DOCSLIB.ORG

Long-Term Outcome of Gastric Per-Oral Endoscopic 63 6 64 7 Pyloromyotomy in Treatment of Gastroparesis 65 8 66 9 Q9 Mohamed M

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Long-Term Outcome of Gastric Per-Oral Endoscopic 63 6 64 7 Pyloromyotomy in Treatment of Gastroparesis 65 8 66 9 Q9 Mohamed M Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2020;-:-–- 1 59 2 60 3 61 4 62 5 Long-Term Outcome of Gastric Per-Oral Endoscopic 63 6 64 7 Pyloromyotomy in Treatment of Gastroparesis 65 8 66 9 Q9 Mohamed M. Abdelfatah, Alan Noll, Neil Kapil, Rushikesh Shah, Lianyong Li, 67 10 Rosemary Nustas, Baiwen Li, Hui Luo, Huimin Chen, Liang Xia, 68 11 Parit Mekaroonkamol, Nikrad Shahnavaz, Steven Keilin, Field Willingham, 69 12 Jennifer Christie, and Qiang Cai 70 13 71 14 72 Division of Digestive Diseases, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia 15 73 16 74 BACKGROUND & AIMS: Gastric per oral endoscopic pyloromyotomy (GPOEM) is a promising treatment for gastro- 17 paresis. There are few data on the long-term outcomes of this procedure. We investigated long- 75 18 term outcomes of GPOEM treatment of patients with refractory gastroparesis. 76 19 77 20 METHODS: We conducted a retrospective case-series study of all patients who underwent GPOEM for re- 78 21 fractory gastroparesis at a single center (n [ 97), from June 2015 through March 2019; 90 79 22 patients had more than 3 months follow-up data and were included in our final analysis. We 80 23 collected data on gastroparesis cardinal symptom index (GCSI) scores (measurements of 81 24 postprandial fullness or early satiety, nausea and vomiting, and bloating) and SF-36 question- 82 25 naire scores (measures quality of life). The primary outcome was clinical response to GPOEM, 83 26 defined as a decrease of at least 1 point in the average total GCSI score with more than a 25% 84 fi 27 decrease in at least 2 subscales of cardinal symptoms. Recurrence was de ned as a return to 85 28 baseline GCSI or GCSI scores of 3 or more for at least 2 months after an initial complete 86 response. The secondary outcome was the factors that predict GPOEM failure (no response or 29 87 gastroparesis recurrence within 6 months). 30 88 31 89 RESULTS: At initial follow-up (3 to 6 months after GPOEM), 73 patients (81.1%) had a clinical response 32 and significant increases in SF-36 questionnaire scores (indicating increased quality of life) 90 33 whereas 17 patients (18.9%) had no response. Six months after GPOEM, 7.1% had recurrence. 91 34 At 12 months, 8.3% of patients remaining in the study had recurrence. At 24 months, 4.8% of 92 35 patients remaining in the study had a recurrence. At 36 months, 14.3% of patients remaining in 93 36 the study had recurrence. For patients who experienced an initial clinical response, the rate of 94 37 loss of that response per year was 12.9%. In the univariate and multivariate regression anal- 95 38 ysis, a longer duration of gastroparesis reduced the odds of response to GPOEM (odds ratio 96 39 [OR], 0.092; 95% CI, 1.04–1.3; P [ .001). On multivariate logistic regression, patients with high 97 – [ 40 BMIs had increased odds of GPOEM failure (OR, 1.097; 95% CI, 1.022 1.176; P .010) and 98 41 patients receiving psychiatric medications had a higher risk of GPOEM failure (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 99 0.110–1.008; P [ .052). 42 100 43 101 CONCLUSIONS: In retrospective analysis of 90 patients who underwent GPOEM for refractory gastroparesis, 44 102 81.1% had a clinical response at initial follow-up of their procedure. 1 year after GPOEM, 69.1% 45 of all patients had a clinical response and 85.2% of initial responders maintained a clinical 103 46 response. Patients maintained a clinical response and improved quality of life for as long as 3 104 47 years after the procedure. High BMI and long duration gastroparesis were associated with 105 48 failure of GPOEM. 106 49 107 50 Keywords: Therapy; Diabetes; Gastric Emptying; Psychologic. 