Toward less invasive coloproctology: The future is out there.

Medical care has undergone remarkable improvements over the past few decades. One of the most important innovative breakthroughs in modern medicine is the advent of minimally and less invasive treatments. The trend towards employing less invasive treatment has been vividly shown in the field of gastroenterology, particularly coloproctology. Parallel to foregut interventions, colorectal surgery has shifted towards a minimally invasive approach. Coloproctology, including both medical and surgical management of colorectal diseases, has undergone a remarkable paradigm shift. The treatment of both benign and malignant colorectal conditions has gradually transitioned towards more conservative and less invasive approaches. An interesting paradigm shift was the trend to avoid the need for radical resection of rectal cancer altogether in patients who showed complete response to neoadjuvant treatment. The trend of adopting less invasive approaches to treat various colorectal conditions does not seem to be stopping soon as further research on novel, more effective and safer methods is ongoing.

Proximal protective diverting ostomy following colon anastomosis for penetrating trauma may not be protective: A matched cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the shift toward liberal primary anastomosis in penetrating colon injuries, some surgeons recommend a protective diverting ostomy (DO) proximal to the anastomosis. This study evaluates the effect of DO on outcomes in patients undergoing colon resection and anastomosis following penetrating trauma. METHODS: The TQIP database (2013-2018) was queried for penetrating colon injuries undergoing colectomy and anastomosis. Patients receiving DO were propensity matched to patients without diverting ostomy (woDO) (1:3). Outcomes were compared between groups. RESULTS: After matching, 89 DO patients were analyzed. The DO group had more surgical site infections (32 â€‹% vs. 21 â€‹%; p â€‹< â€‹0.05) and longer hospital stay (20 [13-27] vs. 15 [9-25]; p â€‹< â€‹0.05) compared to the woDO group. Mortality and unplanned operations were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Diverting ostomy after colon resection and anastomosis is associated with increased infectious complications without decreasing unplanned operations or mortality. Its routine role in penetrating colon trauma needs reassessment.

Primary Repair Versus Resection for AAST Grade I and II Colon Injuries: Does the Type of Repair Matter?

INTRODUCTION: The management of traumatic colon injuries has evolved over the past two decades. Recent evidence suggests that primary repair or resection over colostomy may decrease morbidity and mortality. Data comparing patients undergoing primary repair versus resection are lacking. We sought to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing primary repair versus resection for low-grade colon injuries. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients who presented with American Association for the Surgery of Trauma grade I and II traumatic colon injuries to our Level I trauma center between 2011 and 2021 was performed. Patients were further dichotomized based on whether they underwent primary repair or resection with anastomosis. Outcome measures included length of stay data, infectious complications, and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 120 patients met inclusion criteria. The majority of patients (76.7%) were male, and the average age was 35.6 ± 13.1 y. Most patients also underwent primary repair (80.8%). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in arrival physiology or in injury severity score. Length of stay data including hospital length of stay, intensive care unit length of stay, and ventilator days were similar between groups. Postoperative complications including pneumonia, surgical site infections, fascial dehiscence, the development of enterocutaneous fistulas, and unplanned returns to the operating room were also all found to be similar between groups. The group who underwent resection with anastomosis did demonstrate a higher rate of intra-abdominal abscess development (3.1% versus 26.1%, P < 0001). Mortality between both groups was not found to be statistically significant (7.2% versus 4.3%, P = 0.4) CONCLUSIONS: For low-grade (American Association for the Surgery of Trauma I and II) traumatic colon injuries, patients undergoing primary repair demonstrated a decreased rate of intra-abdominal abscess development when compared to patients who underwent resection with anastomosis.

Intravascular placement and migration of a colonic stent into the inferior mesenteric vein.

Colonic self-expanding metal stents (SEMSs) are commonly used to treat large bowel obstruction due to gastrointestinal malignancy with great success. While mortality is negligible, morbidity from both early and late complications can be significant. Stent perforation, erosion and migration are the most feared complications. We present the first reported case of wire-associated colon perforation with placement and migration of an SEMS into the inferior mesenteric vein (IMV). A man in his early 60s presented with a large bowel obstruction due to a colorectal mass. He underwent endoscopic colonic SEMS placement for colonic decompression. The stent was later found to be within the IMV, requiring a colon resection and retrieval of the stent.

Laparoscopic management of iatrogenic colon perforation.

BACKGROUND: Iatrogenic colon perforation (ICP) due to colonoscopy is a severe complication and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The global estimated incidence of ICP is 0.03% and up to 3% for diagnostic and therapeutic colonoscopies, respectively. Treatment options include endoscopic repair, conservative therapy, and surgery. Treatment decision is based on the time and the setting of the diagnosis, the type, and location of the perforation, the presence of related pathologies, the clinical status and characteristic of the patient, and surgeon's skills. We present our experience in the treatment of ICPs. METHODS: A retrospective review was undertaken of all patients suffering from ICP at Bnai-Zion Medical Center between 1/1/2010 and 1/3/2021. Clinical presentation, therapeutic approach, and short-term outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: There were 51 cases of ICPs. Fourteen (27%) were diagnosed by the gastroenterologist during the procedure, 2 of whom were treated with endoscopic clips. The rest of the patients (72.5%) were diagnosed in the ER after a CT scan. Forty-three patients (84%) went on to operative management: 5 (11%) operations started with laparotomy-all were conducted in the early study period (until 2013). All other operations (88%) started with a diagnostic laparoscopy, 4 of whom (10%) were converted to laparotomy. Out of the 38 laparoscopic cases 29 (80%) were treated with primary suturing. Seven patients went on to colon resection (5 of whom with primary anastomosis). Six patients required ICU admission-with 1/38 (2%) from the laparoscopic cases, and 5/9 (55%) from the laparotomy cases. A total of 49/51 (96%) patients recovered and were discharged after 5 ± 2 for conservative and laparoscopic cases, and 12 ± 9 for open cases. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic treatment of ICP is safe and feasible in most cases. Our data supports a laparoscopic attempt at any such scenario.

