Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
1.
Int J Colorectal Dis ; 34(6): 1079-1086, 2019 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30997602

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Despite a high incidence of fecal incontinence following sphincter-preservation surgery (SPS), there are no definitive factors measured before ileostomy reversal that predict fecal incontinence. We investigated whether vector volume anorectal manometry before ileostomy reversal predicts major fecal incontinence following SPS in patients with mid or low rectal cancer. METHODS: This longitudinal prospective cohort study comprised 173 patients who underwent vector volume anorectal manometry before ileostomy reversal. The Fecal Incontinence Severity Index was measured 1 year after the primary SPS and classified as major incontinence (FISI score ≥ 25) or continent/minor incontinence (FISI score < 25). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of major incontinence. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients (53.1%) had major incontinence. Although tumor stage, location, and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were comparable, the major incontinence group had lower resting pressure (28.4 vs. 34.3 mmHg, P = 0.027), greater asymmetry at rest (39.1% vs. 34.1%, P = 0.002) and squeezing (34.2% vs. 31.4%, P = 0.046), shorter sphincter length (3.3 vs. 3.7 cm, P = 0.034), and lower resting vector volume (143,601 vs. 278,922 mmHg2 mm, P < 0.001) compared with the continent/minor incontinence group. Resting vector volume was the only independent predictor of major incontinence (odds ratio = 0.675 per 100,000 mmHg2 mm, 95% confidence interval, 0.532-0.823; P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that resting vector volume before ileostomy reversal may predict major fecal incontinence. We suggest that the physiology of the anorectum should be discussed with patients before ileostomy reversal in patients at high risk of fecal incontinence.


Assuntos
Bases de Dados como Assunto , Incontinência Fecal/diagnóstico , Incontinência Fecal/etiologia , Ileostomia/efeitos adversos , Neoplasias Retais/cirurgia , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Canal Anal/fisiopatologia , Canal Anal/cirurgia , Humanos , Estudos Longitudinais , Manometria , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Análise Multivariada , Estudos Prospectivos , Curva ROC , Reto/fisiopatologia , Reto/cirurgia
2.
Surg Endosc ; 30(3): 1086-93, 2016 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26238087

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Although enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) have been proven to be beneficial after laparoscopic colon surgery, they may result in adverse clinical outcomes following failure. This study analyzed risk factors associated with ERP failure after laparoscopic colon cancer surgery. METHODS: We analyzed the outcomes of 208 patients who underwent ERPs following laparoscopic colon cancer surgery between June 2007 and April 2013. The ERP included early oral feeding, early ambulation, and regular laxative administration. ERP failure was defined as postoperative hospital stay of more than 5 days related to postoperative complications, unplanned readmission within 30 days of surgery, or death. RESULTS: Surgical procedures included anterior resection (n = 101), right hemicolectomy (n = 90), and left hemicolectomy (n = 17). The mean postoperative hospital stay was 6.5 ± 2.3 days (range 3-24 days). ERP failure occurred in 36 patients (17.3%), with no mortality; reasons included ileus (n = 14), wound infection (n = 4), chylous drainage (n = 3), anastomotic bleeding (n = 3), pneumonia (n = 1), or readmission (n = 11) owing to delayed complications. Univariable analysis showed that ERP failure was associated with proximal colon cancer, side-to-side anastomosis, longer operation time, increased blood loss, and longer resected specimen length. Multivariable analysis showed that side-to-side anastomosis [odds ratio (OR) 4.534; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.902-10.811; P = 0.001] and increased blood loss (OR 1.004; 95% CI 1.001-1.008; P = 0.041) were independent risk factors for ERP failure. CONCLUSIONS: We showed that increased blood loss and side-to-side anastomosis in comparison with end-to-end anastomosis were independent risk factors associated with ERP failure after laparoscopic colon cancer surgery. This suggests that intraoperative elements may be important determinants to obtain successful postoperative recovery in the era of ERP.


Assuntos
Colectomia , Neoplasias do Colo/cirurgia , Laparoscopia , Tempo de Internação/estatística & dados numéricos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Ascite Quilosa , Protocolos Clínicos , Colectomia/efeitos adversos , Colectomia/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Íleus , Laparoscopia/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Duração da Cirurgia , Assistência Perioperatória , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Período Pós-Operatório , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde , Recuperação de Função Fisiológica , Estudos Retrospectivos , Infecção da Ferida Cirúrgica
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA