AzTrials
AzTrials

Ulcer Disease After Gastric BypassPerforatedMUNCT01041196

Perforated Marginal Ulcer After Gastric Bypass

An observational study of Ulcer Disease After Gastric Bypass and Marginal Ulcer, run by University of California, San Francisco at 1 site in United States.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

A common late complication after gastric bypass surgery is marginal ulceration that is defined as ulcers at the margins of the gastrojejunostomy, mostly on the jejunal side. Most marginal ulcers respond to medical therapy and complicated or complex ulcer disease warrants operative intervention; specifically… Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 to 65 years
How many people
30 participants
Where
1 siteUnited States
Study dates
Jan 2009to Dec 2009
Phase
Observational
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 to 65 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Study population: Patients who underwent laparoscopic repair of perforated marginal ulcer after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) for weight loss.

Who may be able to join

  • Laparoscopic repair of perforated marginal ulcer after RYGB

Who cannot join

  • Perforated marginal ulcers after other bariatric procedures
  • Repair by open approach
  • Missing records and/or unreachable patients with scant information for analysis

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United States1 site
  • UCSF Fresno Center for Medical Education and Research

    Fresno, California, 93701

Other trials in United States

About this study

Official title: Laparoscopic Revision Gastric Bypass Surgery for Perforated Marginal Ulcer: A 10 Year Experience

A common late complication after gastric bypass surgery is marginal ulceration that is defined as ulcers at the margins of the gastrojejunostomy, mostly on the jejunal side. Most marginal ulcers respond to medical therapy and complicated or complex ulcer disease warrants operative intervention; specifically, perforated, penetrated, obstructing, bleeding and intractable marginal ulcers require surgical intervention.

Diverse operative strategies for addressing perforated marginal ulcers after gastric bypass have been described including I) Omental (Graham) patch repair, II) Revision of gastrojejunostomy, III) Irrigation and drainage, IV) any previous procedure with truncal vagotomy, V) Esophagojejunostomy, and VI) Reversal. We formally analyze our experience with the laparoscopic resection and repair of acutely perforated marginal ulcers after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), with or without concomitant resolution of technical risk factors for marginal ulceration.

Read the detailed description

The epidemic of overweight and obesity in the United States of America along with its comorbidities continues to expand. Bariatric surgery has demonstrated to be the most effective and sustained method to control severe obesity and its comorbidities. For instance, type 2 diabetes mellitus was completely resolved in 76.8%, systemic arterial hypertension was resolved in 61.7%, dyslipidemia improved in 70% and obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome was resolved in 85.7%. Furthermore, bariatric surgery significantly increases life expectancy (89%) and decreases overall mortality (30-40%), particularly deaths from diabetes, heart disease, and cancer. Lastly, preliminary evidence about downstream savings associated with bariatric surgery offset the initial costs in 2 to 4 years.

Since 2000, there has been a substantially progressive increase in bariatric surgery. In 2007, the ASMBS reported that 205,000 people had bariatric surgery in the United States from which approximately 80% of these were Gastric Bypass. Moreover, there is a mismatch between eligibility and receipt of bariatric surgery with just less than 1% of the eligible population being treated for morbid obesity through bariatric surgery. Along with the increasing number of elective primary weight loss procedures, up to 20% of post RYGB patients cannot sustain their weight loss beyond 2 to 3 years after the primary bariatric procedure. Thus, revisional surgery for poor weight loss and re-operations for technical or mechanical complications will rise in a parallel manner.

A common late complication after gastric bypass surgery is marginal ulceration that is defined as ulcers at the margins of the gastrojejunostomy, mostly on the jejunal side. Its incidence after RYGB ranges from as low as 0.6 to as high as 16%. After 1,040 laparoscopic RYGB surgeries, the incidence rate, in our hands, is 1.4% and mainly related to NSAID´s use. In observational cohort studies, the presence of specific technical factors - staple-line dehiscence or gastro-gastric fistula, enlarged pouch, foreign material and local ischemia - and environmental factors - tobacco, NSAID´s, alcohol consumption, and H pylori infection among others - have been associated with marginal ulceration however the exact etiopathogenesis has not been completely elucidated.

Similar to peptic ulcer disease, most marginal ulcers respond to medical therapy and complicated or complex ulcer disease warrants operative intervention. Specifically, perforated, penetrated, obstructing, bleeding and intractable marginal ulcers require surgical intervention.

