Search tips
Search criteria

Results 1-4 (4)

Clipboard (0)

Select a Filter Below

more »
Year of Publication
Document Types
1.  Impact of body mass index for patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy 
AIM: To evaluate the impact of body mass index (BMI) on short and long term results after pancreaticoduodenectomies (PD).
METHODS: A consecutive series of PDs performed at the Karolinska University Hospital from 2004 till 2010 were retrieved from our prospective database. The patients were divided by BMI into overweight/obese (O; BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2) and controls (C; BMI < 25 kg/m2). Demographics, peri-operative data, morbidity, mortality, pancreatic fistula (PF) rate, length of stay (LOS), hospital costs, histology, and survival were analyzed. An additional sub analysis of survival was performed in patients with a diagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and divided in underweight, normal-weight, overweight and obese.
RESULTS: A total of 367 PDs were included (O = 141/C = 226). No differences were found between O and C regarding demographics, peri-operative data, costs, morbidity or mortality. O was associated with higher intra-operative blood loss (1392 ± 115 mL vs 1121 ± 83 mL; P = 0.01), rate of PF (20% vs 9.5%; P = 0.006) and marginally longer LOS (18 ± 0.9 d vs 15 ± 1.1 d; P = 0.05). An increasing risk for PF was observed with increasing BMI. The 1, 3 and 5 years survival rate was similar in O and C in PDAC (68.7%, 26.4% and 8.8% vs 66.1%, 30.9% and 17.9% respectively; P = 0.9). When the survival was analyzed using 4 different categories of BMI (underweight, normal, overweight and obese), a trend was seen toward a difference in survival, with a worse prognosis for the underweight and obese patients compared to normal weight and overweight patients.
CONCLUSION: Overweight increases the risk for intra-operative bleeding and PF, but do not otherwise alter short or long term outcome after PD for pancreatic cancer.
PMCID: PMC3676538  PMID: 23755369
Pancreas surgery; Pancreatectomy; Body mass index; Pancreatico- duodenectomy; Oncology; Pancreas cancer
2.  Losartan to prevent hyperenzymemia after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopan-creatography: A randomized clinical trial 
AIM: To study if the angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) losartan counteracts pancreatic hyperenzymemia as measured 24 h after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).
METHODS: A triple-blind and placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was performed at two Swedish hospitals in 2006-2008. Patients over 18 years of age undergoing ERCP, excluding those with current pancreatitis, current use of ARB, and severe disease, such as sepsis, liver and renal failure. One oral dose of 50 mg losartan or placebo was given one hour before ERCP. The relative risk of hyperenzymemia 24 h after ERCP was estimated using multivariable logistic regression, and expressed as odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), including adjustment for potential remaining confounding.
RESULTS: Among 76 participating patients, 38 were randomized to the losartan and the placebo group, respectively. The incidence rates of hyperenzymemia and acute pancreatitis among all 76 participating patients were 21% and 12%, respectively. Hyperenzymemia was detected in 9 and 7 patients in the losartan and placebo group, respectively. There were no major differences between the comparison groups regarding cannulation difficulty, findings, or proportion of patients requiring drainage of the bile ducts. There were, however, more pancreatic duct injections, a greater extent of pancreatography, and more biliary sphincterotomies in the losartan group than in the placebo group. Losartan was not associated with risk of hyperenzymemia compared to the placebo group after multi-varible logistic regression analysis (odds ratio 1.6, 95%CI 0.3-7.8).
CONCLUSION: In this randomized trial 50 mg losartan given orally had no prophylactic effect on development of hyperenzymemia after ERCP.
PMCID: PMC3506968  PMID: 23189222
Renin-angiotensin system; Pancreatitis; Prophylaxis; Placebo-controlled trial
3.  Patients’ perspectives of living with a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) 
BMC Gastroenterology  2012;12:126.
Since enteral nutrition therapy is the preferred nutritional support for dysphagic patients with a range of diagnoses, PEG has become part of traditional care. However, enteral nutrition with PEG transfers treatment responsibility and activity to the patients and their carers, so the advantages should be discussed. The aim of this study was therefore to investigate patients’ experience of living with a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) in order to increase the understanding of patients’ need for support.
In a prospective study at Karolinska University Hospital in Sweden, data were collected consecutively at the time of PEG and two months later using a study-specific questionnaire about each patient’s experience of living with a PEG. Fishers exact test was used to test for statistically significant difference at five per cent level.
There were 104 responders (response rate of 70%). Women felt more limited in daily activity compared to men (p = 0.004). Older patients experienced a more limited ability to influence the number of feeding times compared to younger (p = 0.026). Highly educated patients found feeding more time-consuming (p = 0.004). Patients with a cancer diagnosis reported that the PEG feeding interfered with their oral feeding more than patients with a neurological disease (p = 0.009). Patients mostly contacted the PEG outpatient clinic with problems regarding their PEG, and were mainly assisted by their spouse rather than district nurses.
PEG feeding is time-consuming and interferes with daily life. Although 73% was satisfied, patients’ experiences of living with a PEG may be dependent on age, sex, education and diagnosis. Spouses are the main carers for PEG patients at home, and patients prefer to go to the PEG outpatient clinic for help if problems occur.
PMCID: PMC3503865  PMID: 22989321
Experience; Impact; Nutrition; Support
4.  Novel approach to antibiotic prophylaxis in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG): randomised controlled trial 
Objective To evaluate a new and simpler strategy of antibiotic prophylaxis in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG).
Design Single centre, two arm, randomised, controlled, double blind clinical trial.
Setting Endoscopy unit in Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden, between 3 June 2005 and 31 October 2009.
Participants 234 patients with an indication for PEG who gave informed consent to participate.
Intervention A single 20 ml dose of the oral solution of sulfamethoxazole and trimethoprim (also known as co-trimoxazole or Bactrim; F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland) deposited in the PEG catheter immediately after insertion. The control group received standard prophylaxis consisting of a single intravenous dose of 1.5 g cefuroxime (Zinacef; GlaxoSmithKline, London) administered before insertion of the PEG tube.
Main outcome measure Primary outcome was the occurrence of clinically evident wound infection within 14 days after insertion of the PEG catheter. Secondary outcomes were positive bacterial culture and blood tests (highly sensitive C reactive protein and white blood cell count). All randomised patients were included in an intention to treat analysis.
Results Of the 234 patients included in this study, 116 were randomly assigned to co-trimoxazole and 118 to cefuroxime. At follow-up 7-14 days after insertion of the PEG catheter, wound infection was found in 10 (8.6%) patients in the co-trimoxazole group and 14 (11.9%) in the cefuroxime group, which corresponds to a percentage point difference of −3.3% (95% confidence interval −10.9% to 4.5%). The per protocol analysis, which comprised 100 patients in each group, gave similar results—10% and 13% infection in the co-trimoxazole and cefuroxime groups, respectively (percentage point difference −3.0%, 95% CI −11.8% to 5.8%). Both these analyses indicate non-inferiority of co-trimoxazole compared with cefuroxime because the upper bounds of the confidence intervals are lower than the pre-determined non-inferiority margin of 15%. Analyses of the secondary outcomes supported this finding.
Conclusion 20 ml of co-trimoxazole solution deposited in a newly inserted PEG catheter is at least as effective as cefuroxime prophylaxis given intravenously before PEG at preventing wound infections in patients undergoing PEG.
Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN18677736.
PMCID: PMC2896486  PMID: 20601414

Results 1-4 (4)