108 51 109 52 110 53 111 54 112 55 113 Abbreviations used in this paper: BMI, body mass index; GCSI, Gastro- 56 paresis Cardinal Symptom Index; GE, gastric emptying; GES, gastric 114 57 electrical stimulators; GP, gastroparesis; GPOEM, gastric per-oral endo- © 2020 by the AGA Institute 115 scopic pyloromyotomy; ICC, interstitial cells of Cajal; J-tube, jejunostomy 1542-3565/$36.00 58 tube; SF-36, Short Form-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2020.05.039 116 Downloaded for Anonymous User (n/a) at University of Alabama at Birmingham from ClinicalKey.com by Elsevier on November 03, 2020. For personalFLA 5.6.0 use only. DTD No other YJCGH57249_proof uses without permission. Copyright 22 July ©2020. 2020 Elsevier 7:47 Inc. pm All rights ce CJ reserved. 2 Abdelfatah et al Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology Vol. -, No. - 117 Q6 Q5 astroparesis (GP) is a chronic, debilitating motility 175 118 Gdisorder characterized by nausea, vomiting, early What You Need to Know 176 119 satiety, and postprandial fullness.1,2 In 2007, the age- 177 Background 120 adjusted prevalence of GP per 100,000 persons was 178 121 approximately 4-fold higher in women than men: 37.8 Gastric per oral endoscopic pyloromyotomy 179 122 and 9.6, respectively.3 Furthermore, incidence of GP hos- (GPOEM) is a promising treatment for gastroparesis, 180 123 pitalization seems to be rising, reported as high as a yet there are few data on the long-term outcomes of 181 124 300% increase from 1997 to 2013, with an estimated this procedure. 182 4 125 annual health care cost of $568 million. GP can have a Findings 183 126 significant adverse impact on the overall quality of life In retrospective analysis of 90 patients who under- 184 5 127 of the affected patient. No definitive cure for GP went GPOEM for refractory gastroparesis, 80% had 185 128 currently exists with most available treatment options an initial clinical response and more than 90% 186 129 focusing on symptom control with diet modification maintained that response 1 year after the procedure. 187 130 and prokinetic medications. Unfortunately, prokinetic Patients maintained a clinical response and 188 131 medication use is often limited by possible dangerous improved quality of life for as long as 3 years after 189 132 side effects including arrhythmia, tardive dyskinesia, the procedure. 190 133 and tachyphylaxis. 191 134 Gastric electrical stimulators (GES) are an interven- Implications for patient care 192 135 tional therapeutic option, particularly for nausea- GPOEM minimize health care utilization and improve 193 136 predominant GP in patients with diabetes; however, ef- the long term quality of life of patient with refractory 194 137 ficacy of such devices has proven underwhelming.6 It is gastroparesis. High body mass index and long 195 138 estimated that 20% of patients receive no benefit from duration gastroparesis are associated with failure of 196 139 such devices, with open-label studies reporting 1-year GPOEM—these factors should be considered when 197 140 clinical response rates between 45% and 74%.7–13 selecting treatment for patients with gastroparesis. 198 141 Durability of clinical response further limits broad 199 142 adoption of this technology with 1 study reporting only 200 143 25% of patients who found clinical benefit maintaining to evaluate the long-term outcomes of GPOEM in treat- 201 144 response at 3 years and only 26% and 44% of patients ment of patients with refractory GP and identify factors 202 145 reporting reductions in nausea and vomiting, respec- that predict failure of GPOEM. 203 146 tively, at 10 years. In addition to the need for laparo- 204 147 scopic implantation of the device and removal before Materials and Methods 205 148 magnetic resonance imaging, device-related complica- 206 149 tions are reported in 15% of patients. These include 207 After approval by the institutional review board at 150 bowel obstruction, perforation, lead migration, and 208 Emory University, we conducted a retrospective case series 151 wound complications. Complications are associated with 209 – of all patients who underwent GPOEM for refractory GP 152 a removal rate of 6.3%–12.8%.8 10,12,14 210 between June 2015 and March 2019. The procedures were 153 Another therapeutic intervention is pyloric disruptive 211 performed by an endoscopist experienced with the pro- 154 therapy. Laparoscopic pyloromyotomy has been shown 212 