Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Colonic Resection (colonic + resection)
Kinds of Colonic Resection Selected AbstractsDevelopment of colonic stenosis following severe acute pancreatitisHPB, Issue 3 2003F Maisonnette Background Colonic necrosis after acute pancreatitis is rare. When it does occur, it is commonly due to ischaemia or inflammation and may necessitate early colonic resection. Case outline A 72-year-old man developed colonic necrosis 6 weeks after severe acute pancreatitis. CT scan revealed a bulky mass near the left colon. Barium enema and colonoscopy revealed stenosis of the left colonic flexure, and this segment of bowel was successfully resected. Discussion Severe acute pancreatitis must be recognised as a cause of colonic ischaemia and necrosis. The possible pathogenic mechanisms include severe local inflammation and an ischaemic process. This complication is associated with a very poor prognosis despite surgical intervention, but a timely resection may prevent further problems. [source] Predictive value and clinical significance of myenteric plexitis in Crohn's diseaseINFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASES, Issue 10 2009Siew C. Ng MD Abstract Background: Recurrence of Crohn's disease (CD) after ileal or colonic resection is common. Myenteric plexitis in the proximal resection margin of an ileocolonic CD resection specimen may indicate ongoing pathology that relates to disease recurrence. We assessed risk factors for myenteric plexitis, the effect of plexitis on clinical recurrence, and whether preoperative medical therapies affect the intensity of plexitis. Methods: Ileocolonic resection specimens from 99 patients with CD were histologically scored for the presence and severity of plexitis. Myenteric plexitis was correlated with immunosuppressive therapy before index surgery. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify predictive factors for plexitis. Results: Myenteric plexitis was present in 43% and 85% of cases in the proximal resection margin and the affected resected segments of CD, respectively. Patients with a previous resection were more likely to have plexitis than those with no previous resection (odds ratio [OR] 3.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21,10.15, P = 0.02), and those with a greater duration of disease were less likely to have plexitis in the proximal resection margin (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.48,0.96, P = 0.03). Preoperative immunosuppressive therapy was not associated with a lesser incidence of plexitis. Twelve of 40 (30%) patients with plexitis and 9 of 54 (16%) patients without plexitis in the proximal resection margin subsequently developed clinical recurrence (median 10 months; P = 0.17). Conclusions: Previous resections and shorter disease duration are associated with plexitis in proximal resection margin of CD. The prognostic value of plexitis in postoperative disease recurrence and risk stratification remain to be prospectively established. (Inflamm Bowel Dis 2009) [source] Improving outcomes for operable pancreatic cancer: Is access to safer surgery the problem?JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, Issue 7pt1 2008David K Chang Abstract Despite advances in the understanding and treatment of pancreatic cancer in the last two decades, there is a persisting nihilistic attitude among clinicians. An alarmingly high rate of under-utilization of surgical management for operable pancreatic cancer was recently reported in the USA, where more than half of patients with stage 1 operable disease and no other contraindications were not offered surgery as therapy, denying this group of patients a 20% chance of long-term survival. These data indicate that a nihilistic attitude among clinicians may be a significant and reversible cause of the persisting high mortality of patients with pancreatic cancer. This article examines the modern management of pancreatic cancer, in particular, the advances in surgical care that have reduced the mortality of pancreatectomy to almost that of colonic resection, and outlines a strategy for improving outcomes for patients with pancreatic cancer now and in the future. [source] MR colonography for the assessment of colonic anastomosesJOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, Issue 1 2006Waleed Ajaj MD Abstract Purpose To assess colonic anastomoses in patients after surgical treatment by means of MR colonography (MRC) in comparison with conventional colonoscopy (CC). Materials and Methods A total of 39 patients who had previously undergone colonic resection and end-to-end-anastomosis were included in the study. MRI was based on a dark-lumen approach. Contrast-enhanced T1-weighted (T1w) three-dimensional (3D) images were collected following the rectal administration of water for colonic distension. The MRC data were