Treatment for appendicitis in cancer patients on chemotherapy: a retrospective cohort study.

Purpose: Whether to perform surgery or conservatively manage appendicitis in immunosuppressed patients is a concern for clinicians. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of these 2 treatment options for appendicitis in patients with cancer undergoing chemotherapy. Methods: This retrospective study included 206 patients with cancer who were diagnosed with acute appendicitis between August 2001 and December 2021. Among them, patients who received chemotherapy within 1 month were divided into surgical and conservative groups. We evaluated the outcomes, including treatment success within 1 year, 1-year recurrence, and the number of days from the diagnosis of appendicitis to chemotherapy restart, between the 2 groups. Results: Among the 206 patients with cancer who were diagnosed with acute appendicitis, 78 received chemotherapy within 1 month. The patients were divided into surgery (n = 63) and conservative (n = 15) groups. In the surgery group, the duration of antibiotic therapy (7.0 days vs. 16.0 days, P < 0.001) and length of hospital stay (8.0 days vs. 27.5 days, P = 0.002) were significantly shorter than conservative groups. The duration from the diagnosis of appendicitis to the restart of chemotherapy was shorter in the surgery group (20.8 ± 15.1 days vs. 35.2 ± 28.2 days, P = 0.028). The treatment success rate within 1 year was higher in the surgery group (100% vs. 33.3%, P < 0.001). Conclusion: Surgical treatment showed a significantly higher success rate than conservative treatment for appendicitis in patients less than 1 month after chemotherapy. Further prospective studies will be needed to clinically determine treatment options.

Colon cancer: the 2023 Korean clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis and treatment.

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in Korea and the third leading cause of death from cancer. Treatment outcomes for colon cancer are steadily improving due to national health screening programs with advances in diagnostic methods, surgical techniques, and therapeutic agents.. The Korea Colon Cancer Multidisciplinary (KCCM) Committee intends to provide professionals who treat colon cancer with the most up-to-date, evidence-based practice guidelines to improve outcomes and help them make decisions that reflect their patients' values and preferences. These guidelines have been established by consensus reached by the KCCM Guideline Committee based on a systematic literature review and evidence synthesis and by considering the national health insurance system in real clinical practice settings. Each recommendation is presented with a recommendation strength and level of evidence based on the consensus of the committee.

Long-term clinical outcomes after high and low ligations with lymph node dissection around the root of the inferior mesenteric artery in patients with rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes based on the ligation level of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) in patients with rectal cancer. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database that included all patients who underwent elective low anterior resection for rectal cancer between January 2013 and December 2019. The clinical outcomes included oncological outcomes, postoperative complications, and functional outcomes. The oncological outcomes included overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS). The functional outcomes, including defecatory and urogenital functions, were analyzed using the Fecal Incontinence Severity Index, International Prostate Symptom Score, and International Index of Erectile Function questionnaires. RESULTS: In total, 545 patients were included in the analysis. Of these, 244 patients underwent high ligation (HL), whereas 301 underwent low ligation (LL). The tumor size was larger in the HL group than in the LL group. The number of harvested lymph nodes (LNs) was higher in the HL group than in the LL group. There were no significant differences in complication rates and recurrence patterns between the groups. There were no significant differences in 5-year RFS and OS between the groups. Cox regression analysis revealed that the ligation level (HL vs. LL) was not a significant risk factor for oncological outcomes. Regarding functional outcomes, the LL group showed a significant recovery in defecatory function 1 year postoperatively compared with the HL group. CONCLUSION: LL with LNs dissection around the root of the IMA might not affect the oncologic outcomes comparing to HL; however, it has minimal benefit for defecatory function.

Exfoliate cancer cell analysis in rectal cancer surgery: comparison of laparoscopic and transanal total mesorectal excision, a pilot study.

