-
Annals of Surgical Oncology Oct 2014This study was designed to compare the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent limited resection (LR) versus pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for duodenal... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
This study was designed to compare the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent limited resection (LR) versus pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs).
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify studies analyzing the clinical outcomes of LR and PD for duodenal GISTs.
RESULTS
Eleven studies were included, of which 7 that compared 162 patients who underwent LR versus 98 patients who underwent PD were suitable for meta-analysis. Patients who underwent PD were more likely to have tumors which were large (≥ 5 cm) [76.0 vs. 36.6 %, odds ratio (OR) 5.49, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.8-16.76], with high mitotic count ≥5/50 high-power field (HPF) (33.7 vs. 18.5 %, OR 2.23, 95 % CI 1.22-4.08), classified as high risk (60.3 vs. 32.0 %, OR 3.23, 95 % CI 1.65-6.34), and which were located at D2 (80.5 vs. 28.6 %, OR 10.33, 95 % CI 5.22-20.47) compared with LR. PD was associated with a higher postoperative morbidity rate than LR [48.3 vs. 20.7 %, relative risk (RR) 2.34, 95 % CI 1.61-3.42]. LR was not associated with an increased local recurrence rate, had a better DFS [hazard ratio (HR) 2.07, 95 % CI 1.07-4.01], and lower rate of distant metastasis (8.9 vs. 25.8 %, OR 0.28, 95 % CI 0.13-0.59) compared with PD.
CONCLUSIONS
LR should be the procedure of choice for duodenal GIST whenever technically feasible, because it is associated with good oncologic outcomes and lower morbidity compared with PD. The oncologic outcome of GIST is more likely to be dependent on tumor biology rather that the type of surgical resection. The use of Imatinib in patients with duodenal GIST may potentially allow a proportion of patients who would otherwise require a PD to undergo LR instead.
Topics: Duodenal Neoplasms; Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors; Humans; Pancreatectomy; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Prognosis
PubMed: 24854490
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-014-3788-1 -
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics Sep 2021The prevalence of duodenogastroesophageal reflux (DGER) and its effect on symptoms and oesophageal lesions in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is unclear. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The prevalence of duodenogastroesophageal reflux (DGER) and its effect on symptoms and oesophageal lesions in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is unclear.
AIMS
To conduct a systematic review to determine the prevalence of DGER among patients with GERD, the effect of DGER on symptoms and oesophageal lesions, and the treatment of DGER.
METHODS
We searched Pubmed and MEDLINE for full text, English language articles until October 2020 that evaluated DGER prevalence among patients with GERD, the effect of DGER on symptoms and oesophageal lesions, and the treatment of DGER.
RESULTS
We identified 3891 reports and included 35 which analysed DGER prevalence in GERD, 15 which evaluated its effect in non-erosive reflux disease (NERD), 17 on erosive oesophagitis, 23 in Barrett's, and 13 which evaluated the treatment of DGER. The prevalence of DGER, when evaluated by Bilitec, among all GERD patients ranged from 10% to 97%, in NERD 10%-63%, in erosive oesophagitis 22%-80% and in Barrett's 50%-100%. There were no differences in the presence or degree of DGER among patients who were asymptomatic or symptomatic on proton pump inhibitors (PPI). The most commonly evaluated treatments for DGER were PPIs and DGER reduced post-PPI therapy in all studies.
CONCLUSIONS
The prevalence of DGER increased with more advanced oesophageal lesions and did not explain persisting symptoms among patients taking PPI therapy. PPIs appear to be effective in the treatment of DGER. DGER remains an important consideration in patients with GERD and future therapies deserve more study.
Topics: Duodenogastric Reflux; Esophagitis, Peptic; Gastroesophageal Reflux; Humans; Prevalence; Proton Pump Inhibitors
PubMed: 34313333
DOI: 10.1111/apt.16533 -
Pediatric Surgery International Nov 2022To assess the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic versus open repair of congenital duodenal obstruction (CDO), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis (CDO). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To assess the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic versus open repair of congenital duodenal obstruction (CDO), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis (CDO).
METHODS
A literature search was conducted to identify studies that compared laparoscopic surgery (LS) and open surgery (OS) for neonates with CDO. Meta-analysis was used to pool and compare variables such as operative time, time to feeding, length of hospital stay, anastomotic leak or stricture, postoperative ileus, wound infection, and overall postoperative complications.
