-
The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care... Oct 2021There is no consensus on optimal surgical treatment of large duodenal defects arising from perforated ulcers, even though such defects are challenging to repair and...
BACKGROUND
There is no consensus on optimal surgical treatment of large duodenal defects arising from perforated ulcers, even though such defects are challenging to repair and inadequate repair is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to carry out a systematic literature review of different surgical techniques used to treat large duodenal perforations, provide a narrative description of these techniques, and propose a framework for approaching this pathology.
METHODS
PubMed/MEDLINE database was searched for articles published in English between January 1, 1970, and December 1, 2020. Studies describing surgical techniques used to treat giant duodenal ulcer perforation and their outcomes in adult patients were included. No quantitative analysis was planned because of the heterogeneity across studies.
RESULTS
Out of 960 identified records, 25 studies were eligible for inclusion. Two randomized controlled trials, one case-control trial, three cohort studies, 14 case series, and 5 case reports were included. Eight main surgical approaches are described, ranging from simple damage-control operations, such as the omental plug and triple-tube techniques, all the way to complex resections, such as gastrectomy.
CONCLUSION
Evidence on surgical treatment of large duodenal defects is of poor quality, with the majority of studies corresponding to Oxford levels 3b-4. Current evidence does not support any single surgical technique as superior in terms of morbidity or mortality, but choice of technique should be guided by several factors including location of the perforation, degree of duodenal tissue loss, hemodynamic stability of the patient, as well as expertise of the operating surgeon.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
SR with more than two negative criteria, Level IV.
Topics: Duodenal Ulcer; Duodenum; Humans; Peptic Ulcer Perforation; Risk Factors
PubMed: 34254960
DOI: 10.1097/TA.0000000000003357 -
Journal of Gastroenterology Apr 2021The Japanese Society of Gastroenterology (JSGE) revised the third edition of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for peptic ulcer disease in 2020 and created an...
The Japanese Society of Gastroenterology (JSGE) revised the third edition of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for peptic ulcer disease in 2020 and created an English version. The revised guidelines consist of nine items: epidemiology, hemorrhagic gastric and duodenal ulcers, Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication therapy, non-eradication therapy, drug-induced ulcers, non-H. pylori, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) ulcers, remnant gastric ulcers, surgical treatment, and conservative therapy for perforation and stenosis. Therapeutic algorithms for the treatment of peptic ulcers differ based on ulcer complications. In patients with NSAID-induced ulcers, NSAIDs are discontinued and anti-ulcer therapy is administered. If NSAIDs cannot be discontinued, the ulcer is treated with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Vonoprazan (VPZ) with antibiotics is recommended as the first-line treatment for H. pylori eradication, and PPIs or VPZ with antibiotics is recommended as a second-line therapy. Patients who do not use NSAIDs and are H. pylori negative are considered to have idiopathic peptic ulcers. Algorithms for the prevention of NSAID- and low-dose aspirin (LDA)-related ulcers are presented in this guideline. These algorithms differ based on the concomitant use of LDA or NSAIDs and ulcer history or hemorrhagic ulcer history. In patients with a history of ulcers receiving NSAID therapy, PPIs with or without celecoxib are recommended and the administration of VPZ is suggested for the prevention of ulcer recurrence. In patients with a history of ulcers receiving LDA therapy, PPIs or VPZ are recommended and the administration of a histamine 2-receptor antagonist is suggested for the prevention of ulcer recurrence.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Evidence-Based Practice; Japan; Peptic Ulcer; Proton Pump Inhibitors
PubMed: 33620586
DOI: 10.1007/s00535-021-01769-0 -
Critical Care (London, England) Jan 2018Pharmacologic stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) is recommended in critically ill patients with high risk of stress-related gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. However, as to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pharmacologic stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) is recommended in critically ill patients with high risk of stress-related gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. However, as to patients receiving enteral feeding, the preventive effect of SUP is not well-known. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effect of pharmacologic SUP in enterally fed patients on stress-related GI bleeding and other clinical outcomes.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane database from inception through 30 Sep 2017. Eligible trials were RCTs comparing pharmacologic SUP to either placebo or no prophylaxis in enterally fed patients in the ICU. Results were expressed as risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity, subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis and publication bias were explored.
