[Rectal perforation as a result of stapled hemorrhoidectomy]. / Perforación rectal posterior a hemorroidectomía con engrapadora.

BACKGROUND: The procedure for prolapsing hemorrhoids (PPH) has the potential to overcome many of the disadvantages of excisional hemorrhoidectomy; nevertheless, rare serious postoperative complications have been reported. CLINICAL CASE: We present a case of a 31-year-old male who was admitted and treated at another hospital with a stapled mucosectomy, which was carried out using a PPH01 33-mm stapling device. During the immediate postoperative period a fistula presented from the rectum to the right gluteus and a primary closure was attempted. However, the patient continued with the same symptoms and was referred to our hospital in October 2009. On examination at our Department of Colorectal Surgery, a right gluteus abscess was found and a primary orifice in the rectum with a diameter of 10 mm at 4 cm from the anal verge, confirmed with magnetic resonance imaging. A primary closure was attempted; however, during follow-up the patient presented edema, erythema and induration of the right gluteus and a failed closure of the fistula. Afterwards an endorectal advancement flap was successful in the closure of the fistula. CONCLUSIONS: Complications with PPH may compromise function or may be life-threatening for the patient, requiring further surgeries with increased morbidity and mortality. Therefore, it is recommended to be performed by surgeons with special training in this procedure.

Amoebic toxic colitis: analysis of factors related to mortality.

BACKGROUND: Toxic or fulminant colitis due to Entamoeba histolytica infrequently presents but is very serious. Unfortunately, there are numerous contradictory factors related to mortality. METHODS: We analyzed several cases of E. histolytica infection to determine the factors related to mortality. We included patients >15 years of age who were histopathologically diagnosed with amoebic toxic colitis and treated from January 2000 through December 2006. We evaluated demographic, clinical, laboratorial, surgical, and histopathological characteristics. RESULTS: We examined 24 patients and recorded 12 deaths (50%). Twenty patients underwent surgery within a mean time of 24 hours (range: 8-120 hours). Tenesmus and intestinal perforation were determined to be statistically significant (P<0·05) by univariate analysis. Three models of logistic regression were able to determine three statistically significant factors that affected mortality: (1) tenesmus and a lymphocyte count <1·5×10(3) cell/µl; 2) depth of invasion beyond the mucosa and a lymphocyte count <1·5×10(3) cell/µl; 3) time spent with symptoms and perforation. CONCLUSIONS: The mortality rate determined in this study is similar to previously reported series. A low lymphocyte count, significant depth of invasion, and intestinal perforation were determined to be the factors related to increased mortality, while tenesmus and limited amount of time spent with symptoms were associated with survival. Quick diagnosis and appropriate treatment are important factors that reduce mortality.

Primary closure in colon trauma.

BACKGROUND: Primary repair of colon injuries is an accepted therapeutic option; however, controversy persists regarding its safety. Our objective was to report the evolution and presence of complications in patients with colon injury who underwent primary closure and to determine if the time interval (>6 h), degree of injury, contamination, anatomic site injured, PATI (Penetrating Abdominal Trauma Index) >25, and the presence of other injuries in colon trauma are associated with increased morbidity and mortality. METHODS: This was a prospective, observational, longitudinal and descriptive study conducted at the Central Hospital "Dr. Ignacio Morones Prieto," San Luis Potosí, Mexico, from January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2007. We included patients with abdominal trauma with colon injury subjected to surgical treatment. chi(2) was used for basic statistical analysis. RESULTS: There were 481 patients with abdominal trauma who underwent surgery; 77(16.1%) had colon injury. Ninety percent (n = 69) were treated in the first 6 h; 91% (n = 70) were due to penetrating injuries, and gunshot wound accounted for 48% (n = 37). Transverse colon was the most frequently injured (38%) (n = 29). Grade I and II injuries accounted for 75.3% (n = 58). Procedures included primary repair (76.66 %) (n = 46); resection with anastomosis (8.3%) (n = 5); and colostomy (15%) (n = 9). Associated injuries were present in 76.6% (n = 59). There was some degree of contamination in 85.7% (n = 66); 82.8% (58) had PATI <25. Complications associated with the surgical procedure were observed in 28.57% (n = 22). Reoperation was necessary in 10% (n = 8). Average hospital stay was 11.4 days. Mortality was 3.8% (n = 3); none of these were related to colon injury. CONCLUSIONS: Primary repair is a safe procedure for treatment of colon injuries. Patients with primary repair had lower morbidity (p <0.009). Surgery during the first 6 h (p <0.006) and in hemodynamically stable patients (p <0.014) had a lower risk of complications.

