Risk Factors for Marginal Ulcer After Gastric Bypass Surgery for Obesity: A Population-based Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess risk factors for developing marginal ulcer (MU) after gastric bypass (GBP) surgery for obesity. BACKGROUND: MU is a common and potentially serious complication of GBP surgery, little is known about its etiology. METHODS: This population-based cohort study of GBP in 2006-2011 evaluated MU in relation to diabetes, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), ulcer history, use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), aspirin, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression models estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), adjusted for confounding. RESULTS: Among 20,294 GBP patients, diabetes and peptic ulcer history entailed statistically significantly increased risk of MU (HR = 1.26, 95% CI 1.03-1.55 and HR  =  2.70, 95% CI 1.81-4.03), although hyperlipidemia, hypertension, and COPD did not. PPI users had an increased HR of MU (HR  =  1.37, 95% CI 1.17-1.60). Aspirin and NSAID consumption less than or equal to median entailed decreased HRs of MU (HR  =  0.56, 95% CI 0.37-0.86 and HR  =  0.30, 95% CI 0.24-0.38), although aspirin and NSAID users more than median had an increased risk and no association with MU, respectively (HR  =  1.90, 95% CI 1.41-2.58 and HR  =  0.90, 95% CI 0.76-1.87). The use of SSRI less than or equal to median had a decreased risk of MU (HR  =  0.50, 95% CI 0.37-0.67), although use more than median entailed increased HR (HR  =  1.26, 95% CI 1.01-1.56). CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes and peptic ulcer history seem to be risk factors for MU, but not hyperlipidemia, hypertension, or COPD. Limited doses of aspirin, NSAIDs, and SSRIs might not increase the risk, although higher doses of aspirin do. The association with PPI could be due to confounding by indication.

Minimal versus definitive surgery in managing peptic ulcer bleeding: a population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare radical surgery with a minimal approach for peptic ulcer bleeding in relation to survival. DESIGN: A Swedish nationwide population-based cohort study from 1987-2008 compared survival after minimal surgery and definitive surgery. The cohort was also stratified into calendar year before and after the year 2000 for subgroup analyses. Data were collected from the Swedish Patient Register. The two surgical groups were matched based on the propensity score to mimic a randomized trial design. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using Cox regression models adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: 4,163 patients were included. There were no differences in survival in patients who underwent definitive surgical procedures compared to those who underwent minimal surgery for a bleeding peptic ulcer during the full study period. Using minimal surgery group as the reference, the HRs for death in the definitive surgery group within 30 days, 90 days, 1 year, and 5 years were 0.87 (95% CI 0.72-1.05), 0.93 (0.80-1.09), 1.00 (95% CI 0.87-1.14), and 1.05 (95% CI 0.95-1.16), respectively. The corresponding HRs during the calendar period after the year 2000 were 1.05 (95% CI 0.65-1.69), 1.18 (95% CI 0.81-1.73), 1.17 (0.84-1.62), and 1.27 (95% CI 0.99-1.63), respectively. CONCLUSION: This study found no worse overall survival after minimal surgery compared to more extensive surgery for refractory peptic ulcer bleeding, and indicated better long-term survival in the minimal surgery group during the more recent study period. A minimal approach is probably sufficient in most cases.

[Abdominal tuberculosis--still a diagnostic challenge. Two case reports and a literature review]. / Abdominell tuberkulos--en nygammal diagnostisk utmaning Två fallbeskrivningar och en litteraturgenomgång.

Abdominal tuberculosis (TB) is unusual in Sweden today. This paper presents two patients born 1981 and 1975, one with perforated duodenal ulcer due to Helicobacter pylori and/or Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Acute operation with suture was done, signs of granulomatous inflammation revealed culture positive for TB. The other was operated with appendectomy; the pathology was TB in the mesenteries and outside the caecum. Antituberculosis chemotherapy was given in both cases and neither patient suffered any major problems. These two cases show how important it is for surgeons to be aware of TB nowadays, particularly in patients born outside Sweden or those undergoing immune therapy.