-
Clinical and Experimental... 2019There are controversies on the causal role of in duodenal ulceration. are curved gram-negative microaerophilic bacteria found at the layer of gastric mucous or...
BACKGROUND
There are controversies on the causal role of in duodenal ulceration. are curved gram-negative microaerophilic bacteria found at the layer of gastric mucous or adherent to the epithelial lining of the stomach. It's a public health significance bacteria starting from discovery, and the prevalence and severity of the infection varies considerably among populations. are a risk for various diseases, while the extent of host response like gastric inflammation and the amount of acid secretion by parietal cells affects the outcome of infection.
METHOD
Relevant literature were searched from databases such as Google Scholar, PubMed, Hinari, Web of Science, Scopus, and Science Direct.
RESULT
The review evidence supports a strong causal relation between infection and duodenal ulcer, as patients are more likely to be infected by virulent strains which later cause duodenal ulceration. Thus, eradication of infection decreases the incidence of duodenal ulcers, and prevents its recurrence by reducing both basal gastrin release and acid secretion without affecting parietal cell sensitivity. On the other hand, some studies show that infection is not associated with the development of duodenal ulcers and such a lack of association revealed that duodenal ulceration has different pathogenesis.
CONCLUSION
Despite controversies observed in the causal role of to duodenal ulceration by various studies, Hill criteria of causation proved the presence of a causal relation between infection and duodenal ulcers. Other factors are also responsible for the development of duodenal ulcers and such factors are responsible for the differences in the prevalence of the diseases.
PubMed: 31819586
DOI: 10.2147/CEG.S228203 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2017Rheumatoid arthritis is a systemic auto-immune disorder that causes widespread and persistent inflammation of the synovial lining of joints and tendon sheaths.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Rheumatoid arthritis is a systemic auto-immune disorder that causes widespread and persistent inflammation of the synovial lining of joints and tendon sheaths. Presently, there is no cure for rheumatoid arthritis and treatment focuses on managing symptoms such as pain, stiffness and mobility, with the aim of achieving stable remission and improving mobility. Celecoxib is a selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) used for treatment of people with rheumatoid arthritis.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of celecoxib in people with rheumatoid arthritis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase and clinical trials registers (ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization trials portal) to May 18, 2017. We also searched the reference and citation lists of included studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared oral celecoxib (200 mg and 400 mg daily) versus no intervention, placebo or a traditional NSAID (tNSAID) in people with confirmed rheumatoid arthritis, of any age and either sex. We excluded studies with fewer than 50 participants in each arm or had durations of fewer than four weeks treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.
MAIN RESULTS
We included eight RCTs with durations of 4 to 24 weeks, published between 1998 and 2014 that involved a total of 3988 adults (mean age = 54 years), most of whom were women (73%). Participants had rheumatoid arthritis for an average of 9.2 years. All studies were assessed at high or unclear risk of bias in at least one domain. Overall, evidence was assessed as moderate-to-low quality. Five studies were funded by pharmaceutical companies. Celecoxib versus placeboWe included two studies (N = 873) in which participants received 200 mg daily or 400 mg daily or placebo. Participants who received celecoxib showed significant clinical improvement compared with those receiving placebo (15% absolute improvement; 95% CI 7% to 25%; RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.86; number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) = 7, 95% CI 5 to 13; 2 studies, 873 participants; moderate to low quality evidence).Participants who received celecoxib reported less pain than placebo-treated people (11% absolute improvement; 95% CI 8% to 14%; NNTB = 4, 95% CI 3 to 6; 1 study, 706 participants) but results were inconclusive for improvement in physical function (MD -0.10, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.10; 1 study, 706 participants).In the celecoxib group, 15/293 participants developed ulcers, compared with 4/99 in the placebo group (Peto OR 1.26, 95% CI 0.44 to 3.63; 1 study, 392 participants; low quality evidence). Nine (of 475) participants in the celecoxib group developed short-term serious adverse events, compared with five (of 231) in the placebo group (Peto OR 0.87 (0.28 to 2.69; 1 study, 706 participants; low quality evidence).There were fewer withdrawals among people who received celecoxib (163/475) compared with placebo (130/231) (22% absolute change; 95% CI 16% to 27%; RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.72; 1 study, 706 participants).Cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke) were not reported. However, regulatory agencies warn of increased cardiovascular event risk associated with celecoxib. Celecoxib versus tNSAIDsSeven studies (N = 2930) compared celecoxib and tNSAIDs (amtolmetin guacyl, diclofenac, ibuprofen, meloxicam, nabumetone, naproxen, pelubiprofen); one study included comparisons of both placebo and tNSAIDs (N = 1149).There was a small improvement, which may not be clinically significant, in numbers of participants achieving ACR20 criteria response in the celecoxib group compared to tNSAIDs (4% absolute improvement; 95% CI 0% less improvement to 8% more improvement; RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.23; 4 studies, 1981 participants). There was a lack of evidence of difference between participants in the celecoxib and tNSAID groups in terms of pain or physical function. Results were assessed at moderate-to-low quality evidence (downgraded due to risk of bias and inconsistency).People who received celecoxib had a lower incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers ≥ 3 mm (34/870) compared with those who received tNSAIDs (116/698). This corresponded to 12% absolute change (95% CI 11% to 13%; RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.32; 5 studies, 1568 participants; moderate quality evidence). There were 7% fewer withdrawals among people who received celecoxib (95% CI 4% to 9%; RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.86; 6 studies, 2639 participants).Results were inconclusive for short-term serious adverse events and cardiovascular events (low quality evidence). There were 17/918 serious adverse events in people taking celecoxib compared to 42/1236 among people who received placebo (Peto OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.39 to 1.28; 5 studies, 2154 participants). Cardiovascular events were reported in both celecoxib and placebo groups in one study (149 participants).