PURPOSE: This research was conducted to compare the management and the outcome of patients with colovesical fistulae of different aetiologies. METHODS: Retrospective data were collected from 2002 to 2012 and analyzed with SPSS ver. 17. Age, gender, aetiology, management, hospital stay, postoperative complications, and mortality were studied and compared among colovesical fistulae of different aetiologies. RESULTS: A total of 55 patients, 46 males (84%) and 9 females (16%), with a median age of 65 years (interquartile range [IQR], 48-75 years) were studied. Diverticular disease was the most common benign cause and recto-sigmoid cancer the most common malignancy. Anterior resection and bladder repair were the most frequent operations in benign cases, as was total pelvic exenteration in the malignant group. Multiple intestinal loop involvement and subsequent resection were significantly higher in those with Crohn disease than it was in patients of colovesical fistula due to all other causes collectively (60% vs. 6%, P = 0.006). Patients with malignancy had a higher postoperative complication rate than patients who did not (12 [80%] vs. 7 [32%], P = 0.0005). Pelvic collection (11, 22%) was the most frequent early complication (predominantly in the malignant group) whereas incisional hernia (8, 22%) was the most common late complication, with a predominance in the benign group. The median hospital stay was significantly prolonged in the malignant group (32 days; IQR, 17-70 days vs. 16 days; IQR, 11-25 days; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Despite their having similar clinical presentation, colovesical fistulae of various aetiologies differ significantly in management and outcome.
Adenocarcinoma ; Crohn Disease ; Diverticulitis ; Female ; Fistula ; Hernia ; Humans ; Intestinal Fistula* ; Length of Stay ; Male ; Mortality ; Pelvic Exenteration ; Postoperative Complications ; Retrospective Studies ; Urinary Bladder

BACKGROUND: Multiple laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of patients with diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially. APPROACH: An expert committee compiled evidencebased recommendations for the use of laboratory analysis in patients with diabetes. A new system was developed to grade the overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations. A draft of the guidelines was posted on the Internet, and the document was modified in response to comments. The guidelines were reviewed by the joint Evidence-Based Laboratory Medicine Committee of the AACC and the National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry and were accepted after revisions by the Professional Practice Committee and subsequent approval by the Executive Committee of the American Diabetes Association. CONTENT: In addition to the long-standing criteria based on measurement of venous plasma glucose, diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) concentrations in the blood. Monitoring of glycemic control is performed by the patients measuring their own plasma or blood glucose with meters and by laboratory analysis of Hb A1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, C-peptide, and other analytes are addressed. SUMMARY: The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.
Autoantibodies ; Biochemistry ; Blood Glucose ; C-Peptide ; Consensus ; Diabetes Mellitus ; Genetic Testing ; Glucose ; Hemoglobin A, Glycosylated ; Hemoglobins ; Humans ; Insulin ; Internet ; Joints ; Plasma ; Professional Practice ; Proinsulin