Pediatr Surg Int
DOI 10.1007/s00383-017-4196-y
REVIEW ARTICLE
Pyloric stenosis: an enigma more than a century after the first
successful treatment
Yousef El‑Gohary1   · Abdelhafeez Abdelhafeez1 · Elizabeth Paton2 ·
Ankush Gosain1,2 · Andrew J. Murphy1,2 
Accepted: 28 September 2017
© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017
Abstract  Despite hypertrophic pyloric stenosis (HPS)
being one of the most frequently treated pediatric surgical
conditions, its etiology remains incompletely understood.
We review the diagnosis and treatment of this condition
with an emphasis on the evolution of surgical techniques
that led to laparoscopic pyloromyotomy, the most frequently
performed technique for HPS today. In addition, we review
key developments in the understanding of HPS etiology and
treatment, including the postulated etiology of work-induced
hypertrophy of the pylorus, its association with prokinetic
macrolide antibiotics, and the emerging role of atropine sul-
fate as a medical treatment for HPS or a rescue treatment for
incomplete myotomy.
Keywords  Pyloric stenosis · Pyloromyotomy ·
Laparoscopic pyloromyotomy · Macrolide
Introduction
Hypertrophic pyloric stenosis (HPS) is considered one of the
hallmark pediatric surgical diseases. It is the most common
surgical condition causing nonbilious emesis in infancy, and
Electronic supplementary material  The online version of this
article (doi:10.1007/s00383-017-4196-y) contains supplementary
material, which is available to authorized users.
* Andrew J. Murphy
andrew.murphy@stjude.org
1 ever, “Loreta’s operation” was later abandoned due to the
Department of Surgery, St. Jude Children’s Research
Hospital, 262 Danny Thomas Pl, Memphis, TN 38105, USA
2 tonitis due to pyloric rupture. Dr. Clinton Thomas Dent, an
Division of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery,
University of Tennessee Health Sciences Center, Memphis,
TN 38105, USA
pyloromyotomy has remained the treatment of choice ever
since its description more than a century ago [1]. HPS is a
condition that typically manifests between 2 and 12 weeks of
age where the pyloric sphincter becomes abnormally thick,
resulting in gastric outlet obstruction. The classic presenta-
tion is an infant more than two weeks old with postprandial
projectile vomiting who typically becomes hungry after-
ward. The incidence of HPS is 2–4 per 1000 live births with
geographical variation [2]. It is commonly seen in temper-
ate countries, but rarely seen in the African population near
the equator, suggesting an environmental contribution to the
etiology [2]. This report will review the historical aspects of
pyloric stenosis followed by a brief overview of its epidemi-
ology, current treatment and possible etiologies.
History
Hypertrophic pyloric stenosis was first documented by
Harald Hirschsprung, a Danish Pediatrician, in 1888 in
two post-mortem cases [3]. Treatment of pyloric stenosis
in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries broadly
entailed three types of surgical interventions: dilatation of
the pylorus, pyloroplasty, and gastroenterostomy [4]. Dila-
tation of the pyloric orifice was first described by Profes-
sor Loreta, of Bologna, Italy, in 1882 on adult patients [5].
This was later adopted in pediatric patients with the pyloric
sphincter forcibly dilated using either one or two fingers,
after gaining access to the distal stomach through an inci-
sion, or using a mechanical Hegar dilator [4] (Fig. 1). How-
unsatisfactory results with high recurrences and fatal peri-
English surgeon, later performed the first successful pylo-
roplasty 1902, which involved incising the pylorus muscle
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 Pediatr Surg Int

A B C

Fig. 1  Pyloric dilatation. a Orientation of the gastrostomy. b Coronal section through the stomach depicts the hypertrophied pyloric muscle. c
Hegar dilator inserted through gastrostomy site to forcibly dilate the pyloric muscle

longitudinally, leaving the mucosa intact and suturing the
muscularis transversely [4] (Fig. 2). This invariably did not
lead to satisfactory results because it did not durably disrupt
the pyloric ring and relieve the obstruction. Last, gastroen-
terostomy, a procedure that involves the surgical creation
of a connection between the stomach and the jejunum was
employed to bypass the gastric outlet obstruction; however,
there was an unacceptably high mortality rate associated
with this procedure (Fig. 3). It was reportedly first performed
by Dr. W. Abel [6].