RESULTS
Among the 1348 neonatal participants with CDO in the ten studies, 304 received LS and 1044 received OS. When compared to the OS approach, the LS approach resulted in shorter hospital stays, faster time to initial and full feeding, longer operative time, and less wound infection. However, no significant difference in secondary outcomes such as anastomotic leak or stricture, postoperative ileus, and overall postoperative complications was found between LS and OS.
CONCLUSIONS
LS is a safe, feasible and effective surgical procedure for neonatal CDO when compared to OS. Compared with OS, LS has a faster time to feeding, a shorter hospital stay, and less wound infection. Furthermore, in terms of anastomotic leak or stricture, postoperative ileus, and overall postoperative complications, LS is equivalent to OS. We conclude that LS should be considered an acceptable option for CDO.
Topics: Anastomotic Leak; Constriction, Pathologic; Duodenal Obstruction; Humans; Ileus; Infant, Newborn; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Postoperative Complications; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Wound Infection
PubMed: 36053328
DOI: 10.1007/s00383-022-05209-9 -
Clinical Otolaryngology : Official... Jul 2023To investigate the association between laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and recalcitrant chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the association between laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and recalcitrant chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS).
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Cochrane Library and Scopus.
REVIEW METHODS
Three investigators searched the specified databases for studies investigating the relationship between LPR, GERD and recalcitrant CRS with or without polyposis. The following outcomes were investigated with PRISMA criteria: age; gender; reflux and CRS diagnosis; association outcomes and potential treatment outcomes. The authors performed a bias analysis of papers and provided recommendations for future studies.
RESULTS
A total of 17 studies investigated the association between reflux and recalcitrant CRS. According to pharyngeal pH monitoring, 54% of patients with recalcitrant CRS reported hypo or nasopharyngeal acid reflux events. The number of hypo- and nasopharyngeal acid reflux events was significantly higher in patients compared to healthy individuals in 4 and 2 studies, respectively. Only one study did not report intergroup differences. The proportion of GERD was significantly higher in CRS patients compared to controls, with a prevalence ranging from 32% to 91% of cases. No author considered nonacid reflux events. There was significant heterogeneity in the inclusion criteria; definition of reflux and association outcomes, limiting the ability to draw clear conclusions. Pepsin was found in sinonasal secretions more frequently in CRS patients than controls.
CONCLUSION
Laryngopharyngeal reflux and GERD may be contributing factors of CRS therapeutic resistance, but future studies are needed to confirm the association considering nonacid reflux events.
Topics: Humans; Laryngopharyngeal Reflux; Esophagitis, Peptic; Pepsin A; Sinusitis
PubMed: 36895147
DOI: 10.1111/coa.14047 -
The Surgeon : Journal of the Royal... Apr 2023A large proportion of patients diagnosed with inflammatory bowel disease are obese. Outcomes of bariatric surgery in patients with IBD and on IBD disease course itself... (Review)
Review
A large proportion of patients diagnosed with inflammatory bowel disease are obese. Outcomes of bariatric surgery in patients with IBD and on IBD disease course itself is not clear. Furthermore, there is some evidence that bariatric surgery can precipitate the development of de-novo IBD. Thus, the aim of this systematic review was to summarise the evidence from the literature surrounding these questions. A comprehensive literature review was conducted based on the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines (PRISMA). PUBMED, and MEDLINE databases was searched using a combination of keywords and MeSH terms including "gastric bypass", "sleeve gastrectomy", "Roux-en-Y", "Duodenal switch", "RYGB", "bariatric surgery" and "inflammatory bowel disease", "Crohn's disease" ,"Ulcerative colitis". Studies published up to March 2020 were included in this analysis. 22 studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies revealed that bariatric surgery is safe and effective for patients with IBD and resulted in significant weight loss at both the 6-month and 12-month time points. Furthermore, multiple studies reported de-novo IBD development following bariatric surgery in a selection of patients.
Topics: Humans; Obesity, Morbid; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases; Bariatric Surgery; Obesity; Gastric Bypass; Gastrectomy; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 35660070
DOI: 10.1016/j.surge.2022.04.008 -
Arab Journal of Gastroenterology : the... Sep 2020Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) is one of the most common gastrointestinal disorders worldwide. Recent epidemiologic studies have suggested the protective effect of statins... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES
Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) is one of the most common gastrointestinal disorders worldwide. Recent epidemiologic studies have suggested the protective effect of statins against the development of PUD although the results were inconsistent. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted with the aim to summarise all available data.
