The successful use of simple tube duodenostomy in large duodenal perforations from varied etiologies

Failed primary repair of blunt duodenal injury managed by tube duodenostomy, gastrojejunostomy and a feeding jejunostomy: a case report

BACKGROUND

The worldwide increase in road traffic crashes and use of firearms has increased the incidence of duodenal injuries. Upper gastrointestinal radiological studies and computed tomography (CT) in resource settings may lead to the diagnosis of blunt duodenal injury. Exploratory laparotomy remains the ultimate diagnostic test if a high suspicion of duodenal injury continues in the face of absent or equivocal radiographic signs. Although the majority of duodenal injuries may be managed by simple repair, high-risk duodenal injuries are followed by a high incidence of suture line dehiscence and should be treated by duodenal diversion.

CASE PRESENTATION

We report a case of a failed primary repair of a blunt injury to the second part of the duodenum (D2) in a 24-year-old African man. This was successfully managed by a tube duodenostomy, a bypass gastrojejunostomy and a feeding jejunostomy in a low resource setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Detailed knowledge of the available operative choices in duodenal injury and their correct application is important. When duodenal repair is needed, conservative repair techniques over complex reconstructions should be utilised. The technique of tube duodenostomy can be successfully applied to cases of large defects in the second part of the duodenum (D2), failed previous repair attempts and with defects caused by different aetiology. It may remain especially useful as a damage-control procedure in patients with multiple injuries, significant comorbidities and/or haemodynamic instability.

How to manage difficult duodenal defects? Single center experience

Objectives

The aim of this study was to investigate the surgical treatment methods and outcomes of difficult duodenal defects due to perforation.

Material and Methods

Data of patients who had undergone surgery for difficult duodenal defect between January 2012 and November 2022 were collected. Duodenal defect size of 2 cm or more was defined as difficult duodenal defect. Characteristics of the patients, the etiology of perforation, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) scores, Mannheim peritonitis index (MPI), surgical treatment, need for re-operation, and morbidity and mortality were evaluated.

Results

Nineteen patients were detected. Etiology was peptic ulcer perforation in 12 (63.1%) patients, aortaduodenal fistula in 2 (10.5%), tumor implant in 2 (10.5%), cholecystoduodenal fistula in 1 (5.2%), endoscopic retrograde cholangio pancreatography (ERCP) in 1 (5.2%), and cholecystectomy related injury in 1 (5.2%) patient. The first surgical procedure was duodenoraphy + omentopexy in 8 (42.1%), Graham repair in 5 (26.3%), duodenal segment 3-4 resection and Roux-en-Y side to side duodenojejunostomy in 4 (21.0%), Roux-en-Y side to side duodenojejunostomy in 1 (0.5%), and 1 (0.5%) subtotal gastrectomy + duodenum 1st part resection + Roux-en-Y gastroenterostomy, cholecystectomy and external biliary drainage via cystic duct. Four patients who had previously undergone Graham repair (3) and duodenoraphy + omentopexy (1) required salvage surgery. As a salvage surgery; 1 end-to-side and 3 side-to-side Roux-en-Y duodenojejunostomies were performed. Overall, mortality occurred in 6 (31.6%) patients. High ASA score and MPI were considered as significant risk factors for mortality (p= 0.015, p= 0.002).

Conclusion

Primary repair techniques can be used in the surgical treatment of difficult duodenal defects when peritonitis is not severe and tensionfree repair is possible. Otherwise, duodenojejunostomy may be preferred as a fast, easy, and safe technique for both initial and salvage surgeries.

Associated Factors of Leaked Repair Following Omentopexy for Perforated Peptic Ulcer Disease; a Cross-sectional Study

Introduction

Previous studies have reported numerous clinico-pathologic risk factors associated with increased risk of leaked repair following omental patch for perforated peptic ulcer disease (PPUD). This study aimed to analyze the risk factors associated with leaked repair of omental patch and document the management and outcome of established cases of leaked repair in a resource-poor setting.

Methods

This is a multicenter cross-sectional study of leaked repair after omental patch of PPUD between January 2016 to December 2022. Following primary repair of PPUD with omental pedicle reinforcement, associated factors of leaked repair were evaluated using univariate and multivariate analyses.

