Intraperitoneal echoendoscopy for rescue of a gastrojejunal anastomosis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: James TW
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6835064 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Intraperitoneal echoendoscopy for rescue of a gastrojejunal anastomosis.
James Theodore W TW Grimm Ian S IS Baron Todd H TH
VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 20190914 11
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeThe management of concomitant complications after OAGB is challenging. We aim to show the surgical management of two concomitant complications after one anastomosis gastric bypass: internal hernia and anastomotic ulcer perforation.Materials and methodsWe present the case of a 32-year-old woman with BMI of 51 kg/m2, who underwent OAGB. Three years later, she presented with intense and brutal epigastric pain. She was a heavy smoker. Her weight and BMI were 75 kg and 26 kg/m2, respectively. Clinical examination showed generalized peritonitis, computed tomography showed pneumoperitoneum, diffuse peritoneal effusion, and rotation of the superior mesenteric vessels indicative of an internal hernia.ResultsA generalized biliary peritonitis secondary to a perforated ulcer on the gastrojejunal anastomosis and internal hernia of the common loop into a large Petersen orifice were diagnosed. The internal hernia was reduced, and a perforation of the posterior surface of the gastrojejunal anastomosis was identified. Surgical treatment consisted in the placement of a Kehr's drain into the perforation, closure of the Petersen orifice, and lavage-drainage of the peritoneal cavity. The postoperative course was uneventful, and she was discharged on postoperative day 12. The Kehr's drain was removed 1 month after discharge.ConclusionThe combination of two different complications after OAGB can make the pre- and intra-operative judgment difficult and hamper the therapeutic approach. The initial reduction of the internal hernia made it possible to reduce the pressure in the surgical assembly and facilitated the treatment of the anastomotic perforation.
| S-EPMC10156908 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsRoux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is associated with gastrojejunal (GJ) strictures in up to 20% of patients. Surgical revision of the GJ anastomosis is technically challenging and carries significant morbidity, making endoscopic therapies such as endoscopic balloon dilation (EBD) and stent placement the preferred approach. In addition, the angulation of GJ anastomosis relative to the Roux limb can cause obstructive symptoms, which are less amenable to EBD or stent placement. In patients with refractory strictures and/or angulation, we evaluate the safety and feasibility of a new anastomosis EUS-guided gastroenterostomy as an alternative to surgical revision.MethodsIn patients with refractory GJ strictures and/or angulation, a new anastomosis EUS-guided gastroenterostomy between the gastric pouch and Roux limb is created.ResultsOur case series includes 6 patients with a history of RYGB referred for management of obstructive symptoms. Upper endoscopy revealed severe GJ stenosis in 2 patients, complete obliteration of GJ anastomosis in 1 patient, stenosis with angulation in 1 patient, and angulation only in 2 patients. Four patients underwent previous unsuccessful attempts at balloon dilation. Lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) placement was initially performed in 4 patients, resulting in resolution of symptoms. However, their symptoms recurred after LAMS removal. EUS-guided anastomosis between the gastric pouch and Roux limb was created successfully in all patients, with no major adverse events. One patient experienced LAMS migration after 54 days. Patients had complete resolution of symptoms after the new anastomosis anastomosis was created.ConclusionsOur case series highlights the safety and feasibility of EUS-guided gastroenterostomy as an alternative to surgical revision in such patients. Large prospective studies with longer follow-up are needed to assess long-term outcomes of this intervention.
| S-EPMC11806424 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe effectiveness of the anastomosis method for laparoscopic left colectomy (LLC) remains inconclusive. Thus, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to compare the outcomes between intraperitoneal anastomosis (IPA) and extraperitoneal anastomosis(EPA)in LLC.MethodsPubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, and WanFangData were systematically searched for relevant literature. The literature was screened independently by two groups, and data were extracted and evaluated for bias. Meta-analysis was performed using Revman5.4 software.ResultsTwelve studies with a total of 1,278 patients were included in our meta-analysis. Compared with the EPA group, the IPA group had less blood loss [odds ratio (OR)=-20.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-27.98-12.65), p<0.00001], a lower overall complication rate [OR=0.45, 95% CI (0.33-0.63), p<0.00001], fewer non-severe complications [OR=0.44, 95% CI (0.30-0.64), p<0.0001], and fewer surgical site infections [OR=0.39, 95% CI (0.21-0.71), p=0.002]. Additionally, a longer operation time appeared in the multicenter and propensity score matching (PSM) subgroups of the IPA group. Furthermore, patients in the IPA group had an earlier exhaust time and shorter hospital stays. There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding severe complications, anastomose-related complications, postoperative blood transfusion, ileus, reoperation rate, time to stool, pathologic sample length, and lymph node dissection number.ConclusionIPA seems more advantageous than EPA for patients receiving LCC in terms of complications and postoperative recovery and has similar oncological outcomes. However, it may take longer and be more difficult to perform.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails PROSPERO, identifier (CRD4202454391).