The intestinal mucosa is not typically exposed to gastric acid, which is neutralized by the alkaline biliopancreatic secretions. The jejunal mucosa has no natural barriers; when exposed to gastric acid, it ulcerates easily. Capella \& Capella demonstrated that transecting the gastric segments significantly reduce staple-line dehiscence; this is the so-called divided gastric bypass. The incidence for gastro-gastric fistula (GGF) formation after undivided gastric bypass (GBP) was 23%, after a partially divided GBP was 19%, after a completely divided GBP was 2% and after complete transection with interposition of the jejunal limb was 0% (p <0.001).

An unusually large gastric pouch (such as horizontal pouches, retained fundus, long lesser curvature based pouches or enlarged after initially being sized adequately) contain more acid-producing parietal cells. Increased acid production in the pouch carries the risk of developing marginal ulcers. Acid secretion in the small pouch after RYGB is virtually absent.

The anastomotic techniques influence the incidence of marginal ulcers. Capella \& Capella reported a consecutive series with significant decrement from 5.1% to 1.5% (p< 0.001) after switching from a stapled to a hand-sewn anastomosis. Likewise, after changing from an inner layer of absorbable suture and an outer layer of nonabsorbable material to a double-layer of absorbable suture the incidence rate improved from 1.6% to 0%.

Local ischemia, in the immediate postoperative period, is probably secondary to technical reasons. Fundamental aspects for decreasing tension and local ischemia at the gastrojejunostomy are dissection of the tissues around the pouch without devascularizing the lesser curvature and complete mobilization of a well-perfused Roux limb.

NSAID´s inhibit prostaglandin synthesis 1) decreasing blood flow to the mucosa (mainly by PG subgroups E and I, which promotes vasodilatation), 2) increased adherence of neutrophils, 3) topical irritant effect, 4) impair of the repair/healing process, and 5) gastric-acid-related effects. In a retrospective cohort study, Wilson et al found NSAID´s consumption to correlate with the marginal ulcer development after RYGB. Numerous studies have identified NSAID´s use as a main risk factor for PUD; however, the precise relevance of NSAID´s as a factor in marginal ulcer development after RYGB is largely unknown.

In epidemiological, clinical and experimental studies, Tobacco has been identified as a major risk factor for peptic ulcer disease (PUD). Smoking carries an overall relative risk of 2.2 for developing PUD. A synergistic relationship for developing PUD exists between H pylori infection and smoking (2.3 vs. 6.1). Biological evidence suggests that smoking compromises the gastric mucosa barrier, decreases gastric emptying and increases gastric secretion. For marginal ulcer after RYGB, there are three cohort studies that showed positive correlation between smoking with developing anastomotic ulcer.

Helicobacter pylori (H pylori) infection carries an overall relative risk of 3.3 (95%CI, 2.6-4.4) for developing PUD. A synergistic relationship exists between H pylori infection and NSAID´s consumption for developing PUD with an overall risk of 3.5 (95%CI, 1.26-9.96) compared to either H pylori or NSAID´s negative individuals. Furthermore, a 61.1 (95%CI, 9.98-373) overall risk exist when compared to H pylori negative individuals not taking NSAID´s. For marginal ulcers after RYGB, three cohort studies have showed that H. pylori infection is not associated with the development of marginal ulcers. In Papasavas et al study, preoperative H. pylori testing with prophylactic eradication did not decrease the incidence of MU or erosive pouch gastritis.

The pathophysiological mechanisms of damage to the gastric mucosa of Ethanol and alcoholic beverages are poorly understood. There are scant retrospective epidemiological studies that determine if a relationship between alcohol consumption and PUD exists. Although alcohol is not associated with an increased risk of PUD, patients with PUD are advised to avoid alcoholic drinks. Basic science studies have showed that instillation of pure ethanol at lower concentrations (4-40% v/v) causes hemorrhagic gastritis in a dose-dependant fashion. Also a synergistic relationship exists between ethanol and NSAID´s, since both cause mucosal injury. On the other hand, there are no studies available about the effect of alcohol on marginal ulcer development after RYGB.

