-
Obesity Surgery Dec 2016There is debate regarding preoperative endoscopy (EGD) in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Some centers perform EGD routinely in all patients; others perform EGD... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
There is debate regarding preoperative endoscopy (EGD) in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Some centers perform EGD routinely in all patients; others perform EGD selectively. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the existing literature to estimate how frequently preoperative EGD changes management.
METHODS
Our review yielded 28 studies encompassing 6616 patients. Baseline characteristics including age and body mass index (BMI) were included. Patients were grouped based on EGD findings into two groups: Group 1-findings which did not significantly change management (e.g., mild/moderate duodenitis, Grade A/B esophagitis, mild/moderate gastritis, H. pylori infection, hiatal hernia <2 cm); Group 2-findings which delayed, altered, or cancelled surgery (e.g., severe duodenitis, Grade C/D esophagitis, gastric varices, hiatal hernia >2 cm, mass/carcinoma). A general estimating equation (GEE) model accounting for the correlated data within each study was used to calculate confidence intervals around the estimate of how frequently surgery was delayed or altered.
RESULTS
Mean age was 41.4 ± 2.9 years, the majority was women, and mean preoperative BMI was 47 ± 3.2 kg/m. Overall 92.4 % (n = 6112) had a normal EGD or findings that did not change clinical management and 7.6 % (n = 504); 95 % CI [4.6, 12.4 %] had findings that delayed/altered surgery. The revised estimate was 20.6 %; 95%CI [14.5, 28.2 %] if all esophagitis (regardless of grade) were categorized into Group 2. The approximate incidence of Barrett's esophagus and carcinoma were 0.1 and 0.08 %, respectively.
CONCLUSION
A selective approach to preoperative EGD may be considered, based on the patients' symptoms, risk factors, and type of procedure planned.
Topics: Adult; Bariatric Surgery; Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal; Female; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Obesity; Preoperative Care
PubMed: 27198238
DOI: 10.1007/s11695-016-2232-y -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2016Peptic ulcer disease is the cause of dyspepsia in about 10% of people. Ninety-five percent of duodenal and 70% of gastric ulcers are associated with Helicobacter pylori.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Peptic ulcer disease is the cause of dyspepsia in about 10% of people. Ninety-five percent of duodenal and 70% of gastric ulcers are associated with Helicobacter pylori. Eradication of H. pylori reduces the relapse rate of ulcers but the magnitude of this effect is uncertain. This is an update of Ford AC, Delaney B, Forman D, Moayyedi P. Eradication therapy for peptic ulcer disease in Helicobacter pylori-positive patients. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD003840. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003840.pub4.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the proportion of peptic ulcers healed and the proportion of participants who remained free from relapse with eradication therapy against placebo or other pharmacological therapies in H. pylori-positive people.To assess the proportion of participants that achieved complete relief of symptoms and improvement in quality of life scores.To compare the incidence of adverse effects/drop-outs (total number for each drug) associated with the different treatments.To assess the proportion of participants in whom successful eradication was achieved.
SEARCH METHODS
In this update, we identified trials by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to March 2016) and Ovid EMBASE (1980 to March 2016). To identify further relevant trials, we handsearched reference lists from trials selected by electronic searching, and published abstracts from conference proceedings from the United European Gastroenterology Week (published in Gut) and Digestive Disease Week (published in Gastroenterology). The search was last updated in March 2016. We contacted members of Cochrane Upper GI and Pancreatic Diseases, and experts in the field and asked them to provide details of outstanding clinical trials and any relevant unpublished materials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We analysed randomised controlled trials of short- and long-term treatment of peptic ulcer disease in H. pylori-positive adults. Participants received at least one week of H. pylori eradication compared with ulcer healing drug, placebo or no treatment. Trials were included if they reported assessment from two weeks onwards.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We collected data on ulcer healing, recurrence, relief of symptoms and adverse effects. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using both fixed-effect and random-effects models with Review Manager software (RevMan 5.3) based on intention-to-treat analysis as far as possible.
MAIN RESULTS
A total of 55 trials were included for one or more outcomes for this review.In duodenal ulcer healing, eradication therapy was superior to ulcer healing drug (UHD) (34 trials, 3910 participants, RR of ulcer persisting = 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 0.76; 381/2286 (adjusted proportion: 12.4%) in eradication therapy plus UHD versus 304/1624 (18.7%) in UHD; low quality evidence) and no treatment (two trials, 207 participants, RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.53; 30/125 (adjusted proportion: 21.7%) in eradication therapy versus 48/82 (58.5%) in no treatment; low quality evidence).In gastric ulcer healing, the differences were imprecise between eradication therapy and UHD (15 trials, 1974 participants, RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.68; 220/1192 (adjusted proportion: 16.0%) in eradication therapy plus UHD versus 102/782 (13.0%) in UHD; very low quality evidence). In preventing duodenal ulcer recurrence the differences were imprecise between maintenance therapy with H.pylori eradication therapy and maintenance therapy with UHD (four trials, 319 participants, RR of ulcer recurring 0.73; 95% CI 0.42 to 1.25; 19/159 (adjusted proportion: 11.9%) in eradication therapy versus 26/160 (16.3%) in UHD; very low quality evidence), but eradication therapy was superior to no treatment (27 trials 2509 participants, RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.26; 215/1501 (adjusted proportion: 12.9%) in eradication therapy versus 649/1008 (64.4%) in no treatment; very low quality evidence).In preventing gastric ulcer recurrence, eradication therapy was superior to no treatment (12 trials, 1476 participants, RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.45; 116/697 (adjusted proportion: 16.3%) in eradication therapy versus 356/679 (52.4%) in no treatment; very low quality evidence). None of the trials reported proportion of people with gastric ulcer not healed after initial therapy between H.pylori eradication therapy and no active treatment or the proportion of people with recurrent gastric ulcer or peptic ulcers during maintenance therapy between H.pylori eradication therapy and ulcer healing drug therapy.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Adding a one to two-week course of H. pylori eradication therapy is an effective treatment for people with H. pylori-positive duodenal ulcer when compared to ulcer healing drugs alone and no treatment. H. pylori eradication therapy is also effective in preventing recurrence of duodenal and gastric ulcer compared to no treatment. There is currently no evidence that H. pylori eradication therapy is an effective treatment in people with gastric ulcer or that it is effective in preventing recurrence of duodenal ulcer compared to ulcer healing drug. However, confidence intervals were wide and significant benefits or harms of H. pylori eradication therapy in acute ulcer healing of gastric ulcers compared to no treatment, and in preventing recurrence of duodenal ulcers compared to ulcer healing drugs cannot be ruled out.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anti-Ulcer Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination; Duodenal Ulcer; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stomach Ulcer
PubMed: 27092708
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003840.pub5 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2006Endoscopic balloon dilation was introduced as an alternative to endoscopic sphincterotomy to preserve the sphincter of Oddi and avoid undesirable effects due to an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Endoscopic balloon dilation was introduced as an alternative to endoscopic sphincterotomy to preserve the sphincter of Oddi and avoid undesirable effects due to an incompetent sphincter. Endoscopic balloon dilation has been largely abandoned by USA endoscopists due to increased risks of pancreatitis noted in one multicentre trial, but is still practiced in parts of Asia and Europe.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of endoscopic balloon dilation versus endoscopic sphincterotomy in the management of common bile duct stones.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and EMBASE until January 2004. We hand searched Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (1983-2002), read through bibliographies of all included randomised clinical trials, and contacted all primary authors regarding missed randomised trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised clinical trials comparing endoscopic balloon dilation versus endoscopic sphincterotomy in removal of common bile duct stones irrespective of publication status, language, or blinding.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Data collection was done by two independent authors for decisions on study inclusion, data abstraction, and quality assessment. When there was a non-resolvable discrepancy, the third author made the final decision. Analysis was run with RevMan Analysis.
