Trephine Transverse Colostomy Is Effective for Patients Who Have Previously Undergone Rectal Surgery

PURPOSE: Colostomy creation is an essential procedure for colorectal surgeons, but the preferred method of colostomy varies by surgeon. We compared the outcomes of trephine colostomy creation with open those for the (laparotomy) and laparoscopic methods and evaluated appropriate indications for a trephine colostomy and the advantages of the technique. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 263 patients who had undergone colostomy creation by trephine, open and laparoscopic approaches between April 2006 and March 2016. We compared the clinical features and the operative and postoperative outcomes according to the approach used for stoma creation. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-three patients (62%) underwent colostomy surgery for obstructive causes and 100 (38%) for fistulous problems. The mean operative time was significantly shorter with the trephine approach (trephine, 46.0 ± 1.9 minutes; open, 78.7 ± 3.9 minutes; laparoscopic, 63.5 ± 5.0 minutes; P < 0.001), as was the time to flatus (1.8 ± 0.1 days, 2.1 ± 0.1 days, 2.2 ± 0.3 days, P = 0.025). Postoperative complications (<30 days) were not different among the 3 approaches (trephine, 4.3%; open, 1.2%; laparoscopic, 0%; P = 0.828). In patients who underwent rectal surgery, a trephine colostomy was feasible for a diversion colostomy (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The trephine colostomy is safe and can be implemented quickly in various situations, and compared to other colostomy procedures, the patient's recovery is faster. Previous laparotomy history was not a contraindication for a trephine colostomy, and a trephine transverse colostomy is feasible for patients who have undergone previous rectal surgery.

A Case of Rectal Cancer in a Patient with Neurofibromatosis Type 1

A rectal cancer was found in a 67-year-old man with a history of neurofibromatosis type 1. A low anterior resection was performed, and he received concurrent chemoradiation for 6 months. Twelve months after the surgery, a tumor was found at the anastomotic site by positron emission tomography-computed tomography and colonoscopy and was mistaken as anastomotic site recurrence. The tumor was confirmed as an inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor through transanal excision.

Bezoar-induced Small Bowel Obstruction

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to observe the clinical features of a bezoar-induced small bowel obstruction and to investigate the role of abdominal computed tomography (CT) in establishing the diagnosis. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 20 cases of bezoar-induced small bowel obstruction in our hospital from 1996 to 2010. RESULTS: Thirteen patients (65%) had a history of abdominal surgery. Nine patients (45%) were diagnosed with a bezoar before surgery, seven patients were diagnosed by using abdominal CT, and two patients were diagnosed with a small bowel series. Abdominal CT was performed in 15 patients, and the diagnostic accuracy was 47% (7/15). Surgery revealed ten bezoars in the jejunum and 11 in the ileum. Two patients had bezoars found concurrently in the stomach. Spontaneous removal took place in two patients. An enterotomy and bezoar extraction was performed in 15 patients. Fragmentation and milking, a small bowel resection, and a Meckel's diverticulectomy were performed in one patient each. Early operative treatment was possible (P = 0.036) once the bezoar had been diagnosed by using abdominal CT. There tended to be fewer postoperative complications in patients who were diagnosed with a bezoar by using abdominal CT, but the result was not statistically significant (P = 0.712). CONCLUSION: A preoperative diagnosis of bezoar-induced small bowel obstruction by using clinical features was difficult. Increased use of abdominal CT led to a more accurate diagnosis and to earlier surgery for bezoar-induced small bowel obstructions, thereby reducing the rate of complications.