| S-EPMC11466934 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is still no consensus on the management of intraperitoneal anastomotic leakage after colonic surgery. Among of various treatment strategies, laparoscopic redo anastomosis for intraperitoneal leakage has rarely been reported in the literature and is condemned by some. The aim of this study is to demonstrate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic redo anastomosis for intraperitoneal anastomotic leakage.MethodsRetrospective chart review of laparoscopic redo anastomosis for intraperitoneal anastomotic leakage after colonic surgery from January 2013 to May 2020. An accompanying video demonstrates the technique.ResultsFifteen consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic redo anastomosis for management of leakage after colonic surgery; two patients required conversion to open repair. A protective stoma was created in three patients during the second operation. There was no re-leakage nor mortality in this series.ConclusionsLaparoscopic redo anastomosis was feasible and safe for the management of intraperitoneal anastomotic leakage after colonic surgery. Considering the advantages of re-do laparoscopy, this procedure should be part of every surgeon's armamentarium to deal with anastomotic leakage and represents a logical alternative to the "Diversion and Drainage" technique.
| S-EPMC8957142 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7572321 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDumping syndrome is a known complication of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Recently, endoscopic gastrojejunal anastomosis (GJA) revision has been employed as a treatment option. The primary aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis for the role of endoscopic GJA revision in patients with RYGB for the treatment of dumping syndrome.MethodsSearch strategies were developed for PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases from inception through December 2020 in accordance with PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. Pooled proportions with rates estimated using random effects models were used. Outcomes included pooled technical success, clinical success, adverse events, and rate of reintervention. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics and publication bias by funnel plot using Egger and Begg tests.ResultsSix studies (n = 263 patients; 60.25% female) were included (1 prospective and 5 retrospective). Mean age was 46.27 ± 2.54 years. Average patient weight was 95.59 ± 4.78 kg, BMI of 41.43 ± 3.07 kg/m2, and pre-procedure GJA size of 32.23 ± 8.68 mm. Pooled technical and clinical success was 98.15% and 89.5%. Among studies reporting Sigstad scores, endoscopic GJA revision resulted in a significant improvement [mean Sigstad score difference of - 9.96 (95% CI, - 19.951 to - 0.975); P < 0.03]. Mean procedure time was 37.12 ± 10.40 min with an intra-procedural adverse event rate of 2.42%. Over a mean follow-up of 8.03 ± 6.87 months, post-procedure adverse events occurred in 2.96% of patients with a reintervention rate of 11.54%.ConclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that endoscopic GJA revision appears an effective and safe treatment for dumping syndrome.
| S-EPMC9018893 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7332724 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC5988986 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Video 1Presentation and treatment of an unusual acute worsening of gastric outlet obstruction following EUS-guided gastrojejunal bypass.
| S-EPMC10256982 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNatural orifice transluminal endoscopy surgery (NOTES) gastrojejunal anastomosis (GJA) with duodenal exclusion (DE) could be used as a less invasive alternative to surgical gastric bypass. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of both methods for bariatric purpose.MethodsThis was a prospective, experimental and comparative study on 27 obese living pigs, comparing 4 groups: GJA alone (group 1, G1), GJA + DE (group 2, G2), surgical gastric bypass (group 3, G3), control group (group 4, G4). GJA was endoscopically performed, using NOTES technic and LAMS, while DE was performed surgically for limb length selection. Animals were followed for 3 months. Primary outcome included technical success and weight change, while secondary endpoints included the rate of perioperative mortality and morbidity, histological anastomosis analysis and biological analysis.ResultsTechnical success was 100% in each intervention group. No death related to endoscopic procedures occurred in the endoscopic groups, while early mortality (< 1 month) was 57,1% in the surgical group, all due to anastomotic dehiscence. At 3 months, compared to baseline, mean weight change was + 3,1% in G1 (p = 0,46); -14,9% in G2 (p = 0,17); +5,6% in G3 (p = 0,38) and + 25% in G4 (p = 0,029). Histopathological analysis of endoscopic GJA showed complete fusion of different layers without leak or abscess.ConclusionsEndoscopic GJA with DE provides the efficacy of bypass on weight control in an animal model. Next steps consist of the development of devices to perform exclusively endoscopically limb length selection and DE.
| S-EPMC10621135 | biostudies-literature