首页 > 最新文献

Diseases of the Colon & Rectum最新文献

英文 中文
Laparoscopic Resection in Ileocecal Endometrioma. 回盲部子宫内膜瘤的腹腔镜切除术
IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-06 DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000002971
Lukas Schabl, Hermann Kessler
{"title":"Laparoscopic Resection in Ileocecal Endometrioma.","authors":"Lukas Schabl, Hermann Kessler","doi":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000002971","DOIUrl":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000002971","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11299,"journal":{"name":"Diseases of the Colon & Rectum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141283205","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Does Addition of Multipoint Rectus Sheath Block to Multimodal Analgesia Really Improve Postoperative Pain and Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery? 在多模式镇痛中加入多点直肠鞘阻滞是否真的能改善腹腔镜结直肠手术患者的术后疼痛和疗效?
IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-05 DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000003404
Cheng-Wen Li, Fu-Shan Xue, Xin-Yue Li
{"title":"Does Addition of Multipoint Rectus Sheath Block to Multimodal Analgesia Really Improve Postoperative Pain and Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery?","authors":"Cheng-Wen Li, Fu-Shan Xue, Xin-Yue Li","doi":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000003404","DOIUrl":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000003404","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11299,"journal":{"name":"Diseases of the Colon & Rectum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141261253","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Clinical Medicine Will Live Long: Probably in a New Avatar. 临床医学将长盛不衰:也许会以新的面貌出现
IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-05 DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000003409
Sadananda Bolar Naik
{"title":"Clinical Medicine Will Live Long: Probably in a New Avatar.","authors":"Sadananda Bolar Naik","doi":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000003409","DOIUrl":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000003409","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11299,"journal":{"name":"Diseases of the Colon & Rectum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141261237","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision With Combined Resection of the Ureter and Ureterovesical Reimplantation for Recurrent Cervical Adenocarcinoma. 腹腔镜全中胚层切除术联合输尿管切除和输尿管再植术治疗复发性宫颈腺癌
IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-05 DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000003223
Anqi Wang, Peng Zhang, Ce Bian, Ming Chen, Haiyang Zhou
{"title":"Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision With Combined Resection of the Ureter and Ureterovesical Reimplantation for Recurrent Cervical Adenocarcinoma.","authors":"Anqi Wang, Peng Zhang, Ce Bian, Ming Chen, Haiyang Zhou","doi":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000003223","DOIUrl":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000003223","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11299,"journal":{"name":"Diseases of the Colon & Rectum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141537699","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Research Perspective on: Impact of Multidisciplinary Prehabilitation Interventions on Postoperative Hospital Length of Stay and Functional Capacity in Patients Undergoing Resection of Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. 研究视角多学科术前康复干预对结直肠癌切除术患者术后住院时间和功能能力的影响:系统回顾与元分析》。
IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-07 DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000003375
Julia R Berian
{"title":"Research Perspective on: Impact of Multidisciplinary Prehabilitation Interventions on Postoperative Hospital Length of Stay and Functional Capacity in Patients Undergoing Resection of Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Julia R Berian","doi":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000003375","DOIUrl":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000003375","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11299,"journal":{"name":"Diseases of the Colon & Rectum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141093098","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
A Randomized Controlled Trial of Topical Analgesia Posthemorrhoidectomy (TAPH Trial). 痔切除术后局部镇痛随机对照试验(TAPH 试验)。
IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-11 DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000003419
James Z Jin, Weisi Xia, Runzhe Gao, Alain C Vandal, Maree Weston, Lincoln Israel, Andrew Connolly, Primal Parry Singh, Darren Svirskis, Andrew Hill

Background: Postoperative pain remains the greatest problem after hemorrhoidectomy. Pain is hypothesized to arise from bacterial infection, sphincter spasm, and local inflammation.

Objective: This trial was conducted to assess the effects of metronidazole, diltiazem, and lidocaine on posthemorrhoidectomy pain.

Design: A double-blinded randomized controlled factorial trial.

Settings: This multicenter trial was conducted in Auckland, New Zealand.

Patients: A total of 192 participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) into 4 parallel arms.

Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned into 1 of 4 groups receiving topical treatment with 10% metronidazole, 10% metronidazole + 2% diltiazem, 10% metronidazole + 4% lidocaine, or 10% metronidazole + 2% diltiazem + 4% lidocaine. Participants were instructed to apply treatment to the anal verge 3 times daily for 7 days.

Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was pain on the visual analog scale on day 4. The secondary outcomes included analgesia usage, pain during bowel movement, and functional recovery index.

Results: There was no significant difference in the pain and recovery scores when diltiazem or lidocaine was added to metronidazole (score difference between presence and absence of diltiazem in the formulation: -3.69; 95% CI, -13.3 to 5.94; p = 0.46; between presence and absence of lidocaine: -5.67; 95% CI, -15.5 to 3.80; p = 0.24). The combination of metronidazole + diltiazem + lidocaine did not further reduce pain. Secondary analysis revealed a significant difference between the best (metronidazole + lidocaine) and worst (metronidazole + diltiazem + lidocaine) groups in both pain and functional recovery scores. There were no significant differences in analgesic usage, complications, or return to work between the groups. No clinically important adverse events were reported. The adverse event rate did not change in the intervention groups.

Limitations: Topical metronidazole was used in the control group rather than a pure placebo.

Conclusions: There was no significant difference in pain when topical diltiazem, lidocaine, or both were added to topical metronidazole. See Video Abstract .

Clinicaltrialsgov identifier: NCT04276298.

Ensayo controlado aleatorizado de analgesia tpica posterior a hemorroidectoma ensayo taph: ANTECEDENTES:El dolor postoperatorio sigue siendo el mayor problema tras hemorroidectomía. La hipótesis es que el dolor se debe a infección bacteriana, el espasmo esfínteriano e inflamación local.OBJETIVO:Se realizó un ensayo factorial aleatorizado y controlado para evaluar los efectos del metronidazol, el diltiazem y la lidocaína en el dolor posthemorroidectomía.DISEÑO:Ensayo factorial controlado aleatorizado do

