Is laparoscopy equal to laparotomy in detecting and treating small bowel injuries in a porcine model?

AIM: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for diagnosing and treating small bowel injuries (SBIs) in a porcine model. METHODS: Twenty-eight female pigs were anesthetized and laid in the left recumbent position. The SBI model was established by shooting at the right lower quadrant of the abdomen. The pigs were then randomized into either the laparotomy group or the laparoscopy group. All pigs underwent routine exploratory laparotomy or laparoscopy to evaluate the abdominal injuries, particularly the types, sites, and numbers of SBIs. Traditional open surgery or therapeutic laparoscopy was then performed. All pigs were kept alive within the observational period (postoperative 72 h). The postoperative recovery of each pig was carefully observed. RESULTS: The vital signs of all pigs were stable within 1-2 h after shooting and none of the pigs died from gunshot wounds or SBIs immediately. The SBI model was successfully established in all pigs and definitively diagnosed with single or multiple SBIs either by exploratory laparotomy or laparoscopy. Compared with exploratory laparotomy, laparoscopy took a significantly longer time for diagnosis (41.27 ± 12.04 min vs 27.64 ± 13.32 min, P = 0.02), but the time for therapeutic laparoscopy was similar to that of open surgery. The length of incision was significantly reduced in the laparoscopy group compared with the laparotomy group (5.27 ± 1.86 cm vs 15.73 ± 1.06 cm, P < 0.01). In the final post-mortem examination 72 h after surgery, both laparotomy and laparoscopy offered a definitive diagnosis with no missed injuries. Postoperative complications occurred in four cases (three following laparotomy and one following laparoscopy, P = 0.326). The average recovery period for bowel function, vital appearance, and food re-intake after laparoscopy was 10.36 ± 4.72 h, 14.91 ± 3.14 h, and 15.00 ± 7.11 h, respectively. All of these were significantly shorter than after laparotomy (21.27 ± 10.17 h, P = 0.004; 27.82 ± 9.61 h, P < 0.001; and 24.55 ± 9.72 h, respectively, P = 0.016). CONCLUSION: Compared with laparotomy, laparoscopy offers equivalent efficacy for diagnosing and treating SBIs, and reduces postoperative complications as well as recovery period.

NSAID-induced deleterious effects on the proximal and mid small bowel in seronegative spondyloarthropathy patients

AIM:To investigate the small bowel of seronegative spondyloarthropathy(SpA) patients in order to ascertain the presence of mucosal lesions.METHODS:Between January 2008 and June 2010,54 consecutive patients were enrolled and submitted to avideo capsule endoscopy(VCE) examination.Historyand demographic data were taken,as well as the history of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug(NSAID) consumption.After reading each VCE recording,a capsule endoscopy scoring index for small bowel mucosal inflammatory change(Lewis score) was calculated.Statistical analysis of the data was performed.RESULTS:The Lewis score for the whole cohort was 397.73.It was higher in the NSAID consumption subgroup(P = 0.036).The difference in Lewis score between NSAID users and non-users was reproduced for the first and second proximal tertiles of the small bowel,but not for its distal third(P values of 0.036,0.001 and 0.18,respectively).There was no statistical significant difference between the groups with regard to age or sex of the patients.CONCLUSION:The intestinal inflammatory involvement of SpA patients is more prominent in NSAID users for the proximal/mid small bowel,but not for its distal part.

Poor awareness of preventing aspirin-induced gastrointestinal injury with combined protective medications

AIM:To investigate prescribing pattern in low-dose aspirin users and physician awareness of preventing aspirin-induced gastrointestinal(GI) injury with combined protective medications.METHODS:A retrospective drug utilization study was conducted in the 2nd Affiliated Hospital,School of Medicine,Zhejiang University.The hospital has 2300 beds and 2.5 million outpatient visits annually.Data mining was performed on all aspirin prescriptions for outpatients and emergency patients admitted in 2011.Concomitant use of proton-pump inhibitors(PPIs),histamine 2-receptor antagonists(H2RA) and mucoprotective drugs(MPs) were analyzed.A defined daily dose(DDD) methodology was applied to each MP.A further investigation was performed in aspirin users on combination use of GI injurious medicines [non-steoid anti-inflammatory drugs(NSAIDs),corticosteroids and clopidogrel and warfarin] or intestinal protective drugs(misoprostol,rebamipide,teprenone and gefarnate).Data of major bleeding episodes were derived from medical records and adverse drug reaction monitoring records.The annual incidence of major GI bleeding due to low-dose aspirin was estimated for outpatients.RESULTS:Prescriptions for aspirin users receiving PPIs,H2RA and MPs(n = 1039) accounted for only 3.46% of total aspirin prescriptions(n = 30 015).The ratios of coadministration of aspirin/PPI,aspirin/H2RA,aspirin/MP and aspirin/PPI/MP to the total aspirin prescriptions were 2.82%,0.12%,0.40% and 0.12%,respectively.No statistically significant difference was observed in age between patients not receiving any GI protective medications and patients receiving PPIs,H2RA or MPs.The combined medication of aspirin and PPI was used more frequently than that of aspirin and MPs(2.82% vs 0.40%,P < 0.05) and aspirin/H2RA(2.82% vs 0.12%,P < 0.05).The values of DDDs of MPs in descending order were as follows:gefarnate,hydrotalcite > teprenone > sucralfate oral suspension > L-glutamine and sodium gualenate granules > rebamipide > sucralfate chewable tablets.The ratio of MP plus aspirin prescriptions to the total MP prescriptions was as follows:rebamipide(0.47%),teprenone(0.91%),L-glutamine and sodium gualenate granules(0.92%),gefarnate(0.31%),hydrotalcite(1.00%) and sucralfate oral suspension(0.13%).Percentages of prescriptions containing aspirin and intestinal protective drugs among the total aspirin prescriptions were:rebamipide(0.010%),PPI/rebamipide(0.027%),teprenone(0.11%),PPI/teprenone(0.037%),gefarnate(0.017%),and PPI/gefarnate(0.013%).No prescriptions were found containing coadministration of aspirin and other NSAIDs.Among the 3196 prescriptions containing aspirin/clopidogrel,3088(96.6%) prescriptions did not contain any GI protective medicines.Of the 389 prescriptions containing aspirin/corticosteroids,236(60.7%) contained no GI protective medicines.None of the prescriptions using aspirin/warfarin(n = 22) contained GI protective medicines.Thirty-five patients were admitted to this hospital in 2011 because of acute hemorrhage of upper digestive tract induced by low-dose aspirin.The annual incidence rates of major GI bleeding were estimated at 0.25% for outpatients taking aspirin and 0.5% for outpatients taking aspirin/warfarin,respectively.CONCLUSION:The prescribing pattern of low-dose aspirin revealed a poor awareness of preventing GI injury with combined protective medications.Actions should be taken to address this issue.