evaluated by two radiologists. The criteria employed to evaluate the anastomoses included bowel wall thickening and increased contrast uptake in this region. Furthermore, all other colonic segments were assessed for the presence of pathologies. Results In 23 and 20 patients the anastomosis was rated to be normal by MRC and CC, respectively. In three patients CC revealed a slight inflammation of the anastomosis that was missed by MRI. A moderate stenosis of the anastomosis without inflammation was detected by MRC in five patients, which was confirmed by CC. In the remaining 11 patients a relevant pathology of the anastomosis was diagnosed by both MRC and CC. Recurrent tumor was diagnosed in two patients with a history of colorectal carcinoma. In the other nine patients inflammation of the anastomosis was seen in seven with Crohn's disease (CD) and two with ulcerative colitis. MRC did not yield any false-positive findings, resulting in an overall sensitivity/specificity for the assessment of the anastomosis of 84%/100%. Conclusion MRC represents a promising alternative to CC for the assessment of colonic anastomoses in patients with previous colonic resection. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2006. © 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [source] Single-port laparoscopic right colonic resectionANZ JOURNAL OF SURGERY, Issue 1-2 2010Anil Keshava Abstract Background:, The laparoscopic approach is a recognized treatment option for colonic resection. We present the first single-port operation for colonic resection using standard laparoscopic equipment and techniques. Methods:, A single-port laparoscopic right colonic resection was successfully performed using GelPort (Applied Medical, Orange County, CA, USA) and a standard laparoscopic approach. Results:, The procedure was completed in 105 min through a single periumbilical incision. There was minimal blood loss and no post-operative problems. Conclusion:, Single-port laparoscopic techniques can be applied to colonic surgery. It negates morbidity associated with trochar insertion and port sites. It should be performed by surgeons familiar with laparoscopic colorectal techniques. [source] Clinical outcomes of laparoscopic colonic resection for diverticular disease in Japanese patientsASIAN JOURNAL OF ENDOSCOPIC SURGERY, Issue 3 2010T Akagi Abstract Introduction: Indications for laparoscopic surgery for colonic diverticular disease have not been established in Japan despite this being a relatively common disease. We studied surgical outcomes of laparoscopic colon resection (LCR) versus open colon resection (OCR) for diverticular disease. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed surgical outcomes of 21 patients with colonic diverticulitis. Results: Of these 21 patients, 11 underwent OCR, and 10 underwent LCR. There were no differences in age, sex, and BMI between the groups. Diverticulitis in the LCR group, compared to the OCR group, was characterized as being of the uncomplicated type with a right-side location (P<0.01). Volume of blood loss and duration of postoperative hospital stay were less in the LCR group than in the OCR group (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in operative times, duration to start of solid food intake, and rate of postoperative complications. Conclusion: These results suggest that LCR for diverticulitis can be performed safely and less invasively without increased morbidity for uncomplicated diverticulitis. Further studies will be needed to determine the benefits of LCR for complicated diverticulitis. [source] Tumor recurrence at a stapled-anastomosis after radical laparoscopic surgery for descending colon cancer treated successfully by laparoscopic colectomy: A case reportASIAN JOURNAL OF ENDOSCOPIC SURGERY, Issue 2 2010LQ Nhan Abstract Anastomosis using linear staplers following colonic resection has been increasingly used due to its convenience and technical safety. However, there have been few reports of stapled-anastomotic recurrence after curative resection for colon cancer. Here, we report a rare case of suture-line recurrence after functional end-to-end anastomosis. A 78-year-old woman underwent radical laparoscopic colectomy for advanced descending colon cancer. A postoperative 1 year follow-up colonoscopy revealed that suture-line recurrence had occurred. After the detection of early stage recurrent cancer, the patient underwent laparoscopic partial colectomy. This rare case of suture-line recurrence in functional end-to-end anastomosis possibly occurred due to tumor implantation after curative laparoscopic surgery for advanced descending colon cancer. The follow-up colonoscopy was helpful in diagnosing the anastomotic recurrence in its early stages. In addition, laparoscopic surgery for primary colon cancer led to successful laparoscopic treatment for recurrent cancer as a