Jamil S Samaan1, Omar Toubat2,3, Evan T Alicuben3, Sean Dewberry2,3, Adrian Dobrowolski3, Kulmeet Sandhu3, Joerg Zehetner3, John C Lipham3, Kamran Samakar4. 1. Department of Medicine, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 2. Keck School of Medicine of USC, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 3. Division of Upper GI and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Keck School of Medicine of USC, 1510 San Pablo St., Suite 514, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 4. Division of Upper GI and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Keck School of Medicine of USC, 1510 San Pablo St., Suite 514, Los Angeles, CA, USA. kamran.samakar@med.usc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gastric electrical stimulation (GES) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) are known therapeutic options for medically refractory gastroparesis (MRG) although there are limited data comparing their outcomes. We aim to compare clinical outcomes between patients undergoing GES vs upfront LG for the treatment of MRG while examining factors associated with GES failure and conversion to LG. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 181 consecutive patients who underwent GES or LG for MRG at our institution from January 2003 to December 2017. Data collection consisted of chart review and follow-up telephone survey. Statistical analysis utilized Chi-squared, ANOVA, and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Overall, 130 (72%) patients underwent GES and 51 (28%) LG as primary intervention. GES patients were more likely to have diabetic gastroparesis (GES 67% vs LG 39%, p < 0.001), while primary LG patients were more likely to have post-surgical gastroparesis (GES 5% vs LG 43%, p < 0.001). Postoperatively, primary LG patients had higher rates of major in-hospital morbidity events (GES 5% vs LG 18%, p = 0.017) and longer hospital stays (GES 3 vs LG 9 days, p < 0.001). However, over a mean 35-month follow-up period, there were no differences in the rates of major morbidity, readmissions, or mortality. Multivariable regression analysis revealed patients undergoing GES as a primary intervention were less likely to report improvement in symptoms on follow-up compared to primary LG patients OR 0.160 (95% CI 0.048-0.532). Additionally, patients who converted to LG from GES were more likely to have post-surgical gastroparesis as the primary etiology. CONCLUSION: GES as a first-line surgical treatment of MRG was associated with worse outcomes compared to LG. Post-surgical etiology was associated with an increased likelihood of GES failure, and in such patients, upfront gastrectomy may be a superior alternative to GES. Further studies are needed to determine patient selection for operative treatment of MRG.
BACKGROUND: Gastric electrical stimulation (GES) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) are known therapeutic options for medically refractory gastroparesis (MRG) although there are limited data comparing their outcomes. We aim to compare clinical outcomes between patients undergoing GES vs upfront LG for the treatment of MRG while examining factors associated with GES failure and conversion to LG. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 181 consecutive patients who underwent GES or LG for MRG at our institution from January 2003 to December 2017. Data collection consisted of chart review and follow-up telephone survey. Statistical analysis utilized Chi-squared, ANOVA, and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Overall, 130 (72%) patients underwent GES and 51 (28%) LG as primary intervention. GES patients were more likely to have diabetic gastroparesis (GES 67% vs LG 39%, p < 0.001), while primary LG patients were more likely to have post-surgical gastroparesis (GES 5% vs LG 43%, p < 0.001). Postoperatively, primary LG patients had higher rates of major in-hospital morbidity events (GES 5% vs LG 18%, p = 0.017) and longer hospital stays (GES 3 vs LG 9 days, p < 0.001). However, over a mean 35-month follow-up period, there were no differences in the rates of major morbidity, readmissions, or mortality. Multivariable regression analysis revealed patients undergoing GES as a primary intervention were less likely to report improvement in symptoms on follow-up compared to primary LG patients OR 0.160 (95% CI 0.048-0.532). Additionally, patients who converted to LG from GES were more likely to have post-surgical gastroparesis as the primary etiology. CONCLUSION: GES as a first-line surgical treatment of MRG was associated with worse outcomes compared to LG. Post-surgical etiology was associated with an increased likelihood of GES failure, and in such patients, upfront gastrectomy may be a superior alternative to GES. Further studies are needed to determine patient selection for operative treatment of MRG.
Authors: Richard W McCallum; William Snape; Fredrick Brody; John Wo; Henry P Parkman; Thomas Nowak Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2010-06-09 Impact factor: 11.382
Authors: Neil H Bhayani; Ahmed M Sharata; Christy M Dunst; Ashwin A Kurian; Kevin M Reavis; Lee L Swanstrom Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2015-01-10 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Thomas Abell; Richard McCallum; Michael Hocking; Kenneth Koch; Hasse Abrahamsson; Isabelle Leblanc; Greger Lindberg; Jan Konturek; Thomas Nowak; Eammon M M Quigley; Gervais Tougas; Warren Starkebaum Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: A W Forstner-Barthell; M M Murr; S Nitecki; M Camilleri; C M Prather; K A Kelly; M G Sarr Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 1999 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 3.267
Authors: R W McCallum; I Sarosiek; H P Parkman; W Snape; F Brody; J Wo; T Nowak Journal: Neurogastroenterol Motil Date: 2013-07-29 Impact factor: 3.598