RESULTS
Seven studies (n = 889 patients) were included. There was no statistically significant difference in GI bleeding (RR 0.80; 95% CI, 0.49 to 1.31, p = 0.37) between groups. This finding was confirmed by further subgroup analyses and sensitivity analysis. In addition, SUP had no effect on overall mortality (RR 1.21; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.56, p = 0.14), Clostridium difficile infection (RR 0.89; 95% CI, 0.25 to 3.19, p = 0.86), length of stay in the ICU (MD 0.04 days; 95% CI, -0.79 to 0.87, p = 0.92), duration of mechanical ventilation (MD -0.38 days; 95% CI, -1.48 to 0.72, p = 0.50), but was associated with an increased risk of hospital-acquired pneumonia (RR 1.53; 95% CI, 1.04 to 2.27; p = 0.03).
CONCLUSIONS
Our results suggested that in patients receiving enteral feeding, pharmacologic SUP is not beneficial and combined interventions may even increase the risk of nosocomial pneumonia.
Topics: Clostridium Infections; Critical Care; Duodenal Ulcer; Enteral Nutrition; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Histamine H2 Antagonists; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Length of Stay; Peptic Ulcer; Respiration, Artificial; Risk Management; Time Factors
PubMed: 29374489
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-017-1937-1 -
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 -
Prescrire International Jan 2016In patients with gastric or duodenal ulcer associated with Helicobacter pylori, treatment of the infection improves healing and prevents complications and recurrences.... (Review)
Review
In patients with gastric or duodenal ulcer associated with Helicobacter pylori, treatment of the infection improves healing and prevents complications and recurrences. The drug regimen generally consists of a high-dose proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) such as omeprazole plus antibiotics. Using the standard Prescrire methodology, we conducted a review of the literature in order to determine the standard empirical antibiotic regimen for H. pylori infection in adults with gastric or duodenal ulcer in France. In 2015, due to an increase in H. pylori resistance to clarithromycin, a 7-day course of the PPI + clarithromycin + amoxicillin combination is effective in only about 70% of cases. A Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis of trials involving thousands of patients suggests that prolonging treatment with a PPI + amoxicillin + clarithromycin or a PPI + amoxicillin + metronidazole to 10 or 14 days improves the rate of H. pylori eradication by 5% to 10%. A metanalysis of seven trials including a total of about 1000 patients showed that combination therapy with a PPI + amoxicillin + clarithromycin + metronidazole for 5 days eradicates H. pylori in about 90% of cases, compared to about 80% of cases with a PPI + amoxicillin + clarithromycin given for 7 days. Sequential treatment with amoxicillin for 5 days, followed by clarithromycin + metronidazole for 5 days, has also been tested in thousands of patients. Efficacy and adverse effects were similar to those observed when the same antibiotics were taken simultaneously for 5 days. In randomised trials, replacing clarithromycin or amoxicillin with a fluoroquinolone yielded conflicting results. In 2009, nearly 20% of H. pylori isolates were resistant to levofloxacin in France. Tetracycline has only been evaluated in combination with bismuth. The few available data on doxycycline suggest that its efficacy is similar to that of tetracycline. A fixed-dose combination of bismuth subcitrate potassium + metronidazole + tetracycline is authorised in the European Union for use in combination with omeprazole for 10 days. It seems effective, even in case of clarithromycin resistance. However, bismuth can cause encephalopathy, and its value when added to antibiotics and a PPI is poorly documented. We found no robust comparative data on second-line empirical treatments. In patients with gastric or duodenal ulcer associated with H. pylori, eradication of the bacterium reduces the risk of complications and recurrence. In mid-2015, the choice of antibiotics is based on trials in which the primary endpoint was a negative urea breath test, which is an acceptable surrogate criterion. In previously untreated patients, the first-choice empirical treatment consists of three antibiotics: amoxicillin (2 g daily), clarithromycin (1 g daily) and metronidazole (1 g daily), plus a PPI (in practice, omeprazole 40 mg daily), with each drug taken in two divided doses per day. The antibiotics may be taken either simultaneously for five days, or sequentially (amoxicillin for 5 days, followed by clarithromycin + metronidazole for 5 days). The adverse effects of these antibiotic combinations correspond to those of their component drugs, which mainly consist of gastrointestinal disorders and the disulfiram-like reaction of metronidazole. Amoxicillin can be replaced by a fluoroquinolone in patients allergic to beta-lactam antibiotics, but there is a higher risk of resistance. Tetracycline and doxycycline appear effective, as few H. pylori strains are resistant in vitro. Bismuth can cause encephalopathy and should only be used in special cases.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anti-Ulcer Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination; Duodenal Ulcer; France; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Humans; Stomach Ulcer
PubMed: 26942258
DOI: No ID Found -
Helicobacter Apr 2012The most common complications of peptic ulcer are bleeding and perforation. In many regions, definitive acid reduction surgery has given way to simple closure and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The most common complications of peptic ulcer are bleeding and perforation. In many regions, definitive acid reduction surgery has given way to simple closure and Helicobacter pylori eradication.
