-
Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic... Jul 2017Duodenal lipoma is very rare with limited case reports present in literature. Owing to recent advances in endoscopy and modern imaging techniques, more cases are being... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Duodenal lipoma is very rare with limited case reports present in literature. Owing to recent advances in endoscopy and modern imaging techniques, more cases are being diagnosed and treated. However, no systematic study of duodenal lipomas has been reported.
AIM
To study the diagnosis and treatment of duodenal lipoma in a female patient and review the relative literatures to enhance the knowledge of it.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A literature search for 'duodenal lipoma' was performed on PubMed. Papers published from 1948 to 2016 in the English language were identified. Each article was then read in detail and analysed for clinical data, imaging features, diagnosis and therapy. Also, we hereby present a case of upper gastrointestinal obstruction secondary to multiple duodenal lipomas in a 67-year-old woman. The patient underwent a limited bowel resection with an uneventful recovery.
RESULTS
Literature review demonstrated 59 cases of duodenal lipoma, which indicate that duodenal lipomas are rare to occur but commonly found in the second part. The peak of incidence seems to be around the fifth and seventh decade of life. Duodenal lipomas may present as gastrointestinal bleeding, abdominal pain, obstruction or upper abdominal fullness. CT, MRI, Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS), endoscopy are highly accurate diagnostic tools. The disease could be managed by endoscopy or surgery.
CONCLUSION
Our review of literature indicated duodenal lipoma is extremely rare. The symptoms are nonspecific and CT is the first choice for diagnosis. The treatment depends on the patient's condition as well as the size and position of the tumour.
PubMed: 28892976
DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/27748.10322 -
Endoscopy International Open Jun 2022Malignant disease accounts for up to 80 % of gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) cases, which may be treated with duodenal self-expanding metal stents (SEMS), surgical... (Review)
Review
Efficacy and safety of endoscopic duodenal stent versus endoscopic or surgical gastrojejunostomy to treat malignant gastric outlet obstruction: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Malignant disease accounts for up to 80 % of gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) cases, which may be treated with duodenal self-expanding metal stents (SEMS), surgical gastrojejunostomy (GJ), and more recently endoscopic-ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE). These three treatments have not been compared head-to-head in a randomized trial. We searched the Embase and MEDLINE databases for studies published January 2015-February 2021 assessing treatment of malignant GOO using duodenal SEMS, endoscopic (EUS-GE) or surgical (laparoscopic or open) GJ. Efficacy outcomes assessed included technical and clinical success rates, GOO recurrence and reintervention. Safety outcomes included procedure-related bleeding or perforation, and stent-related events for the duodenal SEMS and EUS-GE arms. EUS-GE had a lower rate of technical success (95.3%) than duodenal SEMS (99.4 %) or surgical GJ (99.9%) ( = 0.0048). For duodenal SEMS vs. EUS-GE vs. surgical GJ, rates of clinical success (88.9 % vs. 89.0 % vs. 92.3 % respectively, = 0.49) were similar. EUS-GE had a lower rate of GOO recurrence based on limited data ( = 0.0036), while duodenal SEMS had a higher rate of reintervention ( = 0.041). Overall procedural complications were similar (duodenal SEMS 18.7 % vs. EUS-GE 21.9 % vs. surgical GJ 23.8 %, = 0.32), but estimated bleeding rate was lowest ( = 0.0048) and stent occlusion rate was highest ( = 0.0002) for duodenal SEMS. Duodenal SEMS, EUS-GE, and surgical GJ showed similar clinical efficacy for the treatment of malignant GOO. Duodenal SEMS had a lower procedure-related bleeding rate but higher rate of reintervention.
PubMed: 35692924
DOI: 10.1055/a-1794-0635 -
Clinical and Translational... Apr 2020Data about the efficacy of palliative double stenting for malignant duodenal and biliary obstruction are limited. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Data about the efficacy of palliative double stenting for malignant duodenal and biliary obstruction are limited.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed to assess the feasibility and optimal method of double stenting for malignant duodenobiliary obstruction compared with surgical double bypass in terms of technical and clinical success, adverse events, reinterventions, and survival. Event rates with 95% confidence intervals were calculated.
RESULTS
Seventy-two retrospective and 8 prospective studies published until July 2018 were included. Technical and clinical success rates of double stenting were 97% (95%-99%) and 92% (89%-95%), respectively. Clinical success of endoscopic biliary stenting was higher than that of surgery (97% [94%-99%] vs 86% [78%-92%]). Double stenting was associated with less adverse events (13% [8%-19%] vs 28% [19%-38%]) but more frequent need for reintervention (21% [16%-27%] vs 10% [4%-19%]) than double bypass. No significant difference was found between technical and clinical success and reintervention rate of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), percutaneous transhepatic drainage, and endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage. ERCP was associated with the least adverse events (3% [1%-6%]), followed by percutaneous transhepatic drainage (10% [0%-37%]) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (23% [15%-33%]).
