Israel Medical Association Journal

Despite recent advances in the pharmacological and endoscopic treatments for obesity, bariatric surgery is still considered one of the most effective and safe treatments for morbid obesity with over 250,000 bariatric procedures performed each year in the United States. While these procedures are considered safe, they are not free of complications. It has been reported that the primary short-term major complication after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), one-anastomosis (Mini) gastric bypass (OAGB), or sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is gastrointestinal leakage, with a reported leak rate of 0.1–8.3%, 0–5.1%, and 0–7%, respectively [1,2]. While the etiology of gastrointestinal leakage following bariatric procedure is multifactorial, including preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative factors, a single factor can rarely be attributed to this misfortunate complication. We describe a case of a 30-year-old woman who presented on postoperative day (POD) 10 of a OAGB with a gastrointestinal leakage after treated with a high dose of oral misoprostol.

Background: Despite its wide use, evidence is inconclusive regarding the effect of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) in patients with chronic diseases and dementia among hospitalized patients with malnutrition.

Objectives: To examine the effect of PEG insertion on prognosis after the procedure.

Methods: This retrospective analysis of medical records included all adult patients who underwent PEG insertion between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2013 during their hospitalization. For each PEG patient, two controls similar in age, sex, referring department, and underlying condition were randomly selected from the entire dataset of patients admitted. The effect of PEG on mortality and repeated admissions was examined.

Results: The study comprised 154 patients, 49 referred for PEG insertion and 105 controls (mean age 74.8 ± 19.8 years; 72.7% females; 78.6% admitted to internal medicine units). Compared to controls, the PEG group had a higher 2-year mortality rate (59.2% vs. 17.1%, P < 0.001) but the 2-year readmission rate did not differ significantly (44.9% vs. 56.2% respectively, P = 0.191). Regression analysis showed PEG was  associated with increased risk of the composite endpoint of death or readmission (hazard ratio 1.514, 95% confidence interval 1.016–2.255, P = 0.041). No specific characteristic of admission was associated with increased likelihood of death or readmission. Among readmitted patients, reasons for admission and baseline laboratory data, including albumin and cholesterol, did not differ between the PEG patients and controls.

Conclusions: In-hospital PEG insertion was associated with increased mortality at 2 years but had no effect on readmissions.

Background: Buried bumper syndrome (BBS) mostly occurs as a late complication after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) insertion; however, early BBS has been rarely reported, and the treatment of this condition is still unclear.

Objectives: To evaluate the Seldinger technique for treatment of early BBS after PEG insertion.

Methods: We report two cases of early BBS in two consecutive patients who underwent PEG insertion to maintain oral intake. The first patient was an 83-year-old woman showing Alzheimer type dementia, while the other one was a 76-year-old man who presented with maxillary cancer and treated with radiotherapy followed by left maxillectomy. Post-surgery, he developed progressive difficulty of swallowing due to mouth deformation and treatment related nerve toxicity. The first patient presented with fever and purulent discharge from the gastrostomy insertion site, without ability to rotate or slide the tube through the stoma 10 days after the PEG insertion. The man was admitted to the hospital 5 days following PEG insertion due to a fever of 38°C and peritubal swelling with purulent discharge. In addition, the tube could not rotate or slide through the stoma.

Results: Buried bumper syndrome was demonstrated by computed tomography scan. Gastroscopy and gastrostomy tube replacement was performed successfully according to the Seldinger technique (replacement over guidewire) in both cases. Correct intragastric tube positioning was demonstrated radiographically before resuming tube feeding. The two patients were discharged in good physical condition several days later.

Conclusions: External replacement over guide wire should be considered in such cases.

Background: The frequency of performing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in demented older people has increased in recent years. Several reports indicate flaws in the criteria for performing PEG[1] and in the decision-making process, raising concerns about the adequacy of the consent.

Objectives: To examine knowledge and attitudes of referring doctors and gastroenterologists, and to evaluate attitudes and feelings of family members concerning PEG insertion.

Methods: We conducted a survey of 72 doctors who referred 126 demented patients for PEG, as well as 126 family members and 34 gastroenterologists. Closed-ended questionnaires were designed for each study group, completed by the participants, and computer analyzed.

Results: Approximately 50% of family members expressed dissatisfaction with the decision-making process. Referring physicians reported that PEG insertion was often dictated by the need to transfer patients to a nursing home, with 50% admitting institutional pressure. Most of the referring physicians believed that PEG improved quality of life and longevity, whereas gastroenterologists did not expect an improved quality of life and thought that administrative demands should not intervene in the decision to insert PEG.

Conclusions: The decision-making process in the patient's families regarding PEG insertion for their demented relative is unsatisfactory, often takes place under pressure, and does not provide sufficient information about the procedure or its complications. Interpersonal communication between the patient's family and the medical team need to be improved and institutional demands should not play a major role in the medical decision to insert PEG. Gastroenterologists should take a more active role in the deliberations regarding PEG.

Classic anticoagulant drugs, such as heparin and warfarin, are very effective. Although in use for more than 50 years, they have some clinical drawbacks. Heparin, now better termed unfractionated heparin, can only be used intravenously and its laboratory control is complicated. Warfarin is orally administered, but its therapeutic window is very narrow and patients need repeated laboratory tests. Moreover, both drugs are non-specific, as they inhibit the coagulation cascade at several steps. Pharmaceutic research has developed new drugs, some of which are already on the market, such as fondaparinux, a pentasaccharide that can interact with antithrombin, thus inhibiting factor Xa. This pentasaccharide is part of the parent heparin molecule and can be chemically synthesized, with the advantage of avoiding extractive compounds. Fondaparinux has a half-life compatible with once-a-day administration; modification of its structure (idraparinux) has led to more stable binding with antithrombin and to an increase in its half-life to allow once-a-week administration. Alternatives to oral anticoagulants have been developed following the study of some compounds like hirudin, which directly binds thrombin and blocks its catalytic site. One of these molecules, ximelagatran, is in advanced clinical development. Ximelagatran is converted into its active form, melagatran, in the circulation, and thrombin activity can be blocked by oral administration twice daily. There is no need for laboratory control and phase II and phase III studies are encouraging. The next few years should bring great changes in the treatment of patients with thromboembolic disorders.