MAIN RESULTS
Fifteen randomised trials met our inclusion criteria (1768 participants). Less than half of the trials reported adequate methods of randomisation and only two trials used blinded outcome assessment. Endoscopic balloon dilation is statistically less successful for stone removal (relative risk (RR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 0.97), requires higher rates of mechanical lithotripsy (RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.66), and carries a higher risk of pancreatitis (RR 1.96, 95% CI 1.34 to 2.89). Conversely, endoscopic balloon dilation has statistically significant lower rates of bleeding. When a fixed-effect model is applied endoscopic balloon dilation leads to significantly less short-term infection and long-term infection. There was no statistically significant difference with regards to mortality, perforation, or total short-term complications.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Endoscopic balloon dilation is slightly less successful than endoscopic sphincterotomy in stone extraction and more risky regarding pancreatitis. However, endoscopic balloon dilation seems to have a clinical role in patients who have coagulopathy, who are at risk for infection, and possibly in those who are older.
Topics: Catheterization; Gallstones; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sphincter of Oddi; Sphincterotomy, Endoscopic
PubMed: 17054222
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004890.pub2 -
World Journal of Gastroenterology Jul 2019Gastroduodenal disease (GDD) was initially thought to be uncommon in Africa. Amongst others, lack of access to optimal health infrastructure and suspicion of...
Gastroduodenal disease (GDD) was initially thought to be uncommon in Africa. Amongst others, lack of access to optimal health infrastructure and suspicion of conventional medicine resulted in the reported prevalence of GDD being significantly lower than that in other areas of the world. Following the increasing availability of flexible upper gastro-intestinal endoscopy, it has now become apparent that GDD, especially peptic ulcer disease (PUD), is prevalent across the continent of Africa. Recognised risk factors for gastric cancer (GCA) include (), diet, Epstein-Barr virus infection and industrial chemical exposure, while those for PUD are , non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-use, smoking and alcohol consumption. Of these, is generally accepted to be causally related to the development of atrophic gastritis (AG), intestinal metaplasia (IM), PUD and distal GCA. Here, we perform a systematic review of the patterns of GDD across Africa obtained with endoscopy, and complement the analysis with new data obtained on pre-malignant gastric his-topathological lesions in Accra, Ghana which was compared with previous data from Maputo, Mozambique. As there is a general lack of structured cohort studies in Africa, we also considered endoscopy-based hospital or tertiary centre studies of symptomatic individuals. In Africa, there is considerable heterogeneity in the prevalence of PUD with no clear geographical patterns. Furthermore, there are differences in PUD within-country despite universally endemic infection. PUD is not uncommon in Africa. Most of the African tertiary-centre studies had higher prevalence of PUD when compared with similar studies in western countries. An additional intriguing observation is a recent, ongoing decline in PUD in some African countries where infection is still high. One possible reason for the high, sustained prevalence of PUD may be the significant use of NSAIDs in local or over-the-counter preparations. The prevalence of AG and IM, were similar or modestly higher over rates in western countries but lower than those seen in Asia. . In our new data, sampling of 136 patients in Accra detected evidence of pre-malignant lesions (AG and/or IM) in 20 individuals (14.7%). Likewise, the prevalence of pre-malignant lesions, in a sample of 109 patients from Maputo, were 8.3% AG and 8.3% IM. While H. pylori is endemic in Africa, the observed prevalence for GCA is rather low. However, cancer data is drawn from country cancer registries that are not comprehensive due to considerable variation in the availability of efficient local cancer reporting systems, diagnostic health facilities and expertise. Validation of cases and their source as well as specificity of outcome definitions are not explicit in most studies further contributing to uncertainty about the precise incidence rates of GCA on the continent. We conclude that evidence is still lacking to support (or not) the African enigma theory due to inconsistencies in the data that indicate a particularly low incidence of GDD in African countries.
Topics: Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal; Gastric Mucosa; Gastritis, Atrophic; Ghana; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Humans; Incidence; Intestinal Mucosa; Metaplasia; Peptic Ulcer; Prevalence; Risk Factors; Stomach Neoplasms
PubMed: 31341360
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v25.i26.3344 -
Critical Care (London, England) May 2016The relative efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) compared to histamine-2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) should guide their use in reducing bleeding risk... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The relative efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) compared to histamine-2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) should guide their use in reducing bleeding risk in the critically ill.
METHODS
We searched the Cochrane library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, ACPJC, clinical trials registries, and conference proceedings through November 2015 without language or publication date restrictions. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of PPIs vs H2RAs for stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill adults for clinically important bleeding, overt gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, nosocomial pneumonia, mortality, ICU length of stay and Clostridium difficile infection were included. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess our confidence in the evidence for each outcome.
RESULTS
In 19 trials enrolling 2117 patients, PPIs were more effective than H2RAs in reducing the risk of clinically important GI bleeding (RR 0.39; 95 % CI 0.21, 0.71; P = 0.002; I (2) = 0 %, moderate confidence) and overt GI bleeding (RR 0.48; 95 % CI 0.34, 0.66; P < 0.0001; I (2) = 3 %, moderate confidence). PPI use did not significantly affect risk of pneumonia (RR 1.12; 95 % CI 0.86, 1.46; P = 0.39; I (2) = 2 %, low confidence), mortality (RR 1.05; 95 % CI 0.87, 1.27; P = 0.61; I (2) = 0 %, moderate confidence), or ICU length of stay (mean difference (MD), -0.38 days; 95 % CI -1.49, 0.74; P = 0.51; I (2) = 30 %, low confidence). No RCT reported Clostridium difficile infection.
CONCLUSIONS
PPIs were superior to H2RAs in preventing clinically important and overt GI bleeding, without significantly increasing the risk of pneumonia or mortality. Their impact on Clostridium difficile infection is yet to be determined.
Topics: Duodenal Ulcer; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Histamine H2 Antagonists; Humans; Peptic Ulcer; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment; Stomach Ulcer
PubMed: 27142116
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-016-1305-6 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2004Peptic ulcer disease is the cause for dyspepsia in about 10% of patients. 95% of duodenal and 70% of gastric ulcers are associated with Helicobacter pylori. Eradication... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Peptic ulcer disease is the cause for dyspepsia in about 10% of patients. 95% of duodenal and 70% of gastric ulcers are associated with Helicobacter pylori. Eradication of H pylori reduces the relapse rate of ulcers but the magnitude of this effect is uncertain.
OBJECTIVES
The primary outcomes were the proportion of peptic ulcers healed initially and proportion of patients free from relapse following successful healing. Eradication therapy was compared to placebo or pharmacological therapies in H. pylori positive patients. Secondary aims included symptom relief and adverse effects.
SEARCH STRATEGY
A search was undertaken according to the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases Review Group module using CCTR, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases. Experts in the field and pharmaceutical companies were contacted. Abstract books between 1994 and 2003 were hand-searched.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials of short and long-term treatment of peptic ulcer disease in H. pylori positive adults were analysed. Patients received at least one week of H pylori eradication compared with ulcer healing drug, placebo or not treatment. Trials were included if they reported assessment from 2 weeks onwards.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Data were collected on ulcer healing, recurrence, relief of symptoms and adverse effects.
MAIN RESULTS
60 trials were eligible. Data extraction was not possible in 7 trials, and 53 trials were included. In duodenal ulcer healing, eradication therapy was superior to ulcer healing drug (UHD) (34 trials, 3910 patients, relative risk [RR] of ulcer persisting = 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.58, 0.76) and no treatment (2 trials, 207 patients, RR = 0.37; 95% CI 0.26, 0.53). In gastric ulcer healing, no significant differences were detected between eradication therapy and UHD (13 trials, 1469 patients, RR = 1.32; 95% CI = 0.92, 1.90). In preventing duodenal ulcer recurrence no significant differences were detected between eradication therapy and maintenance therapy with UHD (4 trials, 319 patients, relative risk [RR] of ulcer recurring = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.42, 1.25), but eradication therapy was superior to no treatment (27 trials 2509 patients, RR = 0.20; 95% CI = 0.15, 0.26). In preventing gastric ulcer recurrence, eradication therapy was superior to no treatment (10 trials, 1029 patients, RR = 0.28; 95% CI 0.18, 0.43).
REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS
A 1 to 2 weeks course of H. pylori eradication therapy is an effective treatment for H. pylori positive peptic ulcer disease.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anti-Ulcer Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination; Duodenal Ulcer; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stomach Ulcer
PubMed: 15495066
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003840.pub2 -
Journal of Vascular and Interventional... May 2018To compare postoperative complications in patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy after either endoscopic or percutaneous biliary drain (BD). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Is Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage Better than Endoscopic Drainage in the Management of Jaundiced Patients Awaiting Pancreaticoduodenectomy? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
PURPOSE
To compare postoperative complications in patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy after either endoscopic or percutaneous biliary drain (BD).
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Data from studies comparing the rate of postoperative complications in patients who underwent endoscopic BD or percutaneous BD before pancreatoduodenectomy were extracted independently by 2 investigators. The primary outcome compared in the meta-analysis was the risk of postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes were the risks of procedure-related complications, postoperative mortality, postoperative pancreatic fistula, severe complications, and wound infection. For dichotomous variables, the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated.
RESULTS
Thirteen studies, including 2334 patients (501 in the percutaneous BD group and 1833 in the endoscopic group), met the inclusion criteria. Postoperative and procedure-related complication rates were significantly lower in the percutaneous BD group (OR = .7, 95% CI = .52-.94, P = .02 and OR = .44, 95% CI = .23-.84, P = .01, respectively). No significant differences were observed when severe postoperative complications, postoperative mortality, postoperative pancreatic fistula, and wound infection rates were compared.
CONCLUSIONS
In patients awaiting pancreatoduodenectomy, preoperative percutaneous BD is associated with fewer procedure-related or postoperative complications than endoscopic drain.
Topics: Bile Duct Neoplasms; Cholangiocarcinoma; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Drainage; Duodenal Neoplasms; Endoscopy; Humans; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 29548873
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2017.12.027 -
Clinical Gastroenterology and... May 2013Use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) could predispose individuals to small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) by altering the intraluminal environment and bacterial... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND & AIMS
Use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) could predispose individuals to small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) by altering the intraluminal environment and bacterial flora. There is controversy regarding the risk of SIBO among PPI users because of conflicting results from prior studies. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the association between PPI use and SIBO, using objective clinical outcome measures.
METHODS
Clinical studies comparing SIBO risk among adult users of PPIs vs nonusers were identified in MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials databases through July 2012. Two reviewers independently extracted data on study characteristics and outcomes. The primary metameter was the odds ratio (OR) of SIBO among PPI users vs nonusers. Subgroup analyses were performed to examine the influence of study characteristics, such as SIBO diagnostic modality, on study outcome.
RESULTS
Eleven studies (n = 3134) met inclusion criteria. The pooled OR of SIBO in PPI users vs nonusers was 2.282 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.238-4.205). No significant single large study or temporal effect was seen. Subgroup analysis revealed an association between SIBO and PPI use in studies that used duodenal or jejunal aspirate cultures to diagnose SIBO (OR, 7.587; 95% CI, 1.805-31.894), but no relationship was found between SIBO and PPI use in studies that used the glucose hydrogen breath test (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 0.69-5.42). Funnel plot analysis identified 4 outlying studies, indicating the possible presence of publication bias.
CONCLUSIONS
PPI use statistically was associated with SIBO risk, but only when the diagnosis was made by a highly accurate test (duodenal or jejunal aspirate culture). Differences in study results could arise from the use of different tests to diagnose SIBO.