Cocaine use is responsible for approximately 143,000 Emergency Department visits annually; 19% of American, between 18 to 25 years old, have used cocaine: more than 1% of the Americans use cocaine at least once a week; and approximately 50% of all drug-related deaths were secondary to Cocaine. The temporal association between smoking cocaine (crack) and GI tract manifestations include ulceration, perforation, visceral infarction, and retroperitoneal fibrosis. Most ulcer perforations are juxtapyloric or duodenal (D1) however jejunal location has been reported. The physiopathologic hypothesis includes the following mechanisms 1) cocaine blocks the re-uptake of norepinephrine leading to intense vasoconstriction (alpha-adrenergic receptors), mesenteric ischemia, focal tissue ischemia, coagulative necrosis and perforation; and 2) cocaine causes thrombus formation and platelet aggregation mediated by endogenous Thromboxane B2. A few retrospective cohort studies suggest that primary patch repair is the recommended therapeutic option for this type of ulcers. However, Shuster et al reported a high recurrence rate (42%) after omental patch repair compared to a definitive anti-ulcer procedure (0%). Little information exists about the association between crack and gastroduodenal ulcer perforations other than the temporal association reported in small retrospective cohort studies. In a communication, Dr Mason recalls two patients with perforated "stomach ulcers" associated with cocaine use.

The following Critically-Ill patients have a significant increased risk of stress-related mucosal disease (SRMD): 1) mechanical ventilation > 48hrs conveys a 16-fold risk (p < 0.001), 2) coagulopathy has a 4-fold risk (p < 0.001), 3) shock carries a 3.7-fold risk (p= 0.08), 4) drop of intramural pH (from 8 to 6, 5), 5) increase of the number of risk factors (from 0 to 4), 6) recent major surgery, 7) major trauma, 8) severe burns, 9) head trauma, 10) hepatic or renal disease at admission, and 11) sepsis. SRMD encompasses stress-related injury (SRI), which is primarily erosion in the GI tract, and stress ulcer, which is a focal deep mucosal damage. The pathogenesis of SRMD has not being unraveled completely but there is strong evidence that hypoperfusion and reperfusion of the upper GI tract is the major cause. There is no literature available about marginal ulcer after RYGB associated to ICU or critically ill patients.

Diverse operative strategies for addressing perforated marginal ulcers after gastric bypass have been described including I) Omental (Graham) patch repair, II) Revision of gastrojejunostomy, III) Irrigation and drainage, IV) any previous procedure with truncal vagotomy, V) Esophagojejunostomy, and VI) Reversal.

Summarizing, there is scant information about late complications after gastric bypass especially after the widespread adoption of the laparoscopic approach and the modern anatomical construct of Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass surgery.

Keywords
obesity, ulcer disease, marginal ulcer, perforation, abdominal pain, bariatric surgery, weight loss surgery
Medical subject headings
Peptic Ulcer, Obesity, Abdominal Pain

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

Study groups in NCT01041196
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
perforated ulcer after gastric bypassNot described

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Morbidity and mortality

    Measured: at discharge, 1 week, 3 weeks, 8 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year and annually thereafter for up to 8 years

  2. Recurrence, marginal ulcer.

    Measured: at 6 months, 1 year and annually thereafter for up to 8 years

  3. Weight loss expressed as Body Mass Index and Percentage of excess weight loss

    Measured: at 6 months, 1 year and annually thereafter for up to 8 years

  4. Remission or improvement of symptoms

    Measured: at 6 months, 1 year and annually thereafter for up to 8 years

Secondary outcomes (3)
  1. Remission or improvement of comorbidities

    Measured: at 6 months, 1 year, and annually thereafter for up to 8 years

  2. Length of operative time which is defined as the time duration of operation measured in minutes from the first skin incision to the final closure of the skin incision

    Measured: It is measured in minutes from the first skin incision to the final closure of the skin incision at the time of revisional surgery under study. It is a transoperative measure of outcome of the surgery under study

  3. Length of Hospital Stay which is a measured of surgical recovery quantified and reported in days. It is a hospital pre-discharge traditional measure of outcome.

    Measured: It is measured in days from the admission date to the discharge date for the hospitalization pertaining to revisional surgery under study.

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted31 Dec 2009 (estimated)
  2. Study startJan 2009
  3. Primary completionJan 2009
  4. Study completionDec 2009

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Observational
Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrolment
30 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT01041196
Sponsor's protocol ID
CMC IRB No. 2008091
Other IDs
U1111-1113-0006
Acronym
PerforatedMU
Status last verified
Dec 2009
First submitted
26 Dec 2009
Last updated
1 Jan 2010
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes

Publications

  • Higa KD, Boone KB, Ho T, Davies OG. Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for morbid obesity: technique and preliminary results of our first 400 patients. Arch Surg. 2000 Sep;135(9):1029-33; discussion 1033-4. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.135.9.1029.

