RÉSUMÉ
Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) has improved the laparoscopic dissection for rectal cancer in the narrow pelvis. Although taTME has more clinical benefits than laparoscopic surgery, such as a better view of the distal rectum and direct determination of distal resection margin, an intraoperative urethral injury could occur in excision ta-TME. This study aimed to determine the feasibility and efficacy of the ta-TME with IRIS U kit surgery. This retrospective study enrolled 10 rectal cancer patients who underwent a taTME with an IRIS U kit. The study endpoints were the safety of access (intra- or postoperative morbidity). The detectability of the IRIS U kit catheter was investigated by using a laparoscope-ICG fluorescence camera system. Their mean age was 71.4±6.4 (58-78) years; 80 were men, and 2 were women. The mean operative time was 534.6 ± 94.5 min. The coloanal anastomosis was performed in 80%, and 20% underwent abdominal peritoneal resection. Two patients encountered postoperative complications graded as Clavien-Dindo grade 2. The transanal approach with IRIS U kit assistance is feasible, safe for patients with lower rectal cancer, and may prevent intraoperative urethral injury.
Sujet(s)
Études de faisabilité , Complications postopératoires , Tumeurs du rectum , Chirurgie endoscopique transanale , Urètre , Humains , Tumeurs du rectum/chirurgie , Mâle , Femelle , Sujet âgé , Adulte d'âge moyen , Études rétrospectives , Urètre/traumatismes , Urètre/chirurgie , Chirurgie endoscopique transanale/méthodes , Chirurgie endoscopique transanale/effets indésirables , Complications postopératoires/prévention et contrôle , Complications postopératoires/étiologie , Durée opératoire , Proctectomie/méthodes , Proctectomie/effets indésirables , Complications peropératoires/prévention et contrôle , Complications peropératoires/étiologie , Rectum/chirurgie , Anastomose chirurgicale/effets indésirables , Anastomose chirurgicale/méthodes , Laparoscopie/méthodes , Laparoscopie/effets indésirablesRÉSUMÉ
Introduction and Importance: Lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) for recurrent lateral pelvic lymph node metastasis could be the only surgical treatment to improve its prognosis, but is difficult and challenging technically. Case Presentation: A 75-year-old Japanese man who underwent a radical laparoscopic intersphincteric resection to treat double lower rectal cancer. Computed tomography and MRI showed lower rectal wall thickening and bilateral lateral lymph node swelling. The authors scheduled and performed the LLND for recurrent lateral pelvic lymph nodes after ISR by the totally extraperitoneal (TEP) approach. The bottom of the obturators lymph node (#263D) were positive for metastasis histologically. Clinical Discussion: The TEP approach is an especially effective option for the treatment of bilateral LLND. Conclusion: Herein, the authors introduce our surgical technique: successful challenging treatment of the LLND by the TEP approach after intersphincteric resection of the lower rectum.
RÉSUMÉ
INTRODUCTION: Low and mid rectal cancer cells have the tendency to spread in the lateral pelvic lymph node (LPLN). The Japanese guidelines recommend systematic lymph node dissection when a positive LPLN is suspected or in stages II-III rectal cancer. However, laparoscopic lymph node dissection is complex and challenging. We introduce transanal LPLN dissection using an abdominal approach. PRESENTATION OF CASE: A 78-year-old man was diagnosed with advanced rectal cancer. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging showed lower rectal wall thickening and bilateral lateral lymph node swelling. We performed laparoscopic abdominal peritoneal resection with combined bilateral LPLN dissection using abdominal and transanal approaches. He had an uneventful postoperative course with no signs of recurrence at the 5-month follow-up. DISCUSSION: LPLN metastases for low rectal cancer especially occur at the bottom of the deep pelvic spaces. As laparoscopic LPLND for low rectal cancer can be complicated, we adopted abdominal and transanal approaches, which provide the advantage of an anatomical view. This procedure may improve lateral pelvic anatomical structure viewing, and may offer advantages over laparoscopic abdominal approaches for visualizing and dissecting LPLNs. CONCLUSION: Curative resection has become available for rectal cancer with transanal LPLN dissection. LPLN dissection with combined abdominal and transanal approaches is a feasible treatment for advanced rectal cancer.
