Outcome of endoscopic vacuum therapy for duodenal perforation.

BACKGROUND: Duodenal defects are complex clinical situations, and their management is challenging and associated with high mortality. Besides surgery, endoscopic treatment options exist, but the size and location of the perforation can limit their application. We present a retrospective study, demonstrating a successful application of endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) for duodenal leaks. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of all patients who underwent EVT for duodenal perforations between 2016 and 2021 at two tertiary centers. We analyzed demographic and clinical patient characteristics, surgical outcomes, leak characteristics, sponge-related complications, and success rate. RESULTS: Indications for treatment with EVT in the duodenum consisted of leak after duodenal suture of a perforated ulcer (n = 4), iatrogenic perforation after endoscopic resection (n = 2), iatrogenic perforation during surgery (n = 2), and anastomotic leak after upper gastrointestinal surgery (n = 2). EVT was used as a first-line treatment in seven patients and as a second-line treatment in three patients. EVT was successfully applied in all interventions (n = 10, 100%). Overall, EVT lead to definitive closure of the defects in eight out of ten patients (80%). No severe EVT-related adverse events occurred. CONCLUSION: EVT is safe and technically feasible, so it emerges as a promising endoscopic treatment option for duodenal leaks. However, multidisciplinary collaboration and management are important to reduce the occurrence of postoperative complications, and to improve recovery rates.

Experience in diagnosis and treatment of duodenal ulcer perforation in children.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to summarize our experience in diagnosis and treatment of pediatric duodenal ulcer perforation in a National Center for Children's Health. METHODS: Fifty-two children with duodenal perforation hospitalized in Beijing Children's Hospital Affiliated to Capital Medical University from January 2007 to December 2021 were retrospectively collected. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, patients with duodenal ulcer perforation were included in the group. They were divided into the surgery group and the conservative group according to whether they received surgery. RESULTS: A total of 45 cases (35 males and 10 females) were included, with a median age of 13.0 (0.3-15.4) years. Forty cases (40/45, 88.9%) were over 6 years old, and 31 (31/45, 68.9%) were over 12 years old. Among the 45 cases, 32 cases (32/45, 71.1%) were examined for Helicobacter pylori (HP), and 25 (25/32, 78.1%) were positive. There were 13 cases in the surgery group and 32 cases in the conservative group, without a significant difference in age between the two groups (P = 0.625). All cases in the surgery group and the conservative group started with abdominal pain. The proportion of history time within 24 h in the two groups was 6/13 and 12/32 (P = 0.739), and the proportion of fever was 11/13 and 21/32 (P = 0.362). The proportion of pneumoperitoneum in the surgery group was higher than that in the conservative group (12/13 vs. 15/32, P = 0.013). The fasting days in the surgery group were shorter than those in the conservative group (7.7 ± 2.92 vs. 10.3 ± 2.78 days, P = 0.014). There was no significant difference in the total hospital stay (13.6 ± 5.60 vs14.8 ± 4.60 days, P = 0.531). The operation methods used in the surgery group were all simple sutures through laparotomy (9 cases) or laparoscopy (4 cases). All patients recovered smoothly after surgery. CONCLUSION: Duodenal ulcer perforation in children is more common in adolescents, and HP infection is the main cause. Conservative treatment is safe and feasible, but the fasting time is longer than the surgery group. A simple suture is the main management for the surgery group.

Analysis of risk factors for duodenal leak after repair of a duodenal perforation.

BACKGROUND: Repairing of a duodenal perforation is a well accepted procedure, but clinically, approximately 4% of patients develop duodenal leaks after perforation repair, increasing the risk of death. We retrospectively analyzed clinical data from 168 patients at our hospital to explore risk factors for duodenal leak after perforation repair and developed a nomogram for predicting postoperative duodenal leak. METHODS: This retrospective case-control study totalled 168 patients undergoing repair of a duodenal perforation with omentopexy at the General Surgery Department, Dongnan Hospital of Xiamen University, from January 2012 to January 2022. The patients were divided into the non-leak group and the leak group. Risk factors were evaluated by analyzing the patient's sex, shock, diameter and anatomic position of the ulcer, use of NSAIDS and Glucocorticoid, history of drinking, diabetes, chronic diseases, age, time of onset of symptoms and lab tests. RESULT: One hundred fifty-six patients (92.9%) who did not develop leaks after repair of a duodenal perforation were included in the non-leak group, and 12 (7.1%) developed leaks were included in the leak group. In univariate analysis, there were significant differences between the two groups referring to age, shock, NSAIDs, albumin, and perforation size (P < 0.05). The area under the ROC curve for perforation diameter was 0.737, the p-value was 0.006, the optimal cutoff point was 11.5, sensitivity was 58.3%, and specificity was 93.6%, the positive predictive value is 41.1%, and the negative predictive value is 98.0%. In the internal validation of the performance of the nomogram, the C-index and AUC of the model were 0.896(95%CI 0.81-0.98), demonstrating that the nomogram model was well calibrated. CONCLUSION: The study discussed the risk factors for postoperative duodenal leak in patients undergoing repair of a duodenal perforation, and a nomogram was constructed to predict the leak. Future prospective studies with large sample sizes and multiple centres are needed to further elucidate the risk of duodenal leak after repair of a duodenal perforation.

Drug-induced duodenal perforation in the paediatric patient with thalassemia major, an unreported side effect of iron- chelating agent: A case report.

Duodenal ulcer disease is uncommon in paediatric age group. Its perforation is even rarer. However, it should be kept in mind when examining children with acute abdomen especially if there are signs of shock or possibility of upper gastrointestinal bleed. We report a case of a 6 years old female child, a known case of thalassemia major and taking oral Deferasirox since two years of age. She had atypical presentation as there was no previous history of peptic ulcer disease and she only suffered epigastric pain and vomiting for a week but due to lack of proper diagnosis at a local clinic developed duodenal ulcer perforation, which was ultimately diagnosed at a tertiary care hospital and managed with Graham Patch Closure.

Migration of fish bones into abdominal para-aortic tissue from the duodenum after leading to duodenal perforation: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Migration of fish bones into abdominal para-aortic tissue after penetrating the junction of 3rd and 4th part of duodenum is incredibly rare. CASE PRESENTATION: A 68-year-old man was admitted to our hospital with persistent colic in the lower abdomen after eating fish two weeks ago. Abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan showed High density streaks along the anterior and lower edges of the 3rd part of duodenum with peripheral exudation and localized peritonitis. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy didn't find foreign bodies and perforations in the digestive tract. Laparoscopic surgery and intraoperative endoscopy were made to detect foreign bodies and perforation site was found. After transition to open surgery, the fish bone was found in abdominal para-aortic tissue and removed without complications. Postoperative recovery is smooth, and the patient resumed normal diet and was discharged. CONCLUSIONS: It is difficult to choose a treatment plan for foreign bodies at the 3rd part of the duodenum, because it is difficult to judge the damage caused by the foreign body to the intestine and the positional relationship with the surrounding important organs. Conservative treatment or surgical treatment both have huge risks. The handling of this situation will extremely test the psychology, physical strength and professional experience of the surgeon.

Endoscopic negative pressure therapy as stand-alone treatment for perforated duodenal diverticulum: presentation of two cases.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic negative pressure therapy is a novel and successful treatment method for a variety of gastrointestinal leaks. This therapy mode has been frequently described for rectal and esophageal leakages. Duodenal diverticular perforations are rare but life-threatening events. The early diagnosis of duodenal diverticular perforation is often complicated by inconclusive symptoms. This is the first report about endoscopic negative pressure therapy in patients with perforated duodenal diverticula. CASE PRESENTATION: We present two cases of duodenal diverticula perforations treated with endoscopic negative pressure therapy as stand-alone treatment. Start of symptoms varied from one to three days before hospital admission. Early sectional imaging led to the diagnosis of duodenal diverticular perforation. Both patients were treated with endoluminal endoscopic negative pressure therapy with simultaneous feeding option. Three respective changes of the suction device were performed. Both patients were treated with antibiotics and antimycotics during their hospital stay and be discharged from hospital after 20 days. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first description of successful stand-alone treatment by endoscopic negative pressure therapy in two patients with perforated duodenal diverticulum. We thus strongly recommend to attempt interventional therapy with endoluminal endoscopic negative pressure therapy in patients with duodenal diverticular perforations upfront to surgery.

Establishment of an in-vivo porcine delayed perforation model after duodenal endoscopic submucosal dissection.

OBJECTIVES: Duodenal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors has a significant incidence rate of delayed perforation. Although several methods have been proposed to prevent delayed perforation, the most appropriate methods remain unclear. Currently, there is no appropriate animal model to validate methods for preventing duodenal delayed perforation. This study aimed to establish an in-vivo porcine delayed perforation model after duodenal submucosal dissection. METHODS: Two porcine models underwent either ESD or surgical submucosal dissection. In the surgical dissection model, an inverted duodenal mucosa was resected with electrosurgical energy. In the ESD model, a gauze was placed behind the duodenum with grasped transverse part to improve endoscopic maneuverability. The mucosal defects after dissection were treated with omental coverage without suture in both models. All models were euthanized 0-5 days after procedure. Body weight; resection size; procedure dissection time; presence of intraoperative perforation and delayed perforation; and adhesion score were assessed. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in body weight and adhesion score between the two models. Resection size was significantly larger in the surgical dissection models than in the ESD models (19 mm vs 14.3 mm, P < 0.01). Procedure time was significantly longer in the ESD models than in the surgical models (45.2 minutes vs 4.5 minutes, P < 0.01). Delayed perforation rates in the surgical dissection models and the ESD models were 0% (0/5) and 100% (5/5), respectively (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This study indicated that our in-vivo porcine duodenal ESD model is beneficial to evaluate a prevention strategy for delayed perforation.

Perforation of the excluded segment without pneumoperitoneum following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery: case report and literature review.

BACKGROUND: Because of the increasing prevalence of obesity and bariatric surgery (Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as the gold standard), there is a still growing population of people with altered post-operative anatomy. Although the most common early and late complications following RYGB are well known, they can still be difficult to diagnose. The altered anatomy after RYGB can create a real diagnostic and therapeutic challenge since routine examinations can be negative. CASE REPORT: We present a rare case of a 38-year-old woman with acute abdominal pain and a history of RYGB who proved to have a duodenal perforation in the absence of free air on radiologic examination. The perforation was closed laparoscopically and proton pump inhibitors were administered. CONCLUSIONS: Perforations of the excluded segment in RYGB patients are rare and represent a diagnostic challenge, as pneumoperitoneum is usually absent and the excluded segment is difficult to access. Despite negative diagnostic findings, laparoscopic exploration should always be considered.

Duodenal perforations secondary to a migrated biliary plastic stent successfully treated by endoscope: case-report and review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage (ERBD) is the most frequently performed procedure for treating benign or malignant biliary obstruction. Although duodenal perforations secondary to the biliary plastic stent are quite rare, they can be life-threatening. The treatment strategies for such perforations are diverse and continue to be debated. CASE PRESENTATION: We report three cases of duodenal perforation due to the migration of biliary plastic stents that were successfully managed using an endoscope. The three patients were admitted on complaints of abdominal pain after they underwent ERBD. Abdominal computerized tomography (CT) revealed migration of the biliary plastic stents and perforation of the duodenum. Endoscopy was immediately performed, and perforation was confirmed. All migrated stents were successfully extracted endoscopically by using snares. In two of the three cases, the duodenal defects were successfully closed with haemostatic clips after stent retrieval, and subsequently, endoscopic nasobiliary drainage tubes were inserted. After the endoscopy and medical treatment, all three patients recovered completely. CONCLUSIONS: Duodenal perforations due to the migration of biliary stents are rare, and the treatment strategies remain controversial. Our cases and cases in the literature demonstrate that abdominal CT is the preferred method of examination for such perforations, and endoscopic management is appropriate as a first-line treatment approach.

Diagnosis and management of duodenal perforations: a narrative review.

Duodenal perforation is a rare, but potentially life-threatening injury. Multiple etiologies are associated with duodenal perforations such as peptic ulcer disease, iatrogenic causes and trauma. Computed tomography with intravenous and oral contrast is the most valuable imaging technique to identify duodenal perforation. In some cases, surgical exploration may be necessary for diagnosis. Specific treatment depends upon the nature of the disease process that caused the perforation, the timing, location and extent of the injury and the clinical condition of the patient. Conservative management seems to be feasible in stable patients with sealed perforations. Immediate surgery is required for patients presenting with peritonitis and/or intra-abdominal sepsis. Minimally invasive techniques are safe and effective alternatives to conventional open surgery in selected patients with duodenal perforations. Here we review the current literature on duodenal perforations and discuss the outcomes of different treatment strategies.

Purse-string sutures using novel endoloops and repositionable clips for the closure of large iatrogenic duodenal perforations with single-channel endoscope: a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Serious complications due to perforation restrict the development of duodenal endoscopic treatment. The key stage for remediation is the successful endoscopic closure to prevent peritonitis and the need for surgical intervention. This report aimed to present a new simple method for the closure of large iatrogenic duodenal perforations with purse-string sutures using the novel endoloops and repositionable clips through a single-channel endoscope. METHODS: A total of 23 patients with iatrogenic duodenal perforations ≥ 1 cm were retrospectively studied who were presently treated by purse-string sutures using the novel endoloops and the repositionable hemostasis clips with the single-channel endoscope at four institutes. During and after the procedure, a 20-gauge needle was used to relieve the pneumoperitoneum or subcutaneous emphysema. Finally, a gastroduodenal decompression tube was placed. RESULTS: The median maximum diameter of iatrogenic duodenal perforations was 1.65 cm (range 1.0-3.0 cm). Complete endoscopic closure of all 23 perforations was achieved. No patient had severe complications such as peritonitis. The wounds were healed and no obvious duodenal stricture was observed in all cases after 3 months. CONCLUSION: Purse-string sutures using the novel endoloops and repositionable endoclips through single-channel endoscope were feasible, effective and easy methods for the closure of large duodenal iatrogenic perforations.

Laparoscopy in Acute Care Surgery: Repair of Perforated Duodenal Ulcer.

INTRODUCTION: The use of laparoscopic management as a first choice for the treatment of duodenal perforation is gaining ground but is not routine in many centers. In this report, we aim to report our experience with laparoscopy as the first approach for the repair of duodenal perforation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective review of patients during our initial experience with the use of laparoscopy for the treatment of duodenal perforation between 2009 and 2013. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients underwent management of duodenal perforation. Laparoscopy was attempted initially in 76 patients (76%) and completed in 64 patients (64%). The length of hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic group (mean 2.6) than in the open group (mean 3.1) (p = 0.008). Complications developed in 14 patients (20%). There was a tendency towards fewer admissions to intensive care, less acute kidney injuries, and less acute respiratory distress syndrome in the laparoscopic group. In patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery, the chances of uneventful recovery were 4.3 times higher than in those patients who underwent open surgery (95% CI 1.3-13.5, p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopy in the treatment of perforated duodenal ulcer is safe and can be utilized as a routine approach for the treatment of this pathology.

Routine versus selective upper gastrointestinal contrast series after omental patch repair for gastric or duodenal perforation.

