Abstract
Background
Cardiac anomalies occur frequently in patients with congenital duodenal obstruction (DO). However, the exact occurrence and the type of associated anomalies remain unknown. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review is to aggregate the available literatures on cardiac anomalies in patients with DO.
Methods
In July 2022, a search was performed in PubMed and Embase.com. Studies describing cardiac anomalies in patients with congenital DO were considered eligible. Primary outcome was the pooled percentage of cardiac anomalies in patients with DO. Secondary outcomes were the pooled percentages of the types of cardiac anomalies, type of DO, and trisomy 21. A meta-analysis was performed to pool the reported data.
Results
In total, 99 publications met our eligibility data, representing 6725 patients. The pooled percentage of cardiac anomalies was 29% (95% CI 0.26–0.32). The most common cardiac anomalies were persistent foramen ovale 35% (95% CI 0.20–0.54), ventricular septal defect 33% (95% CI 0.24–0.43), and atrial septal defect 33% (95% CI 0.26–0.41). The most prevalent type of obstruction was type 3 (complete atresias), with a pooled percentage of 54% (95% CI 0.48–0.60). The pooled percentage of Trisomy 21 in patients with DO was 28% (95% CI 0.26–0.31).
Conclusion
This review shows cardiac anomalies are found in one-third of the patients with DO regardless of the presence of trisomy 21. Therefore, we recommend that patients with DO should receive preoperative cardiac screening.
Level of evidence
II.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Duodenal obstruction (DO) is one of the most common bowel obstructions in neonates and occurs in 1:5000–10,000 live births [1, 2]. After the diagnosis DO is made, the type of obstruction will be discovered during surgery and then be classified following Gray and Skandalakis [3]. Subtypes consist of web/membrane (type 1), atresia (types 2 and 3), annular pancreas, stenosis, and obstruction due to preduodenal portal vein. The type of surgical procedure performed during surgery depends on the subtype and may involve duodeno-duodenostomy, duodeno-jejunostomy, or duodenoplasty [4, 5].
Besides subtypes, associated anomalies can greatly affect perioperative management, especially its associated cardiac anomalies [6]. However, studies describing the association between DO and cardiac anomalies are of small cohort sizes and cannot give clear insights on an association between DO and the specific cardiac anomalies. Increased knowledge on the occurrence of the type of cardiac anomalies associated with DO would highlight the anomalies that shouldn’t be missed throughout the screening process.
In addition to cardiac anomalies, DO is also strongly related to trisomy 21. Trisomy 21 is commonly related with cardiac anomalies. However, whether DO has an increased risk for cardiac anomalies without the presence of trisomy 21 remains unknown.
Therefore, we performed a systematic review with meta-analysis to determine the pooled percentages of cardiac malformation and determine which specific subtype of cardiac anomalies is associated with DO. In addition, we determine the pooled percentages of the different types of obstruction and cardiac anomaly in patients with trisomy 21.
Methods
A literature review was conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. In accordance with the guidelines, our systematic review protocol was registered in the International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) with the number CRD42022302763.
Literature search
All studies reporting on cardiac anomalies in children with DO were considered eligible for review. The electronic databases were systematically searched by a medical information specialist from inception to July 22, 2022. The following terms were used (including synonyms and closely related words) as index terms or free-text words: “Infants”, “Newborns”, “Duodenal obstruction”, “Duodenal stenosis”, “Duodenal atresia”, and “Annular pancreas”. Age was restricted to one year, no restrictions for languages were applied. Duplicate articles were excluded by a medical information specialist using Endnote X20.0.1 (Clarivatetm), following the Amsterdam Efficient Deduplication (AED) method and the Bramer method [7]. Studies were included by two independent authors (LES, AP, and both MD). Any disagreements were resolved by consultation with an expert specialist (JD). The reference lists of the included articles were checked to identify any additional studies of interest. Animal studies, duplicate publications, systematic reviews, congress abstracts, mal-rotation as cause of DO, previous published data, and studies with fewer than 10 patients were excluded. The full search strategies for all databases can be found in the supplementary material.
Primary and secondary outcomes
The primary endpoint was to determine the pooled percentage of cardiac anomalies in neonates (< 1 year) with DO. Besides this endpoint, a distinction between the subtypes of DO and cardiac anomalies was made. Secondary outcome measures were the pooled percentages of different subtypes of cardiac anomalies consisting of persistent foramen ovale (PFO), persistent ductus arteriosus (PDA), atrioventricular septal defect (AVSD), atrial septal defect (ASD), and ventricular septal defect (VSD). Moreover, the pooled percentages of the different subtypes of DO were calculated. These subtypes were classified as follows: type 1: web/membrane, type 2: fibrous cord, type 3: complete atresia, annular pancreas, stenosis, and preduodenal portal vein. In addition, the pooled percentages per cardiac anomaly in trisomy 21 patients were determined. Finally, a sensitivity analysis was performed to determine the pooled percentages for cardiac anomalies in patients with DO within five different timeframes.
Data extraction
Two authors (LES and AP) independently extracted the data and evaluated the methodological quality, risk of bias and screened the articles using Rayyan. The full text of the selected articles was obtained for further review. In case of case control studies, the dedicated arm or both arms containing DO patients were used for the analysis. Data on outcome measures were extracted for specific subgroups of patients from the included articles depending on the availability of separate data with regard to specific cardiac malformation and trisomy 21. Disagreements were resolved by discussion between the two reviewers. If no consensus could be reached, a pediatric surgeon was consulted (JD).
Validity assessment
All included articles were assessed for the methodological quality and risk of bias using the Newcastle–Ottawa quality assessment scale [8].
Data synthesis
For the cardiac anomalies and each type of obstruction, a weighted average of the logit proportions was determined by the use of the generic inverse variance method. The logit proportions were back-transformed to the summary estimate, and 95% CIs were obtained in a summary proportion representing the pooled percentage of the type of cardiac anomaly, type of obstruction, and trisomy 21. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 and X2 statistics. The random-effects model was used for interpretation. Heterogeneity was deemed significant if the pooled data’s p value was < 0.05 or X2 statistics were > 75. Heterogeneity was interpreted as small (I2 < 0.25), medium (I2 = 0.25–0.50), or strong (I2 > 0.50), according to Higgins [9].
A sensitivity analysis was performed for five separate time periods: 1956–1979, 1980–1989, 1990–1999, 2000–2009, and 2010–present. These cut-off values were selected in light of the invention and advancement of echocardiography.
Results
The systematic search resulted in 3683 publications: 1614 in PubMed and 2069 in Embase. After removing duplicates, 2343 articles remained. After screening the title and abstract, 217 were obtained for full text review. In total, 120 articles were excluded because there were no cardiac anomalies described (n = 65), no full text available (n = 43), no separate data on DOs (n = 5), cohort of less than 10 patients (n = 4) and duplicates (n = 3). Of the included articles, the reference lists were checked, which resulted in 2 additional eligible studies. In total, 99 articles were included with a total number of 6725 patients and are listed in Table 1 of supplementary materials [1, 6, 10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105,106]. The flow chart of the search and selection process is presented in Fig. 1.
Risk of bias
Risk of bias was assessed using the NOS and is shown in Table 2 of supplementary materials. In total, 51 studies were found to have high quality (score 5–9), 47 studies have a high risk of bias (score 2–4), and one study was assessed as very high risk of bias (1).
Study characteristics of cardiac anomalies
The pooled percentage of cardiac anomalies in patients with DO was 29% (95% CI 25.7–32.5; I2 = 88%; p < 0.001) and is shown in Fig. 2. Separate pooled percentages were calculated for the cardiac anomalies in 30 studies, resulting in a total of 671 patients with one or multiple cardiac anomalies [6, 11, 14, 18, 19, 23, 30, 35, 38, 39, 45, 49,50,51,52, 57, 58, 61, 64, 67, 68, 83, 85, 91, 96, 97, 100,101,102]. The most frequent cardiac malformation was PFO and occurred in 35% (95% CI 0.195–0.536; I2 = 70%; p = 0.035) of the patients with DO. This was followed by ASD 33% (95% CI 0.260–0.414; I2 = 61%; p < 0.001) and VSD 33% (95% CI 0.236–0.429; I2 = 72%; p < 0.001). PDA was present in almost a quarter of the studies with a calculated pooled percentage of 24% (95% CI 0.168–0.327; I2 = 70%; p < 0.001). AVSD had a calculated pooled percentage of 17% (95% CI 0.124–0.217; I2 = 0%; p = 0.505) and TOF occurred in 11% (95% CI 0.083–0.154; I2 = 0%; p = 0.11). The least common cardiac anomaly was CoA and occurred in six percent (95% CI 0.033–0.103; I2 = 0%; p = 0.68) of the patients with DO.
Study characteristics of duodenal obstructions
In total, 70 studies with a total of 4169 patients described the type of DO (Fig. 3) [1, 6, 10,11,12, 16,17,18,19, 21,22,23,24,25, 27,28,29,30,31,32, 34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52, 54,55,56,57, 59, 62,63,64,65, 67, 70,71,72,73,74,75, 81,82,83, 85, 89, 90, 93,94,95, 98,99,100, 102, 105, 106]. Type 3 DO consisting of complete atresia, was the most frequent obstruction and occurred in a pooled percentage of 54% of patients with DO (95% CI 0.478–0.603; I2 = 88%; p < 0.001) of the children. This was followed by the type 1 obstruction, consisting of web/membrane which occurred in 30% of DO patients (95% CI 0.252–0.343; I2 = 82%; p < 0.001) and type 2 in eight percent (95% CI 0.050–0.133; I2 = 75%; p < 0.001) of the patients. Annular pancreas occurred in a pooled percentage of 25% of DO (95% CI 0.210–0.304; I2 = 91%; p < 0.001), and stenosis had a calculated pooled percentage of 16% (95% CI 0.131–0.204; I2 = 76%; p < 0.001). Preduodenal portal vein was the least frequent cause of DO with a pooled percentage of four percent (95% CI 0.022–0.058; I2 = 0%; p = 0.541).
