| Literature DB >> 31763040 |
Tetsuro Taira1, Koji Murono1, Hiroaki Nozawa1, Daisuke Hojo1, Kazushige Kawai1, Keisuke Hata1, Toshiaki Tanaka1, Soichiro Ishihara1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: and Purpose: Intestinal obstruction caused by an internal hernia projecting through a mesenteric defect is a rare sequela of laparoscopic colectomy, as surgeons usually leave such defects open. In this study, we investigated cases of internal hernia after laparoscopic left-sided colectomy.Entities:
Keywords: IMA, Inferior mesenteric artery; Internal hernia; Laparoscopic surgery; Left colectomy; SMA, Superior mesenteric artery; SRA, Superior rectal artery; Stoma; Superior rectal artery
Year: 2019 PMID: 31763040 PMCID: PMC6864359 DOI: 10.1016/j.amsu.2019.10.026
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Med Surg (Lond) ISSN: 2049-0801
Fig. 1Distance between the superior rectal artery (SRA; arrow) and abdominal aorta at the aortic bifurcation level (double-headed arrow) was measured on computed tomography (CT) images obtained 3–6 months after SRA-preserving surgery.
Summary of the three patients who developed symptomatic internal hernia.
| Patients No, age (years)/sex | Location of the resected lesion | Interval from the initial colectomy | Management |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. 54/M | Sigmoid colon | 16 days | Conservative |
| 2. 84/F | Sigmoid colon | 8 