Chronic jejuno-colonic fistula and intestinal malabsorption due to multiple magnet ingestions: A case report and systematic review.

Magnet ingestion in children can lead to serious complications, both acutely and chronically. This case report discusses the treatment approach for a case involving multiple magnet ingestions, which resulted in a jejuno-colonic fistula, segmental intestinal volvulus, hepa-tosteatosis, and renal calculus detected at a late stage. Additionally, we conducted a literature review to explore the characteristics of intestinal fistulas caused by magnet ingestion. A six-year-old girl was admitted to the Pediatric Gastroenterology Department pre-senting with intermittent abdominal pain, vomiting, and diarrhea persisting for two years. Initial differential diagnoses included celiac disease, cystic fibrosis, inflammatory bowel disease, and tuberculosis, yet the etiology remained elusive. The Pediatric Surgery team was consulted after a jejuno-colonic fistula was suspected based on magnetic resonance imaging findings. The physical examination revealed no signs of acute abdomen but showed mild abdominal distension. Subsequent upper gastrointestinal series and contrast enema graphy confirmed a jejuno-colonic fistula and segmental volvulus. The family later reported that the child had swallowed a magnet two years prior, and medical follow-up had stopped after the spontaneous expulsion of the magnets within one to two weeks. Surgical intervention was necessary to correct the volvulus and repair the large jejuno-colonic fistula. To identify relevant studies, we conducted a detailed literature search on magnet ingestion and gastrointestinal fistulas according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. We identified 44 articles encompassing 55 cases where symptoms did not manifest in the acute phase and acute abdomen was not observed. In 29 cases, the time of magnet ingestion was unknown. Among the 26 cases with a known ingestion time, the average duration until fistula detection was 22.8 days (range: 1-90 days). Fistula repairs were performed via laparotomy in 47 cases.

Functional outcomes of bowel resection versus shaving or disc excision of colorectal endometriosis: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Endometriosis is a prevalent gynaecological condition for women of reproductive age worldwide. While endometriosis primarily involves the reproductive system, it can also infiltrate additional viscera such as the gastrointestinal tract. Patients with colorectal endometriosis can have severe symptoms that require surgical intervention. There are limited data available to guide the choice of resection technique based on the functional outcomes of bowel resection versus shaving or disc excision in treating colorectal endometriosis. This protocol aims to outline the methods that will be used in a systematic review of the literature comparing the functional outcomes of bowel resection to shaving and disc excision when surgically treating colorectal endometriosis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Papers will be identified through database searches, scanning reference lists of relevant studies and citation searching of key papers. Two independent reviewers will screen studies against eligibility criteria and extract data using standardised forms. Databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane will be searched from the beginning of each database until February 2024. The primary outcome is comparing the functional bowel outcomes between the different methods of surgical treatment. Secondary outcome will be quality of life, based on the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome score and the incidence of postoperative pain. A meta-analysis will be performed if the data are homogenous. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study does not require ethics approval. The results of the systematic review described within this protocol will be disseminated through presentations at relevant conferences and publication in a peer-reviewed journal. The methods will be used to inform future reviews. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023461711.

Colosplenic fistula diagnosis and management: a case series and review of literature.

BACKGROUND: A colosplenic fistula (CsF) is an extremely rare complication. Its diagnosis and management remain poorly understood, owing to its infrequent incidence. Our objective was to systematically review the etiology, clinical features, diagnosis, management, and prognosis to help clinicians gain a better understanding of this unusual complication and provide aid if it is to be encountered. METHODS: A systematic review of studies reporting CsF diagnosis in Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Wiley Cochrane Library from 1946 to June 2022. Additionally, a retrospective review of four cases at our institution were included. Cases were evaluated for patient characteristics (age, sex, and comorbidities), CsF characteristics including causes, symptoms at presentation, diagnosis approach, management approach, pathology findings, intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, 30-day mortality, and prognosis were collected. RESULTS: Thirty patients with CsFs were analyzed, including four cases at our institution and 26 single-case reports. Most of the patients were male (70%), with a median age of 56 years. The most common etiologies were colonic lymphoma (30%) and colorectal carcinoma (17%). Computed tomography (CT) was commonly used for diagnosis (90%). Approximately 87% of patients underwent a surgical intervention, most commonly segmental resection (81%) of the affected colon and splenectomy (77%). Nineteen patients were initially managed surgically, and 12 patients were initially managed nonoperatively. However, 11 of the nonoperative patients ultimately required surgery due to unresolved symptoms. The rate of postoperative complications was (17%). Symptoms resolved with surgical intervention in 25 (83%) patients. Only one patient (3%) had had postoperative mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Our review of 30 cases worldwide is the largest in literature. CsFs are predominantly complications of neoplastic processes. CsF may be successfully and safely treated with splenectomy and resection of the affected colon, with a low rate of postoperative complications.

Pain and opioid use after colorectal resection for benign versus malignant disease: A single institution analysis.

BACKGROUND: Studies comparing opioid needs between benign and malignant colorectal diseases are inconclusive. METHODS: Single institution analysis of prospectively maintained colorectal surgery database. Multiple regression analyses done on perioperative numeric pain scores (NPS) and opioids prescribed at discharge. RESULTS: 641 patients in Benign and 276 patients in the Malignant group. Unadjusted comparison revealed significantly higher NPS for the Benign than the Malignant group preoperative and postoperative day 0 (after surgery), 1, 2, and 3 (all p â€‹≤ â€‹0.001). Opioids prescribed at discharge were significantly higher in the Benign group (60.0% vs 51.1%, p â€‹= â€‹0.018). After regression analysis, there was no longer a significant difference in NPS (B â€‹= â€‹0.703, p â€‹= â€‹0.095) and opioids prescribed between groups [OR â€‹= â€‹0.803 (95%CI 0.586, 1.1), p â€‹= â€‹0.173]. CONCLUSIONS: Pain and opioids prescribed at discharge are not significantly different between benign and malignant diseases in an enhanced recovery pain management pathway that maximizes non-opioid multimodal analgesic strategies.

Toward less invasive coloproctology: The future is out there.

Medical care has undergone remarkable improvements over the past few decades. One of the most important innovative breakthroughs in modern medicine is the advent of minimally and less invasive treatments. The trend towards employing less invasive treatment has been vividly shown in the field of gastroenterology, particularly coloproctology. Parallel to foregut interventions, colorectal surgery has shifted towards a minimally invasive approach. Coloproctology, including both medical and surgical management of colorectal diseases, has undergone a remarkable paradigm shift. The treatment of both benign and malignant colorectal conditions has gradually transitioned towards more conservative and less invasive approaches. An interesting paradigm shift was the trend to avoid the need for radical resection of rectal cancer altogether in patients who showed complete response to neoadjuvant treatment. The trend of adopting less invasive approaches to treat various colorectal conditions does not seem to be stopping soon as further research on novel, more effective and safer methods is ongoing.

Primary Repair Versus Resection for AAST Grade I and II Colon Injuries: Does the Type of Repair Matter?

INTRODUCTION: The management of traumatic colon injuries has evolved over the past two decades. Recent evidence suggests that primary repair or resection over colostomy may decrease morbidity and mortality. Data comparing patients undergoing primary repair versus resection are lacking. We sought to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing primary repair versus resection for low-grade colon injuries. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients who presented with American Association for the Surgery of Trauma grade I and II traumatic colon injuries to our Level I trauma center between 2011 and 2021 was performed. Patients were further dichotomized based on whether they underwent primary repair or resection with anastomosis. Outcome measures included length of stay data, infectious complications, and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 120 patients met inclusion criteria. The majority of patients (76.7%) were male, and the average age was 35.6 ± 13.1 y. Most patients also underwent primary repair (80.8%). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in arrival physiology or in injury severity score. Length of stay data including hospital length of stay, intensive care unit length of stay, and ventilator days were similar between groups. Postoperative complications including pneumonia, surgical site infections, fascial dehiscence, the development of enterocutaneous fistulas, and unplanned returns to the operating room were also all found to be similar between groups. The group who underwent resection with anastomosis did demonstrate a higher rate of intra-abdominal abscess development (3.1% versus 26.1%, P < 0001). Mortality between both groups was not found to be statistically significant (7.2% versus 4.3%, P = 0.4) CONCLUSIONS: For low-grade (American Association for the Surgery of Trauma I and II) traumatic colon injuries, patients undergoing primary repair demonstrated a decreased rate of intra-abdominal abscess development when compared to patients who underwent resection with anastomosis.

Proximal protective diverting ostomy following colon anastomosis for penetrating trauma may not be protective: A matched cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the shift toward liberal primary anastomosis in penetrating colon injuries, some surgeons recommend a protective diverting ostomy (DO) proximal to the anastomosis. This study evaluates the effect of DO on outcomes in patients undergoing colon resection and anastomosis following penetrating trauma. METHODS: The TQIP database (2013-2018) was queried for penetrating colon injuries undergoing colectomy and anastomosis. Patients receiving DO were propensity matched to patients without diverting ostomy (woDO) (1:3). Outcomes were compared between groups. RESULTS: After matching, 89 DO patients were analyzed. The DO group had more surgical site infections (32 â€‹% vs. 21 â€‹%; p â€‹< â€‹0.05) and longer hospital stay (20 [13-27] vs. 15 [9-25]; p â€‹< â€‹0.05) compared to the woDO group. Mortality and unplanned operations were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Diverting ostomy after colon resection and anastomosis is associated with increased infectious complications without decreasing unplanned operations or mortality. Its routine role in penetrating colon trauma needs reassessment.

Intravascular placement and migration of a colonic stent into the inferior mesenteric vein.

Colonic self-expanding metal stents (SEMSs) are commonly used to treat large bowel obstruction due to gastrointestinal malignancy with great success. While mortality is negligible, morbidity from both early and late complications can be significant. Stent perforation, erosion and migration are the most feared complications. We present the first reported case of wire-associated colon perforation with placement and migration of an SEMS into the inferior mesenteric vein (IMV). A man in his early 60s presented with a large bowel obstruction due to a colorectal mass. He underwent endoscopic colonic SEMS placement for colonic decompression. The stent was later found to be within the IMV, requiring a colon resection and retrieval of the stent.

Colo-colonic intussusception secondary to a lipomatous lesion in an asymptomatic patient.

Colo-colonic intussusception is a rare clinical condition in adults. The predominant aetiology of intussusception in adults is a pathological lead point, with malignant lesions being the most common type. Lipomas are benign tumours of adipocytes that can sometimes be difficult to diagnose without histopathological confirmation as we highlight with this case report. We report a case of an asymptomatic female patient in her 50s who presented with an intussusception due to a giant colonic lipoma. Her CT imaging showed the possibility of a low-grade liposarcomatous component or atypical lipomatous tumour component. A laparoscopic right hemicolectomy was performed due to intussusception with the possibility of leading to colonic obstruction as well as diagnostic uncertainty of the risk of malignancy. Histopathology confirmed the diagnosis of a lipomatous lesion. In cases such as this, early surgical management is appropriate to rule out malignancy and prevent emergency presentation and surgery.

[Surgical treatment of a patient with tubular colonic duplication complicated by perforation and peritonitis]. / Uspeshnoe lechenie patsienta s tubulyarnoi duplikatsiei tolstoi kishki, oslozhnennoi perforatsiei i peritonitom.

We present successful treatment of a patient with tubular colonic duplication complicated by fecal impaction, perforation and fecal peritonitis. This anomaly is usually detected in children younger 2 years old. In adulthood, this diagnosis is of a precedent-setting nature. If the diagnosis was not confirmed in early childhood, the absence of typical clinical picture, long-term course of disease and difficult interpretation of clinical data complicate subsequent verification of congenital anomaly. Only infectious complications and emergency surgery in adults can make a correct diagnosis.

Laparoscopic management of iatrogenic colon perforation.

