A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Selective nonoperative management of leaks after gastric bypass: lessons learned from 2675 consecutive patients. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Objective: To compare outcomes of patients with leaks after primary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (GBP) managed operatively with those managed nonoperatively and subsequently derive indications for selective nonoperative management.

Summary Of Background Data: There is no consensus on the management of leaks complicating GBP, which remains the commonest cause of death.

Methods: We evaluated 2675 consecutive GBP procedures, determining incidence and outcomes of leaks in a program emphasizing early detection, routine drainage, and selective nonoperative management.

Results: Leaks occurred in 46 patients (41 women) with mean (+/-SD) age of 46.9 +/- 8.7 years, weight and body mass index (BMI) of 307.8 +/- 56.9 lb and 51.2 +/- 9.5 kg/m, respectively. Leaks were initially identified by upper gastrointestinal contrast swallow (UGI) on the first postoperative day (22), abnormal drain output (11), delayed UGI (3), or on clinical suspicion (10) with a respective interval to diagnosis of 1.1*, 6.5, 7, and 7.9 days (*P < 0.007 vs. other groups). Leaks were located in the gastrojejunal (GJ) anastomosis (37), gastric pouch (4), gastric remnant (2), jejuno-jejunostomy (1), Roux limb (1), and cervical esophagus (1), and were radiologically contained (40) or diffuse (3) or not demonstrable (3). Contained leaks were treated nonoperatively (31), by operation (7), or required no treatment (2). Patients with diffuse leaks or bilious drain output were operatively managed. They were similar in duration for nil per oral order, drain and antibiotic use and readmission rates, whereas hospital stays were longer in the operative group, P < 0.01. There were no deaths.

Conclusions: Many leaks after gastric bypass are radiologically contained GJ and pouch leaks and can be safely managed nonoperatively. Radiologic features and bilious drainage were key determinants of treatment, with operative treatment used for diffuse GJ leaks, bilious drainage, or clinical suspicion with a negative UGI. Outcomes were similar in both groups.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e31818584aaDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

selective nonoperative
12
leaks
12
gastric bypass
12
management leaks
8
leaks gastric
8
2675 consecutive
8
operatively managed
8
managed nonoperatively
8
drain output
8
clinical suspicion
8

Similar Publications