cedure and typically assisted by an advanced endoscopy 155 to improve symptom scores by 83%–86% and improves 213 fellow. The Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI) 156 or normalizes gastric emptying (GE) in nearly 60%–90% 214 score was calculated by averaging the mean score of 3 157 of GP patients.15 Widespread use of this surgical 215 subscales: (1) postprandial fullness/early satiety, (2) 158 approach is limited by postoperative adverse events 216 nausea/vomiting, and (3) bloating.28 Eight aspects of 159 including leaks, suture line bleeding, and wound in- 217 quality of life, including physical functioning, role limitation 160 fections.15 Alternatively, gastric per-oral endoscopic 218 caused by physical health, bodily pain, general health, vi- 161 myotomy (GPOEM) is an endoscopic pyloric disruptive 219 tality, social functioning, role limitation caused by 162 therapy for GP wherein a submucosal tunnel is created to 220 emotional problems, and mental health were assessed us- 163 approach and then myotomize the pyloric muscle. 221 ing the Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire. The scores 164 GPOEM was debuted in 2013 following the adoption of 222 were calculated using a revised International Resource 165 per-oral endoscopic myotomy for treatment of acha- 223 Center for Health Care Assessment scoring system and 166 lasia.8 Since that time, several studies have reported an 224 reported as a median of each category. An average score of 167 average of 83.9% (62%–90%) short-term (6 months to 1 225 – all 8 domains was used to assess the overall quality of life 168 year) clinical success on GPOEM in GP patients.16 26 226 similar to our previous publication.29,30 169 Benefits of GPOEM over laparoscopic pyloroplasty 227 170 include shorter operative time, less intraprocedural 228 171 blood loss, and a shorter length of stay.27 Definitions 229 172 Despite the initial promising short-term results, proof 230 173 of longer-term outcome is fundamental for wider adop- Refractory gastroparesis.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Is Pylorus Resecting Pancreaticoduodenectomy a Better Surgical Alternative Than Pylorus Preserving Pancreaticoduodenectomy Regarding Delayed Gastric Emptying?
    Editorial Page 1 of 3 Is pylorus resecting pancreaticoduodenectomy a better surgical alternative than pylorus preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy regarding delayed gastric emptying? Shengliang He, Jin He Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA Correspondence to: Jin He, MD, PhD, FACS. Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins Hospital, 600 N. Wolfe Street, Blalock 665, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA. Email: [email protected]. Provenance: This is an invited Editorial commissioned by Section Editor Dr. Ang Li (Department of General Surgery, Xuanwu Hospital Capital Medical University, Beijing 100053, China). Comment on: Hackert T, Probst P, Knebel P, et al. Pylorus Resection Does Not Reduce Delayed Gastric Emptying After Partial Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial (PROPP Study, DRKS00004191). Ann Surg 2018;267:1021-7. Received: 28 February 2018; Accepted: 19 March 2018; Published: 19 July 2018. doi: 10.21037/dmr.2018.07.04 View this article at: http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/dmr.2018.07.04 Pylorus preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPD) incidences (5). has been popularized as the surgical approach for patients As the currently largest, randomized controlled trial, with periampullary lesions by Traverso and Longmire PROPP study included 188 patients with statistical since 1978 (1). It was first hypothesized to reduce the superiority hypothesis (pylorus resection is associated occurrence of dumping, diarrhea, bile reflux gastritis and with less DGE than pylorus preservation). In the control improve overall nutritional status compared with classic group, duodenum was divided 2 cm distal to the pylorus. pancreaticoduodenectomy, also known as classic Whipple An antecolic end-to-side (ETS) duodenojejunostomy (CW). Based on the Cochrane database review in 2016, was performed 50 cm distal to the hepaticojejunostomy.