METHODS
A literature review was performed using MEDLINE and EMBASE database from inception to December 2017. Cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies that compared the risk of PUD among statins users versus non-users were included. Pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random-effect, generic inverse variance method.
RESULTS
A total of 3 studies (1 case-control and 2 retrospective cohort studies) met the eligibility criteria and were included in this meta-analysis. The risk of PUD was numerically lower among statins-users compared with non-users with the pooled OR of 0.89. However, the result did not achieve statistical significance with 95% CI of 0.67-1.18. The between-study statistical heterogeneity was high (I = 80%).
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review and meta-analysis found that the risk of PUD was numerically lower among statin users. However, the results did not reach statistical significance. More studies are still required to further characterise this potential protective effect.
Topics: Cross-Sectional Studies; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Odds Ratio; Peptic Ulcer; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 32830090
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajg.2020.07.007 -
The Surgeon : Journal of the Royal... Dec 2017The incidence of duodenal perforation after ERCP ranges from 0.09% to 1.67% and mortality up to 8%. (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The incidence of duodenal perforation after ERCP ranges from 0.09% to 1.67% and mortality up to 8%.
METHODS
This systematic review was registered in Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, PROSPERO. Stapfer classification of ERCP-related duodenal perforations was used.
RESULTS
The systematic search yielded 259 articles. Most frequent post-ERCP perforation was Stapfer type II (58.4%), type I second most frequent perforation (17.8%) followed by Stapfer type III in 13.2% and type IV in 10.6%. Rate of NOM was lowest in Stapfer type I perforations (13%), moderate in type III lesions (58.1%) and high in other types of perforations (84.2% in type II and 84.6% in IV). In patients underwent early surgical treatment (<24 h from ERCP) the most frequent operation was simple duodenal suture with or without omentopexy (93.7%). In patients undergoing late surgical treatment (>24 h from ERCP) interventions performed were more complex. In type I lesions post-operative mortality rate was higher in patients underwent late operation (>24 h). In type I lesions, failure of NOM occurred in 42.8% of patients. In type II failure of NOM occurred in 28.9% of patients and in type III there was failure of NOM in only 11.1%, none in type IV. Postoperative mortality after NOM failure was 75% in type I, 22.5% in type II and none died after surgical treatment for failure of NOM in type III perforations.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review showed that in patients with Stapfer type I lesions, early surgical treatment gives better results, however the opposite seems true in Stapfer III and IV lesions.
Topics: Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Duodenal Diseases; Duodenum; Humans; Intestinal Perforation
PubMed: 28619547
DOI: 10.1016/j.surge.2017.05.004 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2018Malignant gastric outlet obstruction is the clinical and pathological consequence of cancerous disease causing a mechanical obstruction to gastric emptying. It usually... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Malignant gastric outlet obstruction is the clinical and pathological consequence of cancerous disease causing a mechanical obstruction to gastric emptying. It usually occurs when malignancy is at an advanced stage; therefore, people have a limited life expectancy. It is of paramount importance to restore oral intake to improve quality of life for the person in a manner that has a minimal risk of complications and a short recovery period.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of endoscopic stent placement versus surgical palliation for people with symptomatic malignant gastric outlet obstruction.
SEARCH METHODS
In May 2018 we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase and Ovid CINAHL. We screened reference lists from included studies and review articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials comparing stent placement with surgical palliation for people with gastric outlet obstruction secondary to malignant disease.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted study data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for binary outcomes, mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes and the hazard ratio (HR) for time-to-event outcomes. We performed meta-analyses where meaningful. We assessed the quality of evidence using GRADE criteria.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified three randomised controlled trials with 84 participants. Forty-one participants underwent surgical palliation and 43 participants underwent duodenal stent placement. There may have been little or no difference in the technical success of the procedure (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.09; low-quality evidence), or whether the time to resumption of oral intake was quicker for participants who had undergone duodenal stent placement (MD -3.07 days, 95% CI -4.76 to -1.39; low-quality evidence).Due to very low-quality evidence, we were uncertain whether surgical palliation improved all-cause mortality and median survival postintervention.The time to recurrence of obstructive symptoms may have increased slightly following duodenal stenting (RR 5.08, 95% CI 0.96 to 26.74; moderate-quality evidence).Due to very low-quality evidence, we were uncertain whether surgical palliation improved serious and minor adverse events. The heterogeneity for adverse events was moderately high (serious adverse events: Chi² = 1.71; minor adverse events: Chi² = 3.08), reflecting the differences in definitions used and therefore, may have impacted the outcomes. The need for reintervention may have increased following duodenal stenting (RR 4.71, 95% CI 1.36 to 16.30; very low-quality evidence).The length of hospital stay may have been shorter (by approximately 4 to 10 days) following stenting (MD -6.70 days, 95% CI -9.41 to -3.98; moderate-quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The use of duodenal stent placement in malignant gastric outlet obstruction has the benefits of a quicker resumption of oral intake and a reduced inpatient hospital stay; however, this is balanced by an increase in the recurrence of symptoms and the need for further intervention.It is impossible to draw further conclusions on these and the other measured outcomes, primarily due to the low number of eligible studies and small number of participants which resulted in low-quality evidence. It was not possible to analyse the impact on quality of life each intervention had for these participants.
