Differential diagnosis of diarrhoea in patients with neuroendocrine tumours:A systematic review

BACKGROUND Approximately 20% of patients with neuroendocrine tumours(NETs) develop carcinoid syndrome(CS),characterised by flushing and diarrhoea.Somatostatin analogues or telotristat can be used to control symptoms of CS through inhibition of serotonin secretion.Although CS is often the cause of diarrhoea among patients with gastroenteropancreatic NETs(GEP-NETs),other causes to consider include pancreatic enzyme insufficiency(PEI),bile acid malabsorption and small intestinal bacterial overgrowth.If other causes of diarrhoea unrelated to serotonin secretion are mistaken for CS diarrhoea,these treatments may be ineffective against the diarrhoea,risking detrimental effects to patient quality of life.AIM To identify and synthesise qualitative and quantitative evidence relating to the differential diagnosis of diarrhoea in patients with GEP-NETs.METHODS Electronic databases(MEDLINE,Embase and the Cochrane Library) were searched from inception to September 12,2018 using terms for NETs and diarrhoea.Congresses,systematic literature review bibliographies and included articles were also hand-searched.Any study designs and publication types were eligible for inclusion if relevant data on a cause(s) of diarrhoea in patients with GEP-NETs were reported.Studies were screened by two independent reviewers at abstract and full-text stages.Framework synthesis was adapted to synthesise quantitative and qualitative data.The definition of qualitative data was expanded to include all textual data in any section of relevant publications.RESULTS Forty-seven publications(44 studies) were included,comprising a variety of publication types,including observational studies,reviews,guidelines,case reports,interventional studies,and opinion pieces.Most reported on PEI on/after treatment with somatostatin analogs;9.5%-84% of patients with GEP-NETs had experienced steatorrhoea or confirmed PEI.Where reported,14.3%–50.7% of patients received pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy.Other causes of diarrhoea reported in patients with GEP-NETs included bile acid malabsorption(80%),small intestinal bacterial overgrowth(23.6%-62%),colitis(20%) and infection(7.1%).Diagnostic approaches included faecal elastase,breath tests,tauroselcholic(selenium-75) acid(Se HCAT) scan and stool culture,although evidence on the effectiveness or diagnostic accuracy of these approaches was limited.Assessment of patient history or diarrhoea characteristics was also reported as initial approaches for investigation.From the identified evidence,if diarrhoea is assumed to be CS diarrhoea,consequences include uncontrolled diarrhoea,malnutrition,and perceived ineffectiveness of CS treatment.Approaches for facilitating differential diagnosis of diarrhoea include improving patient and clinician awareness of non-CS causes and involvement of a multidisciplinary clinical team,including gastroenterologists.CONCLUSION Diarrhoea in GEP-NETs can be multifactorial with misdiagnosis leading to delayed patient recovery and inefficient resource use.This systematic literature review highlights gaps for further research on prevalence of non-CS diarrhoea and suitability of diagnostic approaches,to determine an effective algorithm for differential diagnosis of GEP-NET diarrhoea.     

12-year survival analysis of 322 Hintegra total ankle arthroplasties from an independent center

Background and purpose — Total ankle arthroplasties (TAAs) have larger revision rates than hip and knee implants. We examined the survival rates of our primary TAAs, and what different factors, including the cause of arthritis, affect the success and/or revision rate.Patients and methods — From 2004 to 2016, 322 primary Hintegra TAAs were implanted: the 2nd generation implant from 2004 until mid-2007 and the 3rd generation from late 2007 to 2016. A Cox proportional hazards model evaluated sex, age, primary diagnosis, and implant generation, pre- and postoperative angles and implant position as risk factors for revision.Results — 60 implants (19%) were revised, the majority (n = 34) due to loosening. The 5-year survival rate (95% CI) was 75% (69–82) and the 10-year survival rate was 68% (60–77). There was a reduced risk of revision, per degree of increased postoperative medial distal tibial angle at 0.84 (0.72–0.98) and preoperative talus angle at 0.95 (0.90–1.00), indicating that varus ankles may have a larger revision rate. Generation of implant, sex, primary diagnosis, and most pre- and postoperative radiological angles did not statistically affect revision risk.Interpretation — Our revision rates are slightly above registry rates and well above those of the developer. Most were revised due to loosening; no difference was demonstrated with the 2 generations of implant used. Learning curve and a low threshold for revision could explain the high revision rate.

Arthritis in the ankle often develops earlier than in the hip or knee, and 70% have a traumatic etiology (Saltzman et al. 2005, Brown et al. 2006). Total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) can be indicated for severe arthritis in the ankle joint, but the anatomical preconditions, like a small surface area and high stress from compression and torque (Bouguecha et al. 2011, Kakkar and Siddique 2011), makes it less durable than hip and knee prosthetics. The Hintegra TAA, a 3-component mobile bearing, uncemented implant (Hintermann et al. 2004) is widely used and results from the development center demonstrate survival rates of 94% and 84% after 5 and 10 years’ follow-up (Barg et al. 2013). This is considerably more than the survival rates from national registries. Labek et al. (2011) demonstrated that development centers report only half of the revision rate that can be found in the few existing national registers. In a systematic review of primary Agility total ankle arthroplasty (DePuy Synthes Orthopedics, Warsaw, IN, USA), the author (Roukis 2012) found that the incidence of complications increased from 7% to 12%, in studies where the inventor was excluded. Similar results were found by Prissel and Roukis (2013), who found an increased incidence of complications from 6% to 13% in studies where the inventor or faculty consultants were excluded. These studies indicated the risk of selection (inventor) and publication (conflict of interest) bias.Planning and surgical technique, including significant experience, are mandatory for a successful outcome. The better result from development centers may reflect, besides the above-mentioned bias, that there is a long learning curve and that the indication for revision surgery varies.We examined the survival rates of primary Hintegra TAAs performed at Hvidovre Hospital, with revision rate as outcome. We report primary diagnosis for primary TAA and examine whether sex, generation of the implant, preoperative angles and implant position affect the revision rate.