DISCUSSION
Substantially high technical and clinical success can be achieved with double stenting. Based on the adverse event profile, ERCP can be recommended as the first choice for biliary stenting as part of double stenting, if feasible. Prospective comparative studies with well-defined outcomes and cohorts are needed.
Topics: Bile Duct Neoplasms; Cholestasis; Drainage; Duodenal Neoplasms; Duodenal Obstruction; Endoscopy, Digestive System; Feasibility Studies; Humans; Neoplasm Invasiveness; Palliative Care; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Postoperative Complications; Reoperation; Stents; Stomach Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32352679
DOI: 10.14309/ctg.0000000000000161 -
Archives of Disease in Childhood. Fetal... Feb 2024To determine the impact of transanastomotic tube (TAT) feeding in congenital duodenal obstruction (CDO). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To determine the impact of transanastomotic tube (TAT) feeding in congenital duodenal obstruction (CDO).
DESIGN
Systematic review with meta-analysis.
PATIENTS
Infants with CDO requiring surgical repair.
INTERVENTIONS
TAT feeding following CDO repair versus no TAT feeding.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
The main outcome was time to full enteral feeds. Additional outcomes included use of parenteral nutrition (PN), cost and complications from either TAT or central venous catheter. Meta-analyses were undertaken using random-effects models (mean difference (MD) and risk difference (RD)), and risk of bias was assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool.
RESULTS
Twelve out of 373 articles screened met the inclusion criteria. All studies were observational and two were prospective. Nine studies, containing 469 infants, were available for meta-analysis; however, four were excluded due to serious or critical risk of bias. TAT feeding was associated with reduced time to full enteral feeds (-3.34; 95% CI -4.48 to -2.20 days), reduced duration of PN (-6.32; 95% CI -7.93 to -4.71 days) and reduction in nutrition cost of £867.36 (95% CI £304.72 to £1430.00). Other outcomes were similar between those with and without a TAT including inpatient length of stay (MD -0.97 (-5.03 to 3.09) days), mortality (RD -0.01 (-0.04 to 0.01)) and requirement for repeat surgery (RD 0.01 (-0.03 to 0.05)).
CONCLUSION
TAT feeding following CDO repair appears beneficial, without increased risk of adverse events; however, certainty of available evidence is low. Earlier enteral feeding and reduced PN use are known to decrease central venous catheter-associated risks while significantly reducing cost of care.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42022328381.
Topics: Humans; Enteral Nutrition; Duodenal Obstruction; Prospective Studies; Parenteral Nutrition; Nutritional Status
PubMed: 37923385
DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2023-325988 -
Cancers Apr 2023The treatments for cancer palliation in patients with concomitant malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) and gastric outlet obstruction (MGOO) are still under investigation... (Review)
Review
A Systematic Review of Endoscopic Treatments for Concomitant Malignant Biliary Obstruction and Malignant Gastric Outlet Obstruction and the Outstanding Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Therapies.
BACKGROUND
The treatments for cancer palliation in patients with concomitant malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) and gastric outlet obstruction (MGOO) are still under investigation due to the lack of evidence available in the medical literature. We performed a systematic search and critical review to investigate efficacy and safety among patients with MBO and MGOO undergoing both endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) and MGOO endoscopic treatment.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. EUS-BD included both transduodenal and transgastric techniques. Treatment of MGOO included duodenal stenting or EUS-GEA (gastroenteroanastomosis). Outcomes of interest were technical success, clinical success, and rate of adverse events (AEs) in patients undergoing double treatment in the same session or within one week.
RESULTS
11 studies were included in the systematic review for a total number of 337 patients, 150 of whom had concurrent MBO and MGOO treatment, fulfilling the time criteria. MGOO was treated by duodenal stenting (self-expandable metal stents) in 10 studies, and in one study by EUS-GEA. EUS-BD had a mean technical success of 96.4% (CI 95%, 92.18-98.99) and a mean clinical success of 84.96% (CI 95%, 67.99-96.26). The average frequency of AEs for EUS-BD was 28.73% (CI 95%, 9.12-48.33). Clinical success for duodenal stenting was 90% vs. 100% for EUS-GEA.
CONCLUSIONS
EUS-BD could become the preferred drainage in the case of double endoscopic treatment of concomitant MBO and MGOO in the near future, with the promising EUS-GEA becoming a valid option for MGOO treatment in these patients.