    [Show full text]
  • Vomiting in Children
    Vomiting in Children T. Matthew Shields, MD,* Jenifer R. Lightdale, MD, MPH* *Division of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition, UMass Memorial Children’s Medical Center, Department of Pediatrics, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA Education Gaps 1. There are at least 4 known physiologic pathways that can trigger vomiting, 3 of which are extraintestinal. 2. Understanding which pathway is causing a patient’s vomiting will help determine best treatment options, including which antiemetic is most likely to be helpful to mitigate symptoms. 3. Bilious emesis in a newborn should indicate bowel obstruction. 4. Cyclic episodes of vomiting may be indicative of a migraine variant. Objectives After completing this article, readers should be able to: 1. Understand the main pathways that trigger vomiting via the emetic reflex. 2. Differentiate among acute, chronic, and cyclic causes of vomiting. 3. Create a broad differential diagnosis for vomiting based on a patient’s history, physical examination findings, and age. 4. Recognize red flag signs and symptoms of vomiting that require emergent evaluation. 5. Recognize when to begin an antiemetic medication. AUTHOR DISCLOSURE Dr Shields has 6. Select antiemetic medications according to the presumed underlying disclosed no financial relationships relevant to this article. Dr Lightdale has disclosed that she mechanism of vomiting. has a research grant from AbbVie and receives honorarium as a speaker for Mead Johnson. This commentary does not contain a discussion of an unapproved/investigative use of a commercial product/device. Vomiting is a common symptom of numerous underlying conditions for which children frequently present for healthcare. Although vomiting can originate from ABBREVIATIONS the gastrointestinal (GI) tract itself, it can also signal more generalized, systemic 5-HT 5-hydroxytryptamine disorders.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Pediatric Surgery Case Reports 40 (2019) 71–75
    Journal of Pediatric Surgery Case Reports 40 (2019) 71–75 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Pediatric Surgery Case Reports journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/epsc Laparoscopic resection of pancreatic neck lesion with Roux-en-Y T pancreatico-jejunostomy ∗ ∗ Martin Sidlera, , Pratik Shahb, Michael Ashworthc, Paolo De Coppia, a Specialist Neonatal and Paediatric Surgery, Great Ormond Street Hospital, London, United Kingdom b Paediatric Endocrinology, Great Ormond Street Hospital, London, United Kingdom c Paediatric Histopathology, Great Ormond Street Hospital, London, United Kingdom ABSTRACT Background: Congenital hyperinsulinism is a rare disease and patients not re- sponding to medical treatment need near-total or partial pancreatectomy, dependent on whether they have diffuse or focal hyperinsulinism, respectively. While laparoscopic technique for distal and for total pancreatectomy has been developed, minimally invasive resection of the pancreatic neck with pancreatico-jejunostomy has not been reported in children before. Case summary: A 2-year old boy suffered from congenital hyperinsulinism, which was refractory to high-dose medical treatment. The nuclear-medicine scanrevealed a focal lesion of the pancreatic neck, hence partial pancreatectomy was indicated. On laparoscopy, a slightly prominent tissue mass was apparent in the area of the pancreatic neck. We proceeded with laparoscopic mobilisation of the pancreas from the underlying splenic vessels and resected the pancreatic neck and adjacent parts of the body and the head. After macroscopic resection of the mass, the patient's intraoperative blood glucose levels increased to a point where insulin had to be substituted. To drain the pancreatic tail, we formed an end-to-side anastomosis in the proximal Jejunum and brought the open end to the pancreatic tail and performed a laparoscopic pancreatico-jejunostomy.