    PubMed 10982506
  • Hedley AA, Ogden CL, Johnson CL, Carroll MD, Curtin LR, Flegal KM. Prevalence of overweight and obesity among US children, adolescents, and adults, 1999-2002. JAMA. 2004 Jun 16;291(23):2847-50. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.23.2847.

    PubMed 15199035
  • McTigue KM, Harris R, Hemphill B, Lux L, Sutton S, Bunton AJ, Lohr KN. Screening and interventions for obesity in adults: summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2003 Dec 2;139(11):933-49. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-139-11-200312020-00013.

    PubMed 14644897
  • Buchwald H, Avidor Y, Braunwald E, Jensen MD, Pories W, Fahrbach K, Schoelles K. Bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2004 Oct 13;292(14):1724-37. doi: 10.1001/jama.292.14.1724.

    PubMed 15479938
  • Christou NV, Sampalis JS, Liberman M, Look D, Auger S, McLean AP, MacLean LD. Surgery decreases long-term mortality, morbidity, and health care use in morbidly obese patients. Ann Surg. 2004 Sep;240(3):416-23; discussion 423-4. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000137343.63376.19.

    PubMed 15319713
  • Sjostrom L, Narbro K, Sjostrom CD, Karason K, Larsson B, Wedel H, Lystig T, Sullivan M, Bouchard C, Carlsson B, Bengtsson C, Dahlgren S, Gummesson A, Jacobson P, Karlsson J, Lindroos AK, Lonroth H, Naslund I, Olbers T, Stenlof K, Torgerson J, Agren G, Carlsson LM; Swedish Obese Subjects Study. Effects of bariatric surgery on mortality in Swedish obese subjects. N Engl J Med. 2007 Aug 23;357(8):741-52. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa066254.

    PubMed 17715408
  • Cremieux PY, Buchwald H, Shikora SA, Ghosh A, Yang HE, Buessing M. A study on the economic impact of bariatric surgery. Am J Manag Care. 2008 Sep;14(9):589-96.

    PubMed 18778174
  • Santry HP, Gillen DL, Lauderdale DS. Trends in bariatric surgical procedures. JAMA. 2005 Oct 19;294(15):1909-17. doi: 10.1001/jama.294.15.1909.

    PubMed 16234497
  • Flum DR, Khan TV, Dellinger EP. Toward the rational and equitable use of bariatric surgery. JAMA. 2007 Sep 26;298(12):1442-4. doi: 10.1001/jama.298.12.1442. No abstract available.

    PubMed 17895461
  • Meguid MM, Glade MJ, Middleton FA. Weight regain after Roux-en-Y: a significant 20% complication related to PYY. Nutrition. 2008 Sep;24(9):832-42. doi: 10.1016/j.nut.2008.06.027.

    PubMed 18725080
  • Nguyen NT. Reoperations and revisions in bariatric surgery. Surg Endosc. 2007 Nov;21(11):1907-8. doi: 10.1007/s00464-007-9572-6. Epub 2007 Sep 8. No abstract available.

    PubMed 17828427
  • Sapala JA, Wood MH, Sapala MA, Flake TM Jr. Marginal ulcer after gastric bypass: a prospective 3-year study of 173 patients. Obes Surg. 1998 Oct;8(5):505-16. doi: 10.1381/096089298765554061.

    PubMed 9819081
  • Higa KD, Boone KB, Ho T. Complications of the laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: 1,040 patients--what have we learned? Obes Surg. 2000 Dec;10(6):509-13. doi: 10.1381/096089200321593706.

    PubMed 11175957
  • Sanyal AJ, Sugerman HJ, Kellum JM, Engle KM, Wolfe L. Stomal complications of gastric bypass: incidence and outcome of therapy. Am J Gastroenterol. 1992 Sep;87(9):1165-9.

    PubMed 1519574
  • Capella JF, Capella RF. Staple Disruption and Marginal Ulceration in Gastric Bypass Procedures for Weight Reduction. Obes Surg. 1996 Feb;6(1):44-49. doi: 10.1381/096089296765557259.

    PubMed 10731249

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Ulcer Disease After Gastric Bypass and Marginal Ulcer, run by University of California, San Francisco at 1 site in United States.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 1 Jan 2010. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Morbidity and mortality (time frame: at discharge, 1 week, 3 weeks, 8 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year and annually thereafter for up to 8 years). The study lists 4 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01041196, which also lists 45 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 1 Jan 2010.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in