Long-term results from modified sphincteroplasty in patients with traumatic sphincter injury: a retrospective study

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: The results from sphincteroplasty may worsen over time. Reseparation of the rectum and vagina/scrotum in conjunction with sphincteroplasty achieves good results. Improving the surgical effect of sphincteroplasty through perineal body reconstruction is crucial. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term results from anterior sphincteroplasty and perineal body reconstruction (modified sphincteroplasty) among patients with traumatic sphincter injury. DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective study among patients who underwent modified sphincteroplasty in a university hospital between January 2006 and December 2018. Fifty patients were evaluated in detail. METHODS: The following variables were evaluated: gender, age, additional disease status, time interval between trauma and surgery, surgical technique, duration of hospitalization, follow-up period after surgery, manometric values, electromyography results, magnetic resonance imaging scans, Wexner scores, satisfaction levels with surgery and surgical outcomes. RESULTS: The patients' mean age was 44.6 ± 15.1 years. The median follow-up period was 62 months (range, 12-118). The mean Wexner scores preoperatively, postoperatively in first month (M1S) and at the time of this report (AAS) were 15.5 ± 3.2, 1.9 ± 3.15 and 3.9 ± 5.3, respectively. Although improvements in the patients' mean Wexner scores became impaired over time, the postoperative Wexner scores were still significantly better than the preoperative Wexner scores (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Good or excellent results were obtained surgically among patients with traumatic sphincter injury. Performing perineal body reconstruction in addition to sphincteroplasty can provide better long-term continence. Surgical outcomes were found to be better, especially among patients younger than 50 years of age and among patients who underwent surgery within the first five years after trauma.

Comparison of standard 4-row versus 6-row3-D linear cutter stapler in creation of gastrointestinal system anastomoses: a prospective randomized trial

OBJECTIVE: This prospective study was conducted to compare the clinical outcomes of a 6-row 3-D linear cutter with the standard 4-row linear cutter in patients who underwent elective gastrointestinal surgery anastomosis. METHOD: Patients who underwent elective open gastrointestinal surgery that included stapled anastomosis using a linear cutter (Proximate®, Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Cincinnati, OH) between January 2011 and May 2011 were included in the study. The patients were randomly assigned to two groups according to the linear cutter that was used in the surgery: the standard 4-row cutter (the S group) or the new 6-row cutter (the N group). The groups were compared based on the patient demographic data, the laboratory parameters, the preoperative diagnosis, the surgery performed, the operation time, intra-or postoperative complications, the time to oral tolerance and the length of the hospital stay. RESULTS: The S group included 11 male and nine female patients with a mean age of 65 ± 12 (35-84) years, while the N group included 13 male and eight female patients with a mean age of 62 ±11 (46-79) years (p =0.448, p = 0.443, respectively). Anastomotic line bleeding was observed in eight (40%) patients in the S group and in one (4.7%) patient in the N group (p = 0.006). Dehiscence of the anastomosis line was observed in two (10%) patients in the S group and none in the N group (p =0.131). Anastomotic leakage developed in three (15%) patients in the S group and in one (4.7%) patient in the N group (p = 0.269). The mean hospital stay was 12.65 ± 6.1 days in theS group and 9.52 ± 2.9 days in the N group (p = 0.043). CONCLUSION: The 6-row 3-D linear cutter is a safe and easily applied instrument that can be used to create anastomoses in gastrointestinal surgery. The new stapler provides some usage benefits and is also superior to the standard linear cutter with regard to anastomotic line bleeding.

A randomized controlled trial evaluating early versus traditional oral feeding after colorectal surgery

OBJECTIVE: This prospective randomized clinical study was conducted to evaluate the safety and tolerability of early oral feeding after colorectal operations. METHODS: A total of 199 patients underwent colorectal surgery and were randomly assigned to early feeding (n = 99) or a regular diet (n = 100). Patients’ characteristics, diagnoses, surgical procedures, comorbidity, bowel movements, defecation, nasogastric tube reinsertion, time of tolerance of solid diet, complications, and length of hospitalization were assessed. RESULTS: The two groups were similar in terms of gender, age, diagnosis, surgical procedures, and comorbidity. In the early feeding group, 85.9 percent of patients tolerated the early feeding schedule. Bowel movements (1.7±0.89 vs. 3.27±1.3), defecation (3.4±0.77 vs. 4.38±1.18) and time of tolerance of solid diet (2.48±0.85 vs. 4.77±1.81) were significantly earlier in the early feeding group. There was no change between the groups in terms of nasogastric tube reinsertion, overall complication or anastomotic leakage. Hospitalization (5.55±2.35 vs. 9.0±6.5) was shorter in the early feeding group. CONCLUSIONS: The present study indicated that early oral feeding after elective colorectal surgery was not only well tolerated by patients but also affected the postoperative outcomes positively. Early postoperative feeding is safe and leads to the early recovery of gastrointestinal functions.