AIM
To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to ask whether this change in practice is in fact justified.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A search on the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline, and Embase was made for controlled trials of duodenal ulcer perforation patients using simple closure method plus postoperative H. pylori eradication therapy versus simple closure plus antisecretory non-eradication therapy. The long-term results for prevention of ulcer recurrence were compared.
RESULTS
The pooled incidence of 1-year ulcer recurrence in H. pylori eradication group was 5.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.7 and 9.7], which is significantly lower than that of the control group (35.2%) with 95% CI of 0.25 and 0.45. The pooled relative risk was 0.15 with 95% CI of 0.06 and 0.37.
CONCLUSIONS
Helicobacter pylori eradication after simple closure of duodenal ulcer perforation gives better result than the operation plus antisecretory non-eradication therapy for prevention of ulcer recurrence. All duodenal ulcer perforation patients should be tested for H. pylori infection, and eradication therapy is required in all infected patients.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Humans; Peptic Ulcer Perforation; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 22404446
DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-5378.2011.00928.x -
Cureus Aug 2023Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) refers to the occurrence of an open erosion in the inner lining of the stomach, duodenum, or sometimes lower esophagus. Treatments like proton... (Review)
Review
Comparing the Safety and Efficacy of Proton Pump Inhibitors and Histamine-2 Receptor Antagonists in the Management of Patients With Peptic Ulcer Disease: A Systematic Review.
Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) refers to the occurrence of an open erosion in the inner lining of the stomach, duodenum, or sometimes lower esophagus. Treatments like proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or histamine 2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) are available on the market to efficiently treat the break in the mucosal lining. However, there is little evidence about the effects of the medication on the type and location of the ulcer and the epigastric pain caused by disintegration and increased acidity in the stomach. Given the above, we conducted a systematic review comparing the safety and efficacy of PPIs and H2RAs in various ulcer locations (gastric, duodenal, and pre-pyloric) and the effect of prolonging the treatment with the same medication or changing into a drug from another class in treatment-resistant ulcers. We employed major research literature databases and search engines such as PubMed, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Science Direct, and Google Scholar to find relevant articles. After a thorough screening, a quality check using various tools, and applying filters that suited our eligibility criteria, we identified eight articles, of which five were random clinical trials (RCTs), two review articles, and one meta-analysis. This study compares the different side effects of PPIs and H2RAs. Most studies concluded that omeprazole is superior in healing ulcers and bringing pain relief and that patients resistant to H2RAs can be treated better when switched to a PPI. This study also discusses the adverse effects of chronic use, such as diarrhea, constipation, headaches, and gastrointestinal infections. Patients on long-term PPI therapy are required to take calcium supplements to prevent the risk of fractures in older adults. Regarding long-term outcomes, PPIs remain the mainstay of treatment for peptic ulcer disease, based on the papers we reviewed.
PubMed: 37779765
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.44341 -
European Journal of Trauma and... Oct 2020The objective of this study was to compare the results of transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) with surgery in terms of efficacy in the context of bleeding duodenal... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
Management of bleeding peptic duodenal ulcer refractory to endoscopic treatment: surgery or transcatheter arterial embolization as first-line therapy? A retrospective single-center study and systematic review.
BACKGROUND
The objective of this study was to compare the results of transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) with surgery in terms of efficacy in the context of bleeding duodenal ulcer (BDU) refractory to endoscopic treatment.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
From January 2006 to December 2016, all patients treated for a BDU refractory to endoscopic treatment were included in this observational, comparative, retrospective, single-center study. Primary endpoint was the overall success of treatment of BDU requiring surgical and/or TAE. The secondary endpoints were pre-interventional data, recurrence rates, feasibility of secondary treatment, morbidity and mortality of surgical and radiological treatment, intensive care unit and length of stay. A systematic review of the literature was performed to compare results of surgery and TAE.
