M Gümüş1, A Böyük1, M Kapan1, A Onder1, F Taskesen2, I Aliosmanoğlu1, A Tüfek3, M Aldemir1. 1. Department of General Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Dicle University, 21280, Diyarbakir, Turkey. 2. Department of General Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Dicle University, 21280, Diyarbakir, Turkey. drftaskesen@hotmail.com. 3. Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Faculty of Medicine, Dicle University, Diyarbakir, Turkey.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Rectal injuries, which are rarely encountered because of the anatomic characteristics, occur due to penetrating traumas. In the current study, we aimed to present experiences gleaned from our clinic concerning rarely encountered unusual rectal injuries, including those cases presented for the first time. METHODS: Eleven patients who had been treated for unusual rectal injuries in the General Surgery Clinic of Dicle University between 2004 and 2011 were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: The reasons for rectal injuries included foreign bodies in four cases, sexual intercourse in three cases, iatrogenic injuries in two cases, electric shock in one case, and animal horns in one case. All cases had extraperitoneal rectal injuries and all injuries were grade 2 injuries, except for the electrical burn. Primary repair was adequate for the treatment of six patients. Four patients underwent primary repair and ostomy, whereas one of the patients underwent debridement and an ostomy. The patients recovered without complications, except for one patient with sphincter insufficiency. CONCLUSION: The results of the current study suggested that primary repair is adequate in the patients with low-energy injuries and early presentation, whereas an ostomy is required for those with late presentation and for those with high-energy and destructive injuries.
PURPOSE: Rectal injuries, which are rarely encountered because of the anatomic characteristics, occur due to penetrating traumas. In the current study, we aimed to present experiences gleaned from our clinic concerning rarely encountered unusual rectal injuries, including those cases presented for the first time. METHODS: Eleven patients who had been treated for unusual rectal injuries in the General Surgery Clinic of Dicle University between 2004 and 2011 were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: The reasons for rectal injuries included foreign bodies in four cases, sexual intercourse in three cases, iatrogenic injuries in two cases, electric shock in one case, and animal horns in one case. All cases had extraperitoneal rectal injuries and all injuries were grade 2 injuries, except for the electrical burn. Primary repair was adequate for the treatment of six patients. Four patients underwent primary repair and ostomy, whereas one of the patients underwent debridement and an ostomy. The patients recovered without complications, except for one patient with sphincter insufficiency. CONCLUSION: The results of the current study suggested that primary repair is adequate in the patients with low-energy injuries and early presentation, whereas an ostomy is required for those with late presentation and for those with high-energy and destructive injuries.
Authors: Jordan A Weinberg; Timothy C Fabian; Louis J Magnotti; Gayle Minard; Tiffany K Bee; Norma Edwards; Jeffery A Claridge; Martin A Croce Journal: J Trauma Date: 2006-03
Authors: Ran Katz; Tomasz Borkowski; Andras Hoznek; Laurent Salomon; Alexandre de la Taille; Clement Claude Abbou Journal: Urology Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Scott R Steele; Kate E Wolcott; Philip S Mullenix; Matthew J Martin; James A Sebesta; Kenneth S Azarow; Alec C Beekley Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 4.585