Literature DB >> 22405886

[Post-surgical complications and mortality after two-stage coloanal anastomosis using the Turnbull-Cutait procedure].

Sebastiano Biondo1, Loris Trenti, Eloy Espín, Ricardo Frago, Francesc Vallribera, Luis Miguel Jiménez, Ana Gálvez, Jose Luis Sánchez, Esther Kreisler.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: As colo-anal anastomoses continue to have a high risk of post-surgical dehiscence it is recommended to combine this with a protective stoma. The main purpose of this study was to determine the post-operative morbidity and mortality rate in patients operated on using the Turnbull-Cutait (T-C) technique with delayed colo-anal anastomosis without a protective ileostomy.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: An observational study was conducted on 17 patients. The surgical indication was classified as "primary" (group I), and "secondary" (group II) when rescue was performed due to complications in the short to long-term after rectal resection. The surgical technique consisted of two stages: 1) low anterior resection, circumferential mucosectomy from the pectinate line, pulling the colon through the anal canal; 2) resection of the pull-through segment and colo-anal anastomosis between the fifth and tenth day. Demographic data, associated comorbidities, and ASA score were recorded, as well as post-surgical complications, post-surgical mortality, and technical failure (defined as performing a definitive stoma).
RESULTS: The review consisted of 13 patients in group I and 4 in group II. Twelve patients were operated on due to rectal cancer, one patient due to a recto-vesico-vaginal fistula, two due to rescue of early complications (from the Emergency Department), and two were operated due to chronic complications after rectal resection. Six patients (35.3%) had one or more complications, three of them required new surgery. There were no postoperative deaths.
CONCLUSIONS: The T-C could be a first option in cancer of the rectum, with no need for a protective ileostomy. It could be an alternative in urgent re-interventions of patients who have rectal surgery complications.
Copyright © 2011 AEC. Published by Elsevier Espana. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22405886     DOI: 10.1016/j.ciresp.2011.12.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cir Esp        ISSN: 0009-739X            Impact factor:   1.653


  3 in total

1.  A pull-through delayed "high" coloanal anastomosis: new tricks to refresh an old procedure.

Authors:  F Bianco; S De Franciscis; A Belli; V Ragone; G M Romano
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2015-02-14       Impact factor: 3.781

2.  Two-stage Turnbull-Cutait pull-through coloanal anastomosis versus coloanal anastomosis with protective loop ileostomy for low rectal cancer. Protocol for a randomized controlled trial (Turnbull-BCN).

Authors:  Sebastiano Biondo; Loris Trenti; Ana Galvez; Eloy Espin-Basany; Francesco Bianco; Giovanni Romano; Esther Kreisler
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2017-06-30       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Short stump and high anastomosis pull-through (SHiP) procedure for delayed coloanal anastomosis with no protective stoma for low rectal cancer.

Authors:  Francesco Bianco; Paola Incollingo; Armando Falato; Silvia De Franciscis; Andrea Belli; Fabio Carbone; Gaetano Gallo; Mario Fusco; Giovanni Maria Romano
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2021-03-16
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.