result of reduced bowel adhesion. [source] Australasian Laparoscopic Colon Cancer Study shows that elderly patients may benefit from lower postoperative complication rates following laparoscopic versus open resection,BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY (NOW INCLUDES EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY), Issue 1 2010R. A. Allardyce Background: A retrospective analysis of age-related postoperative morbidity in the Australia and New Zealand prospective randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic and open resection for right- and left-sided colonic cancer is presented. Methods: A total of 592 eligible patients were entered and studied from 1998 to 2005. Results: Data from 294 patients who underwent laparoscopic and 298 who had open colonic resection were analysed; 266 patients were aged less than 70 years and 326 were 70 years or older (mean(s.d.) 70·3(11·0) years). Forty-three laparoscopic operations (14·6 per cent) were converted to an open procedure. Fewer complications were reported for intention-to-treat laparoscopic resections compared with open procedures (P = 0·002), owing primarily to a lower rate in patients aged 70 years or more (P = 0·002). Fewer patients in the laparoscopic group experienced any complication (P = 0·035), especially patients aged 70 years or above (P = 0·019). Conclusion: Treatment choices for colonic cancer depend principally upon disease-free survival; however, patients aged 70 years or over should have rigorous preoperative investigation to avoid conversion and should be considered for laparoscopic colonic resection. Registration number: NCT00202111 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov). Copyright © 2009 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Multicentre randomized clinical trial of mechanical bowel preparation in elective colonic resection (Br J Surg 2007; 94: 689,695)BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY (NOW INCLUDES EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY), Issue 10 2007E. J. Noble The Editors welcome topical correspondence from readers relating to articles published in the Journal. Responses should be sent electronically via the BJS website (www.bjs.co.uk). All letters will be reviewed and,if approved,appear on the website. A selection of these will be edited and published in the Journal. Letters must be no more than 250 words in length. Copyright © 2007 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Letter: Randomized clinical trial of multimodal optimization of surgical care in patients undergoing major colonic resection (Br J Surg 2005; 92: 1354-1362)BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY (NOW INCLUDES EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY), Issue 7 2006G. Tornero-Campello No abstract is available for this article. [source] Authors' reply: Randomized clinical trial of multimodal optimization of surgical care in patients undergoing major colonic resection (Br J Surg 2005; 92: 1354-1362)BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY (NOW INCLUDES EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY), Issue 7 2006M. Gatt No abstract is available for this article. [source] Mechanical bowel preparation and antibiotic prophylaxis in colorectal surgery: use by and opinions of Spanish surgeonsCOLORECTAL DISEASE, Issue 1 2009J. V. Roig Abstract Objective, Antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) and mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) previous to surgery have classically been regarded as important in colorectal surgery. The latter has recently been questioned. We evaluated opinion of Spanish surgeons about the use of these measures. Method, E-mail survey among all members of Spanish Coloproctologic Associations. Results, Of 413 participants in the survey, 131 (31.7%) responded; 87% of surgeons used cathartics (70%), enemas (2%) or both (28%) for MBP. MBP was used 60% in right colon surgery, 90% in left colon and 99% in rectal surgery. Surgeons with more case load or those who specialized in colorectal surgery used significantly less MBP; 60% of the surgeons thought that MBP made surgery easier and reduced contamination; 35% thought that it decreased wound infection (WI) and 17% thought that it prevented anastomotic leaks. For 77%, it was regarded as useful or very useful. AP was used by 99.3% of surgeons including systemic alone in 86.2% and combined with oral in 16.8%. The first dose was given 2 h before surgery by 20.2% of the surgeons, at the anaesthetic induction by 78.3% and postoperatively by 1.5%; 43% used single dose only, 44.5% extended to 24 h and 12.5% for two or more days; 95% thought that AP reduced WI and 96% considered that it was useful. Conclusion, There is general agreement on AP. MBP remained a common practice among Spanish colorectal surgeons except for right