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Celecoxib may improve clinical symptoms, alleviate pain and contribute to little or no difference in physical function compared with placebo. Celecoxib was associated with fewer numbers of participant withdrawals. Results for incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers (≥ 3 mm) and short-term serious adverse events were uncertain; however, there were few reported events for either.Celecoxib may slightly improve clinical symptoms compared with tNSAIDs. Results for reduced pain and improved physical function were uncertain. Particpants taking celecoxib had lower incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers (≥ 3 mm) and there were fewer withdrawals from trials. Results for cardiovascular events and short-term serious adverse events were also uncertain.Uncertainty about the rate of cardiovascular events between celecoxib and tNSAIDs could be due to risk of bias; another factor is that these were small, short-term trials. It has been reported previously that both celecoxib and tNSAIDs increase cardiovascular event rates. Our confidence in results about harms is therefore low. Larger head-to-head clinical trials comparing celecoxib to other tNSAIDs is needed to better inform clinical practice.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Celecoxib; Humans; Myocardial Infarction; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stomach Ulcer; Stroke; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28597983
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012095.pub2 -
The Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology... Mar 2016The current systematic review and meta-analysis study assessed the prevalence of celiac disease (CD) in Iran. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND/AIMS
The current systematic review and meta-analysis study assessed the prevalence of celiac disease (CD) in Iran.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Electronic databases, including MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Cochrane library Collaboration, and Iranian scientific databases, were searched from 1993 to 2013 for English and Persian articles. The following terms were used, alone or combined, "celiac (MeSH)," "ceoliac," "prevalence (MeSH)," and "Iran*." Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic with a cut-off value of 50%, and the Chi-square test was used to define a statically significant degree of heterogeneity with a p value of <0.10. The publication bias of literatures was assessed by visual examination of the funnel plot and Begger's funnel plot.
RESULTS
Meta-analysis was conducted on seven publications with 9,720 subjects. Overall, the pooled prevalence of CD among the Iranian population was 0.72% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.62%-0.98%]. There was no significant heterogeneity among the studies (I2=4%, p=0.396). The pooled prevalence of CD on the basis of IgA-anti tissue transglutaminase (tTGA) and tTGA and duodenal biopsy positivity was 0.83% (95% CI: 0.69%-1.14%) and 0.79% (95% CI: 0.66%-1.09%), respectively. No significant publication bias was observed using the funnel plot and Begger's funnel plot.
CONCLUSION
CD prevalence among the Iranian population was approximately similar to that of the American and European populations.
Topics: Biopsy; Celiac Disease; Duodenum; Female; Humans; Immunoglobulin A; Iran; Male; Observational Studies as Topic; Prevalence; Transglutaminases
PubMed: 27015617
DOI: 10.5152/tjg.2015.150191 -
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Aug 2023Most studies on minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) combine patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancers even though there is substantial heterogeneity... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The clinical implication of minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for non-pancreatic periampullary cancer: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Most studies on minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) combine patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancers even though there is substantial heterogeneity between these tumors. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the role of MIPD compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) in patients with non-pancreatic periampullary cancer (NPPC).
METHODS
A systematic review of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases was performed by two independent reviewers to identify studies comparing MIPD and OPD for NPPC (ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenal adenocarcinoma) (01/2015-12/2021). Individual patient data were required from all identified studies. Primary outcomes were (90-day) mortality, and major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo 3a-5). Secondary outcomes were postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), blood-loss, length of hospital stay (LOS), and overall survival (OS).
RESULTS
Overall, 16 studies with 1949 patients were included, combining 928 patients with ampullary, 526 with distal cholangio, and 461 with duodenal cancer. In total, 902 (46.3%) patients underwent MIPD, and 1047 (53.7%) patients underwent OPD. The rates of 90-day mortality, major morbidity, POPF, DGE, PPH, blood-loss, and length of hospital stay did not differ between MIPD and OPD. Operation time was 67 min longer in the MIPD group (P = 0.009). A decrease in DFS for ampullary (HR 2.27, P = 0.019) and distal cholangio (HR 1.84, P = 0.025) cancer, as well as a decrease in OS for distal cholangio (HR 1.71, P = 0.045) and duodenal cancer (HR 4.59, P < 0.001) was found in the MIPD group.
CONCLUSIONS
This individual patient data meta-analysis of MIPD versus OPD in patients with NPPC suggests that MIPD is not inferior in terms of short-term morbidity and mortality. Several major limitations in long-term data highlight a research gap that should be studied in prospective maintained international registries or randomized studies for ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenum cancer separately.
