Pelvic inlet closure with bladder peritoneal flap reduces postoperative ileus after abdominoperineal resection.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
C B Kulle, H A Bozkurt, M Tuncak, A Bayraktar, I Özgür, M T Bulut, M Keskin
{"title":"Pelvic inlet closure with bladder peritoneal flap reduces postoperative ileus after abdominoperineal resection.","authors":"C B Kulle, H A Bozkurt, M Tuncak, A Bayraktar, I Özgür, M T Bulut, M Keskin","doi":"10.1007/s10151-024-03059-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Abdominoperineal resection (APR) is the standard treatment for locally advanced distal rectal cancer (LADRC) following neoadjuvant treatment when sphincter-preserving procedures are inapplicable. However, complications such as perineal site infection, perineal hernia and postoperative ileus remain ongoing challenges. We aimed to compare the rate of postoperative ileus due to pelvic incarceration in APR patients with/without pelvic inlet closure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>LADRC patients, who underwent APR with/without pelvic inlet closure between January 2016 and September 2022 at a comprehensive cancer center were analyzed retrospectively. After laparoscopic APR, the pelvic inlet was closed with a bladder peritoneal flap. A U-shaped peritoneal flap, up to approximately 15 × 20 cm in size, was peeled off from the dome of the bladder with its base at the posterosuperior part of the bladder.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 80 patients included in the analysis, 27 (34%) underwent laparoscopic APR with pelvic inlet closure and 53 (66%) had no pelvic inlet closure. There was no significant difference in age, mean body mass index and American Society of Anesthesiologists score among both groups. Patients with a pelvic inlet closure had a significantly lower postoperative ileus rate because of incarceration [0 vs. 17%, n = 9/53; (P = 0.03)] and a shorter hospital stay [6.74 ± 4.21 vs. 9.00 ± 5.99 days; P = 0.03]. The rate of perineal surgical site infection (SSI) [5/27 (18.5%) vs. 14/53 (26.4%); P = 0.61) was lower in the laparoscopic APR with pelvic inlet closure group, but this was not significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Pelvic inlet closure using a bladder peritoneal flap following APR is a safe and feasible procedure associated with reduced postoperative ileus due to pelvic incarceration rates, emergent surgical interventions due to pelvic incarceration and shorter hospital stay.</p>","PeriodicalId":51192,"journal":{"name":"Techniques in Coloproctology","volume":"29 1","pages":"32"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Techniques in Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-024-03059-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Abdominoperineal resection (APR) is the standard treatment for locally advanced distal rectal cancer (LADRC) following neoadjuvant treatment when sphincter-preserving procedures are inapplicable. However, complications such as perineal site infection, perineal hernia and postoperative ileus remain ongoing challenges. We aimed to compare the rate of postoperative ileus due to pelvic incarceration in APR patients with/without pelvic inlet closure.

Methods: LADRC patients, who underwent APR with/without pelvic inlet closure between January 2016 and September 2022 at a comprehensive cancer center were analyzed retrospectively. After laparoscopic APR, the pelvic inlet was closed with a bladder peritoneal flap. A U-shaped peritoneal flap, up to approximately 15 × 20 cm in size, was peeled off from the dome of the bladder with its base at the posterosuperior part of the bladder.

Results: Of the 80 patients included in the analysis, 27 (34%) underwent laparoscopic APR with pelvic inlet closure and 53 (66%) had no pelvic inlet closure. There was no significant difference in age, mean body mass index and American Society of Anesthesiologists score among both groups. Patients with a pelvic inlet closure had a significantly lower postoperative ileus rate because of incarceration [0 vs. 17%, n = 9/53; (P = 0.03)] and a shorter hospital stay [6.74 ± 4.21 vs. 9.00 ± 5.99 days; P = 0.03]. The rate of perineal surgical site infection (SSI) [5/27 (18.5%) vs. 14/53 (26.4%); P = 0.61) was lower in the laparoscopic APR with pelvic inlet closure group, but this was not significant.

Conclusion: Pelvic inlet closure using a bladder peritoneal flap following APR is a safe and feasible procedure associated with reduced postoperative ileus due to pelvic incarceration rates, emergent surgical interventions due to pelvic incarceration and shorter hospital stay.

膀胱腹膜瓣关闭盆腔入口可减少腹部会阴切除术后肠梗阻。
背景:腹会阴切除术(APR)是局部晚期远端直肠癌(LADRC)在新辅助治疗后不能适用保留括约肌手术的标准治疗方法。然而,会阴部位感染、会阴疝和术后肠梗阻等并发症仍然是持续的挑战。我们的目的是比较APR患者盆腔嵌顿术后肠梗阻的发生率。方法:回顾性分析2016年1月至2022年9月在一家综合癌症中心接受APR(有/没有盆腔入口关闭)的LADRC患者。腹腔镜APR术后,用膀胱腹膜瓣关闭盆腔入口。一个u形腹膜瓣,大小约15 × 20厘米,从膀胱穹窿上剥离,其基部位于膀胱后上部分。结果:在纳入分析的80例患者中,27例(34%)行腹腔镜APR并盆腔入口关闭,53例(66%)未行盆腔入口关闭。两组患者的年龄、平均体重指数和美国麻醉医师学会评分均无显著差异。盆腔入口关闭的患者由于嵌顿,术后肠梗阻发生率明显降低[0比17%,n = 9/53;(P = 0.03)]住院时间较短[6.74±4.21∶9.00±5.99天;p = 0.03]。会阴手术部位感染(SSI)率[5/27 (18.5%)vs. 14/53 (26.4%);P = 0.61)低于腹腔镜APR合并盆腔入口关闭组,但差异无统计学意义。结论:APR术后使用膀胱腹膜瓣关闭盆腔入口是一种安全可行的手术方法,可减少术后因盆腔嵌顿率引起的肠梗阻,减少因盆腔嵌顿引起的紧急手术干预,缩短住院时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Techniques in Coloproctology
Techniques in Coloproctology GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-SURGERY
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
176
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Techniques in Coloproctology is an international journal fully devoted to diagnostic and operative procedures carried out in the management of colorectal diseases. Imaging, clinical physiology, laparoscopy, open abdominal surgery and proctoperineology are the main topics covered by the journal. Reviews, original articles, technical notes and short communications with many detailed illustrations render this publication indispensable for coloproctologists and related specialists. Both surgeons and gastroenterologists are represented on the distinguished Editorial Board, together with pathologists, radiologists and basic scientists from all over the world. The journal is strongly recommended to those who wish to be updated on recent developments in the field, and improve the standards of their work. Manuscripts submitted for publication must contain a statement to the effect that all human studies have been reviewed by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in an appropriate version of the 1965 Declaration of Helsinki. It should also be stated clearly in the text that all persons gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study. Details that might disclose the identity of the subjects under study should be omitted. Reports of animal experiments must state that the Principles of Laboratory Animal Care (NIH publication no. 86-23 revised 1985) were followed as were applicable national laws (e.g. the current version of the German Law on the Protection of Animals). The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. Authors will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfill such requirements.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信