Topics: Adult; Duodenum; Eating; Gastric Outlet Obstruction; Gastrointestinal Neoplasms; Humans; Length of Stay; Palliative Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recurrence; Stents; Time Factors
PubMed: 29845610
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012506.pub2 -
Digestive Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) 2022An increase in the incidence of duodenal adenocarcinoma has been recently reported. However, little is known about the risk factors for duodenal adenocarcinoma, which...
INTRODUCTION
An increase in the incidence of duodenal adenocarcinoma has been recently reported. However, little is known about the risk factors for duodenal adenocarcinoma, which are important for screening purposes. We, therefore, aimed to conduct a systematic review to identify risk factors for non-ampullary duodenal adenocarcinoma.
METHODS
A medical literature search was performed using electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Japan Medical Abstracts Society, and Web of Science. Studies that assessed the association between dietary habits, lifestyle behaviors, comorbidities, and non-ampullary duodenal adenocarcinoma were extracted. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the risk of bias in individual studies, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach was used to assess the quality of evidence across studies included in this review.
RESULTS
Out of 1,244 screened articles, 10 were finally selected for qualitative synthesis. In the general population, no consistent risk factors were identified except for Helicobacter pylori positivity, which was considered a risk factor in 2 studies, but the quality of evidence was considered very low because of the high risk of bias. In patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), Spigelman stage IV at initial endoscopy was considered a consistent risk factor in 3 studies.
CONCLUSIONS
There are currently limited data regarding risk factors for non-ampullary duodenal adenocarcinoma, and no conclusive risk factors were identified in the general population. However, in patients with FAP, Spigelman stage IV was identified as a consistent risk factor. Further studies are needed to improve diagnosis and support effective clinical management of this malignancy.
Topics: Adenocarcinoma; Adenomatous Polyposis Coli; Duodenal Neoplasms; Duodenum; Humans; Risk Factors
PubMed: 34000722
DOI: 10.1159/000516561 -
Digestive Diseases and Sciences Mar 2024Low-dose aspirin (LDA) administration is associated with an elevated risk of recurring peptic ulcer (PU) and gastrointestinal (GI) hemorrhage. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Low-dose aspirin (LDA) administration is associated with an elevated risk of recurring peptic ulcer (PU) and gastrointestinal (GI) hemorrhage.
AIMS
This systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis aimed to comprehensively assess the effectiveness of diverse medications in preventing the recurrence of PU and GI hemorrhage in patients with a history of PU receiving long-term LDA therapy.
METHODS
This systematic review and network meta-analysis followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023406550). We searched relevant studies in main databases from inception to March 2023. All statistical analyses were performed using R (version 4.1.3), with the "Gemtc" (version 1.0-1) package. The pooled risk ratio (RR), corresponding 95% credible interval (95% CrI), and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) were calculated.
RESULTS
11 Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included. The analysis underscored pantoprazole was the most efficacious for reducing the risk of PU recurrence (RR [95% CrI] = 0.02 [0, 0.28]; SUCRA: 90.76%), followed by vonoprazan (RR [95% CrI] = 0.03 [0, 0.19]; SUCRA: 86.47%), comparing with the placebo group. Pantoprazole also performed well in preventing GI hemorrhage (RR [95% CrI] = 0.01[0, 0.42]; SUCRA: 87.12%) compared with Teprenone.
CONCLUSIONS
For patients with a history of PU receiving LDA, pantoprazole and vonoprazan might be the optimal choices to prevent PU recurrence and GI hemorrhage.
Topics: Humans; Pantoprazole; Peptic Ulcer; Aspirin; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Pyrroles; Sulfonamides
PubMed: 38252210
DOI: 10.1007/s10620-023-08233-4