4.4 Article Proceedings Paper

Gastrocutaneous fistulae in children - A systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiology and treatment options

期刊

JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC SURGERY
卷 53, 期 5, 页码 946-958

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2018.02.022

关键词

Gastrocutaneous fistula; GCF; Gastrostomy; Closure; Therapy; Nonoperative

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Gastrostomy tubes are a common adjunct to the care of vulnerable pediatric patients. This study systematically evaluates the epidemiology and risk-factors for gastrocutaneous fistulae (GCF) after gastrostomy removal in children and reviews treatment options focusing on nonoperative management (NOM). Methods: After protocol registration (CRD-42017059565), multiple databases were searched. Studies describing epidemiology in children and GCF treatment at any age were included. Critical appraisal was performed(MINORS risk-of-bias assessment tool). One-sided meta-analysis was executed to estimate efficacy of therapeutic adjuncts using a random-effects model. Results: Sixteen articles evaluating pediatric GCF were identified. 44% defined GCF as persistence > 1 month which occurred in 31 +/- 7% of cases. Risk factors for pediatric GCF include age at gastrostomy, timing of removal, open technique, and fundoplication. Mean MINORS score was 0.60 +/- 0.16. Seventeen additional studies were identified reporting 142 patients undergoing NOM(endoscopic, systemic, and local therapies), and one pediatric comparative study was identified. Overall aggregate proportion of GCF closure after any NOM is 77% (80% success rate in local/systemic therapies; 75% success rate in endoscopic approaches). No adverse events were reported. Conclusion: Persistent GCF complicates the management of gastrostomies in 1/3 of children with predictable risk factors. Several treatment options exist that obviate the need for general anesthesia. Their efficacy is unclear. Further prospective investigations are clearly warranted. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据