[Surgical treatment of a patient with tubular colonic duplication complicated by perforation and peritonitis]. / Uspeshnoe lechenie patsienta s tubulyarnoi duplikatsiei tolstoi kishki, oslozhnennoi perforatsiei i peritonitom.

We present successful treatment of a patient with tubular colonic duplication complicated by fecal impaction, perforation and fecal peritonitis. This anomaly is usually detected in children younger 2 years old. In adulthood, this diagnosis is of a precedent-setting nature. If the diagnosis was not confirmed in early childhood, the absence of typical clinical picture, long-term course of disease and difficult interpretation of clinical data complicate subsequent verification of congenital anomaly. Only infectious complications and emergency surgery in adults can make a correct diagnosis.

Colo-colonic intussusception secondary to a lipomatous lesion in an asymptomatic patient.

Colo-colonic intussusception is a rare clinical condition in adults. The predominant aetiology of intussusception in adults is a pathological lead point, with malignant lesions being the most common type. Lipomas are benign tumours of adipocytes that can sometimes be difficult to diagnose without histopathological confirmation as we highlight with this case report. We report a case of an asymptomatic female patient in her 50s who presented with an intussusception due to a giant colonic lipoma. Her CT imaging showed the possibility of a low-grade liposarcomatous component or atypical lipomatous tumour component. A laparoscopic right hemicolectomy was performed due to intussusception with the possibility of leading to colonic obstruction as well as diagnostic uncertainty of the risk of malignancy. Histopathology confirmed the diagnosis of a lipomatous lesion. In cases such as this, early surgical management is appropriate to rule out malignancy and prevent emergency presentation and surgery.

Colonic Perforation Secondary to COVID-19 Induced Hemorrhagic Colitis in a Patient Heterozygous for Factor V Leiden.

Up to 17.6% of COVID-19 positive patients present with gastrointestinal symptoms and bowel wall abnormalities have been described in up to 31% of COVID-19 positive patients. Here, we present a case of a 40-year-old male diagnosed with COVID-19 complicated by hemorrhagic colitis leading to colonic perforation. CT scan of abdomen and pelvis demonstrated markedly distended descending and sigmoid colon with poorly defined wall, pneumatosis, and pneumoperitoneum. The patient was taken for emergent exploratory laparotomy for extended left hemicolectomy, partial omentectomy, transverse colostomy creation, abdominal washout, repair of small bowel, and appendectomy. The patient was brought back for repeat exploratory laparotomy with ICG perfusion assessment. Patient was found to be heterozygous for factor V Leiden mutation and was never vaccinated for COVID-19. Our case demonstrates a novel use for indocyanine green (ICG) to assess perfusion and underscores the importance of completing a thorough hypercoagulable evaluation following COVID-19 induced thrombotic event.

WSES consensus guidelines on sigmoid volvulus management.

Sigmoid volvulus is a common surgical emergency, especially in elderly patients. Patients can present with a wide range of clinical states: from asymptomatic, to frank peritonitis secondary to colonic perforation. These patients generally need urgent treatment, be it endoscopic decompression of the colon or an upfront colectomy. The World Society of Emergency Surgery united a worldwide group of international experts to review the current evidence and propose a consensus guidelines on the management of sigmoid volvulus.

Incidence of colonoscopy-related perforation and risk factors for poor outcomes: 3-year results from a prospective, multicenter registry (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Perforation is a life-threatening adverse event of colonoscopy that often requires hospitalization and surgery. We aimed to prospectively assess the incidence of colonoscopy-related perforation in a multicenter registry and to analyze the clinical factors associated with poor clinical outcomes. METHODS: This prospective observational study was conducted at six tertiary referral hospitals between 2017 and 2020, and included patients with colonic perforation after colonoscopy. Poor clinical outcomes were defined as mortality, surgery, and prolonged hospitalization (> 13 days). Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with poor clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Among 84,673 patients undergoing colonoscopy, 56 had colon perforation (0.66/1000, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51-0.86). Perforation occurred in 12 of 63,602 diagnostic colonoscopies (0.19/1000, 95% CI 0.11-0.33) and 44 of 21,071 therapeutic colonoscopies (2.09/1000, 95% CI 1.55-2.81). Of these, 15 (26.8%) patients underwent surgery, and 25 (44.6%) patients had a prolonged hospital stay. One patient (1.8%) died after perforation from a diagnostic colonoscopy. In the multivariate analysis, diagnostic colonoscopy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 196.43, p = 0.025) and abdominal rebound tenderness (aOR 17.82, p = 0.012) were independent risk factors for surgical treatment. The location of the sigmoid colon (aOR 18.57, p = 0.048), delayed recognition (aOR 187.71, p = 0.008), and abdominal tenderness (aOR 63.20, p = 0.017) were independent risk factors for prolonged hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective study demonstrated that the incidence of colonoscopy-related perforation was 0.66/1000. The incidence rate was higher in therapeutic colonoscopy, whereas the risk for undergoing surgery was higher in patients undergoing diagnostic colonoscopy. Colonoscopy indication (diagnostic vs. therapeutic), physical signs, the location of the sigmoid perforation, and delayed recognition were independent risk factors for poor clinical outcomes in colonoscopy-related perforation.