BACKGROUND: Iatrogenic colon perforation (ICP) due to colonoscopy is a severe complication and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The global estimated incidence of ICP is 0.03% and up to 3% for diagnostic and therapeutic colonoscopies, respectively. Treatment options include endoscopic repair, conservative therapy, and surgery. Treatment decision is based on the time and the setting of the diagnosis, the type, and location of the perforation, the presence of related pathologies, the clinical status and characteristic of the patient, and surgeon's skills. We present our experience in the treatment of ICPs. METHODS: A retrospective review was undertaken of all patients suffering from ICP at Bnai-Zion Medical Center between 1/1/2010 and 1/3/2021. Clinical presentation, therapeutic approach, and short-term outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: There were 51 cases of ICPs. Fourteen (27%) were diagnosed by the gastroenterologist during the procedure, 2 of whom were treated with endoscopic clips. The rest of the patients (72.5%) were diagnosed in the ER after a CT scan. Forty-three patients (84%) went on to operative management: 5 (11%) operations started with laparotomy-all were conducted in the early study period (until 2013). All other operations (88%) started with a diagnostic laparoscopy, 4 of whom (10%) were converted to laparotomy. Out of the 38 laparoscopic cases 29 (80%) were treated with primary suturing. Seven patients went on to colon resection (5 of whom with primary anastomosis). Six patients required ICU admission-with 1/38 (2%) from the laparoscopic cases, and 5/9 (55%) from the laparotomy cases. A total of 49/51 (96%) patients recovered and were discharged after 5 ± 2 for conservative and laparoscopic cases, and 12 ± 9 for open cases. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic treatment of ICP is safe and feasible in most cases. Our data supports a laparoscopic attempt at any such scenario.

WSES consensus guidelines on sigmoid volvulus management.

Sigmoid volvulus is a common surgical emergency, especially in elderly patients. Patients can present with a wide range of clinical states: from asymptomatic, to frank peritonitis secondary to colonic perforation. These patients generally need urgent treatment, be it endoscopic decompression of the colon or an upfront colectomy. The World Society of Emergency Surgery united a worldwide group of international experts to review the current evidence and propose a consensus guidelines on the management of sigmoid volvulus.

Incidence of colonoscopy-related perforation and risk factors for poor outcomes: 3-year results from a prospective, multicenter registry (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Perforation is a life-threatening adverse event of colonoscopy that often requires hospitalization and surgery. We aimed to prospectively assess the incidence of colonoscopy-related perforation in a multicenter registry and to analyze the clinical factors associated with poor clinical outcomes. METHODS: This prospective observational study was conducted at six tertiary referral hospitals between 2017 and 2020, and included patients with colonic perforation after colonoscopy. Poor clinical outcomes were defined as mortality, surgery, and prolonged hospitalization (> 13 days). Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with poor clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Among 84,673 patients undergoing colonoscopy, 56 had colon perforation (0.66/1000, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51-0.86). Perforation occurred in 12 of 63,602 diagnostic colonoscopies (0.19/1000, 95% CI 0.11-0.33) and 44 of 21,071 therapeutic colonoscopies (2.09/1000, 95% CI 1.55-2.81). Of these, 15 (26.8%) patients underwent surgery, and 25 (44.6%) patients had a prolonged hospital stay. One patient (1.8%) died after perforation from a diagnostic colonoscopy. In the multivariate analysis, diagnostic colonoscopy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 196.43, p = 0.025) and abdominal rebound tenderness (aOR 17.82, p = 0.012) were independent risk factors for surgical treatment. The location of the sigmoid colon (aOR 18.57, p = 0.048), delayed recognition (aOR 187.71, p = 0.008), and abdominal tenderness (aOR 63.20, p = 0.017) were independent risk factors for prolonged hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective study demonstrated that the incidence of colonoscopy-related perforation was 0.66/1000. The incidence rate was higher in therapeutic colonoscopy, whereas the risk for undergoing surgery was higher in patients undergoing diagnostic colonoscopy. Colonoscopy indication (diagnostic vs. therapeutic), physical signs, the location of the sigmoid perforation, and delayed recognition were independent risk factors for poor clinical outcomes in colonoscopy-related perforation.