Jaram Lee, Seung-Seop Yeom, Soo-Young Lee, C. Kim, Hyeong-Rok Kim, Y. J. Kim
{"title":"直肠手术患者难辨梭菌感染的诊断延误及治疗结果","authors":"Jaram Lee, Seung-Seop Yeom, Soo-Young Lee, C. Kim, Hyeong-Rok Kim, Y. J. Kim","doi":"10.14216/KJCO.19007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: The bowel frequency of patients who had undergone rectal resection might be difficult to distinguish from the diarrhea of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). The change of bowel movement following rectal surgery has been a challenge for the diagnosis of CDI and scarce studies discussed this diagnostic difficulty. Methods: a total of 8,327 patients in a single colorectal was evaluated for CDI, and their medical records were ret rospectively reviewed. Bowel frequency and treatment outcomes were compared between the rectal resection group (RG) and colectomy group (CG). Diagnostic time was defined as the time interval between first diarrhea (more than three times a day) and pathologic confirmation date of CDI. Results: CDI incidence was 2.3% (17/752) vs. 0.41% (31/7,575) between RG and CG (P<0.001). RG had frequent bowel movements than CG (RG: 13.56±6.16/day vs. CG: 8.39±6.23/day; P=0.010), but the interval between the time of symptom and the time of CDI diagnosis was longer in the RG than in CG (RG: 1.38±3.34 days vs. CG: 0.39±1.16 days). A total of three mortalities has been occurred (RG: 2 vs. CG: 1), and the reasons were delayed diagnosis and omitted treatment. Conclusion: Patients experienced significant bowel frequency after rectal surgery than after colectomy, and the delayed diagnosis was associated with mortality. Active surveillance for CDI should be performed for the patients who underwent rectal surgery to prevent morbidity and mortality from delayed diagnosis of CDI, but sophisticated guideline also should be evaluated to reduce over-examinations.","PeriodicalId":74045,"journal":{"name":"Korean journal of clinical oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The diagnostic delay and treatment outcome of Clostridium difficile infection in the patients who underwent rectal surgery\",\"authors\":\"Jaram Lee, Seung-Seop Yeom, Soo-Young Lee, C. Kim, Hyeong-Rok Kim, Y. J. Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.14216/KJCO.19007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: The bowel frequency of patients who had undergone rectal resection might be difficult to distinguish from the diarrhea of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). The change of bowel movement following rectal surgery has been a challenge for the diagnosis of CDI and scarce studies discussed this diagnostic difficulty. Methods: a total of 8,327 patients in a single colorectal was evaluated for CDI, and their medical records were ret rospectively reviewed. Bowel frequency and treatment outcomes were compared between the rectal resection group (RG) and colectomy group (CG). Diagnostic time was defined as the time interval between first diarrhea (more than three times a day) and pathologic confirmation date of CDI. Results: CDI incidence was 2.3% (17/752) vs. 0.41% (31/7,575) between RG and CG (P<0.001). RG had frequent bowel movements than CG (RG: 13.56±6.16/day vs. CG: 8.39±6.23/day; P=0.010), but the interval between the time of symptom and the time of CDI diagnosis was longer in the RG than in CG (RG: 1.38±3.34 days vs. CG: 0.39±1.16 days). A total of three mortalities has been occurred (RG: 2 vs. CG: 1), and the reasons were delayed diagnosis and omitted treatment. Conclusion: Patients experienced significant bowel frequency after rectal surgery than after colectomy, and the delayed diagnosis was associated with mortality. Active surveillance for CDI should be performed for the patients who underwent rectal surgery to prevent morbidity and mortality from delayed diagnosis of CDI, but sophisticated guideline also should be evaluated to reduce over-examinations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":74045,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Korean journal of clinical oncology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Korean journal of clinical oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14216/KJCO.19007\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean journal of clinical oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14216/KJCO.19007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
摘要
目的:直肠切除术患者的肠频率可能难以与艰难梭菌感染(CDI)腹泻区分。直肠手术后肠道运动的变化一直是CDI诊断的一个挑战,很少有研究讨论这一诊断困难。方法:对单个结直肠共8327例患者进行CDI评估,并对其病历进行回顾性分析。比较直肠切除术组(RG)和结肠切除术组(CG)的肠频率和治疗结果。诊断时间定义为首次腹泻(每日3次以上)与CDI病理确诊日期之间的时间间隔。结果:RG组和CG组CDI发生率分别为2.3%(17/752)和0.41%(31/ 7575),差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)。RG比CG排便次数多(RG: 13.56±6.16/d vs. CG: 8.39±6.23/d);P=0.010),但RG组症状出现时间与CDI诊断时间间隔较CG组长(RG: 1.38±3.34 d vs CG: 0.39±1.16 d)。共发生3例死亡(RG: 2 vs. CG: 1),原因是延误诊断和遗漏治疗。结论:直肠手术后患者排便频率明显高于结肠切除术后患者,延迟诊断与死亡率相关。对于接受直肠手术的患者,应积极监测CDI,以防止延迟诊断CDI的发病率和死亡率,但也应评估复杂的指南,以减少过度检查。
The diagnostic delay and treatment outcome of Clostridium difficile infection in the patients who underwent rectal surgery
Purpose: The bowel frequency of patients who had undergone rectal resection might be difficult to distinguish from the diarrhea of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). The change of bowel movement following rectal surgery has been a challenge for the diagnosis of CDI and scarce studies discussed this diagnostic difficulty. Methods: a total of 8,327 patients in a single colorectal was evaluated for CDI, and their medical records were ret rospectively reviewed. Bowel frequency and treatment outcomes were compared between the rectal resection group (RG) and colectomy group (CG). Diagnostic time was defined as the time interval between first diarrhea (more than three times a day) and pathologic confirmation date of CDI. Results: CDI incidence was 2.3% (17/752) vs. 0.41% (31/7,575) between RG and CG (P<0.001). RG had frequent bowel movements than CG (RG: 13.56±6.16/day vs. CG: 8.39±6.23/day; P=0.010), but the interval between the time of symptom and the time of CDI diagnosis was longer in the RG than in CG (RG: 1.38±3.34 days vs. CG: 0.39±1.16 days). A total of three mortalities has been occurred (RG: 2 vs. CG: 1), and the reasons were delayed diagnosis and omitted treatment. Conclusion: Patients experienced significant bowel frequency after rectal surgery than after colectomy, and the delayed diagnosis was associated with mortality. Active surveillance for CDI should be performed for the patients who underwent rectal surgery to prevent morbidity and mortality from delayed diagnosis of CDI, but sophisticated guideline also should be evaluated to reduce over-examinations.