PROTOCOL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO (CRD42021277495) on the 25th of October 2021.
Topics: Humans; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Duodenal Neoplasms; Prospective Studies; Pancreas; Postoperative Complications; Laparoscopy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37581763
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03047-4 -
American Journal of Infection Control Sep 2016Several clusters of Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) infections associated with contaminated endoscopes have recently been reported. Interim guidelines for... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Several clusters of Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) infections associated with contaminated endoscopes have recently been reported. Interim guidelines for mitigating endoscope-associated transmission have been proposed, but there has not been a systematic appraisal of CRE prevention practices.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of endoscope-associated CRE infection episodes, abstracting information on outbreak detection, mitigation, outcomes, and corrective steps taken to prevent recurrence.
RESULTS
Seven distinct outbreaks were identified in the published literature, and 5 of these were associated with duodenal endoscopy, with the remaining 2 associated with cystoscopy and ureteroscopy. Several investigators noted difficulties in cleaning protocols surrounding difficult to access components, such as the elevator on duodenoscopes. The published investigations did not report any failures of sterilization. It is unclear if routine reprocessing was ineffective, or difficult to execute properly.
CONCLUSIONS
Meticulous cleaning protocols and increased surveillance are necessary to prevent and detect future outbreaks of CRE and to determine whether more stringent measures, such as sterilization, are needed for duodenoscopes.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Carbapenems; Disease Transmission, Infectious; Endoscopy; Enterobacteriaceae; Enterobacteriaceae Infections; Humans; beta-Lactam Resistance
PubMed: 27179395
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2016.03.029 -
Advances in Therapy Mar 2016Nicorandil is a popular anti-anginal drug in Europe and Japan. Apart from some common adverse drug reactions (ADR), its safety is satisfactory. Several reports have... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Nicorandil is a popular anti-anginal drug in Europe and Japan. Apart from some common adverse drug reactions (ADR), its safety is satisfactory. Several reports have suggested a link between nicorandil, gastrointestinal (GI) ulceration and fistulas. The review aims to critically appraise, synthesize and present the available evidence of all known GI ADR per anatomical location.
METHODS
The study complied with the PRISMA statement. Literature and pharmacovigilance databases were used to provide rate and/or calculate parameters (median age, median dose, history of symptoms, length of therapy and healing time after withdrawal of the drug). Differences in distribution of quantitative variables were analyzed via Mann-Whitney test. Correlation between quantitative variables was assessed with a Spearman's correlation coefficient. A p value <0.05 was significant.
RESULTS
Oral ulcerations occur in 0.2% of the subjects, anal ulcerations are present between 0.07% and 0.37% of patients. Oral and distal GI involvements are the most common ADR (28-29% and 27-31% of all GI ADR, respectively). The hepatobiliary system, the pancreas and salivary glands are not affected by nicorandil exposure. The time to develop oral ulcerations is 74 weeks among people on <30 mg/day compared to only 7.5 weeks in individuals on higher regimens (p = 0.47). There is a significant correlation between dose and ulcer healing time (Spearman's 0.525, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
Ulcerative disease is a very commonly reported GI ADR. A delayed ulcerative tendency supports the hypothesis of an ulcerogenic metabolite. Nicorandil seems to act as a cause of the ulcerations, but appears to also work in synergy with other promoting factors. Whether the action of the metabolites relies on a specific mechanism or a simple chemical ulceration is still to be established.
Topics: Aged; Female; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Nicorandil; Oral Ulcer; Peptic Ulcer; Time Factors
PubMed: 26861848
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-016-0294-9 -
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 -
Asian Journal of Surgery Jan 2020The purpose of this study is to assess the clinical outcomes and prognostic factors for survival of patients with duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) who... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The purpose of this study is to assess the clinical outcomes and prognostic factors for survival of patients with duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or local resection (LR). PubMed database was searched for relevant studies. A meta-analysis was performed with Review Manager 5.3 software. Twenty-seven observational studies involving 1103 patients were included in the review. The overall morbidity and 30-day mortality was 27% and 0.5% respectively. The median (range) 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 87% (60-100%) and 71% (44-100%) respectively. In meta-analyses, factors associated with shorter DFS included male sex, mitotic index >5/50 high-power fields, high risk, tumor size >5 cm, and the PD procedure. Factors associated with shorter OS included mitotic index >5/50 high-power fields and tumor size >5 cm. Patients in PD group had a higher incidence of mitotic index >5/50 HPF, a higher incidence of high-risk classification, a higher incidence of tumors in the second portion of the duodenum, a larger tumor size, a longer duration of operation, more intraoperative blood loss, a greater blood transfusion requirement, a higher morbidity rate, a longer hospital stay, and an increased recurrence rate than those in LR group. In conclusion, the current literature review demonstrates that the postoperative prognosis of duodenal GIST is promising and mainly affected by tumor factors. The choice of the surgical approach should depend on the anatomical location and tumor size.
Topics: Digestive System Surgical Procedures; Gastrointestinal Neoplasms; Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors; Humans; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Prognosis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30853211
DOI: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2019.02.006 -
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