PubMed: 37174051
DOI: 10.3390/cancers15092585 -
Pediatric Surgery International Mar 2023Cardiac anomalies occur frequently in patients with congenital duodenal obstruction (DO). However, the exact occurrence and the type of associated anomalies remain... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Cardiac anomalies occur frequently in patients with congenital duodenal obstruction (DO). However, the exact occurrence and the type of associated anomalies remain unknown. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review is to aggregate the available literatures on cardiac anomalies in patients with DO.
METHODS
In July 2022, a search was performed in PubMed and Embase.com. Studies describing cardiac anomalies in patients with congenital DO were considered eligible. Primary outcome was the pooled percentage of cardiac anomalies in patients with DO. Secondary outcomes were the pooled percentages of the types of cardiac anomalies, type of DO, and trisomy 21. A meta-analysis was performed to pool the reported data.
RESULTS
In total, 99 publications met our eligibility data, representing 6725 patients. The pooled percentage of cardiac anomalies was 29% (95% CI 0.26-0.32). The most common cardiac anomalies were persistent foramen ovale 35% (95% CI 0.20-0.54), ventricular septal defect 33% (95% CI 0.24-0.43), and atrial septal defect 33% (95% CI 0.26-0.41). The most prevalent type of obstruction was type 3 (complete atresias), with a pooled percentage of 54% (95% CI 0.48-0.60). The pooled percentage of Trisomy 21 in patients with DO was 28% (95% CI 0.26-0.31).
CONCLUSION
This review shows cardiac anomalies are found in one-third of the patients with DO regardless of the presence of trisomy 21. Therefore, we recommend that patients with DO should receive preoperative cardiac screening.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
II.
Topics: Humans; Child; Down Syndrome; Duodenal Obstruction; Heart Defects, Congenital
PubMed: 36967411
DOI: 10.1007/s00383-023-05449-3 -
Endocrine-related Cancer Jul 2023Core needle biopsy (CNB) has been used with caution in pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma (PPGL) due to concerns about catecholamine-related complications. While it is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Core needle biopsy (CNB) has been used with caution in pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma (PPGL) due to concerns about catecholamine-related complications. While it is unclear what scientific evidence supports this claim, it has limited the acquisition of biological samples for diagnostic purposes and research, especially in metastatic PPGL. We performed a systematic review and individual patient meta-analysis to evaluate the risk of complications after CNB in PPGL patients. The primary and secondary objectives were to investigate the risk of death and the occurrence of complications requiring intervention or hospitalization, respectively. Fifty-six articles describing 86 PPGL patients undergoing CNB were included. Of the patients (24/71), 34% had metastases and 53.4% (31/58) had catecholamine-related symptoms before CNB. Of the patients (14/41), 34.1% had catecholamine excess testing prior to the biopsy. No CNB-related deaths were reported. Four patients (14.8%, 4/27) experienced CNB-related complications requiring hospitalization or intervention. One case had a temporary duodenal obstruction caused by hematoma, two cases had myocardial infarction, and one case had Takotsubo cardiomyopathy. Eight patients (32%, 8/25) had CNB-related catecholamine symptoms, mainly transient hypertension, excessive diaphoresis, tachycardia, or hypertensive crisis. The scientific literature does not allow us to make any firm conclusion on the safety of CNB in PPGL. However, it is reasonable to argue that CNB could be conducted after thorough consideration, preparation, and with close follow-up for PPGL patients with a strong clinical indication for such investigation.
Topics: Humans; Pheochromocytoma; Biopsy, Large-Core Needle; Paraganglioma; Catecholamines; Adrenal Gland Neoplasms; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37185155
DOI: 10.1530/ERC-22-0354 -
World Journal of Gastroenterology May 2018The major symptoms of advanced hepatopancreatic-biliary cancer are biliary obstruction, pain and gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). For obstructive jaundice, surgical... (Review)
Review
Laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy for gastric outlet obstruction in patients with unresectable hepatopancreatobiliary cancers: A personal series and systematic review of the literature.
The major symptoms of advanced hepatopancreatic-biliary cancer are biliary obstruction, pain and gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). For obstructive jaundice, surgical treatment should de consider in recurrent stent complications. The role of surgery for pain relief is marginal nowadays. On the last, there is no consensus for treatment of malignant GOO. Endoscopic duodenal stents are associated with shorter length of stay and faster relief to oral intake with more recurrent symptoms. Surgical gastrojejunostomy shows better long-term results and lower re-intervention rates, but there are limited data about laparoscopic approach. We performed a systematic review of the literature, according PRISMA guidelines, to search for articles on laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy for malignant GOO treatment. We also report our personal series, from 2009 to 2017. A review of the literature suggests that there is no standardized surgical technique either standardized outcomes to report. Most of the studies are case series, so level of evidence is low. Decision-making must consider medical condition, nutritional status, quality of life and life expectancy. Evaluation of the patient and multidisciplinary expertise are required to select appropriate approach. Given the limited studies and the difficulty to perform prospective controlled trials, no study can answer all the complexities of malignant GOO and more outcome data is needed.