In 1910, Sir Harold Jalland Stiles, a British surgeon,
performed the first pyloromyotomy [7]. However, the pro-
cedure came to be known from the German surgeon, Dr.
Conrad Ramstedt, who in 1911 operated on the first case
of pyloric stenosis that he encountered [1]. He proceeded
with the intent of performing a pyloroplasty. After incising
the pylorus muscle longitudinally, he attempted to close the
defect transversely, however, the sutures tore out through
the muscle and he instead, decided to cover the defect with
an omental patch. This omental patching was done 26 years
before Roscoe Reid Graham of Toronto published his 51
cases of perforated peptic ulcers successfully treated with an
omental ‘Graham’s patch’ [8]. The patient made a success-
ful recovery. Ramstedt performed another pyloromyotomy
a year later, only this time by incising the pylorus muscle
longitudinally without covering the mucosal bulge with an
omental patch. This operation, now known as Ramstedt’s
pyloromyotomy, has remained unchanged since 1912 [4].
Before Ramstedt’s operation, most infants with pyloric
stenosis died in an emaciated state. While the approach to
achieve a Ramstedt pyloromyotomy has evolved over the
years and is currently most frequently done laparoscopically,
which was first reported in the literature in 1991 [9], the
pyloromyotomy itself has remained unchanged.

A B C

Fig. 2  Technique of pyloroplasty. a Longitudinal incision over the pylorus to split the muscle. b Stay sutures placed superiorly and inferiorly to
apply traction to facilitate transverse closure. c End result of the pyloroplasty

13
Pediatr Surg Int
Fig. 3  Gastrojejunostomy to bypass the hypertrophied pyloric
sphincter
Epidemiology
The incidence of HPS is 2–4 per 1000 live births with geo-
graphical variation [2]. It is rare or absent in the developing
world and in sub-Saharan Africa, thus it is considered as a
“Western disease” [10, 11]. This strongly suggests an envi-
ronmental factor. It has a strongly male predilection, occur-
ring often in first-born males, with a male to female ratio
6:1 and the median age for presentation is 40 days old [12].
HPS is more common in Whites than Asians, Hispanics or
Blacks. The incidence in Whites is 2.4 per 1000 live births,
1.8 in Hispanics, 0.7 in Blacks, and 0.6 in Asians [13].
Clinical presentation
Classically, patients with pyloric stenosis present with
postprandial, projectile, nonbilious emesis and are typically
hungry after vomiting. This must be differentiated from
the more common cause of vomiting in infancy, gastroe-
sophageal reflux (GER), which is a physiologic self-limiting
condition that usually resolves by 6 to 12 months of age.
Patients with GER typically regurgitate or “spit up” their
feeds. Significant delay in diagnosing HPS can lead to pro-
tracted vomiting which can eventually lead to blood-tinged
emesis from gastritis. In the past, before the advent of ultra-
sound, patients often became so emaciated that the pyloric
‘olive’, a term which describes how the palpable hypertro-
phied pylorus feels on physical examination, became visible
on the abdominal wall along with visible gastric peristalsis
from left to right (Video). The cardinal biochemical profile
in these patients is a hypokalemic, hypochloremic metabolic
alkalosis. Jaundice develops in about 2% of patients sec-
ondary to defective hepatic glucuronyl transferase activity
associated with starvation, which is corrected post-surgery
[14, 15].
