ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (PEI) is a common complication following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) leading to malnutrition. The course of PEI and related symptoms and vitamin deficiencies is unknown. This study aimed to assess the (long-term) incidence of PEI and vitamin deficiencies after PD. METHODS: A bi-centre prospective observational cohort study was performed, including patients who underwent PD for mainly pancreatic and periampullary (pre)malignancies (2014-2018). Two cohorts were formed to evaluate short and long-term results. Patients were followed for 18 months and clinical symptoms were evaluated by questionnaire. PEI was based on faecal elastase-1 (FE-1) levels and/or clinical symptoms. RESULTS: In total, 95 patients were included. After three months, all but three patients had developed PEI and 27/29 (93%) patients of whom stool samples were available showed abnormal FE-1 levels, which did not improve during follow-up. After six months, all patients had developed PEI. During follow-up, symptoms resolved in 35%-70% of patients. Vitamin D and K deficiencies were observed in 48%-79% of patients, depending on the moment of follow-up; 0%-50% of the patients with deficiencies received vitamin supplementation. DISCUSSION: This prospective study found a high incidence of PEI after PD with persisting symptoms in one-to two thirds of all patients. Limited attention was paid to vitamin deficiencies. Improved screening and treatment strategies for PEI and vitamins need to be designed.
Subject(s)
Exocrine Pancreatic Insufficiency , Pancreaticoduodenectomy , Humans , Pancreaticoduodenectomy/adverse effects , Prospective Studies , Exocrine Pancreatic Insufficiency/epidemiology , Exocrine Pancreatic Insufficiency/etiology , Exocrine Pancreatic Insufficiency/diagnosis , Pancreas , Vitamin AABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Cerebral lateralisation of language processing leads to a right ear advantage in normal hearing subjects. The aim of this study was to present a systematic overview of the effect of implantation side on postoperative cochlear implant performance in patients with symmetrical severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase and The Cochrane Library databases. RESEARCH METHODS: Databases were searched from database inception up to 9 January 2017 for cochlear implant and side and all synonyms. Title, abstract and full-text of retrieved articles were screened for eligibility. Then, directness of evidence and risk of bias were assessed. For the included articles, study characteristics and outcome data (hearing and language development) were extracted. RESULTS: 2541 unique articles were screened, of which twenty were eligible for critical appraisal. No randomised controlled trials were identified. Twelve studies with a high directness of evidence remained for data extraction. Four of six studies including children with pre-lingual sensorineural hearing loss and four of seven studies investigating adults with postlingual sensorineural hearing loss found a right ear advantage in at least one outcome measurement related to cochlear implant performance. CONCLUSION: The available evidence on the effect of side of implantation is of low quality, as study populations and outcome measures are heterogeneous. The majority of studies reveals evidence for a right ear advantage in prelingually deafened children as well as postlingually deafened adults. In view of the present evidence and as no left ear advantage was identified, we cautiously advise implanting the cochlear implant in the right ear when other prognostic factors do not favour the left ear and sensorineural hearing loss is symmetrical.
