1.Triple-Staple Technique Effectively Reduces Operating Time for Rectal Anastomosis
Marie Shella Baduel DE ROBLES ; Christopher John YOUNG
Annals of Coloproctology 2021;37(1):16-20
Purpose:
Stapled anastomotic techniques to the distal rectum have gained widespread acceptance due to their procedural advantages. Various modifications in the stapling techniques have evolved since their inception. The triple-staple technique utilizing stapled closure of both the proximal colon and distal rectal stump provides a rapid and secure colorectal anastomosis. The aims of this study were to determine the safety and efficacy of the triple-staple technique and to compare the clinical outcomes with a historical control group for which the conventional double-staple technique had been performed.
Methods:
One hundred consecutive patients operated on by a single surgeon were included in the study; 50 patients who underwent a double-staple (DSA) procedure and 50 patients undergoing triple-staple anastomosis (TSA).
Results:
The most common indication for surgery in both groups was rectal cancer followed by diverticular disease and distal sigmoid cancer. There was no significant difference in number of patients requiring loop ileostomy formation in the groups (TSA, 56.0% vs. DSA, 68.0%; P = 0.621). The mean operating time for the TSA group was significantly shorter compared to that of the DSA group (TSA, 242.8 minutes vs. DSA, 306.1 minutes; P = 0.001). There was no significant difference in complication rate (TSA, 40% vs. DSA, 50%; P = 0.315) or length of hospital stay between the two groups (TSA, 11.3 days vs. DSA, 13.0 days; P = 0.246). Postoperative complications included anastomotic leak, prolonged ileus, bleeding, wound infection, and pelvic collection.
Conclusion
The triple-staple technique is a safe alternative to double-staple anastomosis after anterior resection and effectively shortens operating time.
2.The Safety and Efficacy of Mesenteric Embolization in the Management of Acute Lower Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage.
Ker Kan TAN ; David Hugh STRONG ; Timothy SHORE ; Mohammmad Rafei AHMAD ; Richard WAUGH ; Christopher John YOUNG
Annals of Coloproctology 2013;29(5):205-208
PURPOSE: Mesenteric embolization is an integral part in the management of acute lower gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. The aim of this study was to highlight our experience after adopting mesenteric embolization in the management of acute lower GI hemorrhage. METHODS: A retrospective review of all cases of mesenteric embolization for acute lower GI bleeding from October 2007 to August 2012 was performed. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients with a median age of 73 years (range, 31 to 86 years) formed the study group. More than half (n = 16, 59.3%) of the patients were on either antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant therapy. The underlying etiology included diverticular disease (n = 9), neoplasms (n = 5) and postprocedural complications (n = 6). The colon was the most common bleeding site and was seen in 21 patients (left, 10; right, 11). The median hemoglobin prior to the embolization was 8.6 g/dL (6.1 to 12.6 g/dL). A 100% technical success rate with immediate cessation of hemorrhage at the end of the session was achieved. There were three clinical failures (11.1%) in our series. Two patients re-bled, and both underwent a successful repeat embolization. The only patient who developed an infarcted bowel following embolization underwent an emergency operation and died one week later. There were no factors that predicted clinical failure. CONCLUSION: Mesenteric embolization for acute lower GI bleeding can be safely performed and is associated with a high clinical success rate in most patients. A repeat embolization can be considered in selected cases, but postembolization ischemia is associated with bad outcomes.
Colon
;
Emergencies
;
Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage*
;
Hemoglobins
;
Hemorrhage
;
Humans
;
Ischemia
;
Retrospective Studies
3.The Safety and Efficacy of Mesenteric Embolization in the Management of Acute Lower Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage.
Ker Kan TAN ; David Hugh STRONG ; Timothy SHORE ; Mohammmad Rafei AHMAD ; Richard WAUGH ; Christopher John YOUNG
Annals of Coloproctology 2013;29(5):205-208
PURPOSE: Mesenteric embolization is an integral part in the management of acute lower gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. The aim of this study was to highlight our experience after adopting mesenteric embolization in the management of acute lower GI hemorrhage. METHODS: A retrospective review of all cases of mesenteric embolization for acute lower GI bleeding from October 2007 to August 2012 was performed. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients with a median age of 73 years (range, 31 to 86 years) formed the study group. More than half (n = 16, 59.3%) of the patients were on either antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant therapy. The underlying etiology included diverticular disease (n = 9), neoplasms (n = 5) and postprocedural complications (n = 6). The colon was the most common bleeding site and was seen in 21 patients (left, 10; right, 11). The median hemoglobin prior to the embolization was 8.6 g/dL (6.1 to 12.6 g/dL). A 100% technical success rate with immediate cessation of hemorrhage at the end of the session was achieved. There were three clinical failures (11.1%) in our series. Two patients re-bled, and both underwent a successful repeat embolization. The only patient who developed an infarcted bowel following embolization underwent an emergency operation and died one week later. There were no factors that predicted clinical failure. CONCLUSION: Mesenteric embolization for acute lower GI bleeding can be safely performed and is associated with a high clinical success rate in most patients. A repeat embolization can be considered in selected cases, but postembolization ischemia is associated with bad outcomes.