    [Show full text]
  • Gastroparesis and Dumping Syndrome: Current Concepts and Management
    Journal of Clinical Medicine Review Gastroparesis and Dumping Syndrome: Current Concepts and Management Stephan R. Vavricka 1,2,* and Thomas Greuter 2 1 Center of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, CH-8048 Zurich, Switzerland 2 Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital Zurich, CH-8091 Zurich, Switzerland * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 21 June 2019; Accepted: 23 July 2019; Published: 29 July 2019 Abstract: Gastroparesis and dumping syndrome both evolve from a disturbed gastric emptying mechanism. Although gastroparesis results from delayed gastric emptying and dumping syndrome from accelerated emptying of the stomach, the two entities share several similarities among which are an underestimated prevalence, considerable impairment of quality of life, the need for a multidisciplinary team setting, and a step-up treatment approach. In the following review, we will present an overview of the most important clinical aspects of gastroparesis and dumping syndrome including epidemiology, pathophysiology, presentation, and diagnostics. Finally, we highlight promising therapeutic options that might be available in the future. Keywords: gastroparesis; dumping syndrome; pathophysiology; clinical presentation; treatment 1. Introduction Gastroparesis and dumping syndrome both evolve from a disturbed gastric emptying mechanism. While gastroparesis results from significantly delayed gastric emptying, dumping syndrome is a consequence of increased flux of food into the small bowel [1,2]. The two entities share several important similarities: (i) gastroparesis and dumping syndrome are frequent, but also frequently overlooked; (ii) they affect patient’s quality of life considerably due to possibly debilitating symptoms; (iii) patients should be taken care of within a multidisciplinary team setting; and (iv) treatment should follow a step-up approach from dietary modifications and patient education to pharmacological interventions and, finally, surgical procedures and/or enteral feeding.
    [Show full text]
  • Endoscopic Approaches to Gastroparesis
    Endoscopic Approaches to Gastroparesis Kevin Liu, MD,1 Thomas Enke, MD,2 and Aziz Aadam, MD1 1Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois 2Department of Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois Corresponding author: Abstract: Gastroparesis is a complex syndrome with multiple Dr Aziz Aadam underlying etiologies and pathophysiologies that can cause signif- 676 North Saint Clair St, Suite 1400 icant morbidity for patients. Currently, there are limited effective Chicago, IL 60611 and durable medical and surgical treatments for patients with Tel: (312) 695-3364 E-mail: [email protected] gastroparesis. As such, there has been recent innovation and development in minimally invasive endoscopic treatments for gastroparesis. Endoscopic therapies that have been investigated for gastroparesis include enteral feeding tube placement, intrapyloric botulinum toxin injection, transpyloric stenting, gastric peroral endoscopic myotomy, and gastric electrical stimulation. This article aims to assess the effectiveness of current endoscopic therapies, as well as discuss future directions for endoscopic therapies, in the management of gastroparesis. astroparesis is defined as a complex syndrome of symp- toms, including early satiety, postprandial fullness, nausea, vomiting, bloating, and upper abdominal pain, with a Gcorresponding objective delay in gastric emptying in the absence of mechanical obstruction.1 The primary etiologies
    [Show full text]
  • Laparoscopic Vs. Open Pyloromyotomy in Treatment of Infantile Hypertrophic Pyloric Stenosis
    ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 21 August 2020 doi: 10.3389/fped.2020.00426 Laparoscopic vs. Open Pyloromyotomy in Treatment of Infantile Hypertrophic Pyloric Stenosis Ibrahim Ismail, Radi Elsherbini, Adham Elsaied, Kamal Aly and Hesham Sheir* Pediatric Surgery Department, Mansoura University Chlidren Hospital, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt Background/Purpose: Laparoscopic pyloromyotomy gained wide popularity in management of pyloric stenosis with contradictory results regarding its benefits over classic open approach. This study aimed at comparing both regarding their safety, efficiency, and outcome. Methods: This is a prospective randomized controlled study performed from April 2017 to April 2019. It included 80 patients, divided randomly into two groups, where laparoscopic pyloromyotomy was performed in group A and open pyloromyotomy Edited by: in group B. Both groups were compared regarding operative