BACKGROUND: There are no guidelines on the routine or selective use of contrast upper gastrointestinal series (UGI) after omental patch repair (OPR) of a gastric (GP) or duodenal perforation (DP). This study aims to elucidate whether the use of selective versus routine contrast study will lead to worse clinical outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 115 (n = 115) patients with OPR of GP or DP was performed. Data were obtained from seven Florida Hospital campuses. Patients aged 18 and older from 2006 to 2016 were identified by ICD9 billing information. Patients were divided into two groups: UGI and no UGI. The UGI group was subdivided into selective versus routine. A selective UGI was defined as one or more of the following after post-operative day 3: WBC >12,000, peritonitis, fever >100.4 F, tachycardia >110 bpm on three or more assessments, and any UGI performed after POD 7. Perioperative symptoms, perforation location, size, abdominal contamination, laparoscopic or open, leak detection, length of stay, mortality, and reoperation within 2 weeks were also examined. RESULTS: No differences between the UGI group and non-UGI group relating to preoperative symptoms, leak detection, death, and reoperation rate were revealed. Differences in length of stay were found to be statistically significant with the UGI group and non-UGI at a median of 15.5 and 8 days, respectively. In the UGI subgroup, 20 of the 29 patients received selective studies. There were no statistical differences identified in leak detection, death, and reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of leak detection, reoperation, and death in patients with GP or DP repaired with omental patch utilizing an UGI study were not statistically significant. An increased length of stay was observed within the UGI group. There was no advantage demonstrated between a selective versus routine UGI; therefore, the use of selective UGI should be based upon clinical indications.

Sealed Duodenal Perforation by nail ingestion in a Child.

Unintentional foreign body ingestion is common among children. Normally, these ingested foreign bodies pass spontaneously and the rest can be removed endoscopically; only few ingested foreign bodies lead to complications and need surgical intervention. We are reporting a case of accidental nail ingestion in a 10-year-old child which led to a sealed perforation of duodenum. Operative management included primary duodenal repair after removal of nail. Post operative recovery was smooth and oral was started on day 5. We recommend that all ingested sharp and large foreign bodies should be removed endoscopically, if not passed spontaneously.

A single-centre experience of Roux-en-Y enteric drainage for pancreas transplantation.

Exocrine drainage following pancreas transplantation can be achieved by drainage into the bladder or bowel, the latter typically by direct duodeno-jejunostomy; the use of Roux-en-Y enteric drainage is uncommon. We report a retrospective analysis of a single-centre experience of Roux-en-Y enteric drainage following pancreas transplantation. Over a 14-year period (2001-2015), 204 consecutive adult pancreas transplants were performed (96.6% simultaneous pancreas and kidney transplants), of which 26.0% were from donors after circulatory death (DCD). During a median follow-up of 67 months (range 13-183 months), 14 (6.9%) recipients experienced complications related to their enteric drainage. Complications during follow-up included early enteric anastomotic haemorrhage (five patients), non-anastomotic enteric bleeding (one patient), small bowel obstruction (four patients) and graft duodenal perforation (two within 6 weeks, five beyond 12 months). No recipient lost their graft as a direct result of complications related to enteric drainage. Patient and pancreas graft survival at 1 year was 99.0% and 94.0% and at 5 years 91.3% and 84.9%, respectively. We conclude that Roux-en-Y enteric drainage following pancreas transplantation is a safe and effective procedure and facilitates graft salvage in the event of graft duodenal perforation.

A systematic review of the management and outcome of ERCP related duodenal perforations using a standardized classification system.

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of duodenal perforation after ERCP ranges from 0.09% to 1.67% and mortality up to 8%. METHODS: This systematic review was registered in Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, PROSPERO. Stapfer classification of ERCP-related duodenal perforations was used. RESULTS: The systematic search yielded 259 articles. Most frequent post-ERCP perforation was Stapfer type II (58.4%), type I second most frequent perforation (17.8%) followed by Stapfer type III in 13.2% and type IV in 10.6%. Rate of NOM was lowest in Stapfer type I perforations (13%), moderate in type III lesions (58.1%) and high in other types of perforations (84.2% in type II and 84.6% in IV). In patients underwent early surgical treatment (<24 h from ERCP) the most frequent operation was simple duodenal suture with or without omentopexy (93.7%). In patients undergoing late surgical treatment (>24 h from ERCP) interventions performed were more complex. In type I lesions post-operative mortality rate was higher in patients underwent late operation (>24 h). In type I lesions, failure of NOM occurred in 42.8% of patients. In type II failure of NOM occurred in 28.9% of patients and in type III there was failure of NOM in only 11.1%, none in type IV. Postoperative mortality after NOM failure was 75% in type I, 22.5% in type II and none died after surgical treatment for failure of NOM in type III perforations. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review showed that in patients with Stapfer type I lesions, early surgical treatment gives better results, however the opposite seems true in Stapfer III and IV lesions.

