T-level downstaging and complete pathologic response after preoperative chemoradiation for advanced rectal cancer result in decreased recurrence and improved disease-free survival.

PURPOSE: Preoperative chemoradiation therapy is used widely in the treatment of rectal cancer. The predictive value of response to neoadjuvant remains uncertain. We retrospectively evaluated the impact of response to preoperative and, specifically, of T-level downstaging, nodal downstaging, and complete pathologic response after chemoradiation therapy on oncologic outcome of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. METHODS: There were 88 patients with ultrasound Stage T3/T4 midrectal (n = 37) and low rectal (n = 51) cancers (63 males; mean age 62.6 years). All patients were treated by preoperative 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy and pelvic radiation followed by surgical resection in six weeks or longer (56 sphincter-preserving resections). RESULTS: T-level downstaging after neoadjuvant treatment was demonstrated in 36 (41 percent) of 88 patients, and complete pathologic response was observed in 16 (18 percent) of the 88. Of the 42 patients with ultrasound-positive nodes, 27 had no evidence of nodal involvement on pathologic evaluation (64 percent). The overall response rate (T-level downstaging or nodal downstaging) was 51 percent. At a median follow-up of 33 months, 86.4 percent of patients were alive. The overall recurrence rate was 10.2 percent (three patients had local and six had metastatic recurrences). Patients with T-level downstaging and complete pathologic response were characterized by significantly better disease-free survival (P = 0.03, P = 0.04) and better overall survival (P = 0.07, P = 0.08), according to Wilcoxon's test comparing Kaplan-Meier survival curves. None of the patients with complete pathologic response developed recurrence or died during the follow-up period. CONCLUSION: T-level downstaging and complete pathologic response after preoperative chemoradiation therapy followed by definitive surgical resection for advanced rectal cancer resulted in decreased recurrence and improved disease-free survival. Advanced rectal cancers that undergo T-level downstaging and complete pathologic response after chemoradiation therapy may represent subgroups that are characterized by better biologic behavior.

Reconstruction of rectovaginal fistula with sphincter disruption by combining rectal mucosal advancement flap and anal sphincteroplasty.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the effectiveness of combining advancement flap with sphincteroplasty in patients symptomatic with rectovaginal fistula and anal sphincter disruption. METHODS: Twenty patients with rectovaginal fistulas and anal sphincter disruptions after vaginal deliveries underwent combined rectal mucosal advancement flap and anal sphincteroplasty between July 1986 and July 1993. The mean age of the patients was 30 (range, 18-40) years and the mean duration of symptoms was 54.8 weeks (range, 7 weeks to 6 years). In addition to mucosal advancement flap repair, 13 patients underwent two-layer repair of anal sphincters (with reapproximation of the puborectalis in 8 of the patients); 6 patients underwent one-layer overlap repair of anal sphincters (with reapproximation of the puborectalis in 2 of the patients); and 1 patient underwent reapproximation of internal anal sphincter alone because squeeze pressures were adequate, as determined by anal manometry. RESULTS: Postoperatively, vaginal discharge of stool and flatus was eliminated entirely in all 20 patients. Perfect anal continence of stool and flatus was restored in 14 patients (70 percent). Incontinence was improved but not eliminated in six patients (4 incontinent to liquid stool and 2 to flatus), and two patients required perineal pads. Subjectively, 19 patients (95 percent) reported the result as excellent or good. There were no complications. CONCLUSION: The combination of mucosal advancement flap and anal sphincteroplasty is a safe and highly effective procedure for correcting rectovaginal fistula with sphincter disruption after obstetrical injuries.

Endorectal mucosal advancement flap: the preferred method for complex cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano.

Cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano is a common affliction that usually responds well to conventional surgical procedures such as fistulectomy, fistulotomy, and seton placement. These procedures, however, can be associated with varying degrees of fecal incontinence. Endorectal mucosal advancement flap has been advocated as an alternative procedure that avoids this problem. This study was undertaken to determine the risks and benefits associated with endorectal mucosal advancement flap in the treatment of complex fistula-in-ano. One hundred sixty-four patients underwent 167 endorectal mucosal advancement flap procedures for complex cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano between January 1982 and December 1990. There were 126 men and 38 women whose mean age was 42.1 years (range 20 to 79 years). The majority of the patients (70%) had complex fistulas (transsphincteric, suprasphincteric, or extrasphincteric). Fifteen patients (9%) had an intersphincteric fistula. All patients were available for short-term follow-up (6 weeks). Postoperative morbidity was minimal and included urinary retention in 13 patients (7.8%) and bleeding in one patient. Healing time averaged 6 weeks. Long-term follow-up, ranging from 19 to 135 months, was carried out in 61 patients. There were two recurrences (3.28%). Nine patients (15%) complained of varying degrees of fecal incontinence. Six patients complained of incontinence to flatus and three patients complained of incontinence to liquid stool. No patient was incontinent of solid stool. Sixty patients (98%) rated their functional result as excellent or good. Endorectal mucosal advancement flap is a safe and effective technique for the treatment of complex cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano. It can be performed with minimal morbidity, no mortality, an acceptable recurrence rate, and little alteration in anorectal continence.

Colonoscopic bowel preparations--which one? A blinded, prospective, randomized trial.

