Loop Ileostomy Closure as a 23-Hour Stay Procedure With Preoperative Efferent Limb Enteral Stimulation: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Loop ileostomy closure is a common procedure in colorectal surgery. Often seen as a simple operation associated with a low complication rate, it still leads to lengthy hospitalizations. Reducing postoperative complications and ileus rates could lead to a shorter length of stay and even ambulatory surgery. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the safety and feasibility of ileostomy closure performed in a 23-hour hospitalization setting using a standardized enhanced recovery pathway. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTINGS: Two high-volume colorectal surgery centers. PATIENTS: Healthy adults undergoing elective ileostomy closure from July 2019 to January 2022. INTERVENTION: All patients were enrolled in a standardized enhanced recovery pathway specific to ileostomy closure, including daily irrigation of efferent limb with a nutritional formula for 7 days before surgery. Patients were randomly allocated to either conventional hospitalization (n = 23) or a 23-hour stay (n = 24). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was total length of stay and secondary outcomes were 30-day rates of readmission, postoperative ileus, surgical site infections, and postoperative morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 47 patients were ultimately randomly allocated. Patients in the 23-hour hospitalization arm had a shorter median length of stay (1 vs 2 days, p = 0.02) and similar rates of readmission (4% vs 13%, p = 0.35), postoperative ileus (none in both arms), surgical site infection (0% vs 4%, p = 0.49), postoperative morbidity (21% vs 22%, p = 1.00), and mortality (none in both arms). LIMITATIONS: Due to coronavirus disease 2019, access to surgical beds was greatly limited, leading to a shift toward ambulatory surgery for ileostomy closure. The study was terminated early, which affected its statistical power. CONCLUSION: Loop ileostomy closures as 23-hour stay procedures are feasible and safe. Ileus rate might be reduced by preoperative intestinal stimulation with nutritional formula through the stoma's efferent limb, although specific randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm this association. See Video Abstract . CIERRE DE ILEOSTOMA EN ASA COMO PROCEDIMIENTO AMBULATORIO DE HORAS CON ESTMULO PREOPERATORIO ENTERAL EFERENTE ESTUDIO ALEATORIO CONTROLADO: ANTECEDENTES:El cierre de la ileostomía en asa es un procedimiento común en la cirugía colorrectal. A menudo vista como una operación simple asociada con bajas tasas de complicaciones, aún conduce a largas hospitalizaciones. La reducción de las complicaciones postoperatorias y las tasas de íleo podría conducir a una estadía hospitalaria más corta o incluso a una cirugía ambulatoria.OBJETIVOS:El presente estudio pretende evaluar la seguridad y la viabilidad del cierre de ileostomía realizadas en un entorno de hospitalización de 23 horas utilizando una vía de recuperación mejorada y estandarizada.DISEÑO:Estudio aleatorio controladoAJUSTES:Dos centros de cirugía colorrectal de gran volúmenPACIENTES:Adultos sanos sometidos a cierre electivo de ileostomía, desde Julio de 2019 hasta Enero de 2022.INTERVENCIÓN:Todos los pacientes fueron inscritos en una vía de recuperación mejorada y estandarizada específica para el cierre de la ileostomía, incluyendo la irrigación diaria de la extremidad eferente del intestino asociada a una fórmula nutricional durante 7 días previos a la cirugía. Los pacientes fueron asignados aleatoriamente en hospitalización convencional (n = 23) o a una estadía de 23 horas (n = 24).PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado primario fue la duración total de la estadía hospitalaria y los resultados secundarios fueron las tasas de reingreso a los 30 días, el íleo postoperatorio, las infecciones de la herida quirúrgica, la morbilidad y mortalidad postoperatorias.RESULTADOS:Finalmente fueron randomizados un total de 47 pacientes. Aquellos que se encontraban en el grupo de hospitalización de 23 horas tuvieron una estadía media más corta (1 día versus 2 días, p = 0,02) y tasas similares de reingreso (4% vs 13%, p = 0,35), de íleo postoperatorio (ninguno en ambos brazos), de infección del sitio quirúrgico (0 vs 4%, p = 0,49), de morbilidad postoperatoria (21% vs 22%, p > 0,99) y de mortalidad (ninguna en ambos brazos).LIMITACIONES:Debido a la pandemia SARS CoV-2, el acceso a las camas quirúrgicas fue muy limitado, lo que llevó a un cambio hacia la cirugía ambulatoria para el cierre de ileostomías. El estudio finalizó anticipadamente, lo que afectó su poder estadístico.CONCLUSIÓN:Los cierres de ileostomía en asa como procedimientos de estadía de 23 horas son factibles y seguros. La tasa de íleo podría reducirse mediante la estimulación intestinal preoperatoria a través de la rama eferente del estoma asociada a fórmulas nutricionales, por lo que se necesitan estudios randomizados específicos para confirmar esta asociación. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo ).

Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a retrospective cohort study of anastomotic complications.

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LRH) can be performed with an intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) or extracorporeal anastomosis (EA). It is not clear which technique is best. This study evaluated the impact of each anastomosis technique on perioperative safety and postoperative evolution. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study at a tertiary colorectal surgery center. All patients who had an elective LRH from 2015 to 2019 were analyzed according to the anastomosis technique used. RESULTS: In total, 285 patients were included in the study. IA was performed in 64 patients (22.5%). Mean operative time was longer in the patients with IA (IA, 160±31 minutes vs. EA, 138±42 minutes; P<0.001). No differences were observed in intraoperative complications, time to first bowel movement, length of stay, reoperation, or rehospitalization. Time to first flatus was longer in the patients with IA (P=0.049). At 30 days after surgery, there were no differences in the frequency of anastomotic leak (IA, 0% vs. EA, 2.3%; P=0.59), bleeding (IA, 3.1% vs. EA, 2.7%; P>0.99), or intraabdominal abscess (IA, 0% vs. EA, 0.5%; P>0.99). During follow-up, we noted more incisional hernias in patients with EA (IA, 1.6% vs. EA, 11.3%; P=0.01) and a trend toward more hernia in patients with EA in multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 7.13; P=0.06). Anastomosis technique had no influence on recurrence. CONCLUSION: For LRH, both IA and EA are safe, with a low incidence of complications when performed by experienced surgeons. IA may be associated with a lower incidence of incisional hernia.

Recurrence following transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a monocentric retrospective series of technically difficult cases.

PURPOSE: Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) has been proposed to overcome surgical difficulties encountered during rectal resection, especially for patients having high body mass index or low rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate oncologic outcomes following TaTME. METHODS: This retrospective study included all consecutive patients with rectal cancer who had a TaTME from 2013 to 2019. The main outcome was the incidence of locoregional recurrence by the end of the follow-up period. RESULTS: Among a total of 81 patients, 96.3% were male, and their mean age was 63±9 years. The mean body mass index was 30.3±5.7 kg/m2, and the median distance from tumor to anal verge was 5.0 cm (interquartile range [IQR], 4.0-6.0 cm). Most patients had a low anterior resection performed (n=80, 98.8%) with a diverting ileostomy (n=64, 79.0%). Distal and circumferential resection margins were positive in 2.5% and 6.2% of patients, respectively. Total mesorectal excision was complete or near complete in 95.1% of patients. A successful resection was achieved in 72 patients (88.9%). After a median follow-up of 27.5 months (IQR, 16.7-48.1 months), 4 patients (4.9%) experienced locoregional recurrence. Anastomotic leaks were observed in 21 patients (25.9%). At the end of the follow-up, 69 patients (85.2%) were stoma-free. CONCLUSION: TaTME was associated with acceptable oncological outcomes, including low locoregional recurrence rates in selected patients with low rectal cancer. Although associated with a high incidence of postoperative morbidities, the use of TaTME enabled a high rate of successful sphincter-saving procedures in selected patients who posed a technical challenge.

Prophylactic retromuscular mesh placement for parastomal hernia prevention: a retrospective cohort study of permanent colostomies and ileostomies.