Acute Yellow Phosphorus Poisoning Causing Fulminant Hepatic Failure with Parenchymal Hemorrhages and Contained Duodenal Perforation.

White phosphorus is well known as a potent hepatotoxin and a severe local and systemic toxin causing damage to gastrointestinal, hepatic, cardiovascular, and renal systems. It is used in the manufacture of matches, fireworks, rodenticide, and fertilizers. Death results due to acute liver failure. Management of yellow phosphorus (YP) poisoning is supportive with no antidote available. Here, we present a case of acute YP poisoning in a 25-year-old female presenting with fulminant hepatic failure and duodenal perforation.

A Rare Case of Gastroduodenal Artery Aneurysm Rupture with Perforated Duodenal Ulcer.

Purpose: In this case we report a rare presentation of a ruptured gastroduodenal artery aneurysm (GDA) accompanied by a duodenal perforation. It contributes to the scientific literature by discussing the management approach and results in a patient with dual complications and emphasizes the importance of early diagnosis and appropriate treatment. Case presentation: A 50-year-old male presented with severe abdominal pain, anemia, and signs of hemodynamic instability. Diagnostic imaging including CTA revealed a large, thrombosed gastroduodenal artery aneurysm with evidence of rupture. The patient underwent open surgical exploration and repair to address both the aneurysm and the duodenal perforation. The patient's recovery was satisfactory and was discharged home in stable condition. Conclusion: Early diagnosis and appropriate management in gastroduodenal artery aneurysms is crucial. There is a need for individualized surgical interventions based on the patient's hemodynamic status and associated complications. Dual complications required open surgical exploration and repair, resulting in favorable outcomes.

Choledochoduodenostomy combined with Billroth II procedure for extrahepatic biliary obstruction and duodenal perforation in a cat.

Case summary: A 5-year-old neutered Somali cat presented with a 2-week history of icterus. Diagnostic imaging revealed extrahepatic biliary obstruction (EHBO) due to a common bile duct (CBD) mass. During exploratory laparotomy, a duodenal perforation was discovered incidentally. Choledochoduodenostomy combined with the Billroth II procedure was performed after resection of the CBD mass and the proximal duodenum to treat the EHBO and duodenal perforation. Based on histological and immunohistochemical findings, the CBD mass was diagnosed as a neuroendocrine carcinoma with gastrin-producing cell differentiation. The cat recovered almost uneventfully and was discharged 11 days after surgery. The cat survived for nearly 100 days without recurrence of EHBO or duodenal perforation; however, intermittent vomiting and weight loss persisted despite supportive medications. Relevance and novel information: To the best of our knowledge, there is no detailed report on the application of choledochoduodenostomy combined with the Billroth II procedure in cats, as we used to treat the EHBO and duodenal perforation in the present case. As serum gastrin concentrations were elevated on the first day of hospitalisation, the CBD mass was diagnosed as a neuroendocrine carcinoma with gastrin-producing cell differentiation, which seemed to have caused not only EHBO but also duodenal perforation (Zollinger-Ellison syndrome). The cat survived for almost 100 days without any perioperative complications. However, this combined procedure might be considered as only a salvage option and not as a definitive treatment option in cats requiring simultaneous biliary and gastrointestinal reconstruction because postoperative supportive care could not improve the cat's condition or maintain its quality of life.