Diagnosis
The diagnosis of HPS can be established with a good history
and physical examination. It is important when perform-
ing physical examination, that the infant is relaxed and dis-
tracted. This can be established with the patient either breast
feeding in the mother’s arms or while soothing the child with
sucrose solution [16]. Once adequately relaxed, one will be
able to palpate the epigastric hypertrophied pyloric muscle
which has a 99% positive predictive value [17]. Over the past
several decades, there has been a noticeable decline in the art
of performing a skilled clinical examination [18, 19]. Cur-
rently, there is a strong reliance on ultrasound to confirm this
diagnosis, which has a 99.5% sensitivity and 100% specific-
ity [20]. This has resulted in the decline in the palpation
of the pyloric “olive”, due to presumed earlier presentation
[21]. The ultrasonographic criteria for diagnosing pyloric
stenosis is a pyloric muscle thickness greater than 3 mm and
a pyloric canal length of at least 15 mm [22].
Pre‑operative and operative management
Pyloric stenosis is a medical emergency, but not a surgical
emergency and should only undergo operative intervention
once the patient is adequately resuscitated. The classic elec-
trolyte abnormality seen is a hypokalemic, hypochloremic
metabolic alkalosis as a result of protracted vomiting. Thus,
the aim of resuscitation is to correct these severe electrolyte
derangements. The body tries to physiologically compensate
for the loss of potassium and chloride ions from the gastric
emesis by attempting to conserve potassium at the expense
of hydrogen ions in the kidney, thus leading to paradoxi-
cal aciduria, exacerbating alkalosis even more. The body
attempts to maintain normal pH by excreting excess H ­ CO3,
but is impaired by chloride depletion. Instead, H ­ CO3 is
reabsorbed to maintain electrochemical neutrality resulting
in metabolic alkalosis [23]. Baseline maintenance fluid is
calculated at 4 mLs/kg/h for the first 10-kg weight with the
intravenous fluid replacement therapy usually consisting of
5% dextrose in 0.45% saline at 1.5 times maintenance rate.
10 to 20 mEq/L of potassium chloride can be added to the
fluids. At the time of presentation, most patients require one
or more 20-mL/kg normal saline resuscitation boluses. The
electrolyte goal needed to be achieved to be considered safe
13

for anesthesia is serum bicarbonate less than 28 mEq/dL,
serum potassium more than 3.5 mEq/dL and serum chloride
greater than 100 mEq/dL [20]. It is vital that the metabolic
alkalosis is corrected prior to surgery because it can poten-
tially affect the respiratory drive, thus leading to difficulties
with extubation at the end of surgery [24].
The routine use of a nasogastric tube (NGT) preopera-
tively has been debated and is mostly based on surgeon and/
or institution preference. A recent prospective, randomized
controlled pilot study on the use of a NGT preoperatively
found no effect on postoperative emesis or length of hospital
stay, concluding its use as unnecessary [25].
The surgical approach for pyloric stenosis varies; how-
ever, all current techniques follow the same principle of
extramucosal longitudinal splitting of the pylorus muscle,
first introduced by Ramstedt in 1912 [1]. An adequate pylo-
romyotomy entails an incision extending from the vein of
Mayo at the duodenal end to the circular fibers of the stom-
ach proximally. Once the mucosal bulge is seen with both
edges of the pylorus muscle moving freely either side, an air
leak test can be performed by asking the anesthesiologist to
insufflate air via the NGT into the stomach while dripping
saline on the mucosa.
The three surgical approaches used today are the right
upper abdominal transverse muscle-splitting incision, cir-
cumbilical approach introduced by Tan and Bianchi in 1986
and lastly the laparoscopic approach [12]. Various studies
have compared laparoscopic to open pyloromyotomy, but
both techniques have broadly acceptable similar outcomes
[23]. People who advocate for laparoscopic approach sup-
port it because of a shorter time needed (2.27 h) to achieve
full enteral feeding and an earlier home discharge [26, 27].
