAV vectors) that can reach specific tissues in the body.

Until now, that meant every CRISPR therapy worked the same way: take cells out, edit them in a lab, put them back. Fine for blood disorders. A dead end for diseases rooted in solid organs.

An NIH-funded team at UT Austin just changed that. They identified a miniature enzyme called Al3Cas12f, roughly one-third the size of standard Cas9, and engineered a version that hit over 80% editing efficiency in human cells. Some targets reached 90%.

Why it matters: The enzyme fits inside AAV vectors. That opens the door to in-body gene editing for conditions like cancer, atherosclerosis, and ALS. Animal studies are next.

Bottom line: This doesn't change your Monday clinic, but it changes the decade ahead.

Source: Guan et al., Nature Structural & Molecular Biology, April 13, 2026

📋 CLINICAL UPDATE

Your Gout Patients' Allopurinol Might Be Protecting Their Hearts

Treating to target in gout may be doing more than preventing flares. A large new study out of the University of Nottingham looked at nearly 110,000 adults with gout and hyperuricemia.

Patients who hit their urate target (below 360 µmol/L) on urate-lowering therapy had significantly fewer heart attacks, strokes, and cardiovascular deaths over five years, compared to those whose levels stayed elevated.

Here's the critical detail: patients who were on allopurinol but never reached goal didn't see the same cardiovascular protection. The benefit wasn't just from taking the drug. It came from actually hitting the target.

The clinical angle: If you're managing gout in primary care, rheumatology, or cardiology, this is a practical nudge. Titrating to target isn't just about preventing flares. It might be protecting the heart.

Source: Cipolletta et al., JAMA Internal Medicine, 2026;186(3):332🤖 AI IN PRACTICE

📊 AI IN PRACTICE

81% of Doctors Now Use AI, But There's a Catch

AI adoption just doubled in three years. According to the AMA's 2026 Physician Survey, 81% of physicians now use AI in their practice, up from 38% in 2023. More than three-quarters say it improves patient care.

The top uses: research summarization and clinical documentation. Seventy percent see it as a tool to reduce burnout.

But there's a tension underneath the optimism.

  • 88% are concerned about skill loss, especially those with fewer than 10 years in practice

  • Nearly half strongly oppose patients using AI to interpret radiology or pathology results

  • 85% want direct involvement in decisions about which AI tools get adopted

Bottom line: The profession is saying something clear: we're using it, we see the value, but we want guardrails. Especially for the next generation of doctors learning medicine alongside these tools.

Source: AMA Center for Digital Health and AI, Physician Survey on Augmented Intelligence, March 12, 2026

🩺 FROM THE FIELD

The 3 AM Chart That Changed Everything

Note: This is a composite narrative for template purposes, not a reported story.

Dr. Mara Osei couldn't remember the last time she finished charting before 10 PM. Four years into her primary care practice, most nights ran closer to midnight.

One Thursday, after 22 patients, she opened her laptop at 3 AM to finish a note on someone she'd seen 14 hours earlier. She couldn't remember if the patient said the chest tightness was on exertion or at rest.

She typed something reasonable. Closed the chart. Went to bed.

But the moment stuck. Not because of the clinical ambiguity. Because she realized she'd been making micro-compromises like that for months. A detail fudged here. A follow-up plan written from memory instead of from the conversation.

Then her system rolled out an ambient AI scribe. The first week felt awkward. A tool listening to patient conversations, drafting notes she had to review.

By week three, something shifted. She was leaving by 6:30. Reading her kids a bedtime story. And her notes were more detailed than the ones she'd been writing at midnight.

Not because the AI was smarter. Because she was reviewing notes while the conversation was still fresh, not reconstructing them from memory hours later.

The 3 AM chart was the last one she never wants to write again.

📝 BEFORE YOU GO

One question before you go: How heavy does your practice rely on AI?

Hit reply and let us know.

If you liked this, share The Consult with a colleague → theconsult.info

Until next time,

The Consult

Keep Reading