colonic resection. Surgeons with more case load and specialization used it significantly less. [source] Laparoscopic colonic resection in inflammatory bowel disease: minimal surgery, minimal access and minimal hospital stayCOLORECTAL DISEASE, Issue 9 2008E. Boyle Abstract Objective, Laparoscopic surgery for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is technically demanding but can offer improved short-term outcomes. The introduction of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) as the default operative approach for IBD, however, may have inherent learning curve-associated disadvantages. We hypothesise that the establishment of MIS as the standard operative approach does not increase patient morbidity as assessed in the initial period of its introduction into a specialised unit, and that it confers earlier postoperative gastrointestinal recovery and reduced hospitalisation compared with conventional open resection. Method, A case,control study was undertaken on laparoscopic resection (LR) vs open colon resection (OR) for IBD. The LR group was collated prospectively and compared with a pathologically matched historical control set. Outcomes measured included: postoperative length of stay, time to normal bowel function and postoperative morbidity. Statistical analysis was performed using spss. Results, Twenty-eight patients were investigated (14 LR, 14 OR). The two groups were matched for type of operation, type of disease and age. There were no conversions in the LR group. Morbidity and readmissions did not differ significantly between the groups. Those undergoing laparoscopic resection had a quicker return to diet (median 2 vs 4 days; P = 0.000002), time to first bowel motion (2 vs 4 days; P = 0.019) and shorter postoperative length of stay (5.5 vs 12.5; P = 0.0067). Conclusion, These findings support the routine use of MIS for the elective surgical management of IBD in our department. Patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomies for IBD can expect faster return of gastrointestinal function and shorter hospitalisation. [source] Convalescence after colonic surgery with fast-track vs conventional careCOLORECTAL DISEASE, Issue 8 2006D. H. Jakobsen Abstract Objective, To compare convalescence after colonic surgery with a fast-track rehabilitation programme vs conventional care. Background, Introduction of a multimodal rehabilitation programme (fast-track) with focus on epidural anaesthesia, minimal invasive surgical techniques, optimal pain control, and early nutrition and mobilization together with detailed patient information have led to a shorter hospital stay after colonic surgery. There are not much data on convalescence after discharge. Methods, A prospective, controlled, non-randomized interview-based assessment in 160 patients undergoing an elective, uncomplicated, open colonic resection or the Hartmann reversal procedure with a fast-track or a conventional care programme in two university hospitals. A structured interview-based assessment was performed preoperatively, and day 14 and 30 postoperatively. Results, Patients undergoing colonic surgery with a fast-track programme regained functional capabilities earlier with less fatigue and need for sleep compared with patients having conventional care. Despite early discharge of the fast-track patients (mean 3.4 days vs 7.5 days), no differences were found according to the need for home care, social care and visit to general practitioners, although the fast-track group had an increased number of visits at the outpatient clinic for wound care. More patients in the fast-track group were re-admitted, but the overall mean total hospital stay was 4.2 days vs 8.3 days in the conventional group. Conclusion, A fast-track rehabillitation programme led to a shorter hospital stay, less fatigue and earlier resumption of normal activities, without the increased need for support after discharge compared with conventionally treated patients after uncomplicated colonic resection. [source] The influence of an Enhanced Recovery Programme on clinical outcomes, costs and quality of life after surgery for colorectal cancerCOLORECTAL DISEASE, Issue 6 2006P. M. King Objective, Optimizing peri-operative care using an enhanced recovery programme improves short-term outcomes following colonic resection. This study compared a prospective group of patients undergoing resection of colorectal cancer within an enhanced recovery programme, with a prospectively studied historic cohort receiving conventional care. Patients and methods, Sixty patients underwent elective resection within an enhanced recovery programme (ERP). This incorporated pre-operative counselling, epidural analgesia, early feeding and mobilization. Clinical outcomes were compared with 86 prospectively studied historic control patients receiving conventional care (CC). All patients completed EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-CR38 and health economics questionnaires up to three months after surgery. Results, Baseline clinical data were similar in both groups. Postoperative hospital stay was significantly reduced in the ERP, with patients staying 49% as long as those in the CC group including convalescent hospital stay (95% CI 39% to 61%P < 0.001). There were no differences in the number of complications, readmissions or re-operations. There were no significant differences in quality of life or health economic outcomes. Conclusion, Patients undergoing colorectal resection within an ERP stay in hospital half as long as those receiving conventional care, with no increased morbidity, deterioration in quality of life or increased cost. [source] Laparoscopic colonic surgery , mission accomplished or work in progress?COLORECTAL DISEASE, Issue 6 2006H. Kehlet Abstract Laparoscopic colonic resection may facilitate early postoperative recovery due to reduced surgical stress, pain and ileus. However, large randomised studies have only shown marginal improvements in outcome compared with open surgery, reporting a median hospital stay of about 5,7 days. Concomitant with these developments multimodal rehabilitation, which involves a revision of general postoperative care principles, improved pain relief with epidural analgesia and early oral nutrition and mobilization, has demonstrated greater improvements in recovery after open surgery, resulting in a median hospital stay of about 2,4 days. Recent single centre, randomised studies where laparoscopic and open colonic resection are combined with multimodal rehabilitation have not resolved the debate regarding which is the optimal operative technique. Therefore, new strategies are required to integrate laparoscopy with multimodal rehabilitation in order to establish its advantages, cost effectiveness and indications in specific groups of patients or colorectal procedures, thus justifying widespread application of the laparoscopic technique. [source] Patterns in current anaesthesiological peri-operative practice for colonic resections: a survey in five northern-European countriesACTA ANAESTHESIOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, Issue 9 2006P. Hannemann Background:, For colorectal surgery, evidence suggests that optimal management includes: no pre-operative fasting, a thoracic epidural analgesia continued for 2 days post-operatively, and avoidance of fluid overload. In addition, no long-acting benzodiazepines on the day of surgery and use of short-acting anaesthetic medication may be beneficial. We examined whether these strategies have been adopted in five northern-European countries. Methods:, In 2003, a questionnaire concerning peri-operative anaesthetic routines in elective, open colonic cancer resection was sent to the chief anaesthesiologist in 258 digestive surgical centres in Scotland, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden and Norway. Results:, The response rate was 74% (n = 191). Although periods of pre-operative fasting up to 48 h were reported, most (> 85%) responders in all countries declared to adhere to guidelines for pre-operative fasting and oral clear liquids were permitted until 2,3 h before anaesthesia. Solid food was permitted up to 6,8 h prior to anaesthesia. In all countries more than 85% of the responders indicated that epidural anaesthesia was routinely used. Except for Denmark, long-acting benzodiazepines were still widely used. Short-acting anaesthetics were used in all countries except Scotland where isoflurane is the anaesthetic of choice. With the exception of Denmark, intravenous fluids were used unrestrictedly. Conclusion:, In northern Europe, most anaesthesiologists adhere to evidence-based optimal management strategies on pre-operative fasting, thoracic epidurals and short-acting anaesthetics. However, premedication with longer-acting agents is still common. Avoidance of fluid overload has not yet found its way into daily practice. This may leave patients undergoing elective colonic surgery at risk of oversedation and excessive fluid administration with potential adverse effects on surgical outcome. [source] Surgical management of colorectal cancer in south-western Sydney 1997,2001: a prospective series of 1293 unselected cases from six public hospitalsANZ JOURNAL OF SURGERY, Issue 9 2005S. K. Cyril Wong Background: The aim of the present study is to provide local data for the management of colorectal cancers in the south-western Sydney health area from 1997 to 2001. Methods: The data were collected prospectively. Follow up was conducted in late 2001 and early 2002. Data were cross-validated with hospital and area databases and with data from the New South Wales Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages. Results: This was an unselected series of 1293 patients from 