Topics: Biliary Tract Neoplasms; Gastric Bypass; Gastric Outlet Obstruction; Humans; Jaundice, Obstructive; Laparoscopy; Palliative Care; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Patient Selection; Quality of Life; Stents; Stomach Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29760541
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v24.i18.1978 -
Journal of Pain Research 2018Locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma (LAPC) has a poor prognosis and the purpose of treatment is survival prolongation and symptom palliation. Radiotherapy has been... (Review)
Review
Locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma (LAPC) has a poor prognosis and the purpose of treatment is survival prolongation and symptom palliation. Radiotherapy has been reported to reduce pain in LAPC. Stereotactic RT (SBRT) is considered as an emerging radiotherapy technique able to achieve high local control rates with acceptable toxicity. However, its role in pain palliation is not clear. To review the impact on pain relief with SBRT in LAPC patients, a literature search was performed on PubMed, Scopus, and Embase (January 2000-December 2017) for prospective and retrospective articles published in English. Fourteen studies (479 patients) reporting the effect of SBRT on pain relief were finally included in this analysis. SBRT was delivered with both standard and/or robotic linear accelerators. The median prescribed SBRT doses ranged from 16.5 to 45 Gy (median: 27.8 Gy), and the number of fractions ranged from 1 to 6 (median: 3.5). Twelve of the 14 studies reported the percentage of pain relief (in patients with pain at presentation) with a global overall response rate (complete and partial response) of 84.9% (95% CI, 75.8%-91.5%), with high heterogeneity ( test: <0.001; 2=83.63%). All studies reported toxicity data. Acute and late toxicity (grade ≥3) rates were 3.3%-18.0% and 6.0%-8.2%, respectively. Reported gastrointestinal side effects were duodenal obstruction/ulcer, small bowel obstruction, duodenal bleeding, hemorrhage, and gastric perforation. SBRT achieves pain relief in most patients with pancreatic cancer with an acceptable gastrointestinal toxicity rate. Further prospective studies are needed to define optimal dose/fractionation and the best systemic therapies modality integration to reduce toxicity and improve the palliative outcome. Finally, the quality of life and, particularly, pain control should be considered as an endpoint in all future trials on this emerging treatment technique.
PubMed: 30323651
DOI: 10.2147/JPR.S167994 -
Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology 2024The symptoms of gastric outlet obstruction have traditionally been managed surgically or endoscopically. Enteral stenting (ES) is a less invasive endoscopic treatment... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The symptoms of gastric outlet obstruction have traditionally been managed surgically or endoscopically. Enteral stenting (ES) is a less invasive endoscopic treatment strategy for this condition. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) has recently become a potential alternative technique.
OBJECTIVES
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness and safety profile of EUS-GE compared with ES.
DESIGN
Meta-analysis and systematic review.
DATA SOURCES AND METHODS
We searched multiple databases from inception to August 2023 to identify studies that reported the effectiveness and safety of EUS-GE compared with ES. The outcomes of technical success, clinical success, and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated. Pooled proportions were calculated using both fixed and random effects models.
RESULTS
We included 13 studies with 1762 patients in our final analysis. The pooled rates of technical success for EUS-GE were 95.59% [95% confidence interval (CI), 94.01-97.44, = 32] and 97.96% (95% CI, 96.06-99.25, = 63) for ES. The pooled rate of clinical success for EUS-GE was 93.62% (95% CI, 90.76-95.98, = 54) while for ES it was lower at 85.57% (95% CI, 79.63-90.63, = 81). The pooled odds ratio (OR) of clinical success was higher for EUS-GE compared to ES at 2.71 (95% CI, 1.87-3.93). The pooled OR of clinical success for EUS-GE was higher compared to ES at 2.72 (95% CI, 1.86-3.97, = 0). The pooled rates of re-intervention for EUS-GE were lower at 3.77% (95% CI, 1.77-6.46, = 44) compared with ES, which was 25.13% (95% CI, 18.96-31.85, = 69). The pooled OR of the rate of re-intervention in the ES group was higher at 7.96 (95% CI, 4.41-14.38, = 13). Overall, the pooled rate for AEs for EUS-GE was 8.97% (95% CI, 6.88-11.30, = 15), whereas that for ES was 19.63% (95% CI, 11.75-28.94, = 89).
CONCLUSION
EUS-GE and ES are comparable in terms of their technical effectiveness. However, EUS-GE has demonstrated improved clinical effectiveness, a lower need for re-intervention, and a better safety profile compared to ES for palliation of gastric outlet obstruction.
PubMed: 38855340
DOI: 10.1177/17562848241248219