Results

Overall, 360 cases were evaluated (62.8% male). Leaked repair rate was 11.7% (42 cases). Those without immunosuppression were 3 times less likely to have leaked repair (aOR= 0.34; 95% CI: 0.16 - 0.72; p = 0.003) while those with sepsis were 4 times more likely to have leaked repair (aOR=4.16; 95% CI: 1.06 - 12.36; p = 0.018). Patients with delayed presentation (>48 hours) were 2.5 times more likely to have leaked repair than those who presented in 0 - 24 hours (aOR=2.51; 95% CI: 3.62 - 10.57; p = 0.044). Those with Perforation diameter 2.1-3.0 cm were 8 times (aOR=7.98; 95% CI: 2.63-24.21; p<0.0001), and those with perforation diameter > 3.0cm were 33 times (aOR=33.04; 95% CI: 10.98-100.25; p<0.0001) more likely to have leaked repair than those with perforation diameter of 0-1.0 cm. Similarly, in those with no perioperative shock, leaked repair was 4 times less likely to develop than those with perioperative shock (aOR= 0.42; 95% CI: 0.41-0.92; p = 0.041). There was significant statistical difference in morbidity (p = 0.003) and mortality (p < 0.0001) rates for cases of leaked repairs and successful repairs.

Conclusion

Leaked repair following omentopexy for peptic ulcer perforation was significantly associated with large perforation diameter, delayed presentation, sepsis, immunosuppressive therapy, and perioperative shock.

A delayed presentation of a traumatic isolated duodenal injury

Blunt injury to the abdomen resulting in isolated duodenal injury is rare in surgical practice. Due to the insidious onset of symptoms and the vague non-specific nature of the clinical presentation, these injuries can be easily missed even in experienced hands. Contrary to Europe or developed countries, assaults to the abdomen using hands, fists, and feet in home-based violence is common in third-world countries. These patients have the habit of hiding the assault part of the history to avoid litigations to 'known' people. A high level of suspicion, a continuous revisiting of the history, and timely damage control surgery can improve the outcomes of such patients.

T-tube Duodenostomy for the Difficult Duodenum

Tube duodenostomy has been described as a useful technique in the management of difficult duodenum arising from a variety of pathologies. In addition, the use of a t-tube for the duodenostomy presents a resourceful option in the event of Malecot or other such catheter unavailability. The aim of our study is to describe the technique and outcomes associated with this approach. During a six-month period in 2020, t-tube duodenostomies were performed in three patients for duodenal stump perforation: the first case involved a patient with Roux-en-Y esophagojejunostomy anatomy; the second involved duodenal stump closure security following Billroth II gastrectomy for peptic ulcer disease; and the third involved decompression following primary closure of duodenal perforation. All duodenostomies were performed with a t-tube that was trimmed with the back wall divided and then secured via the Witzel approach. The t-tube duodenostomies were performed during the index operations of all patients. No patient required additional operations. There was no mortality. All patients were closely monitored postoperatively with duodenostomies kept in place for six weeks. One patient developed a small leak after a trial of tube clamping, which was managed with continued tube drainage and antibiotics prior to definitive removal. The mean length of stay was 20.3 days with two patients being discharged to rehab. T-tube duodenostomy is a simple technique that helps avoid the blowout of the vulnerable duodenal stump in situations of biliopancreatic limb pathology, ulcerative disease, or injury.

Complicated duodenal perforation in children: Role of T-tube

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis of duodenal perforation (DP) in children is often delayed. This worsens the clinical condition and complicates simple closure.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the advantages of using T-tube in surgeries for DP in children.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on all patients of DP managed in the Department of Paediatric surgery at a tertiary centre from January 2016 to December 2020. Clinical, operative and post-operative data were collected. Patients, with closure over a T-tube to ensure tension-free healing, were critically analysed.

RESULTS

A total of nine DP patients with ages ranging from 2 years to 9 years were managed. Five (55.6%) patients had blunt abdominal trauma; a 2-year-old male had perforation following accidental ingestion of lollypop-stick while a 3-year-old male had DP during endoscopic evaluation (iatrogenic) of bleeding duodenal ulcers; cause could not be found in other 2 (22.2%) patients. Of the five patients with blunt abdominal trauma, 4 (80%) had large perforation with oedematous bowel, necessitating repair over T-tube. Both patients with unknown causes had uneventful outcomes following primary repair with Graham's patch. Patients with lollypop-stick ingestion and iatrogenic perforation did well with repair over T-tube. The only trauma patient with primary repair leaked but subsequently had successful repair over a T-tube. One patient with complete transection of the third part of the duodenum and pancreatic injury who had repair over T-tube died due to secondary haemorrhage on the 10^th post-operative day.

CONCLUSION

Closure over a T-tube in DP, presenting late with oedematous bowel, ensures low pressure at the perforation site, forms a controlled fistula and promotes healing, thereby lessening post-operative complications.

