Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic on Surgical Site Infection in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease-A Monocentric, Retrospective Cohort Study.

(1) Background: Surgical site infections (SSIs) are a relevant problem with a 25% incidence rate after elective laparotomy due to inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The aim of this study was to evaluate whether stricter hygienic measures during the COVID-19 pandemic influenced the rate of SSI. (2) Methods: This is a monocentric, retrospective cohort study comparing the rate of SSI in patients with bowel resection due to IBD during COVID-19 (1 March 2020-15 December 2021) to a cohort pre-COVID-19 (1 February 2015-25 May 2018). (3) Results: The rate of SSI in IBD patients with bowel resection was 25.8% during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to 31.8% pre-COVID-19 (OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.40-2.20; p = 0.881). There were seventeen (17.5%) superficial and four (4.1%) deep incisional and organ/space SSIs, respectively, during the COVID-19 pandemic (p = 0.216). There were more postoperative intra-abdominal abscesses during COVID-19 (7.2% vs. 0.9%; p = 0.021). The strictness of hygienic measures (mild, medium, strict) had no influence on the rate of SSI (p = 0.553). (4) Conclusions: Hygienic regulations in hospitals during COVID-19 did not significantly reduce the rate of SSI in patients with bowel resection due to IBD. A ban on surgery, whereby only emergency surgery was allowed, was likely to delay surgery and exacerbate the disease, which probably contributed to more SSIs and postoperative complications.

Rectal anatomy after rectopexy: cinedefecography versus MR-defecography.

BACKGROUND: Conventional defecography can reveal abnormalities in patients with evacuatory disorders. With fast dynamic MR imaging systems, MR-defecography has become possible, which does not expose patients to ionizing radiation. The purpose of this study was to assess the correlation of both methods after rectopexy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-one consecutive patients underwent abdominal sigmoidectomy and rectopexy due to evacuatory disorders. Postoperatively, all patients were investigated by cineradiographic defecography. Fourteen patients underwent MR-defecography additionally. The results were screened for anorectal angle and pelvic floor position (rest, squeezing, and evacuation). The findings were depicted in Box plot analysis and compared with the Friedman-test. Descent of pelvic organs was also assessed. RESULTS: In MR-defecography, anorectal angle at rest was smaller than in conventional defecography, but there was no difference during squeezing and defecation. Concerning pelvic floor position, during squeezing, MR-defecography illustrated a lower perineum and a broader range of pelvic settings, but no difference at rest and during evacuation. In four patients, MR-defecography visualized a descent of the bladder. However, in four patients with complete evacuation in cineradiography and with no clinical complaints about incomplete evacuation, MR imaging showed deficient evacuation. Overall continence of patients was significantly improved through surgery, but there was no change in sphincter pressure, radial asymmetry, or sphincter length. CONCLUSIONS: In general, with respect to anorectal angle and perineal motility, both methods revealed consistent results. The concomitant depiction of structures in MR-defecography is helpful in the assessment of descent of pelvic organs and permits visualization of enteroceles. However, in 30% of patients, MR-defecography wrongly showed incomplete evacuation.

Sacral nerve stimulation induces changes in the pelvic floor and rectum that improve continence and quality of life.

PURPOSE: Sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) can improve fecal incontinence, though the exact mechanism is not known. This study examines the following hypotheses: SNS leads to contraction of the pelvic floor, influences rectal perception, and improves continence and quality of life. METHODS: Fourteen patients with sacral nerve stimulators implanted for fecal incontinence were examined prospectively. Morphological and functional assessment was done by endosonography, manometry, and volumetry with the stimulator turned on and off in direct succession. Questionnaires were used to determine incontinence and quality of life. RESULTS: With the stimulator turned on, rectal filling conditions were perceived only at higher volumes; in particular, the defecation urge was sensed only at higher volumes. There was also a reduction in the diameters of the external and internal anal sphincters and a decrease in the distance between the anal mucosa and the symphysis as a sign of pelvic floor elevation. Six months after surgery, continence and quality of life were markedly better than before the operation. CONCLUSIONS: We were able to confirm the hypotheses given above. The improvements of pelvic floor contraction and rectal perception are rapid adjustment processes in response to stimulation of sacral nerves S3/S4 when turning on the stimulator.