Outcomes for Patients with apparent Chronic Idiopathic Pelvic Pain and associated Pelvic Floor Disorders undergoing Laparoscopic Ventral Mesh Rectopexy.

This article has been temporarily withdrawn, with the agreement of all authors and the journal editor, whilst an investigated is being carried out by the North Bristol NHS Trust and the General Medical Council following some concerns raised.

Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy in male patients with internal or external rectal prolapse.

AIM: Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) has been used to treat rectal prolapse, obstructed defaecation (OD), faecal incontinence (FI) and multicompartment pelvic floor dysfunction. Its value in treating men has been questioned. The aim of the present study was to assess the results in male patients. METHOD: A password-protected electronic database of all LVMRs carried out in North Bristol NHS trust & Spire hospital between 2002 and 2013 was examined. In addition to the clinical outcome, quality of life (QoL), Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Score (CCIS), obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) score, visual analogue score (VAS) for the severity of bowel and urinary symptoms and the numerical rating scale (NRS) for pain and patient-reported outcome measures were evaluated. RESULTS: Sixty-eight men of median age 35 years and body mass index 26 kg/m(2) underwent LVMR for external rectal prolapse (18) or Grade III-V rectal intussusception (50) presenting with OD, FI and pelvic pain. Ten per cent had been labelled 'chronic idiopathic pelvic pain' and 60% had undergone previous haemorrhoidal surgery. Complications were minor and included urinary retention (10%). Eighty per cent of patients had an uncomplicated recovery with 24% being treated as day cases. There were no cases of impotence or retrograde ejaculation. Median follow-up was 42 (IQR 26-61) months. CCIS score improved from 4 (IQR 0-8) to 0 (IQR 0-0) (P < 0.001) and the ODS score from 18.5 (IQR 16-22) to 6 (IQR 5-8) (P < 0.001). Patients reported significant improvement in the NRS for pain and QoL (BBSQ-22) at 3 months (P = 0.000). The QoL and the VAS for bowel symptoms were maintained at 4 years. At the last follow-up 56 (82%) patients were asymptomatic and 6 (8.8%) had persisting symptoms. There was no case of recurrent external rectal prolapse. CONCLUSION: LVMR is an effective treatment for external and symptomatic internal rectal prolapse in men, leading to significant improvement in QoL and function.

How to deal with complications after laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: lessons learnt from a tertiary referral centre.

AIM: Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) is increasingly recognized as having utility in rectal prolapse, obstructive defaecation syndrome (ODS), faecal incontinence (FI) and multicompartment pelvic floor dysfunction (PFD). This study aimed to highlight gaps in service provision and areas for improvement by examining a cohort of patients with complications referred to a tertiary centre. METHOD: Examination was carried out of a password-protected electronic database of all LVMRs operated on in one institution. RESULTS: Fifty patients (45 women), median age 54 (range, 24-71) years, were referred with early symptomatic failure (n = 27) following an inadequate LVMR or major mesh complications (erosion into another organ, fistulation or stricturing) (n = 23). All were amenable to remedial laparoscopic surgery. Functional improvements were found in pre- and postoperative ODS, Wexner (FI) scores (two-tailed t-test; P < 0.0001) and quality of life (Birmingham Bowel and Urinary Symptoms Questionnaire-22) scores at 3 months (two-tailed t-test; P < 0.001) and normalization at 1 year (P < 0.015). This was mirrored by improved linear bowel symptom severity visual analogue scale scores (two-tailed t-test; P < 0.0001 at 3 months and P = 0.015 at 1 year) . CONCLUSION: LVMR can be associated with technical complications arising from inadequate technique or from operation-specific complications that are amenable to complex revisional laparoscopic surgery with significant improvement in quality of life and function.

Enhanced recovery after laparoscopic colorectal resection with primary anastomosis: accelerated discharge is safe and does not give rise to increased readmission rates.

AIMS: Enhanced recovery programmes after colorectal surgery are promoted to minimize complications and expedite recovery, thus reducing length of hospital stay where appropriate and improving the overall standard of patient care. There are few published trials of enhanced recovery programmes in the context of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected on all laparoscopic colorectal resections carried out in our institution from May 2004 to November 2009. An informal move to 48-h discharge was introduced in May 2004 and the official enhanced recovery programme was launched in November 2008. We identified all patients with a primary anastomosis discharged within 3 days of surgery. Early outcomes - leaks, complications, readmission rates and returns to theatre - were analysed. RESULTS: In all, 606 resections were performed in this period. Median length of stay was 4 (0-52) days. Of these patients, 279 (46%) met the criteria of accelerated discharge by day 3: 2 (0.7%) were discharged on the day of surgery, 70 (25.1%) within 24 h, 116 (41.6%) within 48 h and 91 (32.6%) by 72h. Age was not a significant factor in determining length of stay. Patients undergoing right hemicolectomy were more likely to be discharged by 24 h than those with left-sided anastomoses, and patients having total mesorectal excision resections were more likely to stay 3 days. The readmission rate was 4%, regardless of day of discharge. CONCLUSION: Accelerated discharge is feasible and safe. High readmission rates reported in enhanced recovery programmes after open colorectal surgery have not occurred in our laparoscopic experience.

Short-term outcome following elective laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection in octogenarians and nonagenarians.

AIM: The 30-day outcome after laparoscopic resection for cancer in patients over the age of 80 years was studied. METHOD: An electronic database was used to identify patients over 80 years who underwent laparoscopic bowel resection between December 2000 and October 2009 at three UK laparoscopic colorectal training units. Patients who required abdominoperineal excision of the rectum were excluded. RESULTS: In all, 173 patients (80 men) of median age 84 (80-93) years were identified. American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grades were ASA 1, 14; ASA 2, 87; ASA 3, 68; and ASA 4, 4. Median body mass index was 26 (14-45) kg/m(2). Thirteen (7.5%) patients were converted to open surgery. The major causes for conversion were bleeding and adhesions. Thirty-three major complications occurred in 21 (12%) patients. Ten (5.8%) required readmission after discharge for complications giving a total of 17.8% of patients with complications. The median hospital stay was 5 (1-37) days. Three (1.7%) patients died within 30 days of surgery. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that laparoscopic large bowel resection is safe and beneficial in a population over 80 years. It has low morbidity and mortality and a shortened hospital stay. Octogenarians should not be denied major laparoscopic bowel surgery based on age alone.

Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision can be performed on a nonselective basis in patients with rectal cancer with excellent medium-term results.

AIM: Concerns exist regarding laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery due to increased rates of open conversion, complications and circumferential resection margin positivity. This study reports medium-term results from consecutive unselected cases in a single surgeon series. METHOD: The results of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer over a 9-year period within the context of an evolving 'enhanced recovery protocol' (ERP) were reviewed from analysis of a prospectively maintained database. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty patients (91 male, median age 69 years, median BMI 26) underwent laparoscopic TME over 9 years. Median follow up was 28.5 months (range 0-88). Sixteen (10.6%) patients underwent neoadjuvant radiotherapy. Six (4.0%) required open conversion and 13 (9.0%) had an anastomotic leakage. The proportion of Dukes stages were: A, 33.3%; B, 30.7%; C, 31.3%; D, 4.7%. Five (3.3%) patients had an R1 and one an R2 resection. Median length of postoperative stay was 6 days. Three (2.0%) patients died within 30 days. Four (2.7%) developed local recurrence and 14 (9.3%) developed distant metastases. Predicted 5-year disease-free and overall survival rates by Kaplan-Meier analysis were 85.8% and 78.7%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic TME surgery can safely be offered to unselected patients with rectal cancer with excellent medium-term results.

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery - why would you not want to have it and, more importantly, not be trained in it? A consecutive series of 500 elective resections with anastomoses.

AIM: We analysed the outcome of a consecutive series of 500 unselected patients who underwent elective laparoscopic colorectal resection with anastomosis (ELCRA) under the care of a single surgeon. METHOD: A prospectively collected electronic database of all laparoscopic procedures conducted from April 2001 to September 2008 was analysed. RESULTS: A total of 500 ELCRAs were performed [230 male and 270 female patients; mean age 65.6 years (range 19-93 years; American Society of Anesthesiologists grade I (103), II (246), III (145) and IV (6)]. Of these, 217 patients underwent high anterior resection. A total of 131 total mesorectal excisions (55 covering ileostomies), 152 right/extended right resections and 240 operations were performed by trainees under supervision. The indications for surgery included cancer (340), diverticular disease (96), Crohn's disease (40) and polyps (24). Mean operating time was 115 min (range 35-550 min). There were eight (1.6%) conversions. The mean length of hospital stay was 5.2 days (median 4 days). A total of 93 (18.6%) patients had an inpatient complication, including ileus (22), wound infection (14), anastomotic leakage (12), enterotomy (2), 'off-screen' enterotomy (2), abscess (3), ureteric injury (1), cardiac arrhythmia (12), myocardial infarction (5), pulmonary embolus (4), pneumonia (1), Clostridium difficile (3) and retention of urine (9). There were 20 (4%) readmissions for complications, including ileus (4), urinary retention (3), abscess formation (2) and leakage (2). The 30-day mortality was nine of 500 (1.8%) following anastomotic leakage (3), duodenal enterotomy (1), bleeding duodenal ulcer (1), C. difficile infection (1) and cardiac complications (3). CONCLUSION: This unselected cohort of patients (the largest single surgeon series in the UK) demonstrates that in trained hands low conversion and complication rates can be consistently achieved.

Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for external rectal prolapse is safe and effective in the elderly. Does this make perineal procedures obsolete?

AIM: Perineal approaches are considered to be the 'gold standard' in treating elderly patients with external rectal prolapse (ERP) because morbidity and mortality with perineal approaches are lower compared with transabdominal approaches. Higher recurrence rates and poorer function are tolerated as a compromise. The aim of the present study was to assess the safety of laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (LVR) in elderly patients, compared with perineal approaches. METHOD: The prospectively collected databases from two tertiary referral pelvic floor units were interrogated to identify outcome in patients of 80 years of age and older with full-thickness ERP treated by LVR. The primary end-points were age, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) grade, mortality, and major and minor morbidity. Secondary end-points were length of stay (LOS) and recurrence. RESULTS: Between January 2002 and December 2008, 80 [median age 84 (80-97) years] patients underwent rectopexy. The mean ± standard deviation ASA grade was 2.44 (± 0.57) (two patients were ASA grade I, 42 patients were ASA grade II, 35 patients were ASA grade III and one patient was ASA grade IV). The median LOS was 3 (range 1-37) days. There was no mortality, and 10 (13%) patients had complications (one major and nine minor). At a median follow-up of 23 (2-82) months, two (3%) patients had developed a recurrent full-thickness prolapse. CONCLUSION: LVR is a safe procedure for using to treat full-thickness ERP in elderly patients. Mortality, morbidity and hospital stay are comparable with published rates for perineal procedures, with a 10-fold lower recurrence.

Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery is feasible in complex colorectal resections and could enable day case colectomy.

BACKGROUND: Fast-track surgery accelerates recovery, reduces morbidity, and shortens hospital stay. However, the benefits of laparoscopic versus open surgery remain unproven within a fast-track program. Case reports of laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) colectomies are appearing with claims of cosmetic advantage and decreased parietal trauma. This report describes the largest case series of LESS colorectal surgery and its effects on recovery. METHODS: In this series, 20 consecutive unselected patients underwent LESS colorectal surgery including right hemicolectomy (n = 3), extended right hemicolectomy, high anterior resection (n = 2), low anterior resection involving total mesorectal excision (TME; n = 3), ileocolic anastomosis (n = 2, including 1 redo surgery), colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis (n = 4, including 1 with ventral mesh rectopexy), panproctocolectomy (n = 2), proctocolectomy and ileoanal pouch (n = 2) and an abdominoperineal excision of rectum. Single-port conventional instrumentation and transversus abdominus plane (TAP) block analgesia were used. The indications included cancer (n = 8), Crohn's disease (n = 4), ulcerative colitis (n = 3) complicated diverticulosis (n = 2), and slow-transit constipation (n = 3). Eight of the patients had undergone previous surgery. RESULTS: Most of the cases (90%) were managed successfully using the LESS technique and conventional instrumentation. Two operations (10%) were converted to standard laparoscopy, due to insufficient theater time and an unstable port. The operative time ranged from 45 to 240 min (median, 110 min). A normal diet was tolerated within 6 h by 7 patients and in 12 to 16 h (overnight) by 11 patients. Complications included anastomotic bleed (n = 1), ileus (n = 2), acute renal failure secondary to hyperphosphatemia and hypocalcemia (n = 1), urine retention (n = 1), and wound infection (n = 1). The median hospital stay was 46 h (range, 7-384 h). Eight patients were discharged within 24 h. There was one readmission (5%). CONCLUSION: Laparoendoscopic single-site colorectal resection using conventional instrumentation is feasible and safe when performed by an experienced team. The LESS approach may have advantages in terms of minimal pain, cosmesis, lower costs, and faster recovery. A randomized trial is required to confirm whether LESS offers a true patient benefit over standard laparoscopic resection.

The evolution of analgesia in an 'accelerated' recovery programme for resectional laparoscopic colorectal surgery with anastomosis.

OBJECTIVE: The study set out to analyse the outcomes of an evolving accelerated recovery programme after laparoscopic colorectal resection (LCR). METHOD: The results of a prospective electronic database (March 2000 - April 2008) were analysed. RESULTS: There were 353 consecutive patients undergoing 'three port' high anterior resection (AR) (237 without covering stoma) and 166 a right hemicolectomy (RHC). One hundred thirty-eight had postoperative analgesia using paracetamol IV and oral analgesia (IVP); 27 (16.3%) received additional parenteral morphine and were excluded. Patient controlled morphine analgesia (PCA) was used in 138. Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks, supplemented by IV paracetamol and oral analgesia were used in the last 50 patients. The time to the resumption of diet was significantly reduced with TAP analgesia (median 12 h) and IVP (median 12 h) compared with PCA median (36 h) (chi(2) = 143; 4df: P < 0.001). The postoperative hospital stay was significantly reduced with TAP analgesia (median 2 days) and IVP (median 3 days) compared with PCA (median 5 days); chi(2) = 73; 2df: P < 0.001. Seventeen (34%) TAP and nine (6.5%) IVP patients were discharged within 24 h of surgery compared with no patient in the PCA group. Ninety-three per cent of PCA, 35% IVP and 10% TAP patients were discharged in more than 3 days. The movement towards 'accelerated recovery' was not associated with any increased risk of urinary retention, return to theatre, readmission and/or 30 day mortality. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic surgery utilizing IV paracetamol and TAP blocks for postoperative analgesia aids safe effective 'accelerated recovery' in an unselected patient population undergoing right hemicolectomy and high anterior resection. Routine epidural anaesthesia is unnecessary for LCR. Morphine PCA is associated with delayed recovery.

Emergency laparoscopic surgery for complicated diverticular disease.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyse the outcome of emergency laparoscopic surgical management of complicated diverticular disease. METHOD: A prospectively collected electronic database of all colorectal laparoscopic procedures between April 2001 and September 2007 has been used to identify outcomes in patients presenting with complicated diverticular disease. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients (28 men), median age 69 years (23-95), ASA grade II (12), III (38), IV (16) have undergone emergency surgery for complicated diverticulitis--Hinchey grades I (27), II (29), III (7) and diverticular bleeding (3) over a 6(1/2)-year period: 43 high anterior resections, 17 Hartmann's resections and seven low anterior resections. Diverticular fistulas were seen in 16 patients: colovaginal (7), colovesical (2), colo-fallopian (4), entero-colic (3). The median operation time was 110 min (45-195 min). There was one conversion to open surgery. Postoperative analgesia was provided by intravenous Paracetamol in 33 patients (50%), patient-controlled analgesia in 24 (36%), oral Paracetamol and Oramorph (12%) and epidural opioid infusion (1.5%). The median time to normal diet was 24 h (4 h-6 days) and median hospital stay 5 days (2-30). There were two deaths (3.3%); anastomotic leak, ventricular fibrillation (VF) cardiac arrest. Other complications included: wound infection eight (12%), anastomotic leak four (8%), port-site hernia one and one case of Clostridium difficile colitis requiring colectomy. There were five (7.5%) returns to theatre and two readmissions (3%). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic resectional surgery in complicated diverticular disease is a feasible, safe and a largely predictable operation that allows for early hospital discharge and, in our opinion, improved patient care. We are encouraged to continue to offer our patients the option of an emergency laparoscopic resection.