The downside to laparoscopic approach is a very small
Fig. 4  Laparoscopic pyloromyotomy with mucosal bulge seen indicating adequate myotomy
13
Pediatr Surg Int
increased risk of incomplete pyloromyotomy and mucosal
perforation compared to the open approach (Fig. 4) [23, 28].
Postoperative feeding
The optimum feeding regimen is yet to be determined with
feeding strategies varying widely among different institu-
tions. In the past, it was believed that fasting up to 24 h
postoperatively would decrease the number of emesis based
on early gastric motility studies demonstrating normal gas-
tric peristalsis returning 24 h after surgery [29, 30]. How-
ever, that dogma has changed recently with most centers
instituting ad libitum postoperative feeding as the enteral
feeding of choice [31]. A recent meta-analysis demonstrated
that ad libitum feeding decreased the length of stay and
decreased time to achieve full enteral feeding when com-
pared to a structured feeding regimen [31]. The variation in
feeding protocol is based on a surgeon’s preference and the
fear for the development of postoperative emesis. Regard-
less of the postoperative feeding regimen chosen, postop-
erative emesis will occur [23, 31–33]. One of the important
aspects of the postoperative managements of HPS patients
is parental education regarding the self-limiting nature of
postoperative vomiting.
Intraoperative and perioperative complications
The key intraoperative complications associated with
pyloromyotomy are mucosal perforation and incomplete
myotomy. Mucosal perforation most commonly occurs
at the duodenal end of the pyloric incision because the
Pediatr Surg Int
mucosal lining balloons out quite rapidly and the sero-
sal surface of the pylorus substantially thins as it transi-
tions to the duodenal bulb. Intraoperative recognition of
mucosal perforation is critical, as unrecognized perfo-
ration can lead to postoperative peritonitis, sepsis, and
death. Limited perforation can be repaired by simple
suturing, while more extensive perforations should be
repaired by completely closing the pyloromyotomy, rotat-
ing the pylorus ninety degrees, and repeating the pyloro-
myotomy at this alternate location. Incomplete pyloro-
myotomy is most often caused by insufficient disruption
of the muscular fibers on the gastric end of the pyloric
incision. Incomplete pyloromyotomy will cause persistent
vomiting postoperatively and should be considered when
these symptoms persist beyond one week. The diagno-
sis (or exclusion) of incomplete myotomy is most readily
made by an upper gastrointestinal study performed when
postoperative vomiting persists for more than seven days
postoperatively [28]. A study suspicious of incomplete
myotomy will reveal delayed gastric emptying of contrast
and a “string sign” as contrast transits the persistently
narrowed pylorus [34]. As mentioned above, vomiting
may persist postoperatively for up to one week despite
adequate pyloromyotomy due to postoperative pyloric
edema or gastric atony due to chronic obstruction [35].
Non‑operative management
The only accepted non-operative management for the
treatment of HPS is the use of atropine sulfate. This medi-
cal management is usually reserved for patients who are
deemed unfit to undergo general anesthesia due to severe
medical co-morbidities. Atropine is a parasympatholytic,
due its competitive, reversible antagonistic binding to the
muscarinic acetylcholine receptors. It inhibits peristalsis
and therefore reduces muscular spasms that are thought
to lead to muscular hypertrophy of HPS [36]. It is also a
very strong inhibitor of meal-induced gastric acid secre-
tion [37]. This presumably will mitigate the acidic envi-
ronment and thus prevent pyloric sphincter contraction. It
has also been used successfully to treat incomplete pylo-
romyotomy as a ‘rescue therapy’ [34]. Takeuchi et al. [36]
revealed in their series of 188 patients treated initially
with atropine, (intravenous form, n = 80; oral form, n = 8),
they had an overall success rate of 78.9% (142/180). The
reported median number of days needed for successful
medical treatment is between 12 and 14 days [36] with
most recommending intravenous dose of 0.06 mg/kg/day.