PURPOSE: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is currently the standard treatment for rectal cancer. However, its limitations include complications and incomplete total mesorectal resection (TME) due to anatomical features and technical difficulties. Transanal TME (TaTME) has been practiced since 2010 to improve this, but there is a risk of local recurrence and intra-abdominal contamination. We aimed to analyze samples obtained through lavage to compare laparoscopic TME (LapTME) and TaTME. METHODS: From June 2020 to January 2021, 20 patients with rectal cancer undergoing MIS were consecutively and prospectively recruited. Samples were collected at the start of surgery, immediately after TME, and after irrigation. The samples were analyzed for carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and cytokeratin 20 (CK20) through a quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. The primary outcome was to compare the detected amounts of CEA and CK20 immediately after TME between the surgical methods. RESULTS: Among the 20 patients, 13 underwent LapTME and 7 underwent TaTME. Tumor location was lower in TaTME (7.3 cm vs. 4.6 cm, P=0.012), and negative mesorectal fascia (MRF) was more in LapTME (76.9% vs. 28.6%, P=0.044). CEA and CK20 levels were high in 3 patients (42.9%) only in TaTME. There was 1 case of T4 with incomplete purse-string suture and 1 case of positive MRF with dissection failure. All patients were followed up for an average of 32.5 months without local recurrence. CONCLUSION: CEA and CK20 levels were high only in TaTME and were related to tumor factors or intraoperative events. However, whether the detection amount is clinically related to local recurrence remains unclear.

Effects of prior endoscopic resection on recurrence in patients with T1 colorectal cancer who underwent radical surgery.

PURPOSE: Endoscopic resection (ER) is a reliable treatment for early colorectal cancer without lymph node metastasis. We aimed to examine the effects of ER performed prior to T1 colorectal cancer (T1 CRC) surgery by comparing long-term survival after radical surgery with prior ER to that after radical surgery alone. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients who underwent surgical resection of T1 CRC at the National Cancer Center, Korea, between 2003 and 2017. All eligible patients (n = 543) were divided into primary and secondary surgery groups. To ensure similar characteristics between the groups, 1:1 propensity score matching was used. Baseline characteristics, gross and histological features, along with postoperative recurrence-free survival (RFS) between the two groups were compared. Cox proportional hazard model was used to identify the risk factors affecting recurrence after surgery. Cost analysis was performed to examine the cost-effectiveness of ER and radical surgeries. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed in 5-year RFS between the two groups in matched data (96.9% vs. 95.5%, p = 0.596) and in the unadjusted model (97.2% vs. 96.8%, p = 0.930). This difference was also similar in subgroup analyses based on node status and high-risk histologic features. ER before surgery did not increase the medical costs of radical surgery. CONCLUSION: ER prior to radical surgery did not affect the long-term oncologic outcomes of T1 CRC or significantly increased the medical costs. Attempting ER first for suspected T1 CRC would be a good strategy to avoid unnecessary surgery without concerns of worsening cancer-related prognosis.

Stratification of rate of lymph node metastasis according to risk factors and oncologic outcomes in patients who underwent radical resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors.

PURPOSE: Most predictive factors for lymph node metastasis in rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) have been based on local and endoscopic resection. We aimed to evaluate the risk factors for lymph node metastasis in patients who underwent radical resection for rectal NETs and stratify the risk of lymph node metastasis. METHODS: Sixty-four patients who underwent radical resection for rectal NETs between January 2001 and January 2018 were included. We investigated the risk factors of lymph node metastasis using clinicopathologic data. We also performed a risk stratification for lymph node metastases using the number of previously known risk factors. For oncologic outcomes, the 5-year overall survival and recurrence-free survival were evaluated in both groups. RESULTS: Among the patients who underwent radical surgery, 32 (50.0%) had lymph node metastasis and 32 (50.0%) had non-lymph node metastasis. In the multivariable analysis, only the male sex was identified as a risk factor for lymph node metastasis (odds ratio, 3.695; 95% confidence interval, 1.128-12.105; P=0.031). When there were 2 or more known risk factors, the lymph node metastasis rate was significantly higher than when there were one or no risk factors (odds ratio, 3.667; 95% confidence interval, 1.023-13.143; P=0.046). There was also no statistical difference between the 2 groups in 5-year overall survival (P=0.431) and 5-year recurrence-free survival (P=0.144). CONCLUSION: We found that the rate of lymph node metastasis increased significantly when the number of known risk factors is 2 or more.

