PURPOSE: Several factors have been considered important for the decision between diversion and primary repair in the surgical management of colorectal injuries. The aim of this study is to clarify whether patients with colorectal injuries need diversion or not. METHODS: From 2008 to 2010, ten patients with colorectal injuries were surgically treated by primary repair or by a staged repair. RESULTS: The patients were five men and five women, with median age 40 years (20-55). Two men and two women had rectal injuries, while 6 patients had colon injuries. The mechanism of trauma in two patients was firearm injuries, in two patients was a stab injury, in four patients was a motor vehicle accident, in one woman was iatrogenic injury during vaginal delivery, and one case was the transanal foreign body insertion. Primary repair was possible in six patients, while diversion was necessary in four patients. CONCLUSIONS: Primary repair should be attempted in the initial surgical management of all penetrating colon and intraperitoneal rectal injuries. Diversion of colonic injuries should only be considered if the colon tissue itself is inappropriate for repair due to severe edema or ischemia. The role of diversion in the management of unrepaired extraperitoneal rectal injuries and in cases with anal sphincter injuries is mandatory.
PURPOSE: Several factors have been considered important for the decision between diversion and primary repair in the surgical management of colorectal injuries. The aim of this study is to clarify whether patients with colorectal injuries need diversion or not. METHODS: From 2008 to 2010, ten patients with colorectal injuries were surgically treated by primary repair or by a staged repair. RESULTS: The patients were five men and five women, with median age 40 years (20-55). Two men and two women had rectal injuries, while 6 patients had colon injuries. The mechanism of trauma in two patients was firearm injuries, in two patients was a stab injury, in four patients was a motor vehicle accident, in one woman was iatrogenic injury during vaginal delivery, and one case was the transanal foreign body insertion. Primary repair was possible in six patients, while diversion was necessary in four patients. CONCLUSIONS: Primary repair should be attempted in the initial surgical management of all penetrating colon and intraperitoneal rectal injuries. Diversion of colonic injuries should only be considered if the colon tissue itself is inappropriate for repair due to severe edema or ischemia. The role of diversion in the management of unrepaired extraperitoneal rectal injuries and in cases with anal sphincter injuries is mandatory.