Cierre primario en trauma de colon / Primary closure in colon trauma

Objetivo: Informar si la evolución > 6 horas, grado de contaminación y lesión, sitio anatómico lesionado, PATI (penetrating abdominal trauma index) > 25 y presencia de otras lesiones en trauma de colon, se asocian a mayor morbimortalidad en pacientes con lesión colónica a quienes se les realizó cierre primario. Material y métodos: Estudio prospectivo, observacional, longitudinal, descriptivo, en el Hospital Central “Dr. Ignacio Morones Prieto”, San Luis Potosí. Se incluyeron pacientes con trauma abdominal sometidos a cirugía que presentaron lesión colónica. Análisis estadístico básico con χ2. Resultados: 481 pacientes fueron intervenidos por trauma abdominal; 77 (16.1 %) tuvieron lesión colónica, de los cuales 90 % (n = 69) se intervino en las primeras seis horas; 91 % fue lesión penetrante. El colon transverso fue el más lesionado (38 %, n = 29); las lesiones grado I y II representaron 75.3 % (n = 58). Se efectuó cierre primario en 76.66 % (n = 46), resección con anastomosis en 8.3 % (n = 5) y colostomía en 15 % (n = 9). Hubo lesiones asociadas en 76.6 % (n = 59) y contaminación en 85.7 % (n = 66); 82.8 % (58) tuvo PATI < 25; complicaciones asociadas al procedimiento operatorio, 28.57 % (n = 22); reintervenciones, 10 % (n = 8); estancia hospitalaria promedio, 11.4 días; mortalidad no relacionada a lesión de colon, 3.8 % (n = 3). Conclusiones: El cierre primario es un procedimiento seguro para el tratamiento de lesiones colónicas. Los pacientes con cierre primario presentaron menor morbilidad (p < 0.009). Los pacientes con cirugía en las primeras seis horas (p < 0.006) y estabilidad hemodinámica (p < 0.014) tuvieron menor riesgo de complicación.

BACKGROUND: Primary repair of colon injuries is an accepted therapeutic option; however, controversy persists regarding its safety. Our objective was to report the evolution and presence of complications in patients with colon injury who underwent primary closure and to determine if the time interval (>6 h), degree of injury, contamination, anatomic site injured, PATI (Penetrating Abdominal Trauma Index) >25, and the presence of other injuries in colon trauma are associated with increased morbidity and mortality. METHODS: This was a prospective, observational, longitudinal and descriptive study conducted at the Central Hospital "Dr. Ignacio Morones Prieto," San Luis Potosí, Mexico, from January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2007. We included patients with abdominal trauma with colon injury subjected to surgical treatment. chi(2) was used for basic statistical analysis. RESULTS: There were 481 patients with abdominal trauma who underwent surgery; 77(16.1%) had colon injury. Ninety percent (n = 69) were treated in the first 6 h; 91% (n = 70) were due to penetrating injuries, and gunshot wound accounted for 48% (n = 37). Transverse colon was the most frequently injured (38%) (n = 29). Grade I and II injuries accounted for 75.3% (n = 58). Procedures included primary repair (76.66 %) (n = 46); resection with anastomosis (8.3%) (n = 5); and colostomy (15%) (n = 9). Associated injuries were present in 76.6% (n = 59). There was some degree of contamination in 85.7% (n = 66); 82.8% (58) had PATI <25. Complications associated with the surgical procedure were observed in 28.57% (n = 22). Reoperation was necessary in 10% (n = 8). Average hospital stay was 11.4 days. Mortality was 3.8% (n = 3); none of these were related to colon injury. CONCLUSIONS: Primary repair is a safe procedure for treatment of colon injuries. Patients with primary repair had lower morbidity (p <0.009). Surgery during the first 6 h (p <0.006) and in hemodynamically stable patients (p <0.014) had a lower risk of complications.