Colon
;
Emergencies
;
Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage*
;
Hemoglobins
;
Hemorrhage
;
Humans
;
Ischemia
;
Retrospective Studies
4.Effects of Intraoperative Insufflation With Warmed, Humidified CO₂ during Abdominal Surgery: A Review.
Ju Yong CHEONG ; Anil KESHAVA ; Paul WITTING ; Christopher John YOUNG
Annals of Coloproctology 2018;34(3):125-137
PURPOSE: During a laparotomy, the peritoneum is exposed to the cold, dry ambient air of the operating room (20℃, 0%–5% relative humidity). The aim of this review is to determine whether the use of humidified and/or warmed CO2 in the intraperitoneal environment during open or laparoscopic operations influences postoperative outcomes. METHODS: A review was performed in accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The PubMed, OVID MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Embase databases were searched for articles published between 1980 and 2016 (October). Comparative studies on humans or nonhuman animals that involved randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or prospective cohort studies were included. Both laparotomy and laparoscopic studies were included. The primary outcomes identified were peritoneal inflammation, core body temperature, and postoperative pain. RESULTS: The literature search identified 37 articles for analysis, including 30 RCTs, 7 prospective cohort studies, 23 human studies, and 14 animal studies. Four studies found that compared with warmed/humidified CO2, cold, dry CO2 resulted in significant peritoneal injury, with greater lymphocytic infiltration, higher proinflammatory cytokine levels and peritoneal adhesion formation. Seven of 15 human RCTs reported a significantly higher core body temperature in the warmed, humidified CO2 group than in the cold, dry CO2 group. Seven human RCTs found lower postoperative pain with the use of humidified, warmed CO2. CONCLUSION: While evidence supporting the benefits of using humidified and warmed CO2 can be found in the literature, a large human RCT is required to validate these findings.
Animals
;
Body Temperature
;
Carbon Dioxide
;
Cohort Studies
;
Humans
;
Inflammation
;
Insufflation*
;
Laparotomy
;
Operating Rooms
;
Pain, Postoperative
;
Peritoneum
;
Pneumoperitoneum
;
Prospective Studies
;
Tissue Adhesions
5.The Benefits of Colorectal Surgery Surveys in Australia and New Zealand
Auerilius Erastus RICARDO HAMILTON ; Amelia Alice LIN ; Christopher John YOUNG
Annals of Coloproctology 2020;36(2):102-111
Purpose:
Pertaining to the Colorectal Surgery Society of Australia and New Zealand (CSSANZ) Executive and Research Support Committee, this study aimed to assess the usefulness and outcomes of surveys sent out by the society to its members.
Methods:
From 2009 to 2017, CSSANZ members received 38 surveys, most of which were distributed from within the society, and a few of which originated from other affiliated groups. Surveys were categorised by type, topics, times required for completion, delivery method, response rates, and advancement to publication.
Results:
Of 38 surveys, 20 (53%) were published and 18 remain unpublished. Four surveys were distributed annually on average, with 2.2 published annually on average, with a mean impact factor of 2.41 ± 1.55. Mean time to publication was 31 ± 17 months. Surveys contributed to 13 publications (34%). The most common survey topics were rectal cancer decisionmaking, in 6 publications (16%), preoperative assessment of colorectal patients, in 5 publications (13%), and anal physiology: continence and defaecation, in 4 publications (11%). Publication of surveys was not related to the number of surveys distributed per year, the number of questions per survey, or the time required by respondents to complete the surveys.
Conclusion
Most of the CSSANZ-distributed surveys resulted in publications, and one third of the surveys contributed to higher degrees obtained by investigators. These surveys aid research into areas that are otherwise difficult to assess, often indicating areas for future research.