The risk of surgical site infection of oral sulfate tablet versus sodium picosulfate for bowel preparation in colorectal cancer surgery: a randomized clinical trial.

Purpose: Oral sulfate tablets are abundantly used for bowel preparation before colonoscopy. However, their efficiency and safety for bowel preparation before colorectal surgery remain ill-defined. Herein, we aimed to compare the surgical site infection rates and efficiency between oral sulfate tablets and sodium picosulfate. Methods: We designed a prospective, randomized, phase 2 clinical trial. Patients with colorectal cancer aged 19-75 years who underwent elective bowel resection and anastomosis by minimally invasive surgery were administered oral sulfate tablets or sodium picosulfate. Eighty-three cases were analyzed from October 2020 to December 2021. Surgical site infection within 30 days after surgery was considered the primary endpoint. Postoperative morbidities, the degree of bowel cleansing, and tolerability were the secondary endpoints. Results: Surgical site infection was detected in 1 patient (2.5%) in the oral sulfate tablet group and 2 patients (4.7%) in the sodium picosulfate group, indicating no significant difference between the 2 groups. Postoperative morbidity and the degree of bowel cleansing bore no statistically significant differences. Furthermore, none of the investigated tolerability criteria, namely bloating, pain, nausea, vomiting, and discomfort, differed significantly between the 2 groups. The patients' willingness to reuse the drug was also not significantly different between the 2 groups. Conclusion: Although we could not establish the noninferiority of oral sulfate tablets to sodium picosulfate, we found no evidence suggesting that oral sulfate tablets are less safe or tolerable than sodium picosulfate in preoperative bowel preparation.

Subpopulation analysis of survival in high-risk T1 colorectal cancer: surgery versus endoscopic resection only.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study aimed to assess the long-term survival of patients with T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) after local or surgical resection considering the type and number of risk factors for lymph node metastasis. METHODS: This study included patients with high-risk T1 CRC who underwent therapeutic resection at the National Cancer Center, Korea between January 2001 and December 2014. Risk factors included positive resection margin, high-grade histology, deep submucosal invasion, vascular invasion, budding, and no background adenoma (BGA). We statistically divided the population into favorable or unfavorable subpopulations. The favorable subpopulation included the following 5 combinations of risk factors: positive margin only or unconditional for margin status, deep submucosal invasion only, budding only, no BGA only, and budding + no BGA. We analyzed the survival rate according to the resection type (local or surgical) in the total cohort and in each subpopulation. RESULTS: Eighty-one and 466 patients underwent local and surgical resections, respectively. The distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were significantly high in the surgical group (hazard ratio [HR], .20; 95% confidence interval [CI], .06-.61; P = .0045 and HR, .41; 95% CI, .25-.70; P = .0010, respectively). In the favorable subpopulation, both DRFS and OS rates were not significantly different between the surgical and local groups (HR, .26; 95% CI, .02-4.19; P = .3431 and HR, .58; 95% CI, .27-1.23; P = .1534, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Intensive surveillance without additional surgery may be another option in selected cases after of high-risk T1 CRC endoscopic resection.

Efficacy and Safety of Endoscopic Clipping for Acute Anastomotic Bleeding After Colorectal Surgery.

PURPOSE: Anastomotic bleeding after colorectal surgery is a rare, mostly self-limiting, postoperative complication that could lead to a life-threatening condition. Therefore, prompt management is required. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic clipping for acute anastomotic bleeding after colorectal surgery. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the data of patients pathologically diagnosed with colorectal cancer at National Cancer Center, Korea from January 2018 to November 2020, which presented with anastomotic bleeding within the first postoperative week and were endoscopically managed with clips. RESULTS: Nine patients had anastomotic bleeding, underwent endoscopic management, and, therefore, were included in this study. All patients underwent laparoscopic (low/ultralow) anterior resection with mechanical double-stapled anastomosis. Anastomotic bleeding was successfully managed through a colonoscopy with clips on the first trial in all patients. Hypovolemic shock occurred in one patient, following anastomotic breakdown. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic clipping seems to be an effective and safe treatment for anastomotic bleeding with minimal physiologic stress, easy accessibility, and scarce postoperative complications. However, a surgical backup should always be considered for massive bleeding.

