1
|
Ibrahimli A, Aliyev A, Majidli A, Kahraman A, Galandarova A, Khalilzade E, Mammadli H, Huseynli K, Assaf K, Kilinc C, Muradov N, Alisan OF, Abdullayev S, Sahin YI, Samadov E. Metastasis to the stomach: a systematic review. F1000Res 2023; 12:1374. [PMID: 38706640 PMCID: PMC11066534 DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.140758.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/18/2023] [Indexed: 05/07/2024] Open
Abstract
Background: This study reviews the literature on gastric metastases (GM) in terms of diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes. The goal of this study was to provide clinicians with a reliable and beneficial source to understand gastric metastases arising from various primary tumors and to present the growing literature in an easily accessible form. Methods: Articles published in English language from implementation of MEDLINE and Cochrane databases until May 2022 were considered for the systematic review. Articles other than English language, letters to the editor, posters, and clinical images were excluded. Hematogenous and lymphogenic metastases were included whereas direct tumoral invasion and seeding were excluded. Articles and abstracts were analyzed and last selection was done after cross-referencing and by use of defined eligibility criteria. Results: In total 1,521 publications were identified and 170 articles were finally included totaling 186 patients with GM. The median age of patients was 62 years. Gynecologic cancer was the most common cancer type causing GM (67 patients), followed by lung cancer (33 patients), renal cancer (20 patients), and melanoma (19 patients). One of the main treatment methods performed for metastasis was resection surgery (n=62), sometimes combined with chemotherapy (ChT) or immunotherapy. ChT was the other most used treatment method (n=78). Also, immunotherapy was amongst the most preferred treatment options after surgery and ChT (n=10). Conclusions: As 172 case reports were screened in the systematic review from different journals, heterogeneity was inevitable. Some articles missed important information such as complete follow-up or clinical information. Moreover, since all of the included articles were case reports quality assessment could not be performed. Among 172 case reports reviewed, resection surgery was performed the most and was sometimes combined with ChT and immunotherapy. Further research about what type of treatment has the best outcomes for patients with gastric metastases is needed.
Collapse
|
2
|
Li X, Wang JX, Wang YP, Shen JX, Zheng YX, Zhang PH, Wei JJ, Zhuang ZH. Comparison of Pull and Introducer Techniques for Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy. J Multidiscip Healthc 2022; 15:733-741. [PMID: 35411150 PMCID: PMC8994609 DOI: 10.2147/jmdh.s356865] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2022] [Accepted: 03/15/2022] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective To compare indications, success rates and complications of pull [P] and introducer [I] techniques for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG). Methods In this retrospective study, inpatients who underwent primary PEG tube insertion between January 2015 and February 2020 at the Endoscopy Center of the First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University were included. Results A total of 103 inpatients were included in this study (P group, n = 67; I group, n = 36). The rates of tube replacement within first six months in the P and I groups were 1.5% and 11.1%, respectively (P = 0.049). The most common primary indication of PEG was malignancy. The proportion of patients with esophageal cancer was significantly lower in the P group (24.4% vs 54.2%, P = 0.015). No significant difference was found in the overall, major, or minor complications between the two groups. In patients with esophageal stenosis, the pull method was a risk factor for complications (P = 0.03; odds ratio [OR] = 12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.164–123.684). Logistic regression analysis showed that the risk factors for major and minor complications were the admission-to-gastrostomy interval (OR = 1.078, 95% CI: 1.016–1.145, P = 0.014) and lack of antibiotic use (OR = 4.735, 95% CI: 1.247–17.979, P = 0.022), respectively. Conclusion Both PEG techniques have high clinical success rates. The introducer technique is more suitable for patients with esophageal stricture, which has lower minor complications, but higher rate of tube replacement compared to the pull technique. Use of antibiotics may reduce minor complications following PEG. Early PEG insertion may help to reduce post-PEG major complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xia Li
- Endoscopy Center, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, People’s Republic of China
- Endoscope Room, Changle District Hospital, Fuzhou, People’s Republic of China
| | - Jun-Xi Wang
- Endoscopy Center, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, People’s Republic of China
| | - Yu-Ping Wang
- Endoscopy Center, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, People’s Republic of China
| | - Jia-Xin Shen
- Endoscopy Center, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, People’s Republic of China
| | - Yi-Xing Zheng
- Endoscopy Center, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, People’s Republic of China
| | - Pei-Hong Zhang
- Endoscopy Center, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, People’s Republic of China
| | - Jing-Jing Wei
- Endoscopy Center, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, People’s Republic of China
| | - Ze-Hao Zhuang