背景:术后疼痛仍是痔切除术后的最大问题。据推测,疼痛源于细菌感染、括约肌痉挛和局部炎症:旨在评估甲硝唑、地尔硫卓和利多卡因对痔切除术后疼痛的影响:设计:双盲随机对照析因试验:多中心试验在新西兰奥克兰市进行:192名参与者被随机(1:1:1:1:1)分为四组:参与者被随机分为四组,分别接受10%甲硝唑(M)、10%甲硝唑+2%地尔硫卓(MD)、10%甲硝唑+4%利多卡因(ML)或10%甲硝唑+2%地尔硫卓+4%利多卡因(MDL)的局部治疗。指导参与者在肛门边缘涂抹,每天 3 次,持续 7 天:主要结果是第 4 天的视觉模拟量表显示的疼痛。次要结果包括镇痛剂用量、排便疼痛和功能恢复指数:结果:在甲硝唑中添加地尔硫卓或利多卡因后,疼痛评分和恢复评分无明显差异(配方中存在和不存在 D 的评分差异:-3.69,95% CI:-13.3,5.94,p = 0.46;存在和不存在 L 的评分差异:-5.67,95% CI:-15.5,3.80,p = 0.24)。联合使用 MDL 没有进一步减轻疼痛。二次分析显示,最佳组(ML)和最差组(MDL)在疼痛和功能恢复评分方面均存在显著差异。两组在镇痛剂用量、并发症或重返工作岗位方面没有明显差异。无临床重要不良事件报告。干预组的不良事件发生率没有变化:局限性:对照组使用的是局部甲硝唑,而不是纯安慰剂:结论:在外用甲硝唑的基础上外用地尔硫卓或利多卡因,或同时外用这两种药物,疼痛感没有明显差异:NCT04276298。
{"title":"A Randomized Controlled Trial of Topical Analgesia Posthemorrhoidectomy (TAPH Trial).","authors":"James Z Jin, Weisi Xia, Runzhe Gao, Alain C Vandal, Maree Weston, Lincoln Israel, Andrew Connolly, Primal Parry Singh, Darren Svirskis, Andrew Hill","doi":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000003419","DOIUrl":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000003419","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Postoperative pain remains the greatest problem after hemorrhoidectomy. Pain is hypothesized to arise from bacterial infection, sphincter spasm, and local inflammation.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This trial was conducted to assess the effects of metronidazole, diltiazem, and lidocaine on posthemorrhoidectomy pain.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A double-blinded randomized controlled factorial trial.</p><p><strong>Settings: </strong>This multicenter trial was conducted in Auckland, New Zealand.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>A total of 192 participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) into 4 parallel arms.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Participants were randomly assigned into 1 of 4 groups receiving topical treatment with 10% metronidazole, 10% metronidazole + 2% diltiazem, 10% metronidazole + 4% lidocaine, or 10% metronidazole + 2% diltiazem + 4% lidocaine. Participants were instructed to apply treatment to the anal verge 3 times daily for 7 days.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>The primary outcome was pain on the visual analog scale on day 4. The secondary outcomes included analgesia usage, pain during bowel movement, and functional recovery index.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant difference in the pain and recovery scores when diltiazem or lidocaine was added to metronidazole (score difference between presence and absence of diltiazem in the formulation: -3.69; 95% CI, -13.3 to 5.94; p = 0.46; between presence and absence of lidocaine: -5.67; 95% CI, -15.5 to 3.80; p = 0.24). The combination of metronidazole + diltiazem + lidocaine did not further reduce pain. Secondary analysis revealed a significant difference between the best (metronidazole + lidocaine) and worst (metronidazole + diltiazem + lidocaine) groups in both pain and functional recovery scores. There were no significant differences in analgesic usage, complications, or return to work between the groups. No clinically important adverse events were reported. The adverse event rate did not change in the intervention groups.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Topical metronidazole was used in the control group rather than a pure placebo.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was no significant difference in pain when topical diltiazem, lidocaine, or both were added to topical metronidazole. See Video Abstract .</p><p><strong>Clinicaltrialsgov identifier: </strong>NCT04276298.</p><p><strong>Ensayo controlado aleatorizado de analgesia tpica posterior a hemorroidectoma ensayo taph: </strong>ANTECEDENTES:El dolor postoperatorio sigue siendo el mayor problema tras hemorroidectomía. La hipótesis es que el dolor se debe a infección bacteriana, el espasmo esfínteriano e inflamación local.OBJETIVO:Se realizó un ensayo factorial aleatorizado y controlado para evaluar los efectos del metronidazol, el diltiazem y la lidocaína en el dolor posthemorroidectomía.DISEÑO:Ensayo factorial controlado aleatorizado do","PeriodicalId":11299,"journal":{"name":"Diseases of the Colon & Rectum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141317151","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Single-Port Vs Multiport Laparoscopic Total Abdominal Colectomy With End Ileostomy for Medically Refractory Ulcerative Colitis. 针对难治性溃疡性结肠炎的单孔腹腔镜与多孔腹腔镜全腹结肠切除术合并回肠末端造口术的倾向评分匹配分析》(A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Single-Port vs. Multi-Port Laparoscopic Total Abdominal Colectomy with End Ileostomy for Medically Refractory Ulcerative Colitis)。
IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-03 DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000003359
Ali Alipouriani, Niveditha Yalamarthi, Himani Sancheti, Benjamin L Cohen, Stefan D Holubar, Tracy L Hull, Scott R Steele, Emre Gorgun

Background: Medically refractory ulcerative colitis necessitates surgical intervention, with total abdominal colectomy with end ileostomy being a definitive treatment. The comparison between single-port and multiport laparoscopic surgery outcomes remains underexplored.

Objective: To compare the surgical outcomes of single-port versus multiport laparoscopic surgery in patients undergoing total abdominal colectomy with end ileostomy for medically refractory ulcerative colitis.

Design: A retrospective analysis comparing single-port to multiport surgery in patients with ulcerative colitis from 2010 to 2020. Patients were propensity score-matched 3:1 (multiport to single-port) on baseline characteristics.

Settings: Single-center academic hospital.

Patients: A total of 756 patients with medically refractory ulcerative colitis who underwent multiport vs single-port total abdominal colectomy with end ileostomy from 2010 to 2020 were included.

Main outcome measures: Binary outcomes were compared using a multivariable logistic regression model, and a subset analysis was conducted for postoperative stump leak based on stump implantation during surgery. These metrics were compared between the single-port and multiport groups to assess the differences in surgical outcomes.

Results: The multiport and single-port groups included 642 and 114 patients, respectively. The matched cohort included 342 multiports and 114 single ports. We observed a statistically significant difference in mean operation time, with the single-port procedure taking 43 minutes less than the multiport laparoscopy. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in postoperative stump leaks, postoperative ileus, stoma site complications, postoperative readmission within 30 days, postoperative reoperation within 30 days, and subsequent IPAA surgery. In the subset analysis, stump implantation was associated with a higher risk of stump leak in the multiport group. The single-port group had a shorter hospital stay.

Limitations: Retrospective nature and being conducted at a single center.

Conclusion: Single-incision laparoscopic total abdominal colectomy in the treatment of mucosal ulcerative colitis is a safe, effective, and efficient approach. In our cohort, single-incision laparoscopy has had shorter operation times and better overall length of stay compared with the multiport approach. Taking into account a less invasive approach, decreased abdominal trauma, and faster recovery, single-port surgery is a viable alternative to multiport surgery. See Video Abstract .

Un anlisis emparejado por puntuacin de propensin de la colectoma abdominal total laparoscpica con puerto nico versus puerto mltiple con ileostoma terminal para la colitis ulcerosa mdicamente refractaria:

背景:药物难治性溃疡性结肠炎(UC)必须进行外科干预,全腹结肠切除术和回肠末端造口术是最终的治疗方法。单孔腹腔镜手术和多孔腹腔镜手术的疗效比较仍未得到充分探讨:比较单孔与多孔腹腔镜手术治疗药物难治性 UC 患者的手术效果:回顾性分析:比较 2010 年至 2020 年期间接受单孔与多孔腹腔镜手术的 UC 患者。患者基线特征的倾向评分匹配比例为 3:1(多孔口与单孔口):设置:单中心学术医院:使用多变量逻辑回归模型对二元结局进行比较,并根据术中残端植入情况对术后残端渗漏进行子集分析。将这些指标在单孔组和多孔组之间进行比较,以评估手术结果的差异:结果:多孔口组和单孔口组分别包括 642 名和 114 名患者。匹配队列包括 342 例多孔口组和 114 例单孔口组。我们观察到平均手术时间有显著的统计学差异,单孔腹腔镜手术比多孔腹腔镜手术少用 43 分钟。两组患者在术后残端渗漏、术后回肠梗阻、造口部位并发症、术后 30 天内再次入院、术后 30 天内再次手术以及随后的 IPAA 手术方面没有明显差异。在子集分析中,多孔口组的残端植入与较高的残端渗漏风险相关。单端口组的住院时间更短:局限性:具有回顾性,在单个中心进行:单切口腹腔镜全腹结肠切除术治疗粘膜溃疡性结肠炎是一种安全、有效、高效的方法。在我们的队列中,与多切口方法相比,单切口腹腔镜手术的手术时间更短,总体住院时间更长。考虑到创伤更小、腹部创伤更小、恢复更快,单孔手术是多孔手术的可行替代方案。参见视频摘要。
{"title":"A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Single-Port Vs Multiport Laparoscopic Total Abdominal Colectomy With End Ileostomy for Medically Refractory Ulcerative Colitis.","authors":"Ali Alipouriani, Niveditha Yalamarthi, Himani Sancheti, Benjamin L Cohen, Stefan D Holubar, Tracy L Hull, Scott R Steele, Emre Gorgun","doi":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000003359","DOIUrl":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000003359","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Medically refractory ulcerative colitis necessitates surgical intervention, with total abdominal colectomy with end ileostomy being a definitive treatment. The comparison between single-port and multiport laparoscopic surgery outcomes remains underexplored.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the surgical outcomes of single-port versus multiport laparoscopic surgery in patients undergoing total abdominal colectomy with end ileostomy for medically refractory ulcerative colitis.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A retrospective analysis comparing single-port to multiport surgery in patients with ulcerative colitis from 2010 to 2020. Patients were propensity score-matched 3:1 (multiport to single-port) on baseline characteristics.</p><p><strong>Settings: </strong>Single-center academic hospital.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>A total of 756 patients with medically refractory ulcerative colitis who underwent multiport vs single-port total abdominal colectomy with end ileostomy from 2010 to 2020 were included.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Binary outcomes were compared using a multivariable logistic regression model, and a subset analysis was conducted for postoperative stump leak based on stump implantation during surgery. These metrics were compared between the single-port and multiport groups to assess the differences in surgical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The multiport and single-port groups included 642 and 114 patients, respectively. The matched cohort included 342 multiports and 114 single ports. We observed a statistically significant difference in mean operation time, with the single-port procedure taking 43 minutes less than the multiport laparoscopy. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in postoperative stump leaks, postoperative ileus, stoma site complications, postoperative readmission within 30 days, postoperative reoperation within 30 days, and subsequent IPAA surgery. In the subset analysis, stump implantation was associated with a higher risk of stump leak in the multiport group. The single-port group had a shorter hospital stay.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Retrospective nature and being conducted at a single center.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Single-incision laparoscopic total abdominal colectomy in the treatment of mucosal ulcerative colitis is a safe, effective, and efficient approach. In our cohort, single-incision laparoscopy has had shorter operation times and better overall length of stay compared with the multiport approach. Taking into account a less invasive approach, decreased abdominal trauma, and faster recovery, single-port surgery is a viable alternative to multiport surgery. See Video Abstract .</p><p><strong>Un anlisis emparejado por puntuacin de propensin de la colectoma abdominal total laparoscpica con puerto nico versus puerto mltiple con ileostoma terminal para la colitis ulcerosa mdicamente refractaria: </","PeriodicalId":11299,"journal":{"name":"Diseases of the Colon & Rectum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141237565","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Robotic Right Colectomy for Cecal Cancer in a Patient With a History of Renal Transplantation. 机器人右大肠切除术治疗有肾移植史的盲肠癌
IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-05 DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000003302
Stefania Montero, Hanjoo Lee
{"title":"Robotic Right Colectomy for Cecal Cancer in a Patient With a History of Renal Transplantation.","authors":"Stefania Montero, Hanjoo Lee","doi":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000003302","DOIUrl":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000003302","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11299,"journal":{"name":"Diseases of the Colon & Rectum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141261310","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Patient Satisfaction With Long-term Sacral Neuromodulation for Fecal Incontinence: Experience From a Single Tertiary Center. 患者对骶神经调节术治疗大便失禁的长期满意度:来自一家三级医疗中心的经验
IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-07 DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000003411
Sarah A Martin, Alexander D O'Connor, Deepak Selvakumar, Wal Baraza, Gemma Faulkner, Domini Mullins, Edward S Kiff, Karen J Telford, Abhiram Sharma

Background: Sacral neuromodulation is an effective treatment for fecal incontinence in the long term. Efficacy is typically assessed using bowel diary, symptom severity, and quality-of-life questionnaires, and "success" is defined as more than 50% improvement in these measures. However, patient satisfaction may be a more meaningful and individualized measure of treatment efficacy.

Objective: To assess patient-reported satisfaction with long-term sacral neuromodulation and compare it to the frequently applied efficacy measures.

Design: An observational study of a prospectively maintained database.

Setting: A single tertiary pelvic floor referral unit.

Patients: Data from 70 patients (68 women, median age 69 [60-74] years) were available. The median time since implantation was 11 (9-14) years. Nineteen patients reported inactive neuromodulation devices.

Main outcome measures: Bowel diaries, the Manchester Health Questionnaire, and the St. Mark's Incontinence Score were recorded at baseline, after percutaneous nerve evaluation, and at the last follow-up. Patient-reported satisfaction, using a 0% to 100% visual analog scale, with treatment since implantation (overall) and in the 2 weeks preceding completion of the last outcome measures (current) were also assessed.

Results: Satisfaction was significantly higher in those with active sacral neuromodulation devices (75% vs 20%, p < 0.001) at follow-up. No significant relationships exist between symptom improvement using conventional measures and patient-reported satisfaction. Current satisfaction was not associated with changes in bowel diary data after percutaneous nerve evaluation. Despite improvements in the St. Mark's Incontinence Score and Manchester Health Questionnaire below the 50% improvement threshold used to define "success," patients reported high (80%) satisfaction.

Limitations: Retrospective design with gaps in the available data.

Conclusions: High patient satisfaction with sacral neuromodulation can be achieved; however, the response to percutaneous nerve evaluation may not predict treatment satisfaction in the long term. The change in questionnaire results, which measure the use of compensatory behaviors and quality-of-life impact, may better correspond to treatment satisfaction.

Satisfaccin a largo plazo en los pacientes con la neuromodulacin sacra para la incontinencia fecal experiencia de un nico centro terciario: ANTECEDENTES:La neuromodulación sacra es un tratamiento eficaz para la incontinencia fecal a largo plazo. La eficacia suele evaluarse mediante cuestionarios sobre la frecuencia diaria intestinal, la gravedad de los síntomas o la calidad de vida, y el "éxito" se define como una mejoría >50% en estas medidas. Sin embargo, la satisfacción del paciente pue

背景:骶神经调控术是一种长期有效的治疗大便失禁的方法。疗效通常通过排便日记、症状严重程度或生活质量问卷进行评估,"成功 "的定义是这些指标改善>50%。然而,患者的满意度可能是衡量疗效的更有意义的个性化指标:评估患者对长期骶神经调节治疗的满意度,并将其与常用的疗效衡量标准进行比较:设计:对前瞻性数据库进行观察研究:患者:70 名患者(68 名女性,中位数):数据来自 70 名患者(68 名女性,中位年龄 69 [60 - 74])。植入后的中位时间为 11(9 - 14)年。19名患者报告神经调控装置处于非活动状态:主要结果测量:在基线、经皮神经评估后和最后一次随访时记录的排便日记、曼彻斯特健康问卷和圣马克失禁评分。使用0%-100%视觉模拟量表,患者报告自植入以来(总体)和完成最后一次结果测量前两周内(当前)对治疗的满意度:结果:使用有源骶神经调控装置的患者满意度明显更高(75% 对 20%,P<0.05):结论:使用骶神经调节装置的患者满意度较高:结论:患者对骶神经调控的满意度较高,但对经皮神经评估的反应可能无法预测长期治疗的满意度。调查问卷结果的变化可以更好地反映治疗的满意度,该结果用于衡量补偿行为的使用情况和对生活质量的影响。
{"title":"Patient Satisfaction With Long-term Sacral Neuromodulation for Fecal Incontinence: Experience From a Single Tertiary Center.","authors":"Sarah A Martin, Alexander D O'Connor, Deepak Selvakumar, Wal Baraza, Gemma Faulkner, Domini Mullins, Edward S Kiff, Karen J Telford, Abhiram Sharma","doi":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000003411","DOIUrl":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000003411","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Sacral neuromodulation is an effective treatment for fecal incontinence in the long term. Efficacy is typically assessed using bowel diary, symptom severity, and quality-of-life questionnaires, and \"success\" is defined as more than 50% improvement in these measures. However, patient satisfaction may be a more meaningful and individualized measure of treatment efficacy.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess patient-reported satisfaction with long-term sacral neuromodulation and compare it to the frequently applied efficacy measures.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>An observational study of a prospectively maintained database.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>A single tertiary pelvic floor referral unit.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Data from 70 patients (68 women, median age 69 [60-74] years) were available. The median time since implantation was 11 (9-14) years. Nineteen patients reported inactive neuromodulation devices.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Bowel diaries, the Manchester Health Questionnaire, and the St. Mark's Incontinence Score were recorded at baseline, after percutaneous nerve evaluation, and at the last follow-up. Patient-reported satisfaction, using a 0% to 100% visual analog scale, with treatment since implantation (overall) and in the 2 weeks preceding completion of the last outcome measures (current) were also assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Satisfaction was significantly higher in those with active sacral neuromodulation devices (75% vs 20%, p < 0.001) at follow-up. No significant relationships exist between symptom improvement using conventional measures and patient-reported satisfaction. Current satisfaction was not associated with changes in bowel diary data after percutaneous nerve evaluation. Despite improvements in the St. Mark's Incontinence Score and Manchester Health Questionnaire below the 50% improvement threshold used to define \"success,\" patients reported high (80%) satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Retrospective design with gaps in the available data.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>High patient satisfaction with sacral neuromodulation can be achieved; however, the response to percutaneous nerve evaluation may not predict treatment satisfaction in the long term. The change in questionnaire results, which measure the use of compensatory behaviors and quality-of-life impact, may better correspond to treatment satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Satisfaccin a largo plazo en los pacientes con la neuromodulacin sacra para la incontinencia fecal experiencia de un nico centro terciario: </strong>ANTECEDENTES:La neuromodulación sacra es un tratamiento eficaz para la incontinencia fecal a largo plazo. La eficacia suele evaluarse mediante cuestionarios sobre la frecuencia diaria intestinal, la gravedad de los síntomas o la calidad de vida, y el \"éxito\" se define como una mejoría >50% en estas medidas. Sin embargo, la satisfacción del paciente pue","PeriodicalId":11299,"journal":{"name":"Diseases of the Colon & Rectum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11309340/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141287875","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Risk Factors for Postoperative Complications of Laparoscopic Right Colectomy: A Post Hoc Analysis of the RELARC Trial. 腹腔镜右结肠切除术术后并发症的风险因素:RELARC试验的事后分析
IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-21 DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000003331
Zhen Sun, Guannan Zhang, Junyang Lu, Bin Wu, Guole Lin, Yi Xiao, Lai Xu

Background: There is concern regarding the possibility of postoperative complications for laparoscopic right colectomy.

Objective: To evaluate the risk factors for postoperative complications for patients undergoing laparoscopic right colectomy.

Design: This was an observational study.

Settings: This was a post hoc analysis of a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial (RELARC trial, NCT02619942).

Patients: Patients included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis in the RELARC trial were all enrolled in this study.

Main outcome measures: Risk factors for postoperative complications were identified using univariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis.

Results: Of 995 patients, 206 (20.7%) had postoperative complications. Comorbidity ( p = 0.02; OR: 1.544; 95% CI, 1.077-2.212) and operative time >180 minutes ( p = 0.03; OR: 1.453; 95% CI, 1.032-2.044) were independent risk factors for postoperative complications, whereas female sex ( p = 0.04; OR: 0.704; 95% CI, 0.506-0.980) and extracorporeal anastomosis ( p < 0.001; OR: 0.251; 95% CI, 0.166-0.378) were protective factors. Eighty patients (8.0%) had overall surgical site infection, 53 (5.3%) had incisional surgical site infection, and 33 (3.3%) had organ/space surgical site infection. Side-to-side anastomosis was a risk factor for overall surgical site infection ( p < 0.001; OR: 1.912; 95% CI, 1.118-3.268) and organ/space surgical site infection ( p = 0.005; OR: 3.579; 95% CI, 1.455-8.805). The extracorporeal anastomosis was associated with a reduced risk of overall surgical site infection ( p < 0.001; OR: 0.239; 95% CI, 0.138-0.413), organ/space surgical site infection ( p = 0.002; OR: 0.296; 95% CI, 0.136-0.646), and incisional surgical site infection ( p < 0.001; OR: 0.179; 95% CI, 0.099-0.322). Diabetes ( p = 0.039; OR: 2.090; 95% CI, 1.039-4.205) and conversion to open surgery ( p = 0.013; OR: 5.403; 95% CI, 1.437-20.319) were risk factors for incisional surgical site infection.

Limitations: Due to the retrospective nature, the key limitation is the lack of prospective documentation and standardization regarding the perioperative management of these patients, such as preoperative optimization, bowel preparation regimens, and antibiotic regimens, which may be confounder factors of complications. All surgeries were performed by experienced surgeons, and the patients enrolled were relatively young, generally healthy, and without obesity. It is unclear whether the results will be generalizable to obese and other populations worldwide.

Conclusions: Male sex, comorbidity, prolonged operative time, and intracorporeal anastomosis were independent risk factors for postoperative complications of laparoscopic right colectomy. Side-to-side anastomosis was associated with an i

