Literature DB >> 31567926

Perineal Wound Complications After Extralevator Abdominoperineal Excision for Low Rectal Cancer.

Jia Gang Han1, Zhen Jun Wang, Zhi Gang Gao, Guang Hui Wei, Yong Yang, Zhi Wei Zhai, Bao Cheng Zhao, Bing Qiang Yi.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Reconstruction of the pelvic floor defect caused by extralevator abdominoperineal excision poses a challenge for the surgeon.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze the long-term perineal wound complications in patients undergoing conventional primary closure versus biological mesh-assisted repair after extralevator abdominoperineal excision.
DESIGN: This was a single-institution retrospective observational study. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a tertiary academic medical center. PATIENTS: Patients with low advanced rectal cancer undergoing extralevator abdominoperineal excision from August 2008 to December 2016 (N = 228) were included.
INTERVENTIONS: All of the patients received extralevator abdominoperineal excision operation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was perineal wound complications after the operation.
RESULTS: Of the 228 patients who underwent extralevator abdominoperineal excision, 174 received biological mesh repair and 54 received primary closure. Preoperative radiotherapy was administered to 89 patients (51.1%) in the biological mesh group and 20 patients (37.0%) in the primary closure group. The biological mesh group had significantly lower rates of perineal wound infection (11.5% vs 22.2%; p = 0.047), perineal hernia (3.4% vs 13.0%; p = 0.022), wound dehiscence (0.6% vs 5.6%; p = 0.042), and total perineal wound complications (14.9% vs 35.2%; p = 0.001) compared with the primary closure group. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed preoperative radiotherapy (p < 0.001), conventional primary closure (p < 0.001), and intraoperative bowel perforation (p= 0.001) to be significantly associated with perineal procedure-related complications. LIMITATIONS: This was a single-center retrospective study.
CONCLUSIONS: Although perineal wound repair with biological mesh prolongs the operative time of perineal portion, the perineal drainage retention time, and the length of hospital stay, it may reduce perineal procedure-related complications and improve wound healing. Preoperative radiotherapy and intraoperative bowel perforation appear to be independent predictors of perineal complications. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B42. COMPLICACIONES DE LA HERIDA PERINEAL DESPUÉS DE LA EXCISIÓN ABDOMINOPERINEAL EXTRA-ELEVADORA EN CASO DE CÁNCER DE RECTO BAJO: La reconstrucción del defecto en el suelo pélvico, resultado de una resección abdominoperineal extra-elevadora plantea un desafío para el cirujano.El analisis de las complicaciones de la herida perineal a largo plazo en pacientes sometidos a un cierre primario convencional versus una reparación asistida por malla biológica después de una resección abdominoperineal extra-elevadora.Estudio retrospectivo observacional en una sola institución.Investigación realizada en un centro médico académico terciario.Se incluyeron los pacientes con cáncer rectal bajo avanzado que se sometieron a una resección abdominoperineal extra-elevadora desde agosto de 2008 hasta diciembre de 2016 (n= 228).Todos aquellos pacientes que fueron sometidos a una resección abdominoperineal extra-elevadora.Todas las complicaciones de la herida perineal en el postoperatorio.De los 228 pacientes que se sometieron a una resección abdominoperineal extra-elevadora, 174 fueron reparados con una malla biológica y 54 se beneficiaron de un cierre primario. La radioterapia preoperatoria se administró a 89 (51,1%) pacientes en el grupo de malla biológica y 20 (37,0%) pacientes en el grupo de cierre primario. El grupo de malla biológica tuvo tasas significativamente más bajas de infección de la herida perineal (11.5% vs. 22.2%; p = 0.047), hernia perineal (3.4% vs. 13.0%; p = 0.022), dehiscencia de la herida (0.6% vs. 5.6%; p = 0,042) y complicaciones perineales de la herida (14,9% frente a 35,2%; p = 0,001) en comparación con el grupo de cierre primario. El análisis de regresión logística multivariable mostró que la radioterapia preoperatoria (p <0.001), el cierre primario convencional (p <0.001) y la perforación intestinal intra-operatoria (p = 0.001) se asociaron significativamente como complicaciones relacionadas con el procedimiento perineal.Estudio retrospectivo de centro único.Aunque la reparación de la herida perineal con malla biológica prolonga el tiempo perineal de la operación, la presencia y duración del drenaje perineal y la hospitalización pueden reducir las complicaciones relacionadas con el procedimiento perineal y mejorar la cicatrización de la herida. La radioterapia preoperatoria y la perforación intestinal intra-operatorias parecen ser predictores independientes de complicaciones perineales. Vea el Resumen del Video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B42.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31567926     DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001495

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum        ISSN: 0012-3706            Impact factor:   4.585


  9 in total

Review 1.  Meta-analysis of biological mesh reconstruction versus primary perineal closure after abdominoperineal excision of rectal cancer.

Authors:  Nasir Zaheer Ahmad; Muhammad Hasan Abbas; Noof Mohammed A B Al-Naimi; Amjad Parvaiz
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2021-01-03       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Is it worthwhile to perform closure of the pelvic peritoneum in laparoscopic extralevator abdominoperineal resection?

Authors:  Yu Shen; Tinghan Yang; Hanjiang Zeng; Wenjian Meng; Ziqiang Wang
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2022-01-27       Impact factor: 3.445

3.  Tailored concept for the plastic closure of pelvic defects resulting from extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) or pelvic exenteration.

Authors:  Julia Jackisch; Thomas Jackisch; Joerg Roessler; Anja Sims; Holger Nitzsche; Pia Mann; Sören Torge Mees; Sigmar Stelzner
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2022-06-25       Impact factor: 2.796

4.  Continuous Negative Pressure Drainage with Intermittent Irrigation Leaded to a Risk Reduction of Perineal Surgical Site Infection Following Laparoscopic Extralevator Abdominoperineal Excision for Low Rectal Cancer.

Authors:  Zhongbo Han; Chunxia Yang; Qingfeng Wang; Meng Wang; Xi Li; Chao Zhang
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2021-04-22       Impact factor: 2.423

Review 5.  Extralevator abdominoperineal excision for advanced low rectal cancer: Where to go.

Authors:  Yu Tao; Jia-Gang Han; Zhen-Jun Wang
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-06-14       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 6.  Perineal Wound Closure Following Abdominoperineal Resection and Pelvic Exenteration for Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Etienne Buscail; Cindy Canivet; Jason Shourick; Elodie Chantalat; Nicolas Carrere; Jean-Pierre Duffas; Antoine Philis; Emilie Berard; Louis Buscail; Laurent Ghouti; Benoit Chaput
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-02-10       Impact factor: 6.639

7.  Retrospective analysis of risk factors for postoperative perineal hernia after endoscopic abdominoperineal excision for rectal cancer.

Authors:  Tatsuya Manabe; Yusuke Mizuuchi; Yasuhiro Tsuru; Hiroshi Kitagawa; Takaaki Fujimoto; Yasuo Koga; Masafumi Nakamura; Hirokazu Noshiro
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2022-03-08       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  A low incidence of perineal hernia when using a biological mesh after extralevator abdominoperineal excision with or without pelvic exenteration or distal sacral resection in locally advanced rectal cancer patients.

Authors:  E A Dijkstra; N L E Kahmann; P H J Hemmer; K Havenga; B van Etten
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2020-06-08       Impact factor: 3.781

9.  A new surgical approach of direct perineal wound full-thick closure for perineal wound of abdominoperineal resection for rectal carcinoma: A prospective cohort trial.

Authors:  Yong-Ping Yang; Ling-Yun Yu; Min Wang; Yu Mu; Jian-Nan Li; Feng-Jia Shang; Xian-Feng Wu; Tong-Jun Liu; Jian Shi
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2020-08-04       Impact factor: 3.315

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.