Duodenal ulcer perforation: A systematic literature review and narrative description of surgical techniques used to treat large duodenal defects

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus on optimal surgical treatment of large duodenal defects arising from perforated ulcers, even though such defects are challenging to repair and inadequate repair is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to carry out a systematic literature review of different surgical techniques used to treat large duodenal perforations, provide a narrative description of these techniques, and propose a framework for approaching this pathology.

METHODS

PubMed/MEDLINE database was searched for articles published in English between January 1, 1970, and December 1, 2020. Studies describing surgical techniques used to treat giant duodenal ulcer perforation and their outcomes in adult patients were included. No quantitative analysis was planned because of the heterogeneity across studies.

RESULTS

Out of 960 identified records, 25 studies were eligible for inclusion. Two randomized controlled trials, one case-control trial, three cohort studies, 14 case series, and 5 case reports were included. Eight main surgical approaches are described, ranging from simple damage-control operations, such as the omental plug and triple-tube techniques, all the way to complex resections, such as gastrectomy.

CONCLUSION

Evidence on surgical treatment of large duodenal defects is of poor quality, with the majority of studies corresponding to Oxford levels 3b-4. Current evidence does not support any single surgical technique as superior in terms of morbidity or mortality, but choice of technique should be guided by several factors including location of the perforation, degree of duodenal tissue loss, hemodynamic stability of the patient, as well as expertise of the operating surgeon.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

SR with more than two negative criteria, Level IV.

Primary reinforcement with rectus abdominis muscle flap-a salvage technique for a tenuous post traumatic duodenal perforation- a case report

INTRODUCTION

The conventional techniques for management of complex duodenal injuries are duodenal diverticularisation, pyloric exclusion or triple tube decompression. We here present a salvage technique of primary reinforcement with pedicled rectus abdominis muscle flap (RAMF) for a tenuous post traumatic duodenal perforation (PTDP). The majority of the studies in the literature are on the use RAMF for the secondary repair of peptic duodenal perforations.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

A 38 year old male presented with an acute abdomen, three days after sustaining a blunt abdominal trauma. The clinical and radiological findings in the abdomen were subtle and not contributory. An emergency laparotomy with a high index of suspicion revealed a large perforation in the anterolateral wall of the second portion of the duodenum with a friable unhealthy wall and shearing of the serosa around the perforation site. The entire omentum was unhealthy, contused with areas of gangrene and omentectomy done. The perforation site was closed using 3.0 vicryl and reinforced with a pedicled right RAMF based on the superior epigastric artery. The patient recovered uneventfully and was discharged.

DISCUSSION

The addition of conventional diversion techniques to primary duodenorrhaphy is sophisticated, time consuming and adds morbidity.

CONCLUSION

RAMF is a good tissue substitute to buttress tenuous duodenal injuries presenting late with inflamed, friable perforation sites and associated tissue loss, where duodenorrhaphy alone may not be successful. RAMF is a valuable salvage technique when the omentum is not available and the local tissue condition negates the effectiveness of other simpler techniques.

Cholecystoenteric fistula with and without gallstone ileus: A case series

BACKGROUND

A cholecystoenteric fistula (CEF) is an uncommon complication of gallstone disease. The aim of this study was to present our experience of a series of patients with CEF, presenting with or without gallstone ileus, along with their surgical outcomes.

METHODS

From 2015 to 2018, 3245 consecutive patients underwent cholecystectomy for gallbladder disease at our institution, of which 15 were diagnosed with a CEF. All electronic medical records were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients presented with CEF. Ten patients presented cholecystoduodenal fistula, four patients cholecystocolonic, and one patient cholecystogastric counterparts. Twelve patients were female. The median patient age was 61 years (range 33-86 years). Five patients presented with gallstone ileus treated by laparotomy and enterolithotomy. In ten patients, a laparoscopic approach was attempted, but conversion to open surgery was necessary for eight of them. The median operative time was 140 min (range 60-240 min), and the median operative blood loss was 50 mL (range 10-600 mL). The procedure-related morbidity and mortality rates were 13.3% and 6.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no consensus on the best treatment modality for a CEF, as the treatment outcome is mostly dependent on the surgeon's expertise and the patient's condition. Not all CEFs are accompanied by gallstone ileus. For such case, the main purpose is to resolve the intestinal obstruction and, unless necessary, avoidance of the gallbladder area.

