Duodenojejunostomy following failed gastrojejunostomy in superior mesenteric artery syndrome: A case report

INTRODUCTION

Superior mesenteric artery (SMA) syndrome is a rare duodenal-vascular anatomic disorder leading to external compression on the duodenum. The first step of treatment usually is conservative, and in the case of failure, surgical management is the treatment choice. Treatment success with duodenojejunostomy after failure in gastrojejunostomy can show the uniqueness of this article.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 14-year-old boy came to our hospital with a complaint of epigastric pain, nausea, bilious vomiting, and weight loss since 6 months ago. Conservation therapy and laparotomic Braun anastomosis and gastrojejunostomy was performed due to the SMA syndrome diagnosis 2.5 months before the admission. At our hospital, an alteration of gastrojejunostomy by duodenojejunostomy employing a diamond-shaped anastomosis between the third portion of the duodenum (D3) and a part of jejunum that was placed 15 cm away from the ligament Treitz was done. A significantly dilated stomach and the first three parts of the duodenum were observed during the procedure. After the second surgical intervention, the general condition of the patient dramatically improved.

CLINICAL DISCUSSION

Conservative treatment, including nasogastric tube decompression, postural changes, and nutritional support with hyperalimentation, has a variable success rate. However, in some cases, surgery may be necessary. Surgeons prefer laparoscopic duodenojejunostomy due to its outstanding success rate, ranging from 80 % to 100 %. But, in some case reports it is suggested that gastrojejunostomy could be done in cases with severe duodenal dilation instead of duodenojejunostomy. The initial gastrojejunostomy failed because of ongoing symptoms, which was finally revised with a duodenojejunostomy.

CONCLUSION

It is suggested to use duodenojejunostomy after failure of gastrojejunostomy or it can be employed as the first surgical option even in cases with severe dilation. Because it is a more efficient correction with fewer complications than gastrojejunostomy.

A pediatric case series of catastrophic gastrointestinal complications of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease with increasing incidence, high association with coronavirus disease 2019, higher mortality, and a plea for early endoscopy to prevent late fatal outcome

BACKGROUND

Posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder is one of the most severe complications after transplantation, caused by uncontrolled proliferation of Epstein-Barr virus-positive B-cells in the setting of chronic immunosuppression. As one of the biggest transplant centers worldwide, we observed a potential increase in the number of patients with posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder presenting with gastrointestinal symptoms in 1 year, during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. There is limited information about dysregulation of the immune system following coronavirus disease 2019 infection, which may lead to Epstein-Barr virus reactivation in Epstein-Barr virus-positive B-cells and development of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder. Furthermore, there is no consensus in literature on a modality that can help in early diagnosis of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder with nonspecific gastrointestinal presentations before late and fatal complications occur.

CASE PRESENTATION

Our case series includes five Iranian (Persian) patients, three female (2, 2.5, and 5 years old) and two male (2 and 2.5 years old), who developed gastrointestinal posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder after liver transplantation. All of our patients were on a similar immunosuppressant regimen and had similar Epstein-Barr virus serologic status (seronegative at time of transplantation but seropositive at time of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder diagnosis). Four patients had either a positive coronavirus disease 2019 polymerase chain reaction test or exposure within the family. Although all of our patients presented with nonspecific gastrointestinal symptoms, four patients developed late posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder complications such as bowel perforation and obstruction. All five patients with gastrointestinal posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder received chemotherapy, but only two survived and currently are continuing the therapy. In one of the surviving patients, prompt endoscopic investigation resulted in early diagnosis of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder and a better outcome.

CONCLUSION

Since 80% of our patients had exposure to coronavirus, a potential relationship might be suggested between the two. Furthermore, as we witnessed in one case, urgent endoscopic investigation in immunocompromised patients presenting with gastrointestinal symptoms can improve the clinical outcomes and therefore should be considered for early diagnosis of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder.