Techniques in Coloproctology最新文献

Introduction: Despite advantages for patients with ulcerative colitis, Crohn's disease, and familial adenomatous polyposis, restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis carries a risk of pouch failure, necessitating pouch excision. The traditional open approach is associated with potential complications. Robotic and laparoscopic techniques are emerging, but comparative outcome data are limited.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of consecutive adult patients undergoing robotic, laparoscopic, and open ileal pouch excision at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, between January 2015 and December 2023. We analyzed data on patient characteristics, perioperative variables, and postoperative outcomes, focusing on short-term complications. Statistical analysis included appropriate tests.

Results: The study included 123 patients: 23 underwent robotic-assisted pouch excision, 12 laparoscopic, and 82 open. The robotic approach had the longest median operative time (334 ± 170 min, p = 0.03). However, it demonstrated significantly lower estimated blood loss than open (150 ± 200 ml vs. 350 ± 300 ml, p = 0.002) and laparoscopic surgery (250 ± 250 ml, p = 0.005). Robotic and laparoscopic groups required fewer preoperative ureteral stents than the open group (p = 0.001). Additionally, the robotic approach utilized fewer pelvic drainages (p < 0.0001) and had a lower rate of lysis of adhesions > 60 min compared to open surgery (p = 0.003). Robotic procedures had significantly lower 30-day postoperative complications than the open approach (30.4% vs. 65.9%, p = 0.002) while also demonstrating fewer 30-day reoperations than the laparoscopic group (p = 0.04).

Conclusions: Robotic-assisted pouch excision offered significant benefits, including decreased EBL, reduced need for preoperative ureteral stents, and significantly fewer 30-day postoperative complications compared to open surgery.

Background: Pelvic floor rehabilitation is common in patients with colorectal cancer, the purpose of this study is to analyze the role of pelvic floor rehabilitation in patients with colorectal cancer and to understand the specific details of pelvic floor rehabilitation intervention in patients with colorectal cancer.

Methods: Six databases were searched for this scoping review and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews.

Results: A total of 1014 studies were searched, and 12 studies were finally included for analysis. The study found that pelvic floor rehabilitation for colorectal cancer patients can help improve bowel symptoms, quality of life, and psychological status of colorectal cancer patients after surgery, but details of the interventions for pelvic floor rehabilitation for colorectal cancer patients are not standardized.

Conclusions: Pelvic floor rehabilitation has shown positive significance in patients with colorectal cancer, but there is a lack of uniform standards in the process of pelvic floor rehabilitation intervention in patients with colorectal cancer.

Introduction: Anal fissure (AF) poses a common challenge in clinical practice, prompting various treatment approaches. This multicenter study, conducted by the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery, aimed to assess treatment trends in AF over a 10 year period.

Methods: A survey of proctologists and retrospective analysis of patient records were conducted to evaluate treatment modalities and outcomes across six different clinical scenarios based on AF presentation (acute/chronic) stratified by sphincter function (normal/hypertonic/hypotonic).

Results: Analysis of data from 17 principal investigators and 22,016 patients revealed significant variability in treatment approaches, influenced by factors such as symptom duration, anal tone, and surgeon preference. Conservative treatments were commonly utilized, while surgical interventions were reserved for refractory cases. Specifically, pharmaceutical treatment was administered to 66-75% of patients in cases of acute AF and 63-67% for chronic AF, while 10-15% underwent anal dilation, and < 2% received botulinum toxin injection. Among medical treatments, nifedipine with lidocaine and glycerin film-forming ointments were the most utilized. The most performed surgical techniques were fissurectomy and anoplasty, except for patients with chronic AF and hypertonic sphincter where sphincterotomy prevailed. Trends in treatment utilization varied depending on the clinical scenario, with notable shifts observed over time.

Conclusions: This study provides insights into the evolving landscape of AF management, highlighting the need for further research to elucidate optimal treatment strategies and improve patient outcomes.

Background: Iatrogenic urinary injury (IUI) can lead to significant complications after colorectal surgery, especially when diagnosis is delayed. This study analyzes risk factors associated with IUI and delayed IUI among patients undergoing colorectal procedures.

Methods: Adults undergoing colorectal surgery between 2012 and 2021 were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP^®) database. Multivariable regression analysis was used to determine risk factors and outcomes associated with IUI and delayed IUI.

Results: Among 566,036 patients, 5836 patients (1.0%) had IUI after colorectal surgery, of whom 236 (4.0%) had delayed IUI. Multiple preoperative risk factors for IUI and delayed IUI were identified, with disseminated cancer [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2-1.5; p < 0.001] and diverticular disease [aOR 1.1, 95% CI 1.0-1.2; p = 0.009] correlated with IUI and increased body mass index [aOR 1.6, 95% CI 1.2-2.1; p = 0.003] and ascites [aOR 5.6, 95% CI 2.1-15.4; p = 0.001] associated with delayed IUI. Laparoscopic approach was associated with decreased risk of IUI [aOR 0.4, 95% CI 0.4-0.5; p < 0.001] and increased risk of delayed IUI [aOR 1.8, 95% CI 1.4-2.5; p < 0.001]. Both IUI and delayed IUI were associated with significant postoperative morbidity, with severe multiorgan complications seen in delayed IUI.

Conclusions: While IUI occurs infrequently in colorectal surgery, unrecognized injuries can complicate repair and cause other negative postoperative outcomes. Patients with complex intra-abdominal pathology are at increased risk of IUI, and patients with large body habitus undergoing laparoscopic procedures are at increased risk of delayed IUI.

Background: Postoperative rectovaginal fistula leads to a loss of patients' quality of life and presents significant challenges to the surgeon. The literature focusing specifically on postoperative rectovaginal fistulas is limited. The objective of the present study is to identify factors that can enhance the success of the management of this postoperative rectovaginal fistula.

Methods: This retrospective multicentric study included all patients undergoing surgery for rectovaginal fistulas, excluding those for whom the etiology of rectovaginal fistula was not postoperative. The major outcome measure was the success of the procedure.

Results: A total of 82 patients with postsurgical fistulas were identified, of whom 70 were successfully treated, giving a success rate of 85.4%. On average, these patients required 3.04 ± 2.72 interventions. The creation of a diversion stoma did not increase the success rate of management [odds ratio (OR) = 0.488; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.107-2.220]. Among the 217 procedures performed, 69 were successful, accounting for a 31.8% success rate. The number of interventions and the creation of a diversion stoma did not correlate with the success of management. However, direct coloanal anastomosis was significantly associated with success (OR = 35.06; 95% CI 1.271-997.603; p = 0.036) as compared with endorectal advancement flap (ERAF). Other procedures such as Martius flap did not show a significantly higher success rate.

Conclusion: The creation of a diversion stoma is not necessary in closing a fistula. ERAF should be considered as a first-line treatment prior to proposing more invasive approach such as direct coloanal anastomosis.

Background: Diverticulitis is experiencing a significant increase in prevalence and its widespread in-hospital management results in a high burden on healthcare systems worldwide. This study compared inpatient and outpatient approach of acute non-complicated diverticulitis using a non-selected population in a real-world setting.

Methods: This observational retrospective study included all consecutive patients from two Portuguese institutions diagnosed between January 2017 and December 2021 with non-complicated diverticulitis according to the modified Hinchey Classification. The primary endpoints were to identify criteria for inpatient treatment and compare the outcomes on the basis of the treatment regimen. The secondary endpoints were to determine the predictive factors for clinical outcomes, focusing on treatment failure, pain recurrence, and the need for elective surgery following the initial episode.