A Novel Approach to Managing Giant Duodenal Ulcer Perforations: Minimizing Ostomies, Maximizing Decompression. A Case Report

Background: Peptic ulcer perforation is a deadly complication of duodenal ulcers. The literature is still sparse in terms of giant duodenal perforations. There exist a variety of techniques to decompress the duodenum after repair which leave the patient with multiple ostomies that require extensive postoperative care. Case presentation: In this case we present a patient with AIDS who was found to have a large duodenal ulcer perforation. Intraoperatively the fragility of the patient’s duodenum warranted a method of decompression that would keep the integrity of the duodenal tissue. The common method of lateral duodenostomy was not the best option and instead a gastro-jejunal feeding tube was altered into a gastro-duodenal tube to avoid creating another ostomy. Postoperatively she did not show signs of leak, but eventually died from sepsis secondary to fulminant AIDS. Conclusions: We propose this technique as a novel method of decompressing the duodenum. This new method eliminates the need for excessive ostomies and has the possibility to make the postoperative transition simpler.

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.

Ten-Year Experience of Managing Giant Duodenal Ulcer Perforations with Triple Tube Ostomy at Tertiary Hospital of North India

Duodenal ulcer perforations have been known since 1600 AD. It is a common surgical emergency and every surgeon will encounter it. The perforation size of >2 cm has been used as the criteria for defining Giant duodenal ulcers. The management of giant duodenal perforations in hemodynamically unstable patient with comorbid condition is taxing because of high incidence of the postoperative leak and mortality. We have used the simple technique of Triple Tube Ostomy after the primary closure of the defect with encouraging results. It is a retrospective study done at the J. N medical college AMU Aligarh from May 2005 to May 2015. Hemodynamically unstable patients who have presented to the emergency with preoperative diagnoses of giant duodenal ulcer perforation and had undergone triple tube ostomy with primary repair of the perforation were included in the study. There were 34 patients of giant duodenal perforation who presented in shock. All of them underwent triple-tube-ostomy after primary repair of the duodenum. Thirty-two patients recovered with two mortalities (5.8 %). Several definite surgical techniques have been described for the management of giant duodenal ulcer perforation but they are complex, have very high morbidity and mortality rate and require an expert surgeon. A close retrospective scrutiny of the patients suggests that simple triple-tube-ostomy technique which is based on the principle of damage control surgery has good postoperative results Therefore, we recommend it as the procedure of choice in these patients.

Triple tube drainage for "difficult" gastroduodenal perforations: A prospective study

AIM

To prospectively study the outcome of difficult gastroduodenal perforations (GDPs) treated by triple tube drainage (TTD) in order to standardize the procedure.

METHODS

Patients presenting to a single surgical unit of a tertiary hospital with difficult GDPs (large, unfavourable local and systemic factors) were treated with TTD (gastrostomy, duodenostomy and feeding jejunostomy). Postoperative parameters were observed like time to return of bowel sounds, time to start enteral feeds, time to start oral feeds, daily output of all drains, time to clamping/removal of all drains, time for skin to heal, complications, hospital stay, and, mortality. Descriptive statistics were used.

RESULTS

Between December 2013 and April 2015, 20 patients undergoing TTD for GDP were included, with mean age of 44.6 ± 19.8 years and male:female ratio of 17:3. Mean pre-operative APACHE II scores were 10.85 ± 3.55; most GDPs were prepyloric (9/20; 45%) or proximal duodenal (8/20; 40%) and mean size was 1.83 ± 0.59 cm (largest 2.5 cm). Median times of resumption of enteral feeding, removal of gastrostomy, removal of duodenostomy, removal of feeding jejunostomy and oral feeding were 4 d (4-5 IQR), 13 (12-16.5 IQR), 16 (16.25-22.25 IQR), 18 (16.5-24 IQR) and 12 d (10.75-18.5 IQR) respectively. Median hospital stay was 22 d (19-26 IQR) while mortality was 4/20 (20%).

CONCLUSION

TTD for difficult GDP is feasible, easy in the emergency, and patients recover in two-three weeks. It obviates the need for technically demanding and riskier procedures.

Draining T-Tube Jejunostomy: A Technique to Get Out of Trouble

A perforated viscus in the postpancreaticoduodenectomy setting is a rare phenomenon and a devastating complication. In this situation, adherence to damage-control principles demands minimizing the operative intervention while addressing the intestinal perforation as a way to mitigate the injurious effects on a complex gastrointestinal reconstruction. Herein, we describe our intraoperative decision-making with an unconventional approach in the management of a perforated viscus in the postpancreaticoduodenectomy setting using a draining T-tube jejunostomy. Our patient recovered remarkably well from this and was discharged from the hospital in six days with a controlled draining T-tube jejunostomy, which was subsequently removed on postoperative day 35. Our case illustrates an important option when dealing with a perforated viscus in the complex gastrointestinal surgery patient that has minimal morbidity, adequate source control, and the potential for an excellent clinical outcome. As surgical care continues to be delivered in a specialty-driven manner, a draining T-tube jejunostomy presents the ideal technique to get out of trouble for the general surgeon practicing in the community who may not be as experienced with complex gastrointestinal surgery.

Simultaneous Gastric and Duodenal Erosions due to Adjustable Gastric Banding for Morbid Obesity

Erosion is an uncommon but feared late complication of adjustable gastric banding for morbid obesity. A high index of clinical suspicion is required, since symptoms are usually vague and nonspecific. Diagnosis is confirmed on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and band removal is the mainstay of treatment, with band revision or conversion to other bariatric modalities at a later stage. Duodenal erosion is a much rarer complication, caused by the connection tubing of the band. We present our experience with a case of simultaneous gastric and duodenal erosions, managed by laparoscopic explantation of the band, primary suture repair of the duodenum, and omentopexy.

Study on the use of T-tube for patients with persistent duodenal fistula: is it useful?

BACKGROUND

The commonest surgical treatment used for peptic ulcer perforation is omental patching. If, however, the perforation leaks, it rarely heals by itself due to persistence of duodenal fistula (DF). We present our experience with a T-tube placed into the DF for better outcome of the patients.

METHODS

All patients in our hospital with DF following failure of surgery for duodenal perforation were included in this study. After identification of the perforation, a size 16 French T-tube was put in place. The patients were analyzed on basis of duration of hospital stay, complications related to the T-tube and overall complications, start of oral feeds, and follow-up.

RESULTS

In this 3-year study, ten patients with DF were admitted. The mean age was 50 years. The T-tube was kept in place within the fistula for 20.5 days. The mean duration to start oral feeds was 8.8 days. The mean duration of hospital stay was 23.2 days, and the mean follow-up period was 6.3 months. The complications observed in the postoperative period were fever in four patients, wound dehiscence in four patients, and peritoneal collection in two patients, all of which were managed easily. There was no peritubal leakage and no failure of surgery as regards placement of a T-tube. There were no deaths in this study.

CONCLUSIONS

Placement of a T-tube into a DF appears to be very effective procedure for managing this complication of surgical repair of a perforated peptic ulcer with an omental patch. The technique appears to be simple and rewarding. Further use of this method by other workers will substantiate our efforts.

Enteric repair in aortoduodenal fistulas: a forgotten but often lethal player

BACKGROUND

An aortoenteric fistula is an abnormal communication between the aorta and the bowel lumen. It is usually caused by previous aortic surgery and involves the duodenum (ADF) in most cases. The treatment of this high-mortality condition is based on the correction of enteric and vascular defects. However, enteric repair indications and impact are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to characterize the surgical procedures available for duodenal repair in ADF and estimate their impact in mortality.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted, between the years 1951-2010. Cases (791 from 614 references) were individually registered and analyzed to demography, enteric location, type and cause of fistula, type of surgical procedure, mortality, and cause of death. Risk factors to outcome were estimated by univariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

The enteric procedure was described in 331 cases: duodenorrhaphy (with or without omentum interposition; with or without enterostomy) in 266 cases, duodenal resection/reconstruction in 54 cases, antibiotic or abdominal drainage alone in 4 cases, and nothing was done in 7 cases. Vascular treatment was described in 515 cases: extra-anatomic bypass in 207 cases, in situ graft in 197 cases, direct closure of the aortic defect in 52 cases, endovascular procedures in 32 cases, and others arterial reconstructions in 27 cases. Univariate analysis revealed that mortality caused by ADF is directly associated with primary ADF type, direct closure of the aortic defect, and is inversely associated with recent publications, omentum interposition, use of an in situ graft, and endovascular prosthesis. Multivariate analysis revealed that omentum interposition and the use of an in situ graft were independent factors to the outcome, and that omentum use was the strongest factor related to survival. The most common cause of death was ADF recurrence (41.8%), which was significantly high (P = 0.036) in the patients who underwent simple duodenorrhaphy.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature supports the use of omentum interposition and suggests that duodenal derivation is preferable to the simple closure of fistula. Delayed or avoided enteric repair after endovascular treatment emerged as an option, but needs additional supporting research.