ABSTRACT
Background/Aims@#Restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and handsewn anastomosis for ulcerative colitis requires pulling down of the ileal pouch into the pelvis, which can be technically challenging. We examined risk factors for the pouch not reaching the anus. @*Methods@#Clinical records of 62 consecutive patients who were scheduled to undergo RPC with handsewn anastomosis at the University of Tokyo Hospital during 1989–2019 were reviewed. Risk factors for non-reaching were analyzed in patients in whom hand sewing was abandoned for stapled anastomosis because of nonreaching. Risk factors for non-reaching in laparoscopic RPC were separately analyzed. Anatomical indicators obtained from presurgical computed tomography (CT) were also evaluated. @*Results@#Thirty-seven of 62 cases underwent laparoscopic procedures. In 6 cases (9.7%), handsewn anastomosis was changed to stapled anastomosis because of non-reaching. Male sex and a laparoscopic approach were independent risk factors of non-reaching. Distance between the terminal of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) ileal branch and the anus > 11 cm was a risk factor for non-reaching. @*Conclusions@#Laparoscopic RPC with handsewn anastomosis may limit extension and induction of the ileal pouch into the anus. Preoperative CT measurement from the terminal SMA to the anus may be useful for predicting non-reaching.
ABSTRACT
Treatment of perianal and vulvar extramammary Paget disease (EMPD), rare intraepithelial malignancies, is often challenging because of its potential to spread into the anal canal. However, there is still no consensus regarding the optimal resection margin within the anal canal. Between 2004 and 2014, six patients (three with perianal EMPD and three with vulvar EMPD) in which the spread of Paget cells into the anal canal was highly suspected were referred to our department. To evaluate the disease extent within the anal canal, preoperative mapping biopsy of the anal canal was performed in five out of six patients. Two patients were positive for Paget cells within the anal canal (one at the dentate line and the other at 0.5 cm above the dentate line), whereas in three patients, Paget cell were present only in the skin of the anal verge. Using 1 cm margin within the anal canal from the positive biopsy sites, we performed anal-preserving wide local excision (WLE), and negative resection margins within the anal canal were confirmed in all five patients. The remaining one patient with perianal EMPD did not undergo mapping biopsy of the anal canal because preoperative colonoscopy revealed that the Paget cells had spread into the lower rectum. Therefore, WLE with abdominoperineal resection was performed. During the median follow-up period of 37.3 months, no local recurrence was observed in all patients. Our small case series suggest the usefulness of mapping biopsy of the anal canal for the treatment of perianal and vulvar EMPD.
Subject(s)
Humans , Anal Canal , Biopsy , Colonoscopy , Consensus , Follow-Up Studies , Paget Disease, Extramammary , Rectum , Recurrence , SkinABSTRACT
Treatment of perianal and vulvar extramammary Paget disease (EMPD), rare intraepithelial malignancies, is often challenging because of its potential to spread into the anal canal. However, there is still no consensus regarding the optimal resection margin within the anal canal. Between 2004 and 2014, six patients (three with perianal EMPD and three with vulvar EMPD) in which the spread of Paget cells into the anal canal was highly suspected were referred to our department. To evaluate the disease extent within the anal canal, preoperative mapping biopsy of the anal canal was performed in five out of six patients. Two patients were positive for Paget cells within the anal canal (one at the dentate line and the other at 0.5 cm above the dentate line), whereas in three patients, Paget cell were present only in the skin of the anal verge. Using 1 cm margin within the anal canal from the positive biopsy sites, we performed anal-preserving wide local excision (WLE), and negative resection margins within the anal canal were confirmed in all five patients. The remaining one patient with perianal EMPD did not undergo mapping biopsy of the anal canal because preoperative colonoscopy revealed that the Paget cells had spread into the lower rectum. Therefore, WLE with abdominoperineal resection was performed. During the median follow-up period of 37.3 months, no local recurrence was observed in all patients. Our small case series suggest the usefulness of mapping biopsy of the anal canal for the treatment of perianal and vulvar EMPD.
Subject(s)
Humans , Anal Canal , Biopsy , Colonoscopy , Consensus , Follow-Up Studies , Paget Disease, Extramammary , Rectum , Recurrence , SkinABSTRACT
A 72-year-old man was referred to our hospital because of lumbago and an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Computed tomography revealed the AAA to be 5cm in diameter with a retroperitoneal hematoma. A diagnosis of chronic contained rupture of an AAA was made, and an operation was performed. At laparotomy, a punched-out defect (10×20mm) that was thought to connect the thrombosed aneurysm to an organized retroperitoneal hematoma was discovered on the right side of the aorta. The aneurysm was replaced with a Y-shaped prosthetic graft. The patient's postoperative course was uneventful. This case of chronic contained rupture of an AAA was distinctly different from cases of acute rupture. Although patients with chronic contained rupture of an AAA are hemodynamically stable, such cases should be assessed and treated as quickly as possible because of the risk of re-rupture.
ABSTRACT
Fifty-three patients who had received aortic valve replacement (AVR) using tilting disc valve prostheses (Lillehei-Kaster valve, Omniscience valve, Omnicarbon valve), underwent replacement of their aortic valve prostheses over the past 13 years. The indications for reoperation were non-structural opening failure in 35 patients, thrombosed valves, including 2 stuck valves in 8, prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) in 7 and perivalvular leakage (PVL) in 3. The interval periods until reoperation for opening failure and thrombosed valve were 112 and 118 months respectively, and for PVE and PVL were 21 and 25 months. There were 7 hospital deaths (13.2%). Surgical results in cases of active PVE with root abscess and stuck valve required emergency operation were significantly worse than these for nonstructural opening failure. Opening failures, which accounted for two-thirds of the indications for reoperation was found to be due to subvalvular pannus formation on minor orifices which hindered the disc from opening properly. It was suggested that reoperation for these types of prosthetic valve should be done before they develop into emergency cases, taking account of these valve-related complications.