Skin closure after laparotomy with staples or sutures: a study of the mature scar.

BACKGROUND: Surgeons are divided in their method of choice for skin closure following laparotomy. We suggest that the most important determinant should be the resulting scar. This study aims to compare both patients' and independent observers' assessment of mature laparotomy scars that had been closed with either subcuticular sutures or external staples. METHODS: Consecutive patients were enrolled at least 1 year following colorectal surgery. Scars were assessed with the validated Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scoring (POSAS) tool. Photographs were assessed by a blinded independent panel. RESULTS: Overall, 232 patients were enrolled (90 suture, 143 staples). The two groups were well matched by factors affecting wound healing. Patients' overall opinion of their scar was significantly better for the Suture group than the Staples group (P = 0.028) despite there being no difference in their self-assessment of the components of their scar score (pain, itch, colour, stiffness, thickness, irregularity). The panel recorded similar overall scores for the Suture and Staples groups (P = 0.059). There was a significant lower (better) score recorded for the scar area component for the Suture group than the Staples group (P = 0.008) but no differences for the other components (vascularity, pigmentation or thickness). DISCUSSION: This study has shown that independent of skin closure method, patients who have undergone major abdominal surgery have a positive opinion of their mature scars. The patients' overall impression of the wound favours a sutured closure due to a smaller scar area (no staple marks). In all other respects, skin closure with staples would appear acceptable.

Stents or open operation for palliation of colorectal cancer: a retrospective, cohort study of perioperative outcome and long-term survival.

PURPOSE: Expandable, metallic stents provide a new modality of palliation for patients with noncurable metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma. This study was designed to compare the use of expandable metallic stents as a palliative measure to traditional open surgical management, with particular reference to length of stay, and survival. METHODS: Patients admitted between 1997 and 2002 with left-sided (splenic flexure and distal), colorectal adenocarcinoma and nonresectable metastatic disease (Stage 4) were treated with expandable metal stents or open surgery (resection, bypass, or stoma). The group of patients having stents inserted were compared with regard to perioperative outcome and survival to those having open surgical procedures. RESULTS: Twenty-two of 25 patients had colonic stents successfully inserted and 19 patients underwent open surgery. The two groups were comparable: stent: median age, 66 (range, 37-88) years; 13 males; and open operation: median age, 68 (range, 51-85) years; 12 males. The tumors were primary in 22 stents procedures and 18 open operations. The site of obstruction was: splenic flexure, 2 stent vs. 0 open operation; descending colon, 2 stent vs. 2 open operation; sigmoid colon, 12 stent vs. 6 open operation; rectum, 9 stent vs. 11 open operation. The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class was: ASA 1, 0 stent vs. 0 open operation; ASA 2, 6 stent vs. 9 open operation; ASA 3, 15 stent vs. 7 open operation; ASA 4, 4 stent vs. 3 open operation. The open operations were laparotomy only (n = 2), bypass (n = 1), stoma (n = 7), resection with anastomosis (n = 4), resection without anastomosis (n = 5). The complications after open operation were urinary (n = 2), stroke (n = 1), cardiac (n = 2), respiratory (n = 2), deep vein thrombosis (n = 1), anastomotic leak (n = 1). There were no stent-related complications. The mean length of stay was significantly shorter in the stent group (4 vs. 10.4 days; P < 0.0001). There was no difference in survival between the two groups (median survival: stent group, 7.5 months; open operation, 3.9 months; log-rank P value = 0.2156). CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with stents are discharged earlier than after open surgery. Stents do not affect survival. Expandable metal stents provide an acceptable alternative and may be better than traditional open surgical techniques.

Functional assessment of bacterial colonization in patients with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and Brooke ileostomy.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to determine whether patients with an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis have increased gastrointestinal bacterial colonization as assessed functionally compared with patients with Brooke ileostomy and to determine the effect of pouch bacterial colonization on pouch function. METHODS: Gastrointestinal bacterial colonization in 27 patients with an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and 20 patients with a Brooke ileostomy was assessed using the 14C-glycocholate and glucose-hydrogen breath tests. Bacterial colonization was correlated with pouch function and pouch satisfaction. RESULTS: Patients with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis had increased levels of gastrointestinal bacterial colonization as measured using the 14C-glycocholate method compared with patients with Brooke ileostomy (P = 0.03). Only three patients had a positive result on the glucose hydrogen breath test, two patients with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis, and one with ileostomy; however, the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis patients did have higher levels on this test. Pouch satisfaction and pouch symptoms of urgency were not correlated with levels of bacterial colonization, whereas there was a nonsignificant trend with continence. CONCLUSIONS: We showed increased levels of gastrointestinal bacterial colonization with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis compared with Brooke ileostomy. The increase in bacteria is not limited to the pouch but also are found in the proximal small bowel. There was no correlation between bacterial colonization and urgency, continence, and pouch satisfaction. Reasons for this are discussed.

Abdominoperineal resection or low Hartmann's procedure.

AIM: To compare patients having low Hartmann's resection (LHP) with abdominoperineal resection (APR) by investigating postoperative complications. METHODS: Retrospective comparative analysis of preoperative state and postoperative course for patients having surgery from 1 January 1997 to 1 July 2001, by the surgeons of the Colorectal Unit, Christchurch Hospital, Christchurch, New Zealand. RESULTS: Over a 54-month period 65 patients underwent either LHP or APR (29 LHP, 36 APR). The median age/sex (male:female) of patients for LHP was 76 years (51-90 years) (14:15), for APR 72 years (31-93 years) (19:17). The indication for surgery was predominantly cancer (LHP 89.6%, APR 94.4%). There was a high rate of preoperative comorbidities: LHP 75.9% (cardiac 62.1%, pulmonary 17.2%), APR 75% (cardiac 50%, pulmonary 15.9%). Preoperative chemoradiation was used in 10.3% of patients having LHP and 30.6% with APR. There was no difference in postoperative non-septic complications. There was a significant difference in the types of septic complications (P = 0.018), with a higher rate of pelvic abscesses after LHP (5). Perineal wound infection occurred in five patients having APR (14.3%). The median time to heal a perineal wound was 1 month (0.5-7 months). The median length of stay was 13 days for LHP (5-33 days) and 11 days for APR (6-19 days) (P = 0.0266). CONCLUSION: This non-randomized, retrospective, cohort study shows a surprisingly high rate of pelvic abscesses after LHP compared with APR. Perineal wound healing was a problem after APR, but less of a management problem than the septic complications after LHP. Both LHP and APR might be associated with significant morbidity. A high pelvic abscess rate following LHP is associated with a high likelihood of further surgical intervention and a prolonged length of stay.

Parastomal hernia following minimally invasive stoma formation.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive intestinal stoma formation using a laparoscopic approach or through a trephine, is widely described in published literature. The incidence of parastomal hernia (PH) following a stoma formed without formal laparotomy is not well reported. The present review aims to assess the current data available on minimally invasive stoma formation, with particular reference to the incidence of PH. METHODS: A literature search using the Pubmed Medline database was performed, locating English language articles on minimally invasive stoma formation from 1970 to 2002. The manuscripts were searched manually for further references. RESULTS: The number of published studies describing laparoscopic stoma formation is small (263 stomas) and the follow-up studied were short (none longer than 1 year). The incidence of PH was 0-6.7%. The incidence following a trephine stoma was 6.7-12%, and the number of patients was small (118) and the follow up short (up to 12 months). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of PH following minimally invasive stoma formation using a trephine or a laparoscopic technique remains unclear. Studies published to date are generally small and the follow up is short. A prospective randomized trial comparing minimally invasive stoma formation with stoma formation with laparotomy, is required.