PURPOSE: Parastomal hernia (PSH) is the most common complication of stoma formation. The safety and efficiency of prophylactically placing mesh to prevent PSH remain controversial. To address this question, we examined the incidence of clinical and radiological PSH when using parastomal prophylactic mesh (PPM). METHODS: We performed a retrospective, single-center, cohort study that included all patients with permanent stoma creation between 2015 and 2018. Patients were divided into two groups according to the utilization of PPM or not. RESULTS: During the study period, 185 patients had a permanent stoma created, 144 with colostomy and 41 with ileostomy. PPM was placed in 79 patients. There was no difference in the need for early surgical reintervention (p = 0.652) or rehospitalization (p = 0.314) for stoma-related complications in patients with mesh as compared with patients without. Similarly, there was no difference in operative time (p = 0.782) or in length of hospital stay (p = 0.806). No patients experienced infection of the mesh or required prosthesis removal. There was a lower incidence rate of PSH with PPM placement in patients with permanent colostomy [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.50 (95% confidence interval 0.28-0.89); p = 0.018]. In contrast, a higher incidence rate of PSH was observed in patients with ileostomy and PPM [adjusted HR 5.92 (95% confidence interval 1.07-32.65); p = 0.041]. CONCLUSION: Parastomal prophylactic mesh placement to prevent PSH is a safe and efficient approach to reduce the incidence of PSH in patients requiring a permanent colostomy. However, mesh may increase the rate of PSH after permanent ileostomy.

Canadian taTME expert collaboration (CaTaCO) position statement.

INTRODUCTION: Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is a novel approach to surgery for rectal cancer. The technique has gained significant popularity in the surgical community due to the promising ability to overcome technical difficulties related to the access of the distal pelvis. Recently, Norwegian surgeons issued a local moratorium related to potential issues with the safety of the procedure. Early adopters of taTME in Canada have recognized the need to create guidelines for its adoption and supervision. The objective of the statement is to provide expert opinion based on the best available evidence and authors' experience. METHODS: The procedure has been performed in Canada since 2014 at different institutions. In 2016, the first Canadian taTME congress was held in the city of Toronto, organized by two of the authors. In early 2019, a multicentric collaborative was established [The Canadian taTME expert Collaboration] which aimed at ensuring safe performance and adoption of taTME in Canada. Recently surgeons from 8 major Canadian rectal cancer centers met in the city of Toronto on December 7 of 2019, to discuss and develop a position statement. There in person, meeting was followed by 4 rounds of Delphi methodology. RESULTS: The generated document focused on the need to ensure a unified approach among rectal cancer surgeons across the country considering its technical complexity and potential morbidity. The position statement addressed four domains: surgical setting, surgeons' requirements, patient selection, and quality assurance. CONCLUSIONS: Authors agree transanal total mesorectal excision is technically demanding and has a significant risk for morbidity. As of now, there is uncertainty for some of the outcomes. We consider it is possible to safely adopt this operation and obtain adequate results, however for this purpose it is necessary to meet specific requirements in different domains.

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal villous tumours: Can we rely solely on preoperative biopsies and the surgeon's experience?

Background: Transanal endoscopic microsurgery has become the standard of treatment for rectal villous adenomas. However, the role of preoperative imaging for these lesions is not clear. The aim of this study was to compare the value of preoperative imaging and surgeon clinical staging in the preoperative evaluation of patients with rectal villous adenomas having transanal endoscopic microsurgery resection. Methods: We conducted a single-centre comparative retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent transanal endoscopic microsurgery surgery for rectal villous adenomas from 2011 to 2013. The intervention was preoperative imaging versus surgeon clinical staging. The primary outcome was the accuracy of clinical staging by preoperative imaging and surgeon clinical staging according to the histopathologic staging. Results: A total of 146 patients underwent transanal endoscopic microsurgery surgery for rectal villous adenomas. One hundred and twelve (76.7%) of those patients had no preoperative imaging while 34 patients (23.3%) had either endorectal ultrasound (22 patients) or magnetic resonance imaging (12 patients). Surgeon staging was accurate in 89.3% of cases whereas staging by endorectal ultrasound was accurate in 40.9% cases and magnetic resonance imaging was accurate in 0% of cases. In the imaging group, inaccurate staging would have led to unnecessary radical surgery in 44.0% of patients. Conclusion: This study was subject to selection bias because of its retrospective nature and the limited number of patients with imaging. Patients with rectal villous tumours without invasive carcinoma on biopsies and without malignant characteristics on appearance in the judgment of an experienced colorectal surgeon might not benefit from preoperative imaging before undergoing transanal endoscopic microsurgery procedures.