Etiology
The exact cause of the postnatal pyloric muscle thickening
characteristic of HPS is unclear, but it is mostly likely multi-
factorial. Duodenal exposure to acid is known to be a potent
stimulus of pyloric sphincter contraction. Furthermore, high
levels of gastrin have been documented after birth in some
patients with pyloric stenosis. Thus, the gastrin theory pos-
tulates that the high gastrin levels will promote hyperacidity,
which stimulates the cycle of pyloric sphincter contraction
and results in muscle hypertrophy [38]. The acid hypersecre-
tion phenomenon has been reported by Heine et al. [39], who
documented higher histamine-induced gastric acid secretion
in infants with pyloric stenosis before and one week after
pyloromyotomy. In addition, animal studies have induced
pyloric stenosis in newborn dogs after the administration of
maternal pentagastrin shortly before birth [40]. The hypoth-
esis of work-induced hypertrophy of the pylorus muscle is
further supported by the association between pyloric ste-
nosis and the use of erythromycin and azithromycin. Both
macrolide antibiotics are known to act as prokinetic agents
due to their stimulation of motilin receptors in the antrum
and pylorus of the stomach, which promotes peristalsis and
gastric emptying [41]. A sevenfold increase in the incidence
of HPS was reported among newborns that received the anti-
biotic erythromycin for post-exposure pertussis prophylaxis
[42]. More recently, a cohort study found a strong associa-
tion between HPS and infants receiving macrolide antibi-
otics, especially if received within the first two weeks of
life, resulting in a 30-fold increased risk of HPS [43, 44].
Infant consumption from two weeks to four months of age
or maternal consumption during the first two weeks of life
also resulted in a threefold increased risk [43]. The strong
male predominance has remained a mystery, but one clue
is the documentation of preterm male babies having more
acid compared to matched females [45]. Another interest-
ing observation is that bottle-feeding appears to be inde-
pendently associated with HPS with a 4.6-fold increase risk
compared to infants who were breastfed [46]. Other theo-
ries include deficiency of nitric oxide synthase containing
neurons within the thickened pylorus [47]. Nitric oxide is a
major cellular signaling molecule produced by endothelial
cells that relaxes smooth muscle and acts as a major vaso-
dilator. Hence, the abnormal pyloric innervation is postu-
lated to result in inadequate relaxation of the pylorus muscle
leading to hypertrophy [48]. This led the investigators to
postulate the gene for nitric oxide synthetase, NOS1, as a
candidate gene for HPS [49].
Genetic inheritance for HPS is complex and multifacto-
rial. There is increased concordance between monozygotic
twins, when compared to dizygotic twins, and patients with
pyloric stenosis occasionally have a family history of this
condition. Pyloric stenosis is associated with several genetic
13

syndromes, including Apert syndrome, Denys-Drash syn-
drome, Kallmann syndrome and Marden-Walker syndrome
[50]. However, a clear genetic predisposition has yet to be
determined [51, 52]. FOXF1 gene mutations have been asso-
ciated with congenital anomalies, such as annular pancreas,
malrotation and duodenal stenosis [53]. A recent study on a
single extended family with multiple cases of HPS, possibly
identified a single novel missense variant of the FOXF1 gene
on chromosome 16 as a candidate gene that contributes to
HPS [54].
Conclusion
HPS is one of most frequently treated pediatric surgical con-
ditions, but continues to have an incompletely understood
etiology. Early diagnosis by physical exam or ultrasound
and appropriate fluid resuscitation followed by pyloromy-
otomy has transformed HPS from a lethal condition into
a readily diagnosed and treated malady with nearly 100%
survival. Despite various proposed genetic etiologies, the
widespread geographical and ethnic variations are likely
indicators of a mixed environmental and genetic explanation
for this disease. While the precise etiology remains elusive,
work-induced hypertrophy of the pylorus muscle seems to be
the most plausible, unifying physiologic explanation. This
hypothesis is strongly supported by a recent Danish nation-
wide cohort study demonstrating a 30-fold increased risk of
developing HPS with use of prokinetic macrolide antibiotics
in early infancy [43]. This hypothesis is further supported
by the success of atropine sulfate, which reduces muscular
spasms of the pylorus, as a medical treatment for HPS and a
rescue treatment for incomplete pyloromyotomy. Thus, the
administration of macrolide antibiotics to infants during the
first few months of life should be discouraged, unless the
treatment benefits outweigh the risk.