36 surgeons; 16.5% of patients presented as emergencies. Only 3% presented as a result of bowel cancer screening. Of the 1293 patients, 1270 received an operation. There were 598 elective colonic resections with the mortality rate of 1.2%, reoperation rate of 2.7% and anastomotic leak rate of 0.8%. For the 410 elective rectal resections, the rates were 2.9%, 2.7% and 1.2%, respectively. For the 290 emergency operations, the rates were much worse at 7.7%, 6.6% and 4.8%, respectively. The corrected overall 3-year survival rate was 64%. For Dukes' A, B, C and D, the figures were 94%, 87%, 61% and 7%, respectively. Conclusions: Colorectal cancer is a major cause of mortality and morbidity in our community. Very few bowel cancers were discovered at the asymptomatic stage. This paper strongly supports community bowel cancer screening and early diagnosis. The local database has provided a rich source of information to benchmark management and outcomes of bowel cancer patients treated in the South Western Sydney Area Health Service. An area-wide computer network with online data input facilities at individual workplaces will improve data integrity and data collection efficiency. [source] Natural orifice surgery: applications in colonic surgeryASIAN JOURNAL OF ENDOSCOPIC SURGERY, Issue 2 2010J. Leroy Abstract Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic abdominal surgery, or NOTES, allows invasive operations to be performed through a single or multiple natural-orifice approach either in isolation ("pure") or in combination with a transparietal ("hybrid") access format. Therefore, to facilitate a colonic or rectal resection, the transgastric, transrectal or transcolonic routes, as well as the transvaginal route in women, can all be used either alone or in combination. We are now performing resectional colonic techniques on our patients that have been inspired by this revolutionary concept, carefully planned with storyboarding and validated in porcine models with survival analysis. Adaptation of existing equipment along with the use of new instruments and some simple ideas, such as magnetic fields to retract and mobilize the colon, have allowed us to simplify and standardize the operative technique (the first steps to ensuring procedural reproducibility). Initial potential applications can easily be imagined for partial colonic resections for voluminous benign polyps and for small early cancers, but these applications may extend to incorporate inflammatory bowel diseases such as diverticular disease of the sigmoid colon. For these techniques to further improve and the concept to become a concrete reality, a change in current surgical practice is required, and conventional laparoscopic techniques must be understood to represent a point along the evolutional development of surgery and not considered the final destination. However, as important as technical capacity is, due consideration and assurance of oncological and immunological propriety is essential, as is the issue of clarifying precise patient harm:benefit risk ratios. [source] Laparoscopic surgery impairs tissue oxygen tension more than open surgeryBRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY (NOW INCLUDES EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY), Issue 3 2007E. Fleischmann Background: Wound infection remains a common and serious complication after colonic surgery. Although many colonic operations are performed laparoscopically, it remains unclear whether this has any impact on the incidence of wound infection. Subcutaneous tissue oxygenation is an excellent predictor of surgical wound infection. The impact of open and laparoscopic colonic surgery on tissue oxygenation was compared. Methods: Fifty-two patients undergoing elective open and laparoscopic left-sided colonic resections were evaluated in a prospective observational study. Anaesthesia management was standardized and intraoperative arterial partial pressure of oxygen was kept at 150 mmHg in both groups. Oxygen tension was measured in the subcutaneous tissue of the right upper arm. Results: At the start of surgery subcutaneous tissue oxygen tension (PsqO2) was similar in both groups (mean(s.d.) 65·8(17·2) and 63·7(23·6) mmHg for open and laparoscopic operations respectively; P = 0·714). Tissue oxygen remained stable in the open group, but dropped significantly in the laparoscopic group during the course of surgery (PsqO2 after operation 53·4(12·9) and 45·5(11·6) mmHg, respectively; P = 0·012). Conclusion: Laparoscopic colonic surgery significantly decreases PsqO2, an effect that occurs early in the course of surgery. As tissue oxygen tension is a predictor of wound infection, these results may explain why the risk of wound infection after laparoscopic surgery remains higher than expected. Copyright © 2006 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] | ||||||||||