time, post-operative Henri Steyaert, pain score, time required to reach full feeding, hospital stay, complications, and Queen Fabiola Children’s University Hospital, Belgium parents’ satisfaction. Reviewed by: Results: Median operative time was 21 min in group A vs. 30 min in group B (P = 0). Oliver J. Muensterer, Johannes Gutenberg University Pain Assessment in Neonates scores were generally higher in group B with more doses Mainz, Germany of analgesics required (P = 0). Mean time needed to reach full feeding was 15.2 and Matthijs Oomen, 18.8 h in groups A and B, respectively (P = 0). Median hospital stay was 19 h in group Amsterdam University Medical Centers – AMC, Netherlands A and 22 h in group B (P = 0.004). Parents’ satisfaction also was in favor of group *Correspondence: A (P = 0.045). Although no significant difference was reported between both groups Hesham Sheir regarding early and late complications, some complications such as mucosal perforation [email protected] and incomplete pyloromyotomy occurred in the laparoscopic group only.
    [Show full text]
  • Endoscopic Pyloromyotomy for Postesopha- Gectomy Gastric Outlet Obstruction
    Cases and Techniques Library (CTL) E345 Endoscopic pyloromyotomy for postesopha- gectomy gastric outlet obstruction Fig. 1 A 54-year-old woman presented with vomiting 2 weeks after esophagectomy with gastric pull-up. a Esophagography revealed marked delay in passage of contrast through the pylorus. b Fluid retention was noted on esophago- gastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and the scope could not be passed through the pylorus. Postesophagectomy gastric outlet ob- vomiting. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy The mucosal entry was then closed using struction occurs in 20% –30% of patients (EGD) revealed significant food stasis in four endoscopic clips (●" Video 1). who undergo esophagectomy and is asso- the pulled-up stomach and again the en- On the following day, fluoroscopy showed ciated with significant morbidity and de- doscope could not be passed through the significant improvement in passage of layed recovery [1]. Recently, endoscopic pylorus. contrast (●" Fig. 3) and the gastroscope pyloromyotomy, also called gastric per- Endoscopic pyloromyotomy was per- (GIF-H260; Olympus) could pass smooth- oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), has formed with the patient under conscious ly through the pylorus. The patient was been reported, in pigs and in a patient sedation. Saline solution mixed with indi- started on a liquid diet and was dis- with refractory diabetic gastroparesis [2, go carmine was injected on the greater charged the next day. She remains well 3]. We report a case of postesophagec- curvature 5cm proximal to the pylorus. A 10 weeks after the procedure and appro- tomy delayed gastric emptying that was 1.5-cm mucosal incision was made priately tolerates a general diet. successfully treated with endoscopic (●" Fig.2) using a DualKnife (KD-650L; pyloromyotomy.
    [Show full text]
  • Basic Surgical Techniques
    BASIC SURGICAL TECHNIQUES Textbook Authors: György Wéber MD, PhD, med. habil. János Lantos MSc, PhD Balázs Borsiczky MD, PhD Andrea Ferencz MD, PhD Gábor Jancsó MD, PhD Sándor Ferencz MD Szabolcs Horváth MD Hossein Haddadzadeh Bahri MD Ildikó Takács MD Borbála Balatonyi MD University of Pécs, Medical School Department of Surgical Research and Techniques 20 Kodály Zoltán Steet, H-7624 Pécs, Telephone: +36 72 535 820 Website:http://soki.aok.pte.hu 2008 1 PREFACE The healing is impossible without entering into suffering people’s feelings and to humble yourself in your profession. All these are completed by the ability to manage the immediate and critical situations dynamically and to analyze the diseases interdisciplinarily (e.g. diagnosis, differential diagnosis, appropriate decision among the alternative possibilities of treatment, etc.). A successful surgical intervention requires even more than this. It needs the perfect, aimful and economical coordination of operational movements. The refined technique of the handling and uniting the tissues –in the case of manual skills– is attainable by many practices, and the good surgeon works on the perfection of this technique in his daily operating activities. The most important task in the medical education is to teach the problem-oriented thinking and the needed practical ability. The graduate medical student will notice in a short time that a medical practitioner principally needs the practical knowledge and manual skill in provision for the sick. “The surgical techniques” is a popular subJect. It is a subJect in which the medical students -for the first time- will see the inside of the living and pulsating organism.