Laparoscopy in the management of closed loop sigmoid volvulus.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the feasibility and surgical outcome of elective laparoscopic surgery for acute closed loop sigmoid volvulus. METHOD: A prospectively electronic database of colorectal laparoscopic procedures identified nine consecutive patients with sigmoid volvulus managed by colonoscopic decompression followed by same admission laparoscopic recto-sigmoidectomy. RESULTS: Between January 2001 and February 2007, nine patients, ASA I (one), II (four), III (four) with sigmoid volvulus were treated: seven were women. Their age distribution was 37-87 years (median 64). The volvulus was the first episode in one patient, the second episode for four and the third (or more) for the remainder. The median operation time was 115 min (45-145). No anastomosis was de-functioned. Postoperative analgesia was parenteral paracetamol (eight) supplemented by 10 mg oral morphine in one case; a ninth patient received patient controlled parenteral morphine for 36 h. Complications included: ileus (one), myocardial infarct (one) and wound infection (one). There was one death on day 32 from a brainstem infarct. Seven had an uncomplicated recovery. The median postoperative stay was 4 days (2-32). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic recto-sigmoidectomy postcolonoscopic decompression is a good option for patients with sigmoid volvulus. Surgical complications are minimal and recovery is quick.

Laparoscopic emergency and elective surgery for ulcerative colitis.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse surgical outcomes of fulminate and medically resistant ulcerative colitis (UC) carried out laparoscopically. METHOD: A prospective database identified 69 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for UC under the senior author over a 5-year period to April 2006. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients (18 male patients), median BMI 26, underwent laparoscopic subtotal colectomy (LSTC): 22 acute emergencies, 10 refractory to medical therapy and unfit for restorative proctocolectomy. All were receiving iv steroids; azathioprine (7), cyclosporin (5). The median operation time was 135 min (65-280). There was one conversion. Twenty-nine patients have subsequently undergone completion proctectomy and W-pouch formation [24 patients were performed laparoscopically - laparoscopic completion proctectomy (LCP)]; widespread adhesions precluded in five patients. Twenty-six patients underwent restorative laparoscopic proctocolectomy (LRP) - one conversion. Twenty patients underwent W-pouch reconstruction via a Pfannenstiel incision. Six J-pouches were constructed and returned via the ileostomy site. Three underwent a laparoscopic pan-proctocolectomy (LPPC); one conversion. Eight patients underwent open STC. The median time to normal diet was 48 h (1-7 days) for LSTC/LCP and 36 h (1-5 days) for LRP. There were two major complications following LRP, two following LSTC, one following LCP, one following LPPC and five following open surgery. Median hospital stay was 8 days (6-72) for LSTC, 7 days (6-9) for LCP and 5 days (3-45) for LRP. There were six 30-day readmissions following laparoscopic surgery (DVT, reactive depression, ileostomy hold up (2), abdominal pain and high output ileostomy). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic subtotal and restorative proctocolectomies in fulminate and medically resistant UC are feasible, safe and largely predictable operations that allow for early hospital discharge. Laparoscopic colectomy facilitates subsequent proctectomy and pouch construction.

Advanced Trauma Life Support aboard RFA Argus.

The Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) system was adopted for casualty reception and resuscitation. ATLS permitted well-informed triage decisions to be made, coupled with appropriate initial, possibly life-saving, treatment. The training given on board has continued to benefit patients treated by ex-Argus staff in their peacetime roles.

To replace or not to replace? - Partial coning and a sixth nerve palsy secondary due to displacement of a tunnelled intrathecal catheter for pain control.

We report the displacement of a tunnelled intrathecal catheter causing significant cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak, resulting in partial coning and a sixth nerve palsy. The patient had advanced malignant mesothelioma and all other methods of pain control had been unsuccessful. As far as we are aware, there are no published reports of early replacement of an intrathecal catheter in patients with neurological sequelae. Surgical re-siting of the intrathecal catheter produced good pain relief for many months. Doctors involved in the use of indwelling intrathecal catheters for pain control must be aware of the risk of significant neurological sequelae but should not dismiss re-establishment of intrathecal therapy in the presence of significant neurological complications.