6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Closure of the perineal defect after abdominoperineal excision for rectal adenocarcinoma - ACPGBI Position Statement

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references52

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid or low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): short-term outcomes of an open-label randomised controlled trial.

          The safety and short-term efficacy of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer after preoperative chemoradiotherapy has not been demonstrated. The aim of the randomised Comparison of Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid and low REctal cancer After Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN) trial was to compare open surgery with laparoscopic surgery for mid or low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Between April 4, 2006, and Aug 26, 2009, patients with cT3N0-2 mid or low rectal cancer without distant metastasis after preoperative chemoradiotherapy were enrolled at three tertiary-referral hospitals. Patients were randomised 1:1 to receive either open surgery (n=170) or laparoscopic surgery (n=170), stratified according to sex and preoperative chemotherapy regimen. Short-term outcomes assessed were involvement of the circumferential resection margin, macroscopic quality of the total mesorectal excision specimen, number of harvested lymph nodes, recovery of bowel function, perioperative morbidity, postoperative pain, and quality of life. Analyses were based on the intention-to-treat population. Patients continue to be followed up for the primary outcome (3-year disease-free survival). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00470951. Two patients (1.2%) in the laparoscopic group were converted to open surgery, but were included in the laparoscopic group for analyses. Estimated blood loss was less in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (median 217.5 mL [150.0-400.0] in the open group vs 200.0 mL [100.0-300.0] in the laparoscopic group, p=0.006), although surgery time was longer in the laparoscopic group (mean 244.9 min [SD 75.4] vs 197.0 min [62.9], p<0.0001). Involvement of the circumferential resection margin, macroscopic quality of the total mesorectal excision specimen, number of harvested lymph nodes, and perioperative morbidity did not differ between the two groups. The laparoscopic surgery group showed earlier recovery of bowel function than the open surgery group (time to pass first flatus, median 38.5 h [23.0-53.0] vs 60.0 h [43.0-73.0], p<0.0001; time to resume a normal diet, 85.0 h [66.0-95.0] vs 93.0 h [86.0-121.0], p<0.0001; time to first defecation, 96.5 h [70.0-125.0] vs 123 h [94.0-156.0], p<0.0001). The total amount of morphine used was less in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (median 107.2 mg [80.0-150.0] vs 156.9 mg [117.0-185.2], p<0.0001). 3 months after proctectomy or ileostomy takedown, the laparoscopic group showed better physical functioning score than the open group (0.501 [n=122] vs -4.970 [n=128], p=0.0073), less fatigue (-5.659 [n=122] vs 0.098 [n=129], p=0.0206), and fewer micturition (-2.583 [n=122] vs 4.725 [n=129], p=0.0002), gastrointestinal (-0.400 [n=122] vs 4.331 [n=129], p=0.0102), and defecation problems (0.535 [n=103] vs 5.327 [n=99], p=0.0184) in repeated measures analysis of covariance, adjusted for baseline values. Laparoscopic surgery after preoperative chemoradiotherapy for mid or low rectal cancer is safe and has short-term benefits compared with open surgery; the quality of oncological resection was equivalent. 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Radiotherapy and wound healing.

            Radiotherapy is an invaluable weapon when treating cancer. However, the deleterious effects of radiation, both immediate and long-term, may have a significant effect on local tissues. Problematic wound healing in radiation-damaged tissue constitutes a major problem that is frequently overlooked during the management of patients who require radiotherapy, or have had radiotherapy in the past. Poor wound healing may lead to chronic ulceration, pain, secondary infection and psychological distress and compromise the outcome of general or reconstructive surgery. We discuss the pathophysiology of poor wound healing following radiotherapy, specific problems for radiation-damaged tissue and potential treatments to improve wound healing of irradiated tissues.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Multicentre experience with extralevator abdominoperineal excision for low rectal cancer.

              Abdominoperineal excision (APE) for low rectal cancer is associated with higher rates of circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement and intraoperative perforation (IOPs) than anterior resection for higher tumours. This multicentre observational study was designed to confirm that extralevator APE can improve outcomes and investigated the morbidity associated with such extensive surgery. Some 176 extralevator APE procedures from 11 European colorectal surgeons were compared with 124 standard excisions from one UK centre. Clinical and pathological data were collected along with specimen photographs. Tissue morphometry was performed on the distal ten slices of the excision. Extralevator APE removed more tissue from outside the smooth muscle layer per slice (median area 2120 versus 1259 mm(2); P < 0.001) leading to a reduction in CRM involvement (from 49.6 to 20.3 per cent; P < 0.001) and IOP (from 28.2 to 8.2 per cent; P < 0.001) compared with standard surgery. However, extralevator surgery was associated with an increase in perineal wound complications (from 20 to 38.0 per cent; P = 0.019). Extralevator APE is associated with less CRM involvement and IOP than standard surgery. Copyright (c) 2010 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Colorectal Disease
                Colorectal Dis
                Wiley
                14628910
                September 2018
                September 2018
                September 04 2018
                : 20
                : 5-23
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of General Surgery; Poole Hospital NHS Foundation Trust; Poole, Dorset UK
                [2 ]Department of General Surgery; Royal Derby Hospital; Derby UK
                [3 ]Department of General Surgery; Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust; Yeovil, Somerset UK
                [4 ]Department of Surgery and Cancer; Imperial College London; London UK
                [5 ]Department of Surgery; Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital; Exeter UK
                [6 ]Department of Colorectal Surgery; Nottingham University Hospital; Nottingham UK
                [7 ]Department of General Surgery; Leicester General Hospital; Leicester UK
                [8 ]University of Bath; Bath UK
                Article
                10.1111/codi.14348
                30182511
                bb58d6d8-3c35-47c2-a6c1-6dbe07fd1d14
                © 2018

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article