Does Intracorporeal Anastomosis Decrease the Rate of Surgical Site Infection in Laparoscopic Colon Cancer Surgery?

IF 0.2 4区 医学 Q4 SURGERY International surgery Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.9738/intsurg-d-21-00001.1
Yeon Wook Ju, W. Ji, Jung Sik Kim, K. Hong, J. Um
{"title":"Does Intracorporeal Anastomosis Decrease the Rate of Surgical Site Infection in Laparoscopic Colon Cancer Surgery?","authors":"Yeon Wook Ju, W. Ji, Jung Sik Kim, K. Hong, J. Um","doi":"10.9738/intsurg-d-21-00001.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n This study aimed to compare the surgical site infection (SSI) rates between intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) and extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA).\n \n \n \n Laparoscopic surgery is recommended for colonic malignancies because of its superior clinical outcomes and comparable oncologic results. Laparoscopic colectomy with ICA has the advantages of incision length and free extraction site choice. However, ICA may be associated with a risk of SSI due to enterotomy inside the abdominal cavity.\n \n \n \n We retrospectively analyzed patients with colon cancer who underwent radical surgery at Korea University Ansan Hospital between January 2017 and June 2020. We compared the SSI rates and other clinical variables between the ICA and ECA groups.\n \n \n \n Of the 502 patients who underwent radical surgery for colorectal cancer during the study period, 234 were eligible for inclusion. ECA and ICA were performed in 62.4% and 37.6% of patients, respectively. There were no statistically significant intergroup differences in clinicopathologic variables. The overall SSI rate did not differ between the groups (P = 0.801), but organ/space SSIs were more common in the ICA group than in the ECA group (P = 0.048).\n \n \n \n There was no significant difference in overall SSI or anastomotic leakage (AL) rates between the ICA and ECA groups, but the organ/space SSI rate was higher in the ICA group when AL cases were excluded. Further high-quality studies are needed to assess the risk of organ/space SSIs in the ICA after colon cancer surgery.\n","PeriodicalId":14474,"journal":{"name":"International surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9738/intsurg-d-21-00001.1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the surgical site infection (SSI) rates between intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) and extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA). Laparoscopic surgery is recommended for colonic malignancies because of its superior clinical outcomes and comparable oncologic results. Laparoscopic colectomy with ICA has the advantages of incision length and free extraction site choice. However, ICA may be associated with a risk of SSI due to enterotomy inside the abdominal cavity. We retrospectively analyzed patients with colon cancer who underwent radical surgery at Korea University Ansan Hospital between January 2017 and June 2020. We compared the SSI rates and other clinical variables between the ICA and ECA groups. Of the 502 patients who underwent radical surgery for colorectal cancer during the study period, 234 were eligible for inclusion. ECA and ICA were performed in 62.4% and 37.6% of patients, respectively. There were no statistically significant intergroup differences in clinicopathologic variables. The overall SSI rate did not differ between the groups (P = 0.801), but organ/space SSIs were more common in the ICA group than in the ECA group (P = 0.048). There was no significant difference in overall SSI or anastomotic leakage (AL) rates between the ICA and ECA groups, but the organ/space SSI rate was higher in the ICA group when AL cases were excluded. Further high-quality studies are needed to assess the risk of organ/space SSIs in the ICA after colon cancer surgery.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在腹腔镜结肠癌手术中,体内吻合术能降低手术部位的感染率吗?
本研究旨在比较体内吻合(ICA)和体外吻合(ECA)手术部位感染(SSI)的发生率。腹腔镜手术被推荐用于结肠恶性肿瘤,因为它具有优越的临床效果和可比较的肿瘤学结果。腹腔镜结肠切除术具有切口长度短、提取部位选择自由等优点。然而,ICA可能与腹腔内肠切开术导致SSI的风险相关。我们回顾性分析了2017年1月至2020年6月期间在高丽大学安山医院接受根治性手术的结肠癌患者。我们比较了ICA组和ECA组之间的SSI率和其他临床变量。在研究期间接受根治性结直肠癌手术的502例患者中,有234例符合纳入条件。ECA和ICA分别占62.4%和37.6%。临床病理指标组间差异无统计学意义。总体SSI发生率在两组之间没有差异(P = 0.801),但ICA组比ECA组更常见器官/空间SSI (P = 0.048)。ICA组和ECA组在总体SSI和吻合口漏(AL)发生率上无显著差异,但当排除AL病例时,ICA组的器官/间隙SSI发生率更高。需要进一步的高质量研究来评估结肠癌手术后ICA发生器官/间隙ssi的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International surgery
International surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: International Surgery is the Official Journal of the International College of Surgeons. International Surgery has been published since 1938 and has an important position in the global scientific and medical publishing field. The Journal publishes only open access manuscripts. Advantages and benefits of open access publishing in International Surgery include: -worldwide internet transmission -prompt peer reviews -timely publishing following peer review approved manuscripts -even more timely worldwide transmissions of unedited peer review approved manuscripts (“online first”) prior to having copy edited manuscripts formally published. Non-approved peer reviewed manuscript authors have the opportunity to update and improve manuscripts prior to again submitting for peer review.
期刊最新文献
Traumatic Pulmonary Herniation: A Conservative Approach Considerations for Iliac Vein Repair in the Setting of Urologic Procedures Abscess formation of abdominal wall mimicking lymphoma due to Morganella morganii infection in a prepubescent children Application of Kegel Motion Combined with Warming Acupuncture at the Eight Acupuncture Points in Patients with Urinary Incontinence after Radical Prostatectomy A 270° Retention of Spinal Structure in the Treatment of Thoracic and Lumbar Tuberculosis via Posterior-Only Approach
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1