Factors associated with diet failure after colon cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Since the introduction of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS), early diet after surgery has been emphasized and clinical outcomes have improved, though vomiting has been reported frequently. We defined diet failure based on clinical manifestation and images after colon cancer surgery and attempted to analyze underlying risk factors by comparing the early diet group with the conventional diet group. METHODS: All consecutive patients underwent colectomy with curative intent at a single institution between August 2015 and July 2017. The early diet group was started on soft diet on the second day after surgery, while the conventional group started the same after flatulence. The primary outcome was the difference in the incidence of diet failure between the two groups. Secondary outcomes were analyzed to determine risk factors for diet failure and readmission due to ileus. RESULTS: Overall, 293 patients were included in the conventional diet group and 231 in the early diet group. There were no significant differences between the two groups, except for shorter hospital stays in the early diet group (median 8 days, p < 0.001). A total of 46 patients (early diet, n = 20; conventional diet, n = 26, p = 1.000) had diet failure. Multivariate analysis showed that operation time (odds ratio [OR] 1.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.33-2.32) and side-to-side anastomosis compared with the end-to-end method (OR 4.41, 95% CI 2.10-9.24) were independent risk factors for diet failure. Sixteen patients were readmitted due to ileus that occurred within 2 months after surgical operation. Diet resumption time was not a risk factor for both diet failure and ileus. CONCLUSIONS: Early diet resumption does not increase diet failure and can reduce hospital stay. Anastomosis and operation time may be related to diet failure. Our study suggests that evaluation of surgical factors is important for postoperative recovery, and well-designed follow-up studies are needed.

Comparison between early surgical treatment and conservative treatment of appendicitis in cancer patients.

BACKGROUNDS: In cancer patients, the optimal appendicitis treatment has not been established. Therefore, we aimed to determine the ideal treatment option for appendicitis in cancer patients. METHODS: This retrospective study included 185 cancer patients with acute appendicitis who were divided into the early surgical group (n = 152) involving surgery performed within 48 h following the appendicitis diagnosis or the conservative group (n = 33) involving intravenous antibiotics. We compared the appendicitis treatment efficacy between the groups. RESULTS: In the early surgical group, the antibiotic duration [5.5 days (4.0-8.0) vs. 17.0 days (12.5-25.0), p < 0.001] and hospital stay length [7.0 days (5.0-11.75) vs. 10.0 days (8.0-32.0), p < 0.001] were significantly shorter. Regarding pathology, 16/171 (9.4%) patients who underwent surgery exhibited appendiceal tumours. During the 1-year follow-up period, one recurrence occurred in each group [1/152 (0.7%) vs. 1/33 (3.0%), p = 0.326]. The 1-year treatment success rate was higher in the early surgical group [99.3% (151/152) vs. 42.4% (14/33), p < 0.001]. CONCLUSION: Early surgical treatment yielded a significantly higher success rate than conservative treatment for appendicitis in cancer patients. Surgery for appendicitis in cancer patients should be considered not only for treatment but also for pathologic confirmation.

Diverting ileostomy itself may not increase the rate of postoperative readmission related to dehydration after low anterior resection.

PURPOSE: This study was performed to evaluate the risk of readmission in the first year after low anterior resection (LAR) for patients with rectal cancer and to identify the contributing factors for readmission related to dehydration specifically. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of 570 patients who underwent LAR for rectal cancer at National Cancer Center, Republic of Korea. A diverting loop ileostomy was performed in 357 (62.6%) of these patients. Readmission was defined as an unplanned visit to the emergency room or admission to the ward. The reasons for readmission were reviewed and compared between the ileostomy (n = 357) and no-ileostomy (n = 213) groups. The risk factors for readmission and readmission due to dehydration were analyzed using multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: Dehydration was the most common cause of readmission in both groups (ileostomy group, 6.7%, and no-ileostomy group, 4.7%, P = 0.323). On multivariable analysis, risk factors for readmission were an estimated intraoperative blood loss of ≥400 mL (odds ratio [OR], 1.757; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.058-2.918; P = 0.029), and postoperative chemotherapy (OR, 2.914; 95% CI, 1.824-4.653; P < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, postoperative chemotherapy, and not a diverting loop ileostomy, was an independent risk factor for dehydration-related readmission (OR, 5.102; 95% CI, 1.772-14.688; P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: The most common cause of readmission after LAR for rectal cancer was dehydration, as reported previously. Postoperative chemotherapy, not the creation of a diverting ileostomy, was identified as the risk factor associated with readmission related to dehydration.