Contexte: La microchirurgie endoscopique transanale est devenue le traitement standard des adénomes villeux rectaux. La valeur de l'imagerie préopératoire pour le traitement de ces lésions n'est toutefois pas bien établie. Cette étude visait à comparer l'exactitude de la stadification par imagerie préopératoire et de la stadification clinique par le chirurgien dans le cadre de l'évaluation préopératoire des patients atteints d'adénomes villeux rectaux qui subissent une résection par microchirurgie endoscopique transanale. Méthodes: Nous avons mené une étude de cohorte rétrospective comparative monocentrique chez des patients ayant subi une microchirurgie endoscopique transanale pour un adénome villeux rectal entre 2011 et 2013. Les interventions comparées étaient la stadification par imagerie préopératoire et la stadification clinique par le chirurgien. L'issue principale était l'exactitude de la stadification clinique par imagerie préopératoire et de la stadification clinique par le chirurgien, confirmée par stadification histopathologique. Résultats: Au total, 146 patients ont subi une microchirurgie endoscopique transanale pour le traitement d'un adénome villeux rectal. De ces patients, 112 (76,7 %) n'avaient pas subi d'imagerie préopératoire et 34 (23,3 %) avaient subi une échographie endorectale (22 patients) ou une imagerie par résonance magnétique (12 patients). La stadification par le chirurgien était exacte dans 89,3 % des cas, contre 40,9 % des cas pour l'échographie endorectale et 0 % des cas pour l'imagerie par résonnance magnétique. Dans le groupe ayant subi une imagerie, l'inexactitude de la stadification aurait mené à une chirurgie radicale inutile pour 44,0 % des patients. Conclusion: Cette étude comportait un biais de sélection en raison de sa nature rétrospective et du nombre limité de patients ayant subi une imagerie. L'imagerie préopératoire avant une microchirurgie endoscopique transanale pourrait ne présenter aucun avantage pour les patients présentant des tumeurs villeuses rectales dans les cas où aucun carcinome invasif n'a été détecté par biopsie et où un chirurgien colorectal chevronné n'a détecté aucune caractéristique maligne.

The Role of transanal (Ta) dissection in the management of difficult primary and recurrent rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to review the postoperative and short-term oncological outcomes of our first cohort of patients having had a transanal (Ta) approach for primary or recurrent rectal cancer. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on all cases of Ta dissection occurring between 2013 and 2016. We reviewed data concerning case selection, tumour characteristics, perioperative and postoperative data and final pathology. RESULTS: A total of 24 males were operated for primary (92% (22/24)) or recurrent rectal cancer (8.3% (2/24)). Four patients (16.7% (4/24)) had a history of previous rectal surgery and two had a history of previous Ta total mesorectal excision (TME). A majority of patients were obese, with 58.3% (14/24) having a body mass index >30. The laparoscopic approach was used in the majority of cases (95.8% (23/24)). Most patients had a low anterior resection (95.8% (23/24)). Sixteen patients received a temporary ileostomy (66.7% (16/24)). Three patients suffered perioperative complications (including colonic ischaemia, rectal perforation and arterial bleeding). Five patients (21.7% (5/23)) had an anastomotic leak treated with Ta drainage in two patients. Final pathology revealed negative margins in 95.8% (23/24). TME was considered complete in 87.5% (21/24) overall and in 95% (21/22) when considering only primary cancer cases. CONCLUSION: According to our cohort of selected difficult cases, Ta dissection approach helped achieve complete mesorectal excision in complex primary rectal cancer but also allowed for rectal resection in patients with previous rectal surgery. This technique also helped perform a primary anastomosis in these difficult cases.