Results: A total of 688 patients were included in this study, 437 treated as outpatients and 251 hospitalized. Inpatient management was significantly associated with higher preadmission American society of anesthesiologists (ASA) score (p = 0.004), fever (p = 0.030), leukocytosis (p < 0.001), and elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) (p < 0.001). No significant association was found between failure of conservative treatment and patient's age, ASA score, baseline CRP, presence of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), and inpatient or outpatient treatment regimen. Pain recurrence was significantly associated with higher CRP levels (p = 0.049), inpatient treatment regime (p = 0.009) and post index episode mesalazine prescription (p = 0.006). Moreover, the need for elective surgery was significantly associated with the presence of previous episodes (p = 0.004) and pain recurrence (p < 0.001).

Conclusions: The majority of patients with uncomplicated diverticulitis of the left colon experience successful conservative approach and can be safely managed in an ambulatory setting. Neither treatment failure, recurrence of pain, or need for posterior elective surgery are associated with outpatient treatment regimen.

Background: A significant number of patients experience complications of the Kock pouch (KP) warranting revision or excision. This systematic review aimed to assess the pooled prevalence and risk factors for complications and failure of the KP.

Methods: This Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA)-compliant systematic review (CRD42023416961) searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for studies on adult patients with Kock continent ileostomy published after the year 2000. The main outcome measures were revision, complications, and failure of the KP. Risk factors for complications and failure were assessed using a meta-regression analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-1 tool. A proportional meta-analysis of the main outcomes was performed.

Results: A total of 19 studies (2042 patients) were included. The weighted mean prevalence of complications was 60.4% [95% confidence interval (CI): 46.1-74.7%], of pouch revision was 46.6% (95% CI: 38.5-54.7%), and of pouch failure was 12.9% (95% CI: 9.3-16.4%). Studies conducted in the USA had a mean failure prevalence of 12.6% (95% CI: 6.2-18.9%) comparable to studies conducted in Europe (11.1%; 95% CI: 7.5-14.7%). Factors associated with higher complications were increased body mass index (BMI) and previous ileoanal pouch anastomosis (IPAA); however, these factors were not associated with increased pouch failure.

Conclusions: The KP is a highly complex operation as shown by a pooled complication prevalence of 60%, and thus, it should be only performed by experienced surgeons. Despite the high prevalence of complications and need for revisional surgery, patients are keen to preserve their KP. Increased BMI and a previous failed IPAA are risk factors for pouch complications, but not failure.

Background: Very low-energy diets (VLEDs) prescribed prior to bariatric surgery have been associated with decreased operative time, technical difficulty, and postoperative morbidity. To date, limited data are available regarding the impact of VLEDs prior to colorectal surgery. We designed this study to determine whether preoperative VLEDs benefit patients with obesity undergoing colorectal surgery.

Methods: This is a single-center retrospective cohort study. Individuals undergoing elective colorectal surgery with a body mass index (BMI) of greater than 30 kg/m² from 2015 to 2022 were included. The exposure of interest was VLEDs for 2-4 weeks immediately prior to surgery. The control group consisted of patients prior to January 2018 who did not receive preoperative VLED. The primary outcome was 30 day postoperative morbidity. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was used to determine associations with 30 day postoperative morbidity.

Results: Overall, 190 patients were included, 89 patients received VLEDs (median age: 66 years; median BMI: 35.9 kg/m²; 48.3% female) and 101 patients did not receive VLEDs (median age: 68 years; median BMI: 32.1 kg/m²; 44.6% female). One-hundred four (54.7%) patients experienced 30 day postoperative morbidity. Multivariable regression analysis identified three variables associated with postoperative morbidity: VLEDs [odds ratio (OR) 0.22, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.08-0.61, P < 0.01], Charlson comorbidity index (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.03-1.52, P = 0.02), and rectal dissections (OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.30-5.65, P < 0.01).

Conclusions: The use of a preoperative VLED was associated with a significant reduction in postoperative morbidity in patients with obesity prior to colorectal surgery. A high-quality randomized controlled trial is required to confirm these findings.