RESULTS
59 out of 396 patients (14.9%) treated for BDU required embolization and/or surgery: 15 patients underwent surgery (group S) including 7 patients after embolization failure and 44 patients underwent TAE (group TAE). The overall treatment success in intention to treat (85.7% vs 67.3%), per protocol (80% vs 79.5%) and bleeding recurrence rates (20% vs 15.9%) were also identical. Mortality (14.2% vs 15.3%) was similar between the two groups. Our study data were pooled with data from eight published studies and suggest that surgery have significant increased overall success (68.3% vs. 55.4%, p < 0.005).
CONCLUSION
The overall success rate was in favour of surgery according our meta-analysis. Our single-center study highlights the fact that predictive factors for recurrent bleeding after TAE must be identified to select good candidates for TAE and/or surgery.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Angiography; Critical Care; Embolization, Therapeutic; Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal; Length of Stay; Peptic Ulcer Hemorrhage; Recurrence; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors
PubMed: 32246169
DOI: 10.1007/s00068-020-01356-7 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2018Short-term use of standard-dose proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) is the first-line initial non-eradication treatment for duodenal ulcer (DU), but the choice on individual...
Standard-Dose Proton Pump Inhibitors in the Initial Non-eradication Treatment of Duodenal Ulcer: Systematic Review, Network Meta-Analysis, and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.
Short-term use of standard-dose proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) is the first-line initial non-eradication treatment for duodenal ulcer (DU), but the choice on individual PPI drug is still controversial. The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of standard-dose PPI medications in the initial non-eradication treatment of DU. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Clinicaltrials.gov, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP database, and the Wanfang database from their earliest records to September 2017. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating omeprazole (20 mg/day), pantoprazole (40 mg/day), lansoprazole (30 mg/day), rabeprazole (20 mg/day), ilaprazole (10 mg/day), ranitidine (300 mg/day), famotidine (40 mg/day), or placebo for DU were included. The outcomes were 4-week ulcer healing rate (4-UHR) and the incidence of adverse events (AEs). A network meta-analysis (NMA) using a Bayesian random effects model was conducted, and a cost-effectiveness analysis using a decision tree was performed from the payer's perspective over 1 year. A total of 62 RCTs involving 10,339 participants (eight interventions) were included. The NMA showed that all the PPIs significantly increased the 4-UHR compared to H receptor antagonists (HRA) and placebo, while there was no significant difference for 4-UHR among PPIs. As to the incidence of AEs, no significant difference was observed among PPIs, HRA, and placebo during 4-week follow-up. Based on the costs of both PPIs and management of AEs in China, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life year (in US dollars) for pantoprazole, lansoprazole, rabeprazole, and ilaprazole compared to omeprazole corresponded to $5134.67, $17801.67, $25488.31, and $44572.22, respectively. Although the efficacy and tolerance of different PPIs are similar in the initial non-eradication treatment of DU, pantoprazole (40 mg/day) seems to be the most cost-effective option in China.
PubMed: 30666204
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2018.01512 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Oct 2009The principal effect of Helicobacter pylori infection is lifelong chronic gastritis, affecting up to 20% of younger adults but 50% to 80% of adults born in resource-rich... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The principal effect of Helicobacter pylori infection is lifelong chronic gastritis, affecting up to 20% of younger adults but 50% to 80% of adults born in resource-rich countries before 1950.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of H pylori eradication treatment in people with a confirmed duodenal ulcer, a confirmed gastric ulcer, confirmed gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD), confirmed non-ulcer dyspepsia, uninvestigated dyspepsia, localised B cell lymphoma of the stomach, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-related peptic ulcers? What are the effects of H pylori eradication treatment for preventing NSAID-related peptic ulcers in people with or without previous ulcers or dyspepsia? What are the effects of H pylori eradication treatment on the risk of developing gastric cancer? Do H pylori eradication treatments differ in their effects? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to September 2007 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 58 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: effects of H pylori eradication in different populations; relative effects of triple regimens, quadruple regimens, and sequential regimens.
Topics: Duodenal Ulcer; Dyspepsia; Gastroesophageal Reflux; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Humans
PubMed: 21718575
DOI: No ID Found