Incidence and clinical features of endometriosis in 2484 consecutive female patients undergoing appendectomy for suspected appendicitis-a retrospective analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Endometriosis is a common condition affecting 5 to 10% of women of childbearing age. The true incidence of endometriosis of the appendix is currently unknown. Since symptoms often overlap with those of acute appendicitis, endometriosis of the appendix presents a diagnostic challenge in the emergency department. This large retrospective study investigates the incidence and perioperative clinical, radiologic, and laboratory findings, as well as possible differences between patients with and without endometriosis. METHODS: Data from consecutive patients who underwent appendectomy for suspected appendicitis without a history of endometriosis were analyzed. Perioperative clinical, laboratory, perioperative, and histopathologic findings were compared between women with and without endometriosis. RESULTS: Between January 2008 and June 2023, 2484 consecutive patients without a history of endometriosis underwent urgent appendectomy for suspected appendicitis. Endometriosis was detected on histopathologic examination in 17 (0.7%) patients. Signs of appendicitis were found less frequently on ultrasound in the endometriosis group compared to the non-endometriosis group (23.4% vs. 61.5%; p = 0.002; OR = 0.193; 95% CI 0.063-0.593). There were no differences in physical examination findings, duration of symptoms, degree of inflammation, surgical outcomes, or complication rates. CONCLUSION: The incidence of endometriosis of the appendix in patients undergoing appendectomy for suspected appendicitis was higher than suggested by data from autopsy series and populations with biopsy-proven endometriosis. Patients with endometriosis of the appendix were less likely to have a positive ultrasound finding, but perioperative and histopathologic findings and severity of inflammation did not differ from patients without endometriosis, presenting diagnostic challenges for clinicians.

Detection Rate and Clinical Relevance of Ink Tattooing during Balloon-Assisted Enteroscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Balloon-assisted enteroscopy (BAE) is a well-established tool in the diagnosis and therapy of small bowel diseases. Ink tattooing of the small bowel is used to mark pathologic lesions or the depth of small bowel insertion. The purpose of this study was to determine the safety, the detection rate, and the clinical relevance of ink tattooing during BAE. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of all 81 patients who received an ink tattooing during BAE between 2010 and 2015. RESULTS: In all patients, ink tattooing was performed with no complications. 26 patients received a capsule endoscopy after BAE. The tattoo could be detected via capsule endoscopy in 19 of these 26 patients. The tattoo of the previous BAE could be detected via opposite BAE in 2 of 11 patients. In 9 patients, ink tattooing influenced the choice of approach for reenteroscopy. In 7 patients, the tattoo was used for intraoperative localization and in 3 patients for intraoperative localization as well as for reenteroscopy. The intraoperative detection rate of the tattoo was 100%. CONCLUSION: Ink tattooing of the small intestine is a safe endoscopic procedure to mark the depth of scope insertion or a pathologic lesion during balloon-assisted enteroscopy.

[Laparoscopic rectal resection technique]. / Technik der laparoskopischen Rektumresektion.

The quality of radical oncological operations for patients with rectal cancer determines the rate of local recurrence and long-term survival. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced tumors, a standardized surgical procedure for rectal tumors less than 12 cm from the anus with total mesorectal excision (TME) and preservation of the autonomous nerve system for sexual and bladder function have significantly improved the oncological results and quality of life of patients. The TME procedure for rectal resection has been performed laparoscopically in Germany for almost 20 years; however, no reliable data are available on the frequency of laparoscopic procedures in rectal cancer patients in Germany. The rate of minimally invasive procedures is estimated to be less than 20 %. A prerequisite for using the laparoscopic approach is implicit adherence to the described standards of open surgery. Available data from prospective randomized trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses indicate that in the early postoperative phase the generally well-known positive effects of the minimally invasive approach to the benefit of patients can be realized without any long-term negative impact on the oncological results; however, the results of many of these studies are difficult to interpret because it could not be confirmed whether the hospitals and surgeons involved had successfully completed the learning curve. In this article we would like to present our technique, which we have developed over the past 17 years in more than 1000 patients. Based on our experiences the laparoscopic approach can be highly recommended as a suitable alternative to the open procedure.