Study characteristic of cardiac anomalies in Trisomy 21
In total, 90 studies described trisomy 21 in 5413 patients with DO [1, 10,11,12, 14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26, 28,29,30, 32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67, 69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76, 78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89, 91,92,93,94,95, 97,98,99,100,101,102,103, 105, 106]. The pooled percentage of trisomy 21 was 28% (95% CI 0.262–0.308; I2 = 66%; p < 0.001) of the patients with DO and is shown in Fig. 4. To determine the pooled percentages for the occurrence of cardiac anomalies with or without the presence of trisomy 21 in patients with DO, we performed a separate calculation. These separate pooled percentages for the presence of trisomy 21 and combination with cardiac anomalies were calculated using 20 studies that described 1552 patients with DO [10, 11, 17, 19, 21, 23, 29, 34, 38, 39, 49, 64, 66, 67, 71, 76, 79, 85, 91, 93, 102]. For this group, the pooled percentage of trisomy 21 in combination with cardiac anomalies was 16% (95% CI 0.123–0.212; I2 = 77%; p < 0.001), and for trisomy 21 without cardiac anomalies, it was also 16% (95% CI 0.131–0.197; I2 = 57%; p < 0.001) of the patients with DO. The pooled percentage for cardiac anomalies without trisomy 21 was 15% (95% CI 0.108–0.196; I2 = 79%; p < 0.001) in patients with DO (see Fig. 2). In these 20 studies, we calculated the pooled proportions for cardiac anomalies in the patients with DO in combination with trisomy 21 existing of 520 patients. This resulted in a pooled percentage of 51% (95% CI 0.413–0.608; I2 = 70%; p < 0.001) for cardiac anomalies in patients with DO and trisomy 21.
Subtypes of cardiac malformation with or without presence of trisomy 21 were only described in ten studies including 535 patients [11, 19, 38, 39, 49, 64, 67, 85, 91, 102]. Due to the small cohort sizes of subtypes of cardiac anomalies, pooling of the data was only possible for ASD, VSD and PDA. The pooled percentage of VSD in patients with trisomy 21 was nine percent (95% CI 0.063–0.120; I2 = 12%; p = 0.337) and in patients without trisomy 21 seven percent (95% CI 0.048–0.098; I2 = 0%; p = 0.506). This was followed by a pooled percentage of seven percent (95% CI 0.051–0.100; I2 = 35%; p = 0.590) for patients with ASD in combination with trisomy 21, and eight percent (95% CI 0.023–0.253; I2 = 91%; p < 0.001) for those without trisomy 21. The calculated pooled percentages for PDA were six percent (95% CI 0.020–0.154; I2 = 65%; p = 0.034) for patients with trisomy 21 and nine percent (95% CI 0.020–0.301; I2 = 90%; p < 0.001) for patients without trisomy 21 (Fig. 5).
Study characteristics of cardiac anomalies per timeframe
Pooled percentages of cardiac anomalies were calculated in five different time frames. Between 1956 and 1979, ten studies including 505 patients were described [10, 40, 44, 54, 60, 65, 76, 79, 86, 102]. The calculated pooled percentage was 11 percent (95% CI 0.052–0.220; I2 = 12%; p = 0.323). For the period between 1980 and 1989, nine studies including 524 patients showed a pooled percentage of 23% percent (95% CI 0.034–0.725; I2 = 95%; p = 0.000) [13, 15, 33, 34, 43, 56, 63, 64, 101]. Between 1990 and 1999, 16 studies with a total of 1070 patients were described [11, 17, 30, 32, 38, 39, 41, 51, 61, 66, 70, 75, 80, 89, 96, 99]. The calculated pooled percentage was 23% percent (95% CI 0.177–0.307; I2 = 70%; p = 0.000). The following period between 2000 and 2009 included 17 studies with 970 patients and had a calculated pooled proportion of 32% percent (95% CI 0.243–0.407; I2 = 82%; p = 0.000) [12, 14, 22, 23, 28, 29, 37, 45, 48, 49, 62, 67, 73, 74, 85, 90, 106]. The last period between 2010 and present included 47 studies with 3747 patients [1, 6, 16, 18,19,20,21, 24,25,26,27, 31, 35, 36, 42, 46, 47, 50, 52, 53, 55, 57,58,59, 68, 69, 71, 72, 77, 78, 81,82,83,84, 87, 88, 91,92,93,94,95, 97, 98, 100, 103,104,105]. For this period, the pooled percentage for cardiac anomalies was 34% percent (95% CI 0.290–0.392; I2 = 89%; p = 0.000).
Discussion
This systematic review with meta-analysis showed an overall pooled percentage of 29% for cardiac anomalies in patients with DO. A persistent foramen ovale was the most frequent diagnosed cardiac anomaly in patients with DO with an occurrence of 35%, followed by atrial septal defect and ventricular septal defects which both occurred in 33% of the patients with DO. DO due to complete atresia (type 3) was the most frequent cause of DO and occurred in 54% of the patients. Trisomy 21 was seen in 28% of the patients with DO. In patients with both DO and trisomy 21, the risk of having a cardiac anomaly of 16%, whereas the pooled percentage of cardiac anomalies without presence of trisomy 21 in these patients was 15%. The most common cardiac anomalies in combination with trisomy 21 were ventricular septal defects and persistent ductus arteriosus with an occurrence of nine percent.