The risk of colorectal neoplasm in ex- and never-smokers according to urinary cotinine level.

ABSTRACT: To investigate the relationship between urinary cotinine and colorectal neoplasm (CRN).The participants in the health screening cohort of the National Cancer Center who underwent screening colonoscopy between June 2007 and December 2009 were included. A total of 8121 subjects who underwent urinary cotinine measurement within 14 days from the index colonoscopy were included. Cotinine positivity was defined as having a urinary cotinine level ≥50 ng/mL. Follow-up colonoscopy data were collected by reviewing the patients' medical records.Patients were classified according to their urinary cotinine level and self-reported smoking status, and the number of patients with cotinine positivity was 1960 (24.1%). There was no significant difference in the cumulative CRN and advanced CRN (ACRN) risks according to the self-reported smoking status. However, cotinine positivity at the time of index colonoscopy was an independent risk factor for CRN (hazard ratio [HR]= 1.23, P = .006) in follow-up colonoscopy. Moreover, in never- and ex-smokers, cotinine positivity was an independent risk factor for CRN (HR = 1.95, P = .019; HR = 2.12, P = .003, respectively) and ACRN (HR = 8.89, P < .001; HR = 5.03, P = .003) during follow-up colonoscopy. The cumulative incidence of CRN and ACRN was higher in the cotinine-positive never- and ex-smokers than in the cotinine-negative never- and ex-smokers (P < .001 and P = .008, respectively).CRN or ACRN is more likely to occur at follow-up colonoscopy in the urinary cotinine-positive never- and ex-smokers than in the urinary cotinine-negative group. Therefore, urinary cotinine measurements may provide useful information on never- or ex-smokers undergoing screening colonoscopy.

Guidelines for accreditation of endoscopy units: quality measures from the Korean Society of Coloproctology.

PURPOSE: Colonoscopy is an effective method of screening for colorectal cancer (CRC), and it can prevent CRC by detection and removal of precancerous lesions. The most important considerations when performing colonoscopy screening are the safety and satisfaction of the patient and the diagnostic accuracy. Accordingly, the Korean Society of Coloproctology (KSCP) herein proposes an optimal level of standard performance to be used in endoscopy units and by individual colonoscopists for screening colonoscopy. These guidelines establish specific criteria for assessment of safety and quality in screening colonoscopy. METHODS: The Colonoscopy Committee of the KSCP commissioned this Position Statement. Expert gastrointestinal surgeons representing the KSCP reviewed the published evidence to identify acceptable quality indicators and indicators that lacked sufficient evidence. RESULTS: The KSCP recommends an optimal standard list for quality control of screening colonoscopy in the following 6 categories: training and competency of the colonoscopist, procedural quality, facilities and equipment, performance indicators and auditable outcomes, disinfection of equipment, and sedation and recovery of the patient. CONCLUSION: The KSCP recommends that endoscopy units performing CRC screening evaluate 6 key performance measures during daily practice.

CORRIGENDUM: Correction of acknowledgements & funding/grant support: The effect of curative resection on fecal microbiota in patients with colorectal cancer: a prospective pilot study.

[This corrects the article on p. 44 in vol. 99, PMID: 32676481.].

