Synthetic versus Biological Patches for CDH: A Comparison of Recurrence Rates and Adverse Events, Systematic Review, and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Our systematic review aims to compare recurrence rates and complications of biological versus synthetic patches for the repair of congenital diaphragmatic herniae. METHODS: Studies from January 1, 1980 to April 25, 2020, with patients under the age of 16 years and with a minimum 6-month follow-up, were included from MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Funnel plots for recurrence rates were constructed for biological and synthetic patches. Subgroup analysis was performed for recurrence rate at the 1-year time-point and data were gathered on individual adverse events from relevant studies. RESULTS: A total of 47 studies with 986 patients (226 biological, 760 synthetic) were included. Funnel plot analysis determined overall recurrence rates of 16.7% for synthetic and 30.3% for biological patches. Subgroup analysis of 493 and 146 patients with synthetic and biological patches, respectively, showed recurrence rates of 9.9 and 26%, respectively.The most commonly used patch types-PTFE (polytetrafluoroethylene) and SIS (small intestinal submucosa)-had 11.5 and 33.3% recurrence, respectively. Adhesive bowel obstruction rates ranged from 4 to 29% in studies that systematically reported it for synthetic, and 7 to 35% for biological patches. Gastroesophageal reflux rates ranged from 25 to 48% in studies that systematically reported it for synthetic, and 21 to 42% for biological patches. Pectus deformity rates were reported as high as 80% for synthetic patches. CONCLUSION: Biological patches appear to have higher recurrence rates than synthetic patches, while skeletal deformities are associated more commonly with synthetic patches. Results of biological patches are mainly using SIS and this may overestimate complications of current superior biological patches.

Gastrojejunal (GJ) tube feeding: developing a service and evaluating associated complications in a paediatric surgical centre.

INTRODUCTION: Gastrojejunal (GJ) tubes are becoming an established alternative method of delivering nutrition to children who do not tolerate gastric feeding. However, there is limited literature surrounding patient outcomes, the longevity of tubes or complications. We aim to highlight the development and evaluation of a service to provide children with GJ tube feeding. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective case-note review of children either undergoing an initial gastrostomy to gastrojejunal tube conversion or gastrojejunal tube replacement in our tertiary paediatric surgical centre between January 2015 and June 2018. RESULTS: 134 GJ feeding tubes were placed in 33 neurologically impaired children with a median age of 4.9 years (8 months-17 years) having a median 4 tube placements per child (1-11) within the study period. All tubes were 14 or 16 Fr 'AMT G-JET' tubes with a median replacement time of 174.9 days (13-504 days). The most common indication was foregut dysmotility in children with global developmental delay. The complication rate was 34.3% (46 tubes). In the study period, 2 patients (6.1%) reverted to oral feeding, 6 patients (18.2%) to gastric feeding and 25 children (75.7%) continued with jejunal feeding. No child required fundoplication. There were no procedure-related mortalities or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: GJ tube feeding is an effective and safe method of managing children with foregut dysmotility. Many patients do not require permanent jejunal feeding, and thus the reversibility of this method is an asset. A dedicated team is needed to co-ordinate tube replacements and provide efficient long-term jejunal feeding. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

A Review on Safety and Outcomes of Mucous Fistula Refeeding in Neonates.

INTRODUCTION: The utility of mucous fistula refeeding (MFR) in neonates with short bowel syndrome is widely debated. Our purpose is to review MFR and outline methods, reported complications, and clinical outcomes (survival, weight gain, dependence on parenteral nutrition [PN], and time to enteral autonomy). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a MEDLINE literature search and reference review from January 1980 to May 2020 for terms ("mucous fistula re-feeding" or "enteral re-feeding") and neonates. We included studies that utilized conventional MFR in the neonatal period. Non-English language articles were excluded. RESULTS: We identified 11 relevant articles. Internationally, there was no consensus on methods of MFR. A total of 197 neonates underwent MFR. Within a single study, four neonates developed major complications; however, the procedure was well tolerated without major complications in 10 of the 11 studies. A mortality of nine patients during MFR highlights the burden of disease within the study population; however, of these, only one was directly attributable to MFR. Minor complications were seldom quantified. Three studies demonstrated a higher rate of weight gain and shorter PN support versus controls. Neonates who underwent MFR had lower chance of anastomotic leak and quicker progression to full feed after reversal versus controls. The influence of microorganisms in MFR was only investigated in one study. CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests benefits of MFR; however, an international consensus is yet to be reached on the optimal method. A large prospective study investigating the influence of MFR on the enteric system is required.