The use of silver nylon in preventing surgical site infections following colon and rectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Patients who undergo colorectal surgery have up to a 30% chance of developing a surgical site infection postoperatively. Silverlon is a silver nylon dressing designed to prevent surgical site infections, but only anecdotal evidence has previously supported its efficacy. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of silver nylon dressings in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. DESIGN: We performed a prospective, randomized, controlled trial comparing a silver nylon dressing with gauze dressings in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. SETTING: The study was performed at a university-based, tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: We studied patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery with an abdominal skin incision of at least 3 cm. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either a silver nylon or a gauze dressing. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was surgical site infection occurring within 30 days of surgery. RESULTS: One hundred ten patients were enrolled in the study and were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 treatment groups. After a 30-day follow-up period, the incidence of surgical site infection was lower in the silver nylon group compared with the control group (13% vs 33%, P = .011). Twenty-five patients in the study developed superficial surgical site infections, 5 in the silver nylon group and 14 in the control group (P = .021). Two patients in the study group developed deep wound infections compared with 4 in the control group (P = .438). Multivariate analysis revealed that patients in the control group had a 3-fold increase in risk of infection compared with patients in the silver nylon group (P = .013). LIMITATIONS: A limitation of this study is that the members of the surgical team were not blinded to the treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Silver nylon is safe and effective in preventing surgical site infection following colorectal surgery.

Fecal diversion in perirectal fistulizing Crohn's disease is an underutilized and potentially temporary means of successful treatment.

The purpose of this study was to determine the outcome of patients treated with fecal diversion for perirectal fistulizing Crohn's disease. Thirty-nine patients were identified and followed for an average of 60 months. Patients were divided into two groups based on surgical treatment: local surgical treatment only and fecal diversion in addition to local surgical therapy. Thirteen patients (33%) underwent fecal diversion due to the severity of their disease. Eleven of these patients (85%) had complete resolution of their fistulas and only two (15%) required proctectomy. In contrast, only five out of 26 patients (19%) who underwent local surgical procedures alone had complete perirectal disease resolution. Intestinal continuity was restored in six patients (46%) and three of these patients (50%) remained disease free. The remaining three patients had disease recurrence, which required additional local procedures in one patient (17%), but with eventual resolution; the other two patients (33%) necessitated rediversion. Our data suggest that fecal diversion is a viable treatment option for severe perirectal fistulizing Crohn's disease and may be associated with a higher rate of resolution than local surgical treatment alone. In addition, we demonstrate a higher rate of successful intestinal continuity restoration than is typically reported.

Laparoscopic-assisted transvaginal approach for sigmoidectomy and rectocolpopexy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Laparoscopic-assisted colonic resection has been well described for multiple surgical indications. This typically requires an abdominal incision for specimen removal that is associated with the majority of postoperative pain. We describe the first laparoscopic-assisted transvaginal approach for sigmoidectomy and rectocolpopexy for the treatment of rectal prolapse. METHODS: Mobilization of the sigmoid colon was performed laparoscopically using a 12-mm vaginal port and 3 additional 5-mm abdominal ports. A laparoscopic stapler was used through the vaginal port to transect the distal sigmoid colon. The specimen was subsequently externalized through the colpotomy to complete the resection and prepare the remaining bowel for intracorporeal, end-to-end, stapled anastomosis. The colpotomy was then repaired, and the colorectal anastomosis and rectocolpopexy were completed laparoscopically. RESULTS: Sigmoidectomy and rectocolpopexy were successfully performed laparoscopically by using a transvaginal approach without the need for an abdominal incision for specimen removal. The patient had an uncomplicated postoperative course, complained of minimal pain, and was discharged home on postoperative day 3. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic-assisted transvaginal sigmoidectomy and rectocolpopexy is a feasible option that appears to be associated with little incisional pain and rapid recovery.