Spontaneous intestinal perforation (SIP) occurs commonly in extremely low birth weight (ELBW) infants. Our understanding of its etiologies has improved dramatically over the last decade. Included in this comprehension is an ongoing reconciliation of the iatrogenic risk factors, the microbiology, and the histopathology. The latter shows focal perforations with necrosis of the muscularis externa and no sign of ischemic damage (typically characterized by mucosal necrosis in the preterm bowel). Associations include extreme prematurity, early postnatal steroids (EPS), early use of indomethacin (EUI), and two common pathogens (Candida and Staphylococcus epidermis). Animal models of SIP suggest that all risk factors converge on a common collection of signaling pathways: those of nitric oxide synthases (NOS), insulin-like growth factors (IGFs), and epidermal growth factors (EGFs). Many of these factors skew trophism of the ileum (defined as thinning of the submucosa concomitant with hyperplasia of the muscosa). Global depletion of NOS is associated with disturbed intestinal motility and diminished transforming growth factor-alpha (TGF-␣) in the muscularis externa. This constellation of insults seems to make the distal intestine vulnerable to perforation during recovery of motility.
WHY SPONTANEOUS INTESTINAL PERFORATION IS NOT NECROTIZING ENTEROCOLITISBefore any serious discussion of spontaneous intestinal perforation (SIP) etiology can commence, it is necessary to dispense with the idea that SIP and necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) are manifestations of the same disease, but representative of two different ends of the continuum (1,2). The evidence for such an argument has never been compelling, essentially based on a belief that it must be so because they occur in the same patient population and because management is roughly similar. The same can be said about syphilis and gonorrhea. They affect the same patient populations, affect the same organs and, if you are creative, they can be managed with the same antibiotic regimen. Few would argue these diseases are the same.In contrast, the evidence that SIP is distinct from NEC is very strong. The histopathology of SIP has been well documented by four independent groups on nearly as many continents (3-6). It looks nothing like NEC. The mucosa is robust rather than necrotic. There are focal perforations, most commonly in the ileum, which are associated with isolated areas of necrosis in the muscularis externa about 30% of the time (7).There is no inflammation and no evidence of ischemia (a hallmark of NEC), particularly so in cases that are diagnosed in a timely fashion. The progression of disease with SIP does not follow Bell's staging for NEC (8). That is to say, with the majority of SIP cases, pneumatosis cannot be found on radiographs either before or after perforation. Finally, infants who acquire SIP are smaller, younger, and acquire the disease at a different time of life than infants who acquire NEC with perforation (9,10). They also are unlikely to be fed...