Acknowledgements  This research received no specific grant from
any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Compliance with ethical standards  22. Gale HI, Gee MS, Westra SJ, Nimkin K (2016) Abdominal ultra-
Ethical approval  This article does not contain any studies with
human participants performed by any of the authors.
Conflict of interest  The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Ramstedt C (1912) Zur operation der angeborenen pylorus sten-
ose. Med Klin 8:1702–1705
2. To T, Wajja A, Wales PW, Langer JC (2005) Population demo-
graphic indicators associated with incidence of pyloric stenosis.
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 159:520–525
13
Pediatr Surg Int
3. Hirschsprung H (1888) Falle von angeborener pylorus stenose,
beobachtet bej sauglingen. Jahrb der Kinderh 28:61–68
4. Taylor S (1959) Pyloric stenosis before and after Ramstedt. Arch
Dis Child 34:20–23
5. Gardner W (1889) A case of Loreta’s operation for dilatation of
the pyloric orifice of the stomach. Br Med J 2:1322–1323
6. Nicoll JH (1904) Congenital hypertrophic stenosis of the pylorus.
From an experience of fifteen cases. Br Med J 2:1148–1149
7. MacKinlay G, Barhnart D (2008) Laparoscopic pyloromyotomy.
In: Bax NMA (ed) Endoscopic surgery in infants and children.
Springer, Berlin, pp 281–286
8. Graham RR (1937) The treatment of perforated duodenal ulcers.
Surg Gynecol Obstet 64:235–238
9. Alain JL, Grousseau D, Terrier G (1991) Extramucosal pyloro-
myotomy by laparoscopy. Surg Endosc 5:174–175
10. Bickler SW (2000) Incidence of appendicitis and hypertrophic
pyloric stenosis in a sub-Saharan African country. J Pediatr Gas-
troenterol Nutr 31:S39
11. Bickler SW (2006) Tropical enteropathy protects against West-
ern diseases in environments of poor sanitation. Med Hypotheses
67:146–150
12. El-Gohary Y, Yeap BH, Hempel G, Gillick J (2010) A 9-year
single center experience with circumumbilical Ramstedt’s pylo-
romyotomy. Eur J Pediatr Surg 20:387–390
13. Schechter R, Torfs CP, Bateson TF (1997) The epidemiology of
infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol
11:407–427
14. Lippert MM (1986) Pyloric stenosis presenting as severe pro-
longed jaundice. A case report. S Afr Med J 69:446–447
15. Trioche P, Chalas J, Francoual J, Capel L, Lindenbaum A, Odievre
M, Labrune P (1999) Jaundice with hypertrophic pyloric stenosis
as an early manifestation of Gilbert syndrome. Arch Dis Child
81:301–303
16. Greenberg CS (2002) A sugar-coated pacifier reduces procedural
pain in newborns. Pediatr Nurs 28:271–277
17. White MC, Langer JC, Don S, DeBaun MR (1998) Sensitivity
and cost minimization analysis of radiology versus olive palpation
for the diagnosis of hypertrophic pyloric stenosis. J Pediatr Surg
33:913–917
18. Feddock CA (2007) The lost art of clinical skills. Am J Med
120:374–378
19. Jauhar S (2006) The demise of the physical exam. N Engl J Med
354:548–551
20. Aspelund G, Langer JC (2007) Current management of hyper-
trophic pyloric stenosis. Semin Pediatr Surg 16:27–33
21. Glatstein M, Carbell G, Boddu SK, Bernardini A, Scolnik D
(2011) The changing clinical presentation of hypertrophic pyloric
stenosis: the experience of a large, tertiary care pediatric hospital.