Comparison of endoscopic submucosal dissection and transanal endoscopic microsurgery for T1 rectal neuroendocrine tumors: a propensity score-matched study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) are the most effective endoscopic resection methods for T1 rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ESD and TEM for rectal NETs ≤20 mm. METHODS: Patients with rectal NETs ≤20 mm who underwent ESD or TEM were enrolled in this retrospective observational study. ESD and TEM groups were matched for pathologic tumor size and EMR history. We evaluated between-group differences in R0 resection rate, adverse event rate, procedure time, and hospital stay. RESULTS: We included 285 patients (ESD = 226, TEM = 59) in the final cohort, with 104 patients in the matched groups (ESD = 52, TEM = 52). The R0 resection rate was significantly higher for TEM (ESD 71.2% vs TEM 92.3%, P = .005). However, the median procedure time (ESD 22 [range, 11-65] vs TEM 35 [17-160] minutes, P < .001) and hospital stay (ESD 2.5 range 1-5] vs TEM 4 [3-8] days, P < .001) were significantly shorter for ESD. In the subgroup analysis of patients divided by tumor size <10 mm (ESD = 218, TEM = 49) and 10 to 20 mm (ESD = 8, TEM = 10)], there was no significant between-group difference in the R0 resection rate (83.5% vs 93.9%, P = .063 and 37.5% vs 80%, P = .145, respectively) or the rate of recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Although TEM showed a better overall R0 resection rate for rectal NETs ≤20 mm, ESD could be a viable treatment modality concerning adverse events, procedure time, and hospital stay for rectal NETs <10 mm with similar R0 resection rates in comparison with TEM.

Favorable short-term oncologic outcomes following laparoscopic surgery for small T4 colon cancer: a multicenter comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic surgery for T4 colon cancer may be safe in selected patients. We hypothesized that small tumor size might preoperatively predict a good laparoscopic surgery outcome. Herein, we compared the clinicopathologic and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic and open surgery in small T4 colon cancer. METHODS: In a retrospective multicenter study, we reviewed the data of 449 patients, including 117 patients with tumors ≤ 4.0 cm who underwent surgery for T4 colon cancer between January 2014 and December 2017. We compared the clinicopathologic and 3-year oncologic outcomes between the laparoscopic and open groups. Survival curves were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using the Cox proportional hazards model. A p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Blood loss, length of hospital stay, and postoperative morbidity were lower in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (median [range], 50 [0-700] vs. 100 [0-4000] mL, p < 0.001; 8 vs. 10 days, p < 0.001; and 18.0 vs. 29.5%, p = 0.005, respectively). There were no intergroup differences in 3-year overall survival or disease-free survival (86.6 vs. 83.2%, p = 0.180, and 71.7 vs. 75.1%, p = 0.720, respectively). Among patients with tumor size ≤ 4.0 cm, blood loss was significantly lower in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (median [range], 50 [0-530] vs. 50 [0-1000] mL, p = 0.003). Despite no statistical difference observed in the 3-year overall survival rate (83.3 vs. 78.7%, p = 0.538), the laparoscopic group had a significantly higher 3-year disease-free survival rate (79.2 vs. 53.2%, p = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic surgery showed similar outcomes to open surgery in T4 colon cancer patients and may have favorable short-term oncologic outcomes in patients with tumors ≤ 4.0 cm.

Small Bowel Perforation Associated With Gastrointestinal Graft-Versus-Host Disease and Cytomegalovirus Enteritis in a Patient With Leukemia: A Case Report With Literature Review.

Gastrointestinal graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a common complication after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Concomitant cytomegalovirus (CMV) enteritis worsens the prognosis of this condition. We report a case of small bowel perforation associated with gastrointestinal GVHD and CMV enteritis in a patient with leukemia who was successfully treated surgically. A 39-year-old man presented with intestinal perforation necessitating emergency surgical intervention. He was diagnosed with T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia and developed severe gastrointestinal GVHD and CMV enteritis after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. His terminal ileum showed a perforation with diffuse wall thinning, and petechiae were observed over long segments of the distal ileum and the proximal colon. Small bowel segmental resection and a subtotal colectomy with a double-barreled ileocolostomy were performed. The patient recovered uneventfully after the operation. Based on reports described in the literature, surgery plays a minor role in the management of gastrointestinal GVHD; however, timely surgical intervention could be effective in selected patients.