Advertisement

Autologous intestinal reconstruction: a single institution study of the serial transverse enteroplasty (STEP) and the longitudinal intestinal lengthening and tailoring (LILT)

  • Adil A. Shah
  • Mikael PetrosyanEmail author
  • Ashanti L. Franklin
  • Alfred A. Chahine
  • Clarivet Torres
  • Anthony D. Sandler
Original Article
  • 13 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

To review the effectiveness of the longitudinal intestinal lengthening and tailoring (LILT) and serial transverse enteroplasty (STEP) operations in a cohort of patients with short bowel syndrome (SBS).

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis of children with SBS treated at our institution from 2004 until 2014. Children aged 0 days to 18 years with SBS who underwent autologous intestinal reconstruction were included in the study.

Results

Twenty-two SBS patients underwent 31 different lengthening procedures (LP). Seventeen patients underwent their primary lengthening procedures at our institution: 9 (53%) patients underwent a LILT, 7 (41%) underwent a STEP and 1 (6%) had a simultaneous LILT and STEP procedure. 12/22 patients had a second STEP, two had a third STEP and one patient had an intestinal transplantation after the LP. Median intestinal length at the time of surgery was 25 cm (range 12–90 cm). There was no difference in gain of intestinal length after LILT vs. STEP (p = 0.74). Length of stay and initiation of feeds were similar. Serum albumin increased after autologous bowel lengthening (p < 0.001). 50% were weaned off parenteral nutrition (PN) (5/9 of the LILT, 1/7 of the STEP, 1/1 of the combined LILT/STEP). There were no surgical complications or deaths.

Conclusion

In patients with SBS, LILT and STEP procedures are effective for autologous intestinal reconstruction and enable intestinal rehabilitation.

Keywords

Short bowel syndrome Intestinal rehabilitation Autologous intestinal reconstruction 

Notes

Funding

Not applicable.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to report.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Not applicable. Institutional review board (IRB) exemption was obtained for this retrospective chart review.

References

  1. 1.
    O’Keefe SJ et al (2006) Short bowel syndrome and intestinal failure: consensus definitions and overview. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 4(1):6–10CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Squires RH et al (2012) Natural history of pediatric intestinal failure: initial report from the Pediatric Intestinal Failure Consortium. J Pediatr 161(4):723–728 e2CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vanderhoof JA, Young RJ (2003) Enteral and parenteral nutrition in the care of patients with short-bowel syndrome. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 17(6):997–1015CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Demehri FR et al (2015) Enteral autonomy in pediatric short bowel syndrome: predictive factors one year after diagnosis. J Pediatr Surg 50(1):131–135CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Torres CVJ (2005) Short bowel syndrome, 4th edn. In: Bankhead R, Rolandelli RH, Boullata JI, Compher CW (eds) Clinical nutrition: enteral and tube feeding. Elsevier Saunders, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Torres C (2012) Clinical management of intestinal failure. In: Duggan CP, Jaksic T (eds) Clinical management of intestinal failure. CRC Press Taylor and Francis Group, Boca Raton, pp 107–115Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bianchi A (2007) Autologous gastrointestinal reconstruction for short bowel syndrome. Br J Hosp Med (Lond) 68(1):24–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bianchi A (2006) From the cradle to enteral autonomy: the role of autologous gastrointestinal reconstruction. Gastroenterology 130(2 Suppl 1):S138–S146CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wood SJ et al (2013) Early structured surgical management plan for neonates with short bowel syndrome may improve outcomes. World J Surg 37(7):1714–1717CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Torres C et al (2007) Role of an intestinal rehabilitation program in the treatment of advanced intestinal failure. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 45(2):204–212CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chahine AA, Ricketts RR (1998) A modification of the Bianchi intestinal lengthening procedure with a single anastomosis. J Pediatr Surg 33(8):1292–1293CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sehgal S et al (2018) Ostomy in continuity: a novel approach for the management of children with complex short bowel syndrome. J Pediatr Surg 53(10):1989–1995CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nusinovich Y, Revenis M, Torres C (2013) Long-term outcomes for infants with intestinal atresia studied at Children’s National Medical Center. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 57(3):324–329CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Walker SR et al (2006) The Bianchi procedure: a 20-year single institution experience. J Pediatr Surg 41(1):113–119 (discussion 113–9) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Khalil BA et al (2012) Intestinal rehabilitation and bowel reconstructive surgery: improved outcomes in children with short bowel syndrome. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 54(4):505–509CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Reinshagen K et al (2008) Long-term outcome in patients with short bowel syndrome after longitudinal intestinal lengthening and tailoring. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 47(5):573–578CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jones BA et al (2013) Report of 111 consecutive patients enrolled in the International Serial Transverse Enteroplasty (STEP) Data Registry: a retrospective observational study. J Am Coll Surg 216(3):438–446CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Leung MW et al (2012) Serial transverse enteroplasty for short bowel syndrome: Hong Kong experience. Hong Kong Med J 18(1):35–39Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lourenco L et al (2012) Serial transverse enteroplasty (STEP): intermediate outcomes in children with short bowel syndrome. Eur J Pediatr 171(8):1265–1268CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Oliveira C, de Silva N, Wales PW (2012) Five-year outcomes after serial transverse enteroplasty in children with short bowel syndrome. J Pediatr Surg 47(5):931–937CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Javid PJ et al (2013) Intestinal lengthening and nutritional outcomes in children with short bowel syndrome. Am J Surg 205(5):576–580CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cowles RA et al (2007) Serial transverse enteroplasty in a newborn patient. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 45(2):257–260CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Modi BP et al (2006) Serial transverse enteroplasty for management of refractory d-lactic acidosis in short-bowel syndrome. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 43(3):395–397CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Frongia G et al (2013) Comparison of LILT and STEP procedures in children with short bowel syndrome—a systematic review of the literature. J Pediatr Surg 48(8):1794–1805CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bianchi A (1984) Intestinal lengthening: an experimental and clinical review. J R Soc Med 77(Suppl 3):35–41PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ehrlich PF, Mychaliska GB, Teitelbaum DH (2007) The 2 STEP: an approach to repeating a serial transverse enteroplasty. J Pediatr Surg 42(5):819–822CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Morikawa N et al (2009) Repeat STEP procedure to establish enteral nutrition in an infant with short bowel syndrome. Pediatr Surg Int 25(11):1007–1011CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bianchi A (1997) Longitudinal intestinal lengthening and tailoring: results in 20 children. J R Soc Med 90(8):429–432CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bueno J et al (2001) Analysis of patients with longitudinal intestinal lengthening procedure referred for intestinal transplantation. J Pediatr Surg 36(1):178–183CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bianchi A (1999) Experience with longitudinal intestinal lengthening and tailoring. Eur J Pediatr Surg 9(4):256–259CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adil A. Shah
    • 1
    • 2
  • Mikael Petrosyan
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ashanti L. Franklin
    • 1
  • Alfred A. Chahine
    • 1
  • Clarivet Torres
    • 1
    • 3
  • Anthony D. Sandler
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of General and Thoracic SurgeryChildren’s National Health SystemWashingtonUSA
  2. 2.Department of SurgeryHoward University Hospital and College of MedicineWashingtonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and NutritionChildren’s National Health SystemWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations