Routine histopathologic examination of "benign" anal lesions: is it necessary?

PURPOSE: To establish the necessity of routine histopathologic examination of specimens from hemorrhoids and anal fistula that are diagnosed preoperatively. METHODS: We reviewed histopathologic reports from hemorrhoidectomy and anal fistula excision operations performed between 2007 and 2011 in the sixth affiliated hospital of Sun Yat-sen University and Guangdong Province Traditional Chinese Medical Hospital. We evaluated the incidence of unexpected pathologic malignancy and its impact on postoperative management. RESULTS: Among the 10532 patients recruited, 8308 had undergone hemorrhoidectomy and 2224 had undergone excision of an anal fistula. Unexpected pathologic malignancy was discovered in 17 specimens (0.16 %). Overall and subgroup analysis for risk factors of malignant detection revealed unexpected pathologic malignancy was more likely to be found in people over the age of 60 years (OR = 5.516, P = 0.002 overall and OR = 5.442, P = 0.007 for hemorrhoids). CONCLUSION: Routine histopathologic examination of specimens from patients undergoing hemorrhoid or anal fistula surgery is of value for identifying unexpected pathologic malignancy. An age older than 60 years may be a remarkable risk factor.

Stapled side-to-side anastomosis might be better than handsewn end-to-end anastomosis in ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Ileocolic anastomosis is an essential step in the treatment to restore continuity of the gastrointestinal tract following ileocolic resection in patients with Crohn's disease (CD). However, the association between anastomotic type and surgical outcome is controversial. AIMS: The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare surgical outcomes between stapled side-to-side anastomosis (SSSA) and handsewn end-to-end anastomosis (HEEA) after ileocolic resection in patients with CD. METHODS: Studies comparing SSSA with HEEA after ileocolic resection in patients with CD were identified in PubMed and EMBASE. Outcomes such as complication, recurrence, and re-operation were evaluated. Eight studies (three randomized controlled trials, one prospective non-randomized trial, and four non-randomized retrospective trials) comparing SSSA (396 cases) and HEEA (425 cases) were included. RESULTS: As compared with HEEA, SSSA was superior in terms of overall postoperative complications [odds ratio (OR), 0.54; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.32-0.93], anastomotic leak (OR 0.45; 95 % CI 0.20-1.00), recurrence (OR 0.20; 95 % CI 0.07-0.55), and re-operation for recurrence (OR 0.18; 95 % CI 0.07-0.45). Postoperative hospital stay, mortality, and complications other than anastomotic leak were comparable. CONCLUSION: Based on the results of our meta-analysis, SSSA would appear to be the preferred procedure after ileocolic resection for CD, with reduced overall postoperative complications, especially anastomotic leak, and a decreased recurrence and re-operation rate.