Topics: Bacterial Infections; Humans; Intestine, Small; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Risk Assessment; Superinfection
PubMed: 23270866
DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2012.12.011 -
Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology Sep 2014By systematic review, we assessed the impact of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) for the treatment of Clostridium difficile (CD)-associated diarrhea. (Review)
Review
GOAL
By systematic review, we assessed the impact of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) for the treatment of Clostridium difficile (CD)-associated diarrhea.
BACKGROUND
Fecal microbiota microbiota transplantation from a healthy donor into an individual with CD infection (CDI) can resolve symptoms.
STUDY
We conducted systematic searches in PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. The last search was run on February 8, 2013. The following Medical Subject Headings terms and keywords were used alone or in combination: Clostridium difficile; Clostridium infection; pseudomembranous colitis; feces; stools; fecal suspension; fecal transplantation; fecal transfer; fecal infusion; microbiota; bacteriotherapy; enema; nasogastric tube; colonoscopy; gastroscopy; fecal donation; donor. A critical appraisal of the clinical research evidence on the effectiveness and safety of FMT for the treatment of patients with CD-associated diarrhea was made.
RESULTS
Twenty full-text case series, 15 case reports, and 1 randomized controlled study were included for the final analysis. Almost all patients treated with donors' fecal infusion experienced recurrent episodes of CD-associated diarrhea despite standard antibiotic treatment. Of a total of 536 patients treated, 467 (87%) experienced resolution of diarrhea. Diarrhea resolution rates varied according to the site of infusion: 81% in the stomach; 86% in the duodenum/jejunum; 93% in the cecum/ascending colon; and 84% in the distal colon. No severe adverse events were reported with the procedure.
CONCLUSIONS
FMT seems efficacious and safe for the treatment of recurrent CDI. Hospitals should encourage the development of fecal transplantation programs to improve therapy of local patients.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Clostridioides difficile; Clostridium Infections; Diarrhea; Feces; Humans; Microbiota; Recurrence; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 24440934
DOI: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000000046 -
BMC Surgery May 2019Duodenal stump fistula (DSF) remains one of the most serious complications following subtotal or total gastrectomy, as it endangers patient's life. DSF is related to...
BACKGROUND
Duodenal stump fistula (DSF) remains one of the most serious complications following subtotal or total gastrectomy, as it endangers patient's life. DSF is related to high mortality (16-20%) and morbidity (75%) rates. DSF-related morbidity always leads to longer hospitalization times due to medical and surgical complications such as wound infections, intra-abdominal abscesses, intra-abdominal bleeding, acute pancreatitis, acute cholecystitis, severe malnutrition, fluids and electrolytes disorders, diffuse peritonitis, and pneumonia. Our systematic review aimed at improving our understanding of such surgical complication, focusing on nonsurgical and surgical DSF management in patients undergoing gastric resection for gastric cancer.
METHODS
We performed a systematic literature review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were used to search all related literature.
RESULTS
The 20 included articles covered an approximately 40 years-study period (1979-2017), with a total 294 patient population. DSF diagnosis occurred between the fifth and tenth postoperative day. Main DSF-related complications were sepsis, abdominal abscess, wound infection, pneumonia, and intra-abdominal bleeding. DSF treatment was divided into four categories: conservative (101 cases), endoscopic (4 cases), percutaneous (82 cases), and surgical (157 cases). Length of hospitalization was 21-39 days, ranging from 1 to 1035 days. Healing time was 19-63 days, ranging from 1 to 1035 days. DSF-related mortality rate recorded 18.7%.
CONCLUSIONS
DSF is a rare but potentially lethal complication after gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Early DSF diagnosis is crucial in reducing DSF-related morbidity and mortality. Conservative and/or endoscopic/percutaneous treatments is/are the first choice. However, if the patient clinical condition worsens, surgery becomes mandatory and duodenostomy appears to be the most effective surgical procedure.
Topics: Abdominal Abscess; Duodenal Diseases; Gastrectomy; Humans; Intestinal Fistula; Peritonitis; Postoperative Complications; Stomach Neoplasms; Wound Healing
PubMed: 31138190
DOI: 10.1186/s12893-019-0520-x