Safety and Feasibility of Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging Criteria to Identify Patients With "Good Prognosis" Rectal Cancer Eligible for Primary Surgery: The Phase 2 Nonrandomized QuickSilver Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Chemoradiotherapy (CRT), followed by surgery, is the recommended approach for stage II and III rectal cancer. While CRT decreases the risk of local recurrence, it does not improve survival and leads to poorer functional outcomes than surgery alone. Therefore, new approaches to better select patients for CRT are important. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a phase 2 study to evaluate the safety and feasibility of using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) criteria to select patients with "good prognosis" rectal tumors for primary surgery. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective nonrandomized phase 2 study at 12 high-volume colorectal surgery centers across Canada. From September 30, 2014, to October 21, 2016, a total of 82 patients were recruited for the study. Participants were patients newly diagnosed as having rectal cancer with MRI-predicted good prognosis rectal cancer. The MRI criteria for good prognosis tumors included distance to the mesorectal fascia greater than 1 mm; definite T2, T2/early T3, or definite T3 with less than 5 mm of extramural depth of invasion; and absent or equivocal extramural venous invasion. INTERVENTIONS: Patients with rectal cancer with MRI-predicted good prognosis tumors underwent primary surgery. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) rate. Assuming a 10% baseline probability of a positive CRM, a sample size of 75 was estimated to yield a 95% CI of ±6.7%. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients (74% male) participated in the study. The median age at the time of surgery was 66 years (range, 37-89 years). Based on MRI, most tumors were midrectal (65% [n = 53]), T2/early T3 (60% [n = 49]), with no suspicious lymph nodes (63% [n = 52]). On final pathology, 91% (n = 75) of tumors were T2 or greater, 29% (n = 24) were node positive, and 59% (n = 48) were stage II or III. The positive CRM rate was 4 of 82 (4.9%; 95% CI, 0.2%-9.6%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The use of MRI criteria to select patients with good prognosis rectal cancer for primary surgery results in a low rate of positive CRM and suggests that CRT may not be necessary for all patients with stage II and III rectal cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN.com identifier: ISRCTN05107772.

Strangulated Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia of Bochdalek Diagnosed in Late Pregnancy: A Case Report and Review of the Literature.

BACKGROUND: Congenital diaphragmatic hernia is an unusual condition in the adult population because it is mostly a neonatal diagnosis. This entity may be triggered by pregnancy and threaten the life of the mother and her fetus. CASE: This report presents the case of a maternal diaphragmatic hernia diagnosed at 35 weeks of pregnancy with epigastric pain, nausea, and vomiting. Patient developed respiratory distress, and a radiograph revealed left lung collapse. A chest tube was inserted for a presumed tension pneumothorax. The patient's condition deteriorated, and a diaphragmatic hernia containing the stomach, transverse colon, and small bowel was diagnosed. The patient underwent laparotomy with Caesarean section, hernia reduction, and diaphragmatic repair. CONCLUSION: A high degree of suspicion is required to avoid misdiagnosis and management delay. Surgical treatment must be individualized according to gestational age and clinical setting.

Family medicine residents' training in, knowledge about, and perceptions of digital rectal examination.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate family medicine residents' training in, knowledge about, and perceptions of digital rectal examination (DRE). DESIGN: Descriptive study, using an online survey that was available in French and English. SETTING: Quebec. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 217 residents enrolled in a family medicine program. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Residents' demographic characteristics; the DRE teaching they received throughout their medical training; their reasons for omitting DRE; their recognition of DRE indications (strong vs weak) and application of DRE for 10 anorectal complaints; and their perceptions of the overall quality of the DRE training they received. RESULTS: Of the 879 residents contacted, 217 (25%) responded to the survey. Throughout their training, one-third of respondents did not receive any supervision for or feedback on DRE technique. Seventy-one percent of respondents expressed their inability to identify the nature of abnormal examination findings at least once during their training. The most frequently reported reasons to omit DRE were patient refusal, inadequate setting, and lack of time. CONCLUSION: Most of the residents in this study had omitted DRE at least once in their clinical work despite recognizing its importance. There was discordance between recognition of a complaint requiring DRE and execution of this technique in a clinical setting. Family medicine education programs and continuing medical education committees should consider including DRE training.

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery as an outpatient procedure is feasible and safe.

BACKGROUND: Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for the excision of rectal tumor is mostly performed as an inpatient procedure. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of TEM resection as an outpatient procedure in selected patients. POPULATION: All first 178 consecutive patients who underwent resection of a rectal tumor using TEM in our institution from April 2011 to September 2013 were included. METHOD: Standardized retrospective chart review was performed. Primary outcome was 30-day mortality and morbidity. Secondary outcomes included unplanned admission and readmission rates, operative and pathologic data. RESULTS: Of the 175 patients who underwent only TEM, 80% (140/175) were discharged the same day of surgery. There was no mortality. Morbidity rate was 31.4%. Ninety-one percent of 154 patients planned as outpatients were discharged the same day. The most common reason for unplanned admission was urinary retention (7/14; 50%). Twelve patients discharged the day of the procedure were readmitted at 30 days. Median operative time was 60 min (10-256 min). All lesions were removed with grossly negative margins with 15 positive microscopic margins on final pathology. A total of 124 adenomatous polyps and 37 malignant lesions were excised. Mean tumor diameter after fixation was 5.0 cm (range 0.5-11 cm). CONCLUSION: Transanal endoscopic microsurgery as an outpatient procedure is feasible and safe in selected patients. The main reason for unplanned admission was urinary retention in our series.

Laparoscopic versus open colonic resection for complicated diverticular disease in the emergency setting: a safe choice? A retrospective comparative cohort study.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a retrospective cohort study to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic colon resection (LCR) with open colon resection (OCR) for complicated diverticular disease (CDD) during emergent hospital admission. METHODS: Charts from all patients undergoing colon resection for CDD during emergent hospital admission at a single academic institution were reviewed. The primary outcomes were overall 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: From 2000 to 2010, 125 cases were retrieved (49 LCR and 86 OCR). Conversion rate was 5.1%. Overall morbidity significantly decreased with laparoscopic surgery compared with OCR. No mortality occurred with LCR. Prolonged ileus was less frequent (12.8% vs. 32.6%; P = .02), time to oral intake shorter (3 vs. 6 days; P < .01), and LOS shorter (5 vs. 8 days; P = .05) for LCR. CONCLUSIONS: In our series, in the patients selected, LCR for CDD during emergent hospital admission appears to be a safe procedure associated with decreased morbidity, time to oral intake, and LOS compared with OCR.

Anastomotic salvage after rectal cancer resection using the Turnbull-Cutait delayed anastomosis.

BACKGROUND: Turnbull-Cutait abdominoperineal pull-through followed by delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCA) was first described in 1961. Studies have described its use for challenging colorectal conditions. We reviewed our experience with Turnbull-Cutait DCA as a salvage procedure for complex failure of colorectal anastomosis. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study from October 2010 to September 2011, with analysis of postoperative morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: Seven DCAs were performed for anastomotic complications (3 chronic leaks, 2 rectovaginal fistulas, 1 colovesical fistula, 1 colonic ischemia) following surgery for rectal cancer. Six patients had a diverting ileostomy constructed as part of previous treatment for anastomotic complications before the salvage procedure. No anastomotic leaks were observed. All procedures but 1 were completed successfully. One patient who underwent DCA subsequently required an abdominoperineal resection and a permanent colostomy for postoperative extensive colonic ischemia. No 30-day mortality occurred. CONCLUSION: Salvage Turnbull-Cutait DCA appears to be a safe procedure and could be offered to patients with complex anastomotic complications. This procedure could be added to the surgeon's armamentarium as an alternative to the creation of a permanent stoma.

CONTEXTE: La résection colique abdominale avec extraction trans-anale et anastomose colo-anale différée (CAD) fut décrite initialement par Turnbull et Cutait en 1961. Cette intervention a récemment été rapportée pour le traitement des conditions colorectales complexes. Nous avons revu notre expérience avec la CAD comme chirurgie de sauvetage dans le traitement des complications complexes de l'anastomose colo-anale de première intention. MÉTHODES: Nous avons effectué une étude de cohorte rétrospective entre octobre 2010 et septembre 2011, en analysant la morbidité et la mortalité postopératoires. RÉSULTATS: Sept CAD ont été réalisées en raison de complications anastomotiques (3 fuites anastomotiques chroniques, 2 fistules rectovaginales, 1 fistule colovésicale, 1 ischémie colique) résultant du traitement chirurgical d'un cancer rectal. Six patients avaient subi une iléostomie de dérivation pour fuite anastomotique, dans la période précédant la CAD de sauvetage. À l'exception d'un patient, toutes les procédures se sont soldées en succès. Aucune fuite anastomotique n'a été observée après CAD. Un patient a dû subir une résection abdominopérinéale avec colostomie terminale permanente en raison d'ischémie colique aigue du colon distal après CAD. Aucun décès n'est survenu dans les 30 jours suivant la CAD. CONCLUSION: La CAD de sauvetage apparait comme une intervention sécuritaire qui représente une option thérapeutique valable pour les patients souffrant de complications complexes de fuites anastomotiques colorectales. Cette intervention pourrait s'ajouter à l'arsenal du chirurgien comme alternative à la création d'une stomie permanente.

Laparoscopic emergency surgery for diverticular disease that failed medical treatment: a valuable option? Results of a retrospective comparative cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic surgery has become the standard of treatment for elective management of diverticular disease. However, its use in the acute setting remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic surgery with open surgery in the acute management of complicated diverticular disease that failed initial medical treatment. SETTINGS: This is a single-center comparative retrospective cohort study. PATIENTS: Patients undergoing surgery for complicated diverticular disease after an attempt at medical treatment from 2000 to 2011 were selected. INTERVENTION: Laparoscopic versus open surgery was compared. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were overall 30-day morbidity and mortality. Secondary outcomes were length of stay, time to resume diet, and need for a permanent stoma. RESULTS: Forty-two patients were identified by using medical records: 24 laparoscopic surgery and 18 open surgery. Baseline demographics, ASA classification, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation scores, Hinchey classification, and Charlson Comorbidity Index did not differ between groups. The mean operative time was 36 minutes longer (p = 0.05) and blood loss was 460 mL less (p < 0.001) for laparoscopic surgery. Two patients (8.3%) in the laparoscopic surgery group required conversion to open surgery. There was no mortality. Overall morbidity was lower favoring laparoscopic surgery (16.7% vs 55.6%; p = 0.01). Two patients in the laparoscopic surgery group experienced an anastomotic leak compared with none in the open surgery group. Mean time to resume diet (3 vs 6.5 days; p < 0.01) and length of stay (5 vs 8 days; p = 0.04) were shorter for the laparoscopic surgery group. Rate of permanent stoma at last follow-up (median, 332 days) did not differ significantly between groups. LIMITATIONS: This study is limited by selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery for patients in whom medical treatment for complicated diverticular disease failed is associated with favorable outcomes, including a reduced rate of morbidity and a shorter length of stay. When applied to selected patients, this approach appears to be a safe procedure with a low rate of conversion.

Transanal drainage to treat anastomotic leaks after low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a valuable option.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leaks after low anterior resection for rectal cancer remain a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Few studies have focused on their management, particularly on the technique of transanal drainage. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the short- and long-term outcomes according to the initial management of clinical leaks. DESIGN AND SETTINGS: This study is a retrospective review of a single institution experience. PATIENTS: All patients treated for a symptomatic anastomotic leak after low anterior resection for rectal cancer between January 2000 and March 2011 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were mortality attributed to the leak, sepsis control, stoma closure rate, and functional results. RESULTS: A total of 37 patients (35 men/2 women) developed a symptomatic leak. Leaks were initially managed by transanal drainage in 16 patients, abdominal reintervention in 12 patients, and medical treatment in 9 patients. The only death attributed to the leak occurred in the abdominal reintervention group. In the transanal drainage group, antibiotics were administered for a median length of 9 days, and the drain was left in place for a median length of 30 days. One patient underwent percutaneous drainage of a collection in addition to transanal drainage, but no patient required abdominal reintervention. Of the treatment modalities applied, transanal drainage was associated with the highest stoma closure rate (93%), after a median postoperative time of 7 months. Complications observed after transanal drainage were anastomotic strictures in 33% and the creation of a permanent stoma due to poor function in 13%. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its nonrandomized retrospective design and the presence of selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: : For the management of low anastomotic leaks, transanal drainage allows preservation of the anastomosis and sepsis control with a high rate of ileostomy closure. It is a valuable option in patients with a diverting ileostomy.