背景:腹腔镜右结肠切除术术后并发症的可能性备受关注:腹腔镜右结肠切除术术后并发症的可能性备受关注:评估腹腔镜右结肠切除术患者术后并发症的风险因素:设计:这是一项观察性研究:这是一项前瞻性多中心随机对照试验(RELARC 试验,NCT02619942)的事后分析:主要结果指标:术后并发症的风险因素:采用单变量和多变量逻辑回归分析确定术后并发症的风险因素:在995名患者中,206人(20.7%)出现术后并发症。合并症(p = 0.02,OR:1.544,95% CI:1.077-2.212)和手术时间大于 180 分钟(p = 0.03,OR:1.453,95% CI:1.032-2.044)是术后并发症的独立风险因素。而女性(p = 0.04,OR:0.704,95% CI:0.506-0.980)和体外吻合(p < 0.001,OR:0.251,95% CI:0.166-0.378)则是保护因素。80例(8.0%)患者出现整体手术部位感染,53例(5.3%)患者出现切口SSI,33例(3.3%)患者出现器官/间隙SSI。侧对侧吻合是整体手术部位感染(P < 0.001,OR:1.912,95% CI:1.118-3.268)和器官/间隙手术部位感染(P = 0.005,OR:3.579,95% CI:1.455-8.805)的风险因素。体外吻合术与总体手术部位感染(p < 0.001,OR:0.239,95% CI:0.138-0.413)、器官/空间手术部位感染(p = 0.002,OR:0.296,95% CI:0.136-0.646)和切口手术部位感染(p < 0.001,OR:0.179,95% CI:0.099-0.322)风险降低相关。糖尿病(p = 0.039 OR:2.090,95% CI:1.039-4.205)和转为开放手术(p = 0.013 OR:5.403,95% CI:1.437-20.319)是切口手术部位感染的风险因素:由于是回顾性研究,其主要局限性在于缺乏前瞻性记录和标准化的围手术期管理,如术前优化、肠道准备方案和抗生素方案,这些可能是并发症的混杂因素。所有手术均由经验丰富的外科医生完成,入选患者相对年轻、普遍健康且不肥胖。目前还不清楚这些结果是否适用于全球肥胖人群和其他人群:结论:男性、合并症、手术时间延长和体腔内吻合是腹腔镜右结肠切除术术后并发症的独立风险因素。侧对侧吻合与器官/间隙手术部位感染风险增加有关。体外吻合术可降低整体手术部位感染的发生率。糖尿病和转为开放手术与切口手术部位感染风险增加有关。参见视频摘要。
{"title":"Risk Factors for Postoperative Complications of Laparoscopic Right Colectomy: A Post Hoc Analysis of the RELARC Trial.","authors":"Zhen Sun, Guannan Zhang, Junyang Lu, Bin Wu, Guole Lin, Yi Xiao, Lai Xu","doi":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000003331","DOIUrl":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000003331","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is concern regarding the possibility of postoperative complications for laparoscopic right colectomy.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the risk factors for postoperative complications for patients undergoing laparoscopic right colectomy.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This was an observational study.</p><p><strong>Settings: </strong>This was a post hoc analysis of a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial (RELARC trial, NCT02619942).</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Patients included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis in the RELARC trial were all enrolled in this study.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Risk factors for postoperative complications were identified using univariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 995 patients, 206 (20.7%) had postoperative complications. Comorbidity ( p = 0.02; OR: 1.544; 95% CI, 1.077-2.212) and operative time >180 minutes ( p = 0.03; OR: 1.453; 95% CI, 1.032-2.044) were independent risk factors for postoperative complications, whereas female sex ( p = 0.04; OR: 0.704; 95% CI, 0.506-0.980) and extracorporeal anastomosis ( p < 0.001; OR: 0.251; 95% CI, 0.166-0.378) were protective factors. Eighty patients (8.0%) had overall surgical site infection, 53 (5.3%) had incisional surgical site infection, and 33 (3.3%) had organ/space surgical site infection. Side-to-side anastomosis was a risk factor for overall surgical site infection ( p < 0.001; OR: 1.912; 95% CI, 1.118-3.268) and organ/space surgical site infection ( p = 0.005; OR: 3.579; 95% CI, 1.455-8.805). The extracorporeal anastomosis was associated with a reduced risk of overall surgical site infection ( p < 0.001; OR: 0.239; 95% CI, 0.138-0.413), organ/space surgical site infection ( p = 0.002; OR: 0.296; 95% CI, 0.136-0.646), and incisional surgical site infection ( p < 0.001; OR: 0.179; 95% CI, 0.099-0.322). Diabetes ( p = 0.039; OR: 2.090; 95% CI, 1.039-4.205) and conversion to open surgery ( p = 0.013; OR: 5.403; 95% CI, 1.437-20.319) were risk factors for incisional surgical site infection.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Due to the retrospective nature, the key limitation is the lack of prospective documentation and standardization regarding the perioperative management of these patients, such as preoperative optimization, bowel preparation regimens, and antibiotic regimens, which may be confounder factors of complications. All surgeries were performed by experienced surgeons, and the patients enrolled were relatively young, generally healthy, and without obesity. It is unclear whether the results will be generalizable to obese and other populations worldwide.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Male sex, comorbidity, prolonged operative time, and intracorporeal anastomosis were independent risk factors for postoperative complications of laparoscopic right colectomy. Side-to-side anastomosis was associated with an i","PeriodicalId":11299,"journal":{"name":"Diseases of the Colon & Rectum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11309329/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141075744","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
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
×
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
确定
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