RÉSUMÉ
INTRODUCTION: Dysfunctions such as mucosal prolapse occur after intersphincteric resection (ISR) to treat lower rectal cancer, even when it is possible to preserve the anus. METHOD: We analyzed the data of 12 patients with rectal or colonic prolapse who underwent the Gant-Miwa-Thiersch procedure between March 2017 and May 2021. RESULT: There were no severe postoperative complications or recurrences. CASE PRESENTATION: A 75-year-old Japanese man initially underwent ISR and had mucosal prolapse nine months after his initial operation. We performed the Gant-Miwa-Thiersch procedure for colonic mucosal prolapse after ISR. SURGICAL PROCEDURE: Our procedure is a perineal plication method of prolapsed colonic mucosa with nylon wiring (The Gant-Miwa procedure), using a 1-nylon wire encircled three times to straighten the anal canal, with a cord inserted above the internal sphincter muscle (Thiersch procedure). DISCUSSION: Mucosal plication is performed via the Gant-Mowa or Delorme procedure to reduce the risk of recurrence. However, mucosal plication can be performed many times. Our Thiersch procedure involves encircling and straightening the anal canal with a 1-nylon wire to fix the new internal anal sphincter. In conclusion, the Gant-Miwa-Thiersch procedure for rectal and colonic mucosal prolapse, especially after ISR, is a viable treatment option.
RÉSUMÉ
INTRODUCTION: Hemorrhagic cholecystitis (HC) is a rare but specific complication of acute cholecystitis. HC progression often leads to fatal and severe outcomes. PRESENTATION OF CASE: We describe the case of a 64-year-old man who was diagnosed with HC. Intraoperatively, the gallbladder surface was congested. The resected specimen had no gallstones and showed basophilic degenerate material toward the mucosal surface. In addition, vascular congestion and red cell extravasation were noted at the bottom of the layer. The patient's postoperative course was good, and he was discharged with remission 4 days following the operation. DISCUSSION: Diagnosis and treatment during early stages are the most critical aspects of HC management and may lead to improved outcomes. We successfully performed timely laparoscopic cholecystectomy for the treatment of HC. CONCLUSION: In cases where HC occurs, appropriate treatment should be chosen by experiential judgment and consideration of the current literature.
RÉSUMÉ
INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE: Ventral hernial repair extensively requires the use of surgical meshes to cover the abdominal wall. Patients with a history of laparoscopic ventral hernial repair are predisposed to secondary mesh infections. However, strategies to avoid these mesh infections have not yet been reported. Herein, we report the safety of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a patient with cholecystitis following extended totally extraperitoneal repair of a ventral hernia. CASE PRESENTATION: A 69-year-old man presented with a five-day history of right hypochondrial pain and severe epigastric pain since the previous day. He had undergone ventral hernial repair. With a diagnosis of acute cholecystitis, laparoscopic cholecystectomy was performed. During laparoscopic cholecystectomy, we inserted the first trocar from the right lower quadrant of the abdomen. Subsequently, we completed the surgery without penetrating the mesh by the ports and observing the other ports in the abdominal cavity. The patient recovered without any complications or short-term mesh infections. CLINICAL DISCUSSION: When performing abdominal surgery in a patient after ventral hernial repair, the presence of the mesh limits the approachability of the abdominal cavity without mesh penetration. Although it remains unclear whether mesh damage during abdominal surgery causes secondary mesh infection, avoiding any damage to the mesh may be recommended, especially in patients who are highly susceptible to intra-abdominal infection. CONCLUSION: We concluded that if the surgery is completed without damaging the mesh site, mesh infection after abdominal contamination surgery may be avoided.