Evidence Hub

Bowel perforation in type IV vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. A systematic review

El Masri H, Loong TH, Meurette G, Podevin J, Zinzindohoue F, Lehur PA

Techniques in coloproctology, 2018

Abstract

Spontaneous gastrointestinal (GI) perforation is a well-known complication occurring in patients suffering from Type IV vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS IV). The aim of the present study was to review the current literature on spontaneous GI perforation in EDS IV and illustrate the surgical management and outcome when possible. A systematic review of all the published data on EDS IV patients with spontaneous GI perforation between January 2000 and December 2015 was conducted using three major databases PUBMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trails. References of the selected articles were screened to avoid missing main articles. Twenty-seven published case reports and four retrospective studies, including 31 and 527 cases, respectively, matched the search criteria. A case from our institution was added. Mean age was 26 years (range 6-64 years). The most frequent site of perforation was the colon, particularly the sigmoid, followed by small bowel, upper rectum, and finally stomach. The majority of cases were initially managed with Hartmann's procedure. In recurrent perforations, total colectomy was performed. The reperforation rate was considerably higher in the "partial colectomy with anastomosis" group than in the Hartmann group. Colonic perforation is the most common spontaneous GI perforation in EDS IV patients. An unexpected fragility of the tissues should raise the possibility of a connective tissue disorder and prompt further investigation with…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free