- Endoscopy Center, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, People’s Republic of China
- Correspondence: Ze-Hao Zhuang, Endoscopy Center, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, 20, Chazhong Road, Taijiang District, Fuzhou, 350005, Fujian Province, People’s Republic of China, Tel +860591-87981370, Fax +860591-87981371, Email
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Siu J, Fuller K, Nadler A, Pugash R, Cohen L, Deutsch K, Enepekides D, Karam I, Husain Z, Chan K, Singh S, Poon I, Higgins K, Xu B, Eskander A. Metastasis to gastrostomy sites from upper aerodigestive tract malignancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 91:1005-1014.e17. [PMID: 31926149 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.12.045] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/17/2019] [Accepted: 12/26/2019] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Metastasis to the gastrostomy site in patients with upper aerodigestive tract (UADT) malignancies is a rare but devastating adverse event that has been poorly described. Our aim was to determine the overall incidence and clinicopathologic characteristics observed with development of gastrostomy site metastasis in patients with UADT cancers. METHODS This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of 6138 studies retrieved from Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Register after being queried for studies including gastrostomy site metastasis in patients with UADT malignancies. RESULTS The final analysis included 121 studies. Pooled analysis showed an overall event rate gastrostomy site metastasis of .5% (95% confidence interval [CI], .4%-.7%). Subgroup analysis showed an event rate of .56% (95% CI, .40%-.79%) with the pull technique and .29% (95% CI, .15%-.55%) with the push technique. Clinicopathologic characteristics observed with gastrostomy site metastasis were late-stage disease (T3/T4) (57.8%), positive lymph node status (51.2%), and no evidence of systemic disease (M0) (62.8%) at initial presentation. The average time from gastrostomy placement to diagnosis of metastasis was 7.78 ± 4.9 months, average tumor size on detection was 4.65 cm (standard deviation, 2.02), and average length of survival was 7.26 months (standard deviation, 6.23). CONCLUSIONS Gastrostomy site metastasis is a rare but serious adverse event that occurs at an overall rate of .5%, particularly in patients with advanced-stage disease, and is observed with a very poor prognosis. These findings emphasize a need for clinical practice guidelines to include a regular assessment of the PEG site and highlight the importance of detection and management of gastrostomy site metastasis by the multidisciplinary care oncology team.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer Siu
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Cancer Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Kaitlin Fuller
- Gerstein Science Information Centre, University of Toronto Libraries, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Ashlie Nadler
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Robyn Pugash
- Vascular/Interventional Radiology, Department of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Lawrence Cohen
- Division of Gastroenterology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Konrado Deutsch
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Cancer Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Danny Enepekides
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Cancer Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Head & Neck Surgical Oncology, University of Toronto, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Irene Karam
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Zain Husain
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Kelvin Chan
- Division of Medical Oncology, University of Toronto, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, Canada
| | - Simron Singh
- Division of Medical Oncology, University of Toronto, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Ian Poon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Kevin Higgins
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Cancer Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Head & Neck Surgical Oncology, University of Toronto, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Bin Xu
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Antoine Eskander
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Cancer Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Head & Neck Surgical Oncology, University of Toronto, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Michael Garron Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute for Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute for Clinical Evaluative Science, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Rowell NP. Tumor implantation following percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy insertion for head and neck and oesophageal cancer: Review of the literature. Head Neck 2019; 41:2007-2015. [PMID: 30684284 DOI: 10.1002/hed.25652] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2018] [Revised: 12/18/2018] [Accepted: 12/28/2018] [Indexed: 01/14/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Because of publication bias, there is uncertainty about the true incidence of tumor seeding or implantation in patients with head and neck or oesophageal cancer undergoing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) insertion. METHODS In order to obtain a more reliable estimate of risk, a systematic review was undertaken. Randomized or non-randomized studies and case reports were identified by electronic searching. A risk of bias assessment was carried out for each study. RESULTS Ninety-eight cases from 74 published case reports and 1 unpublished case were identified. Synchronous distant metastases were present in 37%. Analysis of case series (6192 patients) considered to carry a moderate risk of bias suggests an incidence of seeding after PEG insertion of 0.32%. Studies carrying a lower risk of bias indicate a risk of seeding closer to 1 in 2000. CONCLUSION The true risk of seeding after PEG insertion is probably less than 1 in 1000.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicholas P Rowell
- Clinical Oncology, Kent Oncology Centre, Maidstone Hospital, Maidstone, Kent, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Montes de Oca MK, Nye A, Porter C, Collins J, Satterfield C, Schammel CMG, Trocha SD. Head and neck cancer PEG site metastases: Association with PEG placement method. Head Neck 2019; 41:1508-1516. [DOI: 10.1002/hed.25564] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2018] [Revised: 08/16/2018] [Accepted: 11/21/2018] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Mary K. Montes de Oca
- University of South Carolina School of Medicine Greenville Greenville South Carolina
| | - Anthony Nye
- University of South Carolina School of Medicine Greenville Greenville South Carolina
| | - Caroline Porter
- University of South Carolina School of Medicine Greenville Greenville South Carolina
| | - Justin Collins
- Institute for Translational Oncologic ResearchGreenville Health System Greenville South Carolina
| | | | | | - Steven D. Trocha
- Department of SurgeryGreenville Health System Greenville South Carolina
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Vincenzi F, De Caro G, Gaiani F, Fornaroli F, Minelli R, Leandro G, Di Mario F, De' Angelis GL. Risk of tumor implantation in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in the upper aerodigestive tumors. ACTA BIO-MEDICA : ATENEI PARMENSIS 2018; 89:117-121. [PMID: 30561429 PMCID: PMC6502208 DOI: 10.23750/abm.v89i8-s.7894] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2018] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) has become a mainstay in providing enteral access for patients with obstructive head, neck and esophageal tumors. Tumor cell implantation is a rare complication in patients with aerodigestive cancers, who have undergone PEG tube placement. The objective of this review is to determine the incidence and contributing risk factors leading to the implantation of metastases into the abdominal wall following PEG placement. A comprehensive review of the literature in PUBMED (2008-2018) was performed. The literature search revealed reports of more than 50 cases of abdominal wall metastases after PEG placement. As most of these studies were case reports, the exact rate of metastasis remains unknown. Generally pharyngoesophageal location of primary cancer (100%), squamous cell histology (98%), poorly differentiated tumor cells (92%), advanced pathological stage (97%), and large primary cancer size were identified as strong risk factors for the development of stomal metastasis. Abdominal wall metastases following PEG placement are a rare but serious complication in patients with head and neck malignancy. (www.actabiomedica.it)
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesca Vincenzi
- Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Unit, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Teich N, Selig L, Liese S, Schiefke F, Hemprich A, Mössner J, Schiefke I. Usage characteristics and adverse event rates of the direct puncture and pull techniques for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in patients with malignant tumors of the upper aerodigestive tract. Endosc Int Open 2018; 6:E29-E35. [PMID: 29340295 PMCID: PMC5766340 DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-121879] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/14/2017] [Accepted: 09/12/2017] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS Patients with malignant tumors of the upper gastrointestinal tract are at risk of weight loss. Early supportive nutrition therapy is therefore recommended and usually requires placement of a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG). The aim of this study was to compare adverse events and usage characteristics of the direct puncture technique with those of the traditional pull technique when used in patients with endoscopically passable tumors. The primary endpoint was the rate of inflammatory adverse events (AEs) at the gastrostomy fistula. The secondary endpoint was the long-term rate of puncture-site metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS One hundred twenty patients (median age 56; IQR 36, 86 years) were randomized and treated per protocol in this prospective open randomized single-center study. Follow-ups were conducted on the third and seventh post-interventional days, after 1, 3 and 6 months and the last follow-up 5 years after intervention. RESULTS Within the short-term follow-up period of 6 months after PEG placement, AEs were noted in 47 patients (39.2 %). These included 22 inflammations and 16 device dislocations and were mainly found in the puncture group (33 vs. 14 in the pull group) with a significantly increased incidence in the first month after PEG insertion ( P = 0.001). Evaluation of the 5-year data did not reveal any significant differences. The gastrostomy tube was used in 101 patients (84.2 %) (range 18 days to 5 years). CONCLUSIONS Our results favor the pull technique for patients with endoscopically passable tumors of the upper gastrointestinal tract due to less short-term adverse events. Both systems contributed equally to secure long-term use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Niels Teich
- Klinikum St. Georg, Klinik für Gastroenterologie und Hepatologie, Leipzig, Germany,Internistische Gemeinschaftspraxis für Verdauungs- und Stoffwechselkrankheiten, Leipzig, Germany,Medizinische Fakultät der Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena, Jena,Corresponding author Niels Teich, MD Internistische Gemeinschaftspraxis für Verdauungs- und StoffwechselkrankheitenNordstr. 21D-04105 LeipzigGermany+0049 341 60036560
| | - Lars Selig
- Universität Leipzig, Klinik und Poliklinik für Gastroenterologie und Rheumatologie, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Susanne Liese
- Universität Rostock, Klinik und Poliklinik für Mund-, Kiefer- und Plastische Gesichtschirurgie, Rostock, Germany
| | - Franziska Schiefke
- Universität Leipzig, Klinik für Mund-, Kiefer- und Plastische Gesichtschirurgie, Leipzig, Germany,Gemeinschaftspraxis für Mund-, Kiefer- und Gesichtschirurgie am Johannisplatz, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Alexander Hemprich
- Universität Leipzig, Klinik für Mund-, Kiefer- und Plastische Gesichtschirurgie, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Joachim Mössner
- Universität Leipzig, Klinik und Poliklinik für Gastroenterologie und Rheumatologie, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Ingolf Schiefke
- Klinikum St. Georg, Klinik für Gastroenterologie und Hepatologie, Leipzig, Germany,Gastroenterologie und Hepatologie am Johannisplatz, Leipzig, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Retes FA, Kawaguti FS, de Lima MS, da Costa Martins B, Uemura RS, de Paulo GA, Pennacchi CM, Gusmon C, Ribeiro AV, Baba ER, Geiger SN, Sorbello MP, Kulcsar MA, Ribeiro U, Maluf-Filho F. Comparison of the pull and introducer percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy techniques in patients with head and neck cancer. United European Gastroenterol J 2016; 5:365-373. [PMID: 28507748 DOI: 10.1177/2050640616662160] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2016] [Accepted: 07/04/2016] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients is associated with higher complication and mortality rates when compared to a general patient population. The pull technique is still the preferred technique worldwide but it has some limitations. The aim of this study is to compare the pull and introducer PEG techniques in patients with HNC. PATIENTS AND METHODS This study is based on a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database of 309 patients with HNC who underwent PEG in the Cancer Institute of São Paulo. RESULTS The procedure was performed with the standard endoscope in 205 patients and the introducer technique was used in 137 patients. There was one procedure-related mortality. Age, sex and albumin level were similar in both groups. However in the introducer technique group, patients had a higher tumor stage, a lower Karnofsky status, and presented more frequently with tracheostomy and trismus. Overall, major, minor, immediate and late complications and 30-day mortality rates were similar but the introducer technique group presented more minor bleeding and tube dysfunctions. CONCLUSION The push and introducer PEG techniques seem to be both safe and effective but present different complication profiles. The choice of PEG technique in patients with HNC should be made individually.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Felipe A Retes
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Fabio S Kawaguti
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Marcelo S de Lima
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Bruno da Costa Martins
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Ricardo S Uemura
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Gustavo A de Paulo
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Caterina Mp Pennacchi
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Carla Gusmon
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Adriana Vs Ribeiro
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Elisa R Baba
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Sebastian N Geiger
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Mauricio P Sorbello
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Marco A Kulcsar
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Ulysses Ribeiro
- Gastrointestinal Surgery, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Fauze Maluf-Filho
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW This review addresses current controversies regarding appropriate indications for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) insertion. We address specific indications, namely, dementia, stroke, aspiration, motor neurone disease/amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and head and neck cancer. We recommend practical strategies for improving patient selection. RECENT FINDINGS There is now a general consensus in the United States that PEG feeding does not benefit patients with advanced dementia. 'Early' PEG insertion following stroke is similarly of no benefit. It is currently unclear whether patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and head and neck tumors should have PEG or radiologically inserted gastrostomy. SUMMARY Decisions relating to PEG insertion remain difficult. The gastroenterologist, working as a member of a multidisciplinary nutrition team, needs to take a lead role in this regard, rather than functioning as a technician.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carthage Moran
- aDepartment of Medicine bDepartment of Gastroenterology, Cork University Hospital, Wilton, Cork, Ireland
| | | |
Collapse
|