RESUMO
Pelvic radiation injury can potentially involve multiple pelvic organs, and due to its progressive and irreversible nature, its late stage can be complicated by fistulas, perforations, obstructions and other complications involved multiple pelvic organs, which seriously affect the long-term survival and the quality of life of patients. As a multidisciplinary surgical approach, pelvic exenteration has potential application in the treatment of late complications of pelvic radiation injury by completely removing the irradiated lesion, relieving symptoms and avoiding recurrence of symptoms. In clinical practice, we should advocate the concept of "pelvic radiation injury", emphasize multidisciplinary collaboration, fully evaluate the overall status of patients, primary tumor and pelvic radiation injury. We should follow the principles of "damage-control" and "extended resection", and follow the principle of enhanced recovery after surgery to achieve the goal of ensuring the surgical safety, relieving patients' symptoms and improving patients' quality of life and long-term survival.
Assuntos
Humanos , Exenteração Pélvica/efeitos adversos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Qualidade de Vida , Lesões por Radiação/cirurgia , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/cirurgia , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
For elective surgery of colorectal cancer, current evidence supports preoperative mechanical bowel preparation combined with oral antibiotics. Meanwhile, for patients with varied degrees of intestinal stenosis, individualized protocol is required to avoid adverse events. We hereby summarize recent high-quality evidences and updates of guidelines and consensus, and recommend stratified bowel preparation based on the clinical practice of our institute as follows. (1) For patients with unimpaired oral intake, whose tumor can be passed by colonoscopy, mechanical bowel preparation and oral antibiotics are given. (2) For patients without symptoms of bowel obstruction but with impaired oral intake or incomplete colonoscopy due to tumor-related stenosis, small-dosage laxative is given for several days before surgery, and oral antibiotics the day before surgery. (3) For patients with bowel obstruction, mechanical bowel preparation or enema is not indicated. We proposed this evidence-based, individualized protocol for preoperative bowel preparation for the reference of our colleagues, in the hope of improving perioperative outcomes and reducing adverse events.
Assuntos
Humanos , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias Colorretais/tratamento farmacológico , Constrição Patológica/etiologia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos/efeitos adversos , Cuidados Pré-Operatórios/métodos , Infecção da Ferida Cirúrgica/etiologiaRESUMO
Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of diseased bowel resection and diversion enterostomy in the treatment of late severe complications of chronic radiation-induced late rectal injury (RLRI). Methods: Studies about comparison of diseased bowel resection and diversion enterostomy in the treatment of late severe complications of chronic RLRI were screened and retrieved from databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP, CBM and Wanfang. The following terms in Chinese were used to search [Title/Abstract]: radiation-induced intestinal injury, radiation proctitis, surgery. The following English terms were used to search: Radiation-induced intestinal injury, Bowel injury from radiation, Radiation proctitis, Surgery, Colostomy. Literature inclusion criteria: (1) studies with control groups, published at home and abroad publicly, about the postoperative effects of diseased bowel resection vs. diversion enterostomy on RLRI patients with late severe complications; (2) the period of the study performed in the literatures must be clear; (3) patients at the preoperative diagnosis for RLRI with refractory bleeding, narrow, obstruction, perforation or fistula, etc.; (4) diseased bowel resection included Hartmann, Dixon, Bacon and Parks; diversion enterostomy included colostomy and ileostomy; (5) if the studies were published by the same institution or authors at the same time, the study with the biggest sample size was chosen; studies conducted in different time with different subjects were simultaneously included; (6) at least one prognostic indicator of the following parameters should be included: the improvement of symptoms, postoperative complications, mortality, and reversed stomas rate. The stoma reduction rate was defined as the ratio of successful closure of colostomy after diseased bowel resection and diversion enterostomy. The method of direct calculation or the method of convert into direct calculation were used for stoma reduction rate. Exclusion criteria: (1) a single-arm study without control group; (2) RLRI patients did not undergo diseased bowel resection or diversion enterostomy at the first time; (3) RLRI patients with distant metastasis; (4) the statistical method in the study was not appropriate; (5) the information was not complete, such as a lack of prognosis in the observational indexes. After screening literatures according to criteria, data retrieval and quality evaluation were carried out. Review Manager 5.3 software was used for Meta-analysis. Sensitivity analysis was used to exam the stability of results. Funnel diagram was used to analyze the bias of publication. Results: A total of 11 literatures were enrolled, including 426 RLRI patients with late severe complications, of whom 174 underwent diseased bowel resection (resection group) and 252 underwent diversion enterostomy (diversion group), respectively. Compared with diversion group, although resection group had a higher morbidity of complication (35.1% vs. 15.9%, OR=2.67, 95% CI: 1.58 to 4.53, P<0.001), but it was more advantageous in symptom improvement (94.2% vs. 64.1%, OR=6.19, 95% CI: 2.47 to 15.52, P<0.001) and stoma reductions (62.8% vs. 5.1%, OR=15.17, 95% CI: 1.21 to 189.74, P=0.030), and the differences were significant (both P<0.05). No significant difference in postoperative mortality was found between the two groups (10.1% vs. 18.8%, OR=0.74, 95% CI: 0.21 to 2.59, P=0.640). There were no obvious changes between the two groups after sensitivity analysis for the prognostic indicators (the symptoms improved, postoperative complications, mortality, and reversed stomas rate) compared with the meta-analysis results before exclusion, suggesting that the results were robust and credible. Funnel diagram analysis suggested a small published bias. Conclusions: Chronic RLRI patients with late severe complications undergoing diseased bowel resection have higher risk of complication, while their long-term mortality is comparable to those undergoing diversion enterostomy. Diseased bowel resection is better in postoperative improvement of symptoms and stoma reduction rate.