Eosinophilic enteritis confined to an ileostomy site.

Eosinophilic enteritis is a rather rare condition that can manifest anywhere from esophagus to rectum. Its description in the literature is sparse, but associations have been made with collagen vascular disease, malignancy, food allergy, parasitic or viral infections, inflammatory bowel disease, and drug sensitivity. We present the case of a 41-year-old male diagnosed with ulcerative colitis who underwent proctocolectomy with ileal pouch anal anastomosis and loop ileostomy formation utilizing Seprafilm®, who later developed eosinophilic enteritis of the loop ileostomy site. This is the first report of eosinophilic enteritis and its possible link to the use of bioabsorbable adhesion barriers.

The right lateral position for laparoscopic diaphragmatic hernia repair in pregnancy: technique and review of the literature.

Maternal diaphragmatic hernia is a rare disorder of pregnancy. Laparoscopic repair of diaphragmatic hernias is gaining more and more consideration among the surgical community. To date, only a few centers have reported using the laparoscopic approach for diaphragmatic hernias occurring in pregnancy. As congenital diaphragmatic hernias occur mostly on the left side, a right lateral position would theoretically facilitate the surgery and would render an eventual simultaneous left thoracoscopy feasible without repositioning the patient. However, such a position in a pregnant woman has serious implications because of possible inferior vena cava compression by the gravid uterus. We performed a laparoscopic reduction and repair of a left foramen of Bochdalek hernia in a 26-week-pregnant patient, using a right lateral position. The right lateral position facilitated the procedure, without any adverse outcome for the fetus or the mother. This approach should be considered for any left diaphragmatic hernia repair occurring in pregnancy.

Laparoscopic colectomy for complex diverticular disease: a justifiable choice?

BACKGROUND: Surgery is increasingly reserved for complicated diverticulitis. The role of laparoscopy in this context is ill defined. This study aimed to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and outcomes associated with the application of laparoscopy to an unrestricted spectrum of diverticular pathologies, with an emphasis on complicated disease. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent elective, urgent, or emergent laparoscopic colectomy for diverticular disease from 1991 to 2007 were analyzed from a prospectively collected database. Laparoscopy was offered to all patients presenting for surgical attention, thus minimizing selection bias. Complicated cases had abscesses, perforations, fistulas, or strictures. Uncomplicated cases had chronic or recurrent diverticulitis. Summary statistics and univariate comparisons were generated. RESULTS: A total of 183 patients were analyzed, including 39 complicated cases. The complicated cohort included 12 abscesses or perforations (31%), 18 fistulas (46%), and 11 strictures (28%). Intraoperative complications were comparable between the two groups (7.7 vs. 9.7%), although the complicated cases resulted in more conversions (23 vs. 4.2%; p = 0.0007). More than 79% of the complicated patients and 96% of the uncomplicated patients underwent unprotected primary anastomosis. Medical (23 vs. 1.4%; p < 0.0001) and surgical (28 vs. 14%; p = 0.035) complications were more frequent in the complicated group. Leak rates were acceptably low (6.5 vs. 2.2%; p = 0.23). There were no recorded deaths. Finally, the time until discharge from hospital was significantly longer in the complicated group by a median of 1 day. CONCLUSIONS: The laparoscopic management of complicated diverticular disease is feasible and appears to be safe in the hands of experts. Despite a high rate of conversion to open surgery, laparoscopy was the sole operative intervention for the majority of patients with complicated diverticular disease. Further studies are needed to allow rigorous comparison with an open control group.