    [Show full text]
  • Endoscopic Innovations in Gastric and Pyloric Disease
    9 Review Article Page 1 of 9 Endoscopic innovations in gastric and pyloric disease Megan Lundgren, John Rodriguez General Surgery, Digestive Disease Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA Contributions: (I) Conception and design: Both authors; (II) Administrative support: Both authors; (III) Provision of study materials or patients: Both authors; (IV) Collection and assembly of data: Both authors; (V) Data analysis and interpretation: Both authors; (VI) Manuscript writing: Both authors; (VII) Final approval of manuscript: Both authors. Correspondence to: Megan Lundgren, MD. Advanced Laparoscopic/Endoscopic Fellow, General Surgery, Digestive Disease Institute, 9500 Euclid Ave. Desk A100, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA. Email: [email protected]. Abstract: Endoluminal surgery has innovated the management of foregut disorders including gastric motility disorders such as gastroparesis, upper gastrointestinal (GI) neoplasms including early-stage gastric cancer, gastric outlet obstruction, and management of post-operative foregut complications. Foregut pathologies that would have otherwise required abdominal incisions can now be successfully managed in the most minimally invasive available fashion. Intramural intervention, such as that used for per-oral pyloromyotomy (POP) which will be described here, has revolutionized the treatment of motility disorders of the foregut. Many aspects of the techniques described in this chapter share and build off of one another and several of the endoscopic instruments utilized are also shared across procedures. This is one of the many reasons endoluminal surgery has blossomed over the last two decades. To truly flourish as a foregut surgeon is to have the capability to perform the open, laparoscopic and the existing and future endoscopic alternatives of procedures of this specialty, as well as to manage complications in an endoscopic fashion when possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Physicians As Assistants at Surgery: 2016 Update
    Physicians as Assistants at Surgery: 2016 Update Participating Organizations: American College of Surgeons American Academy of Ophthalmology American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons American Academy of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery American Association of Neurological Surgeons American Pediatric Surgical Association American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons American Society of Plastic Surgeons American Society of Transplant Surgeons American Urological Association Congress of Neurological Surgeons Society for Surgical Oncology Society for Vascular Surgery Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Physicians as Assistants at Surgery: 2016 Update INTRODUCTION This is the seventh edition of Physicians as Assistants at Surgery, a study first undertaken in 1994 by the American College of Surgeons and other surgical specialty organizations. The study reviews all procedures listed in the “Surgery” section of the 2016 American Medical Association’s Current Procedural Terminology (CPT TM). Each organization was asked to review new codes since 2013 that are applicable to their specialty and determine whether the operation requires the use of a physician as an assistant at surgery: (1) almost always; (2) almost never; or (3) some of the time. The results of this study are presented in the accompanying report, which is in a table format. This table presents information about the need for a physician as an assistant at surgery. Also, please note that an indication that a physician would “almost never” be needed to assist at surgery for some procedures does NOT imply that a physician is never needed. The decision to request that a physician assist at surgery remains the responsibility of the primary surgeon and, when necessary, should be a payable service.