UNLABELLED: For the past decade peroral, orthograde, polyethylene glycol-electrolyte lavage solutions (PEG-ELS) have been the preferred bowel-cleansing regimens before diagnostic and therapeutic procedures on the colon and rectum. The large volume and unpalatibility of these solutions may lead to troubling side effects and poor patient compliance. PURPOSE: This study was undertaken to determine which of various colon-cleansing methods before colonoscopy would provide greater patient acceptance while maintaining similar or improved effectiveness and safety. METHODS: Three hundred twenty-nine patients undergoing elective ambulatory colonoscopy were prospectively randomized to one of three bowel preparation regimens. Group 1 received 41 of PEG-ELS (n = 124). Group 2, in addition to PEG-ELS, received oral metoclopramide (n = 99). Group 3 received oral sodium phosphate (n = 106). All groups were evenly matched according to age and sex. RESULTS: Ninety-one percent of all patients completed the preparation received. Sixteen percent of patients suffered significant sleep loss with a bowel preparation. When comparing the three groups, there was no difference in the assessment of nausea, vomiting, abdominal cramps, anal irritation, or quality of the preparation. Compared with other preparations, oral sodium phosphate was better tolerated. More patients completed the preparation (P < or = 0.001). Fewer patients complained of abdominal fullness (P < or = 0.001). More patients were willing to repeat their preparation (P < or = 0.02). Also, sodium phosphate was found to be four times less expensive than either of the PEG-ELS preparations. CONCLUSION: All regimens were found to be equally effective. Abdominal symptoms and bowel preparation were not influenced by the addition of metoclopramide. The oral sodium phosphate preparation was less expensive, better tolerated, and more likely to be completed than either of the other preparations.

Is preoperative computerized tomography useful in assessing patients with colorectal carcinoma?

PURPOSE: Controversy exists over the appropriate preoperative evaluation of colorectal cancer patients. Most surgeons agree that basic laboratory studies are indicated. Computerized tomography of the abdomen and pelvis has been used in our practice to augment the preoperative evaluation of these patients. METHODS: One hundred fifty-eight consecutive patients with primary colorectal carcinoma underwent computerized tomography (CT) of the abdomen as part of their preoperative evaluation. Their medical records were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: In 88 patients, 120 findings present on CT were otherwise unknown. Of these, 35 percent were clinically significant in that they allowed the surgeon to alter the proposed operative procedure or added additional technical information for consideration preoperatively. Findings include liver metastasis (26), atrophic kidney (3), and abdominal wall or contiguous organ invasion (11). In addition, two other solid organ carcinomas were detected. In the remaining 70 patients, CT contributed no additional pertinent information about the patient prior to this initial operative procedure. CONCLUSIONS: CT aids in the preoperative evaluation of individuals with colorectal carcinoma. It provides important clinical information that is useful to the surgeon planning the procedure. Additionally, CT permits the patient and his family to be aware of their overall status and to subsequent treatment options. Computerized tomography eliminates the need for preoperative intravenous pyelogram, improves the preoperative staging for metastatic disease, and provides a baseline for comparison during the postoperative follow-up period should recurrence be suspected or adjuvant therapy be planned.

Abdominal aortic aneurysmectomy without preoperative angiography. A prospective study.

In an attempt to analyze whether routine angiography is necessary prior to elective abdominal aortic aneurysmectomy (AAA), a prospective study was designed in which this examination was obtained only for specific indications. These included significant hypertension, renal dysfunction, symptoms of visceral ischemia, suprarenal extension of the aneurysm or a coexisting thoracic aneurysm, and diminished or absent femoral pulses. A consecutive series of 124 abdominal aortic aneurysms is reported, in which 110 procedures were performed electively. Preoperative angiograms were obtained in only ten patients (9.1%) and in nine of these an alteration in the usual operative strategy resulted. In the remaining 100 patients undergoing elective AAA without preoperative aortography, acceptable morbidity and mortality rates were obtained despite the intraoperative discovery of iliac aneurysms in 25 patients (23%) and accessory renal arteries in three patients (2.7%). In the absence of specific indications for angiography, the mainstay of the preoperative evaluation for abdominal aortic aneurysms should be computed tomography (CT). The preoperative workup can be done entirely on an outpatient basis.

Limb salvage in elderly patients. Is aggressive surgical therapy warranted?

With the continued increase in life expectancy in the United States, the number of elderly patients presenting with limb-threatening atherosclerotic occlusive disease will also rise. The risk of arterial reconstructive surgery has been considered prohibitive in many of these individuals. During a six-year period, 50 patients aged 80 years or greater underwent a total of 64 surgical procedures for limb-threatening ischemia: 17 men (34%) and 33 women (66%). Ages ranged from 80 to 97 with a mean of 84 years. The procedural mortality rate was 3.1%. Cumulative life table survival rates for these patients were at 1 year, 92%; at 2 years, 76%; and at 3 years, 76%. The cumulative life table limb salvage rates were 92%, 88%, and 83% at the same intervals. Of the patients who died during the follow-up periods, 79% still had their previously-threatened limb intact. The results in these patients, as well as those from other series, support an aggressive policy of arterial reconstruction for elderly patients with limb-threatening ischemia. Age, per se, is not a contraindication to revascularization.