Clin Pediatr (Phila) 50:192–195
sonography of the pediatric gastrointestinal tract. World J Radiol
8:656–667
23. Jobson M, Hall NJ (2016) Contemporary management of pyloric
stenosis. Semin Pediatr Surg 25:219–224
24. Pandya S, Heiss K (2012) Pyloric stenosis in pediatric surgery: an
evidence-based review. Surg Clin N Am 92:527–539 vii-viii.
25. Flageole HH, Pemberton J (2015) Post-operative impact of
nasogastric tubes on length of stay in infants with pyloric steno-
sis (POINTS): a prospective randomized controlled pilot trial. J
Pediatr Surg 50:1681–1685
26. Oomen MW, Hoekstra LT, Bakx R, Ubbink DT, Heij HA (2012)
Open versus laparoscopic pyloromyotomy for hypertrophic
pyloric stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis focusing
on major complications. Surg Endosc 26:2104–2110
27. Mahida JB, Asti L, Deans KJ, Minneci PC, Groner JI (2016)
Laparoscopic pyloromyotomy decreases postoperative length of
Pediatr Surg Int
stay in children with hypertrophic pyloric stenosis. J Pediatr Surg
51:1436–1439
28. Hall NJ, Eaton S, Seims A, Leys CM, Densmore JC, Calkins
CM, Ostlie DJ, St Peter SD, Azizkhan RG, von Allmen D et al
(2014) Risk of incomplete pyloromyotomy and mucosal perfo-
ration in open and laparoscopic pyloromyotomy. J Pediatr Surg
49:1083–1086
29. Leahy A, Fitzgerald RJ (1982) The influence of delayed feeding
on postoperative vomiting in hypertrophic pyloric stenosis. Br J
Surg 69:658–659
30. Scharli AF, Leditschke JF (1968) Gastric motility after pyloromy-
otomy in infants. A reappraisal of postoperative feeding. Surgery
64:1133–1137
31. Sullivan KJ, Chan E, Vincent J, Iqbal M, Wayne C, Nasr A,
Canadian Association of Paediatric Surgeons Evidence-Based., R
(2016) Feeding post-pyloromyotomy: a meta-analysis. Pediatrics
137
32. Adibe OO, Iqbal CW, Sharp SW, Juang D, Snyder CL, Holcomb
GW 3rd, Ostlie DJ, St Peter SD (2014) Protocol versus ad libi-
tum feeds after laparoscopic pyloromyotomy: a prospective rand-
omized trial. J Pediatr Surg 49:129–132. (discussion 132)
33. Wheeler RA, Najmaldin AS, Stoodley N, Griffiths DM, Burge
DM, Atwell JD (1990) Feeding regimens after pyloromyotomy.
Br J Surg 77:1018–1019
34. Owen RP, Almond SL, Humphrey GM (2012) Atropine sulphate:
rescue therapy for pyloric stenosis. BMJ case reports 2012
35. Muramori K, Nagasaki A, Kawanami T (2007) Ultrasonographic
serial measurements of the morphologic resolution of the pylorus
after Ramstedt pyloromyotomy for infantile hypertrophic pyloric
stenosis. J Ultrasound Med 26:1681–1687
36. Takeuchi M, Yasunaga H, Horiguchi H, Hashimoto H, Matsuda S
(2013) Pyloromyotomy versus i.v. atropine therapy for the treat-
ment of infantile pyloric stenosis: nationwide hospital discharge
database analysis. Pediatr Int Off J Jpn Pediatric Soc 55:488–491
37. Konturek SJ, Biernat J, Oleksy J, Rehfeld JF, Stadil F (1974)
Effect of atropine on gastrin and gastric acid response to peptone
meal. J Clin Invest 54:593–597
38. Rogers IM (2006) The true cause of pyloric stenosis is hyperacid-
ity. Acta paediatrica 95:132–136
39. Heine W, Groger B, Litzenberger M, Drescher U (1986) [Results
of Lambling gastric juice analysis in infants with spastic hyper-
trophic pyloric stenosis (SHPS)]. Padiatrie Padologie 21:119–125
40. Dodge JA, Karim AA (1976) Induction of pyloric hypertrophy by
pentagastrin. An animal model for infantile hypertrophic pyloric
stenosis. Gut 17:280–284
41. Coulie B, Tack J, Peeters T, Janssens J (1998) Involvement of two
different pathways in the motor effects of erythromycin on the
gastric antrum in humans. Gut 43:395–400
42. Honein MA, Paulozzi LJ, Himelright IM, Lee B, Cragan JD, Pat-
terson L, Correa A, Hall S, Erickson JD (1999) Infantile hyper-
trophic pyloric stenosis after pertussis prophylaxis with erythrom-
cyin: a case review and cohort study. Lancet 354:2101–2105
43. Lund M, Pasternak B, Davidsen RB, Feenstra B, Krogh C, Diaz
LJ, Wohlfahrt J, Melbye M (2014) Use of macrolides in mother
and child and risk of infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis:
nationwide cohort study. BMJ 348:g1908
44. Eberly MD, Eide MB, Thompson JL, Nylund CM (2015)
Azithromycin in early infancy and pyloric stenosis. Pediatrics
135:483–488
45. Ames MD (1960) Gastric acidity in the first ten days of life of the
prematurely born baby. Am J Dis Child 100:252–256
46. Krogh C, Biggar RJ, Fischer TK, Lindholm M, Wohlfahrt J, Mel-
bye M (2012) Bottle-feeding and the risk of pyloric stenosis. Pedi-
atrics 130:e943-949
47. Piotrowska AP, Solari V, Puri P (2003) Distribution of heme oxy-
genase-2 in nerves and interstitial cells of Cajal in the normal
pylorus and in infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis. Arch Pathol
Lab Med 127:1182–1186
48. Oue T, Puri P (1999) Smooth muscle cell hypertrophy versus
hyperplasia in infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis. Pediatr Res
45:853–857
49. Huang PL, Dawson TM, Bredt DS, Snyder SH, Fishman MC
(1993) Targeted disruption of the neuronal nitric oxide synthase
gene. Cell 75:1273–1286
50. Peeters B, Benninga MA, Hennekam RC (2012) Infantile hyper-
trophic pyloric stenosis–genetics and syndromes. Nat Rev Gas-
troenterol Hepatol 9:646–660
51. Krogh C, Fischer TK, Skotte L, Biggar RJ, Oyen N, Skytthe
A, Goertz S, Christensen K, Wohlfahrt J, Melbye M (2010)
Familial aggregation and heritability of pyloric stenosis. Jama
303:2393–2399
52. Pedersen RN, Garne E, Loane M, Korsholm L, Husby S, Group
EW (2008) Infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis: a compara-
tive study of incidence and other epidemiological characteris-
tics in seven European regions. J Maternal Fetal Neonatal Med
21:599–604
53. Stankiewicz P, Sen P, Bhatt SS, Storer M, Xia Z, Bejjani BA, Ou
Z, Wiszniewska J, Driscoll DJ, Maisenbacher MK et al (2009)
Genomic and genic deletions of the FOX gene cluster on 16q24.1
and inactivating mutations of FOXF1 cause alveolar capillary dys-
plasia and other malformations. Am J Hum Genet 84:780–791
54. Everett KV, Ataliotis P, Chioza BA, Shaw-Smith C, Chung
E.M.K. (2017) A novel missense mutation in the transcription
factor FOXF1 cosegregating with infantile hypertrophic pyloric
stenosis in the extended pedigree linked to IHPS5 on chromosome
16q24. Pediatr Res 81:632–638
13