    [Show full text]
  • Variations Between Hospitals in Antireflux Procedures in Children
    ARTICLE Variations Between Hospitals in Antireflux Procedures in Children Adam B. Goldin, MD, MPH; Michelle Garrison, PhD; Dimitri Christakis, MD, MPH Objective: To examine the differences and trends in nonincidental appendectomies, 14 895 pyloromyoto- pediatric antireflux procedures (ARPs) across individual mies, and 23 527 gastrostomy tube placements were pediatric hospitals over time. identified. The average number of ARPs per appendec- tomy, pyloromyotomy, and gastrostomy tube place- Design: Retrospective cohort study. ment declined annually across free-standing pediatric institutions. When these annual changes are examined Setting: Administrative database containing inpatient within each hospital individually, however, it appears records with discharge dates between January 1, 2001, that such changes are not occurring equally, in that and March 31, 2006. some hospitals are performing significantly greater and some significantly fewer ARPs relative to these common Participants: Hospitalized pediatric patients younger procedures. than 18 years with primary procedure codes for ARP, ap- pendectomy, pyloromyotomy, and gastrostomy tube Conclusions: The number of ARPs being performed in placement. The comparisons with admissions for these 36 free-standing children’s hospitals is decreasing each common procedures were used to identify changes in the year relative to several operations commonly performed incidence of ARP per hospital per year. at these institutions. Despite this overall annual de- Main Outcome Measures: The ratio of ARPs to ap- crease, there is tremendous variation between indi- pendectomies, pyloromyotomies, gastrostomies, and all vidual hospitals in how frequently ARPs are being per- 3 procedures combined, in each hospital by year. formed relative to these procedures. Results: During our study period 13 691 ARPs, 41 441 Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med.
    [Show full text]
  • IQI 24 Incidental Appendectomy in the Elderly Rate
    AHRQ QI, Inpatient Quality Indicators #24, Technical Specifications, Incidental Appendectomy in the Elderly Rate www.qualityindicators.ahrq.gov Incidental Appendectomy in the Elderly Rate Inpatient Quality Indicators #24 Technical Specifications Provider-Level Indicator Procedure Utilization Indicator AHRQ Quality Indicators, Version 4.4, March 2012 Numerator Number of incidental appendectomies (procedures) among cases meeting the inclusion and exclusion rules for the denominator. ICD-9-CM Incidental appendectomy procedure codes1,2: 4382 LAP VERTICAL GASTRECTOMY 4711 LAP INCID APPENDECTOMY 471 INCIDENTAL APPENDECTOMY 4719 OTHER INCID APPENDECTOMY 1 Bolded codes are new to the current fiscal year. 2 Italicized codes are not active in the current fiscal year. Denominator All discharges, age 65 years and older, with ICD-9-CM codes for abdominal and pelvic surgery. ICD-9-CM Abdominal and pelvic surgery procedure codes1: 1711 LAP DIR ING HERN-GRAFT 4342 LOCAL GASTR EXCISION NEC 1712 LAP INDIR ING HERN-GRAFT 4349 LOCAL GASTR DESTRUCT NEC 1713 LAP ING HERN-GRAFT NOS 435 PROXIMAL GASTRECTOMY 1721 LAP BIL DIR ING HRN-GRFT 436 DISTAL GASTRECTOMY 1722 LAP BI INDIR ING HRN-GRF 437 PART GASTREC W JEJ ANAST 1723 LAP BI DR/IND ING HRN-GR 4381 PART GAST W JEJ TRANSPOS 1724 LAP BIL ING HERN-GRF NOS 4389 OPN/OTH PART GASTRECTOMY 412 SPLENOTOMY 4391 TOT GAST W INTES INTERPO 4133 OPEN SPLEEN BIOPSY 4399 TOTAL GASTRECTOMY NEC 4141 SPLENIC CYST MARSUPIAL 4400 VAGOTOMY NOS 4142 EXC SPLENIC LESION/TISS 4401 TRUNCAL VAGOTOMY 4143 PARTIAL SPLENECTOMY 4402 HIGHLY
    [Show full text]