In general population, the incidence of a cardiac anomaly is one per 100 live births and a patent foramen ovale occurs between 25 and 30% [107, 108]. Approximately two-thirds of these children have a mild cardiac anomaly, such as minor ASD or VSD, which is clinically insignificant [109]. Some of these mild anomalies are only discovered later in life, and the actual percentage of congenital cardiac anomalies might be higher. Our findings suggest that patients born with a DO are comparatively more at risk of also having a cardiac anomaly and is found in 29% of the patients. The clinical significance of these cardiac anomalies, however, is uncertain.
According to previous research, 12% of cardiac anomalies are severe leading to hemodynamic challenges or early intervention [110]. ASD and VSD are the two most common cardiac anomalies in the general population which demand further analysis and sometimes surgical intervention. These cardiac anomalies have incidences of two to five cases per 1000 live births, respectively. In our cohort of DO patients, we found a higher occurrence of seven to nine percent for VSD and seven to eight percent for patients with an ASD, depending on the presence of trisomy 21. The combination with DO may have consequences for postnatal management in these children, as hemodynamic insufficiency can cause problems with perioperative anesthesia. Moreover, heart surgery may be required to treat the anomaly. In that case, the DO surgery is postponed, the patient weakened before surgery and might need parenteral nutrition. In the most severe cases, the cardiac anomaly can result in fatal outcome.
In live births, 78% of hemodynamically relevant cardiac anomalies are detected prenatally. This number has increased over the last decades [109]. This detection rate is not known in patients with DO. We found that 29% of these children with DO have cardiac anomalies. This percentage is substantially higher than in the general population, emphasizing the importance of prenatal screening in these children. It is critical that these children are treated in a pediatric surgical center with the presence of pediatric cardiologists.
A recently performed systematic review showed an incidence of cardiac anomalies in patients with trisomy 21 of 60% [111]. This incidence was slightly higher than our calculated pooled percentages of 51% that was found in patients with DO and trisomy 21. One hypothesis for this could be that cardiac anomalies are sometimes asymptomatic, and full screening was not always performed in the past, as we show a pooled percentage of 11% of cardiac anomalies between 1956 and 1979. Due to the retrospective design of most studies, the reported percentages may even be lower than the actual occurrence. A recent performed study in our center supported the finding of equal incidences of cardiac anomalies in patients with DO with and without trisomy 21 [112]. The presence of cardiac anomalies and trisomy 21 combined in this systematic review was only described in 20 studies [10, 11, 17, 19, 21, 23, 29, 34, 38, 39, 49, 64, 66, 67, 71, 76, 79, 85, 91, 93, 102] showing almost equal pooled percentages of 16% for trisomy 21 with cardiac anomalies, trisomy 21 without cardiac anomalies and cardiac anomalies without trisomy 21. This could indicate that the increased occurrence of cardiac anomalies in children with DO is not only associated with trisomy 21, but is also related to DO itself.
A hypothesis about the association between cardiac anomalies and DO is a defect in recanalization of the primitive duodenum, which occurs between the 8th and 10th week of gestation [113]. Studies show intestinal atresia occurs in week six to seven of gestation due to failure of recanalization. [114]. The fact that the failure of recanalization occurs this early in gestation might be an explanation for the fact that DO is highly associated with cardiac anomalies, but also various other anomalies [28]. The development of septal defects ASD and AVSD starts at the fourth week of embryonic life [115]. Based on the early stage of gestation, pathophysiology might exist there. However, relationship between these two in pathogenesis in early gestational age has not yet been proven.
Since the invention of echocardiogram in the 1950s, this medical imaging technique is continuously improving [116]. This might influence the detection rate of cardiac anomalies. We calculated a pooled percentage of 11% in the first time frame between 1956 and 1979, which increased over the years to a pooled percentage of 34% between 2010 and present. In recent years, there have been further advancements in echocardiogram, such as the use of contrast media and introduction of 3D imaging. These significant improvements over time have led to better diagnostic accuracy and increased use of echocardiogram, which might influence the detection rate of cardiac anomalies [116]. However, not all these cardiac anomalies might be hemodynamically or clinically relevant.
The reported pooled proportions based on the available literature bring some limitations—the methodological shortcomings of the majority of the studies, not describing cardiac anomalies in a prospective evaluation, lack of uniformity in the definitions used for classifying DO and cardiac anomalies, and heterogeneity of the studies which undeniably has led to the influence of forms of bias, such as selection, publication, and reporting bias. Our risk of bias assessment showed most articles to have only fair quality. The presented data are the best available approximation of the occurrences of cardiac anomalies in patients with DO.
Conclusion
This is the first review that investigates the occurrence of cardiac anomalies in patients with DO based on known literature. We show that cardiac anomalies are present in almost one-third of the patients with DO. It is therefore important that preoperative screening for cardiac anomalies in these patients will be part of standard care, regardless of the presence of trisomy 21.
Data availability
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.
References
Miscia ME, Lauriti G, Lelli Chiesa P et al (2019) Duodenal atresia and associated intestinal atresia: a cohort study and review of the literature. Pediatr Surg Int 35(1):151–157
Bethell GS, Long AM, Knight M et al (2020) Congenital duodenal obstruction in the UK: a population-based study. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 105(2):178–183
Gray S. Embryology for surgeons: the embryological basis for treatment of congenitaldefects. . Gray SW, Skandalakis JE (1972) Embryology for surgeons: the embryological basis for treatment of congenitaldefects WB Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 177–217
Kimura K, Mukohara N, Nishijima E et al (1990) Diamond-shaped anastomosis for duodenal atresia: an experience with 44 patients over 15 years. J Pediatr Surg 25(9):977–979
Alexander F, DiFiore J, Stallion A (2002) Triangular tapered duodenoplasty for the treatment of congenital duodenal obstruction. J Pediatr Surg 37(6):862–864
Khan A, Tanny ST, Perkins EJ et al (2017) Is selective echocardiography in duodenal atresia the future standard of care? J Pediatr Surg 52(12):1952–1955
Bramer WM, Giustini D, de Jonge GB et al (2016) De-duplication of database search results for systematic reviews in EndNote. J Med Libr Assoc 104(3):240–243
Wells GA, Shea B, Higgins JP et al (2013) Checklists of methodological issues for review authors to consider when including non-randomized studies in systematic reviews. Res Synth Methods 4(1):63–77
Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ et al (2003) Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 327(7414):557–560
Aitken J (1966) Congenital intrinsic duodenal obstruction in infancy. A series of 30 cases treated over a 6 year period. J Pediatr Surg 1(6):546–558
Akhtar J, Guiney EJ (1992) Congenital duodenal obstruction. Br J Surg 79(2):133–135
Al-Salem AH (2007) Congenital intrinsic duodenal obstruction: a review of 35 cases. Ann Saudi Med 27(4):289–292
Al-Salem AH, Khwaja S, Grant C et al (1989) Congenital intrinsic duodenal obstruction: problems in the diagnosis and management. J Pediatr Surg 24(12):1247–1249
Arnbjörnsson E, Larsson M, Finkel Y et al (2002) Transanastomotic feeding tube after an operation for duodenal atresia. Eur J Pediatr Surg 12(3):159–162
Atwell JD, Klidkjian AM (1982) Vertebral anomalies and duodenal atresia. J Pediatr Surg 17(3):237–240
Avci V, Bilici S, Düz E et al (2018) Congenital duodenal obstruction: Ten-year results of a tertiary center. Eastern J Med 23(3):191–194
Bailey PV, Tracy TF Jr, Connors RH et al (1993) Congenital duodenal obstruction: a 32-year review. J Pediatr Surg 28(1):92–95
Bairdain S, Yu DC, Lien C et al (2014) A modern cohort of duodenal obstruction patients: predictors of delayed transition to full enteral nutrition. J Nutr Metab 2014:850820
Bethell GS, Long AM, Knight M et al (2020) The impact of trisomy 21 on epidemiology, management, and outcomes of congenital duodenal obstruction: a population-based study. Pediatr Surg Int 36(4):477–483
Bishay M, Lakshminarayanan B, Arnaud A et al (2013) The role of parenteral nutrition following surgery for duodenal atresia or stenosis. Pediatr Surg Int 29(2):191–195
Bishop JC, McCormick B, Johnson CT et al (2020) The double bubble sign: duodenal atresia and associated genetic etiologies. Fetal Diagn Ther 47(2):98–103
Bittencourt DG, Barini R, Marba S et al (2004) Congenital duodenal obstruction: does prenatal diagnosis improve the outcome? Pediatr Surg Int 20(8):582–585
Brantberg A, Blaas HG, Salvesen KA et al (2002) Fetal duodenal obstructions: increased risk of prenatal sudden death. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 20(5):439–446
Burgmeier C, Schier F (2012) The role of laparoscopy in the treatment of duodenal obstruction in term and preterm infants. Pediatr Surg Int 28(10):997–1000
Burjonrappa S, Crete E, Bouchard S (2011) Comparative outcomes in intestinal atresia: a clinical outcome and pathophysiology analysis. Pediatr Surg Int 27(4):437–442
Chiarenza SF, Bucci V, Conighi ML et al (2017) Duodenal atresia: open versus MIS repair-analysis of our experience over the last 12 years. Biomed Res Int 2017:4585360
Cho MJ, Kim DY, Kim SC et al (2017) Transition from laparotomy to laparoscopic repair of congenital duodenal obstruction in neonates: our early experience. Front Pediatr 5:203
Choudhry MS, Rahman N, Boyd P et al (2009) Duodenal atresia: associated anomalies, prenatal diagnosis and outcome. Pediatr Surg Int 25(8):727–730
Cohen-Overbeek TE, Grijseels EW, Niemeijer ND et al (2008) Isolated or non-isolated duodenal obstruction: perinatal outcome following prenatal or postnatal diagnosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 32(6):784–792
Cragan JD, Martin ML, Moore CA et al (1993) Descriptive epidemiology of small intestinal atresia, Atlanta. Georgia Teratology 48(5):441–450
Cresner R, Neville JJ, Drewett M et al (2022) Use of trans-anastomotic tubes in congenital duodenal obstruction. J Pediatr Surg 57:45–48
Dalla Vecchia LK, Grosfeld JL, West KW et al (1998) Intestinal atresia and stenosis: a 25-year experience with 277 cases. Arch Surg (Chicago, Ill : 1960) 133(5):490–496
Danismend EN, Brown S, Frank JD (1986) Morbidity and mortality in duodenal atresia. Z Kinderchir 41(2):86–88
Davey RB (1980) Congenital intrinsic duodenal obstruction: a comparative review of associated anomalies. Aust Paediatr J 16(4):274–278
Deguchi K, Tazuke Y, Matsuura R et al (2022) Factors associated with adverse outcomes following duodenal atresia surgery in neonates: a retrospective study. Cureus 14(2):e22349
Dewberry LC, Hilton SA, Vuille-Dit-Bille RN et al (2020) Tapering duodenoplasty: a beneficial adjunct in the treatment of congenital duodenal obstruction. J Int Med Res 48(1):300060519862109
Escobar MA, Ladd AP, Grosfeld JL et al (2004) Duodenal atresia and stenosis: long-term follow-up over 30 years. J Pediatr Surg 39(6):867–871
Fogel M, Copel JA, Cullen MT et al (1991) Congenital heart disease and fetal thoracoabdominal anomalies: associations in utero and the importance of cytogenetic analysis. Am J Perinatol 8(6):411–416
Gavopoulos S, Limas C, Avtzoglou P et al (1993) Operative and postoperative management of congenital duodenal obstruction: a 10-year experience. Pediatr Surg Int 8(2):122–124
Girvan DP, Stephens CA (1974) Congenital intrinsic duodenal obstruction: a twenty-year review of its surgical management and consequences. J Pediatr Surg 9(6):833–839
Grosfeld JL, Rescorla FJ (1993) Duodenal atresia and stenosis: reassessment of treatment and outcome based on antenatal diagnosis, pathologic variance, and long-term follow-up. World J Surg 17(3):301–309
Hall NJ, Drewett M, Wheeler RA et al (2011) Trans-anastomotic tubes reduce the need for central venous access and parenteral nutrition in infants with congenital duodenal obstruction. Pediatr Surg Int 27(8):851–855
Hancock BJ, Wiseman NE (1989) Congenital duodenal obstruction: the impact of an antenatal diagnosis. J Pediatr Surg 24(10):1027–1031
Harberg FJ, Pokorny WJ, Hahn H (1979) Congenital duodenal obstruction. A review of 65 cases. Am J Surg 138(6):825–828
Hemming V, Rankin J (2007) Small intestinal atresia in a defined population: occurrence, prenatal diagnosis and survival. Prenat Diagn 27(13):1205–1211
Hill S, Koontz CS, Langness SM et al (2011) Laparoscopic versus open repair of congenital duodenal obstruction in infants. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 21(10):961–963
Holler AS, Muensterer OJ, Martynov I et al (2019) Duodenal atresia repair using a miniature stapler compared to laparoscopic hand-sewn and open technique. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 29(10):1216–1222
Jimenez JC, Emil S, Podnos Y et al (2004) Annular pancreas in children: a recent decade’s experience. J Pediatr Surg 39(11):1654–1657
Keckler SJ, St Peter SD, Spilde TL et al (2008) The influence of trisomy 21 on the incidence and severity of congenital heart defects in patients with duodenal atresia. Pediatr Surg Int 24(8):921–923
Kim JY, You JY, Chang KH et al (2016) Association between prenatal sonographic findings of duodenal obstruction and adverse outcomes. J Ultrasound Med 35(9):1931–1938
Kimble RM, Harding J, Kolbe A (1997) Additional congenital anomalies in babies with gut atresia or stenosis: when to investigate, and which investigation. Pediatr Surg Int 12(8):565–570
Komuro H, Ono K, Hoshino N et al (2011) Bile duct duplication as a cause of distal bowel gas in neonatal duodenal obstruction. J Pediatr Surg 46(12):2301–2304
Kozlov Y, Novogilov V, Yurkov P et al (2011) Keyhole approach for repair of congenital duodenal obstruction. Eur J Pediatr Surg 21(2):124–127
Kraeger RR, Gromoljez P, Lewis JE Jr (1973) Congenital duodenal atresia. Am J Surg 126(6):762–764
Kumar P, Kumar C, Pandey PR et al (2016) Congenital duodenal obstruction in neonates: over 13 years’ experience from a single centre. J Neonatal Surg 5(4):50
Kyyrönen P, Hemminki K (1988) Gastro-intestinal atresias in Finland in 1970–79, indicating time-place clustering. J Epidemiol Community Health 42(3):257–265
Lin HH, Lee HC, Yeung CY et al (2012) Congenital webs of the gastrointestinal tract: 20 years of experience from a pediatric care teaching hospital in taiwan. Pediatr Neonatol 53(1):12–17
Mahmood MM, Baazi AMAA, Kadium AA (2021) Management of congenital duodenal obstruction by diamond-shaped duodenoduodenostomy. Indian J Forensic Med Toxicol 15(3):772–777
Makkadafi M, Fauzi AR, Wandita S et al (2021) Outcomes and survival of infants with congenital duodenal obstruction following Kimura procedure with post-anastomosis jejunostomy feeding tube. BMC Gastroenterol 21(1):100
Merrill JR, Raffensperger JG (1976) Pediatric annular pancreas: twenty years’ experience. J Pediatr Surg 11(6):921–925
Mikaelsson C, Arnbjörnsson E, Kullendorff CM (1997) Membranous duodenal stenosis. Acta Paediatr 86(9):953–955
Miranda ME, Bittencourt DG, Bustorff-Silva JM et al (2008) Congenital duodenal obstruction: the impact of down’s syndrome in neonatal morbidity. A Two-Center Survey Curr Pediatric Rev 4(1):15–18
Miro J, Bard H (1988) Congenital atresia and stenosis of the duodenum: the impact of a prenatal diagnosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 158(3):555–559
Mooney D, Lewis JE, Connors RH et al (1987) Newborn duodenal atresia: an improving outlook. Am J Surg 153(4):347–349
Moore TC (1956) Congenital intrinsic duodenal obstruction; report of 32 cases. Ann Surg 144(2):159–164
Murshed R, Nicholls G, Spitz L (1999) Intrinsic duodenal obstruction: trends in management and outcome over 45 years (1951–1995) with relevance to prenatal counselling. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 106(11):1197–1199
Mustafawi AR, Hassan ME (2008) Congenital duodenal obstruction in children: a decade’s experience. Eur J Pediatr Surg 18(2):93–97
Muto M, Sugita K, Matsuba T et al (2022) How should we treat representative neonatal surgical diseases with congenital heart disease? Pediatr Surg Int 38:1235–1240
Nakamura N, Ozawa K, Wada S et al (2019) Umbilical cord ulcer and intrauterine death in fetal intestinal atresia. Fetal Diagn Ther 46(5):313–318
Nerwich N, Shi E (1994) Neonatal duodenal obstruction: a review of 30 consecutive cases. Pediatr Surg Int 9(1):47–50
Niramis R, Anuntkosol M, Tongsin A et al (2010) Influence of Down’s syndrome on management and outcome of patients with congenital intrinsic duodenal obstruction. J Pediatr Surg 45(7):1467–1472
Oh C, Lee S, Lee SK et al (2017) Laparoscopic duodenoduodenostomy with parallel anastomosis for duodenal atresia. Surg Endosc 31(6):2406–2410
Ozturk H, Ozturk H, Gedik S et al (2007) A comprehensive analysis of 51 neonates with congenital intestinal atresia. Saudi Med J 28(7):1050–1054
Piper HG, Alesbury J, Waterford SD et al (2008) Intestinal atresias: factors affecting clinical outcomes. J Pediatr Surg 43(7):1244–1248
Rattan KN, Sharma A, Sharma VK (1995) Study of congenital duodenal obstruction. Indian J Pediatr 62(3):317–320
Reid IS (1973) The pattern of intrinsic duodenal obstructions. Aust N Z J Surg 42(4):349–352
Reppucci ML, Meier M, Stevens J et al (2022) Incidence of and risk factors for perioperative blood transfusion in infants undergoing index pediatric surgery procedures. J Pediatr Surg 57(6):1067–1071
Saalabian K, Friedmacher F, Theilen TM et al (2022) Prenatal detection of congenital duodenal obstruction-impact on postnatal care. Children (Basel) 9(2):160
Safra MJ, Oakley GP, Erickson JD (1976) Descriptive epidemiology of small-bowel atresia in metropolitan Atlanta. Teratology 14(2):143–149
Samuel M, Wheeler RA, Mami AG (1997) Does duodenal atresia and stenosis prevent midgut volvulus in malrotation? Eur J Pediatr Surg 7(1):11–12
Sarin YK, Sharma A, Sinha S et al (2012) Duodenal webs: an experience with 18 patients. J Neonatal Surg 1(2):20
Savran B, Adigüzel Ü, Yüksel KB et al (2016) The importance of antenatal diagnosis of congenital duodenal obstruction. Ir J Med Sci 185(3):695–698
Short SS, Pierce JR, Burke RV et al (2014) Is routine preoperative screening echocardiogram indicated in all children with congenital duodenal obstruction? Pediatr Surg Int 30(6):609–614
Sidler M, Djendov F, Curry JI et al (2020) Potential benefits of laparoscopic repair of duodenal atresia: insights from a retrospective comparative study. Eur J Pediatr Surg 30(1):33–38
Singh MV, Richards C, Bowen JC (2004) Does down syndrome affect the outcome of congenital duodenal obstruction? Pediatr Surg Int 20(8):586–589
Singleton AO Jr, Fish J (1963) Obstruction of the stomach and duodenum in infancy and Childhood. Am J Surg 106:596–603
Smith MD, Landman MP (2019) Feeding outcomes in neonates with trisomy 21 and duodenal atresia. J Surg Res 244:91–95
Son TN, Kien HH (2017) Laparoscopic versus open surgery in management of congenital duodenal obstruction in neonates: a single-center experience with 112 cases. J Pediatr Surg 52(12):1949–1951
Spigland N, Yazbeck S (1990) Complications associated with surgical treatment of congenital intrinsic duodenal obstruction. J Pediatr Surg 25(11):1127–1130
Spilde TL, St Peter SD, Keckler SJ et al (2008) Open vs laparoscopic repair of congenital duodenal obstructions: a concurrent series. J Pediatr Surg 43(6):1002–1005
Stephens CQ, Dukhovny S, Rowland KJ et al (2018) Neonatal echocardiogram in duodenal obstruction is unnecessary after normal fetal cardiac imaging. J Pediatr Surg 53(11):2145–2149
Takahashi D, Hiroma T, Takamizawa S et al (2014) Population-based study of esophageal and small intestinal atresia/stenosis. Pediatr Int 56(6):838–844
Takahashi Y, Tajiri T, Masumoto K et al (2010) Umbilical crease incision for duodenal atresia achieves excellent cosmetic results. Pediatr Surg Int 26(10):963–966
Treider M, Engebretsen AH, Skari H et al (2021) Is postoperative transanastomotic feeding beneficial in neonates with congenital duodenal obstruction? Pediatr Surg Int 38:749–478
Tsai LY, Hsieh WS, Chen CY et al (2010) Distinct clinical characteristics of patients with congenital duodenal obstruction in a medical center in Taiwan. Pediatr Neonatol 51(6):343–346
Tulloh RM, Tansey SP, Parashar K et al (1994) Echocardiographic screening in neonates undergoing surgery for selected gastrointestinal malformations. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 70(3):F206–F208
van der Zee DC (2011) Laparoscopic repair of duodenal atresia: revisited. World J Surg 35(8):1781–1784
Vinycomb T, Browning A, Jones MLM et al (2020) Quality of life outcomes in children born with duodenal atresia. J Pediatr Surg 55(10):2111–2114
Waever E, Nielsen OH, Arnbjornsson E et al (1995) Operative management of duodenal atresia. Pediatr Surg Int 10(5):322–324
Wang D, Kang Q, Shi S et al (2018) Annular pancreas in China: 9 years’ experience from a single center. Pediatr Surg Int 34(8):823–827
Weber TR, Lewis JE, Mooney D et al (1986) Duodenal atresia: a comparison of techniques of repair. J Pediatr Surg 21(12):1133–1136
Weitzman JJ, Brennan LP (1974) An improved technique for the correction of congenital duodenal obstruction in the neonate. J Pediatr Surg 9(3):385–388
Weller JH, Engwall-Gill AJ, Westermann CR et al (2022) Laparoscopic versus open surgical repair of duodenal atresia: an NSQIP-pediatric analysis. J Surg Res 279:803–808
Williams SA, Nguyen ATH, Chang H et al (2021) Multicenter comparison of laparoscopic versus open repair of duodenal atresia in neonates. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 32(2):226–230
Yigiter M, Yildiz A, Firinci B et al (2010) Annular pancreas in children: a decade of experience. Eurasian J Med 42(3):116–119
Zyromski NJ, Sandoval JA, Pitt HA et al (2008) Annular pancreas: dramatic differences between children and adults. J Am Coll Surg 206(5):1019–1025
Hoffman JI (1990) Congenital heart disease: incidence and inheritance. Pediatr Clin North Am 37(1):25–43
Hagen PT, Scholz DG, Edwards WD (1984) Incidence and size of patent foramen ovale during the first 10 decades of life: an autopsy study of 965 normal hearts. Mayo Clin Proc 59(1):17–20
Schwedler G, Lindinger A, Lange PE et al (2011) Frequency and spectrum of congenital heart defects among live births in Germany: a study of the competence network for congenital heart defects. Clin Res Cardiol 100(12):1111–1117
Lindinger A, Schwedler G, Hense HW (2010) Prevalence of congenital heart defects in newborns in Germany: results of the first registration year of the PAN Study (July 2006 to June 2007). Klin Padiatr 222(5):321–326
Lagan N, Huggard D, Mc Grane F et al (2020) Multiorgan involvement and management in children with down syndrome. Acta Paediatr 109(6):1096–1111
Pijpers AGH, Eeftinck Schattenkerk LD, Straver B et al (2022) The incidence of associated anomalies in children with congenital duodenal obstruction-a retrospective cohort study of 112 patients. Children (Basel) 9(12):1814
Louw JH, Barnard CN (1955) Congenital intestinal atresia; observations on its origin. Lancet 269(6899):1065–1067
Liu X, Song Y, Hao P et al (2022) Delayed development of vacuoles and recanalization in the duodenum: a study in human fetuses to understand susceptibility to duodenal atresia/stenosis. Fetal Pediatr Pathol 41(4):568–575
Kheiwa A, Hari P, Madabhushi P et al (2020) Patent foramen ovale and atrial septal defect. Echocardiography 37(12):2172–2184
Singh S, Goyal A (2007) The origin of echocardiography: a tribute to Inge Edler. Tex Heart Inst J 34(4):431–438
Funding
Not applicable.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
A.P. and L.E.S performed the screening and wrote the main manuscript text together with G.M. A.P. created figure 2-4 and tables 1 and 2. R.V. performed the search and provided figure 1. In case of a doubt in the screening process, J.D. was consulted. All authors reviewed the manuscript and provided feedback to improve the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Pijpers, A.G.H., Eeftinck Schattenkerk, L.D., de Vries, R. et al. Cardiac anomalies in children with congenital duodenal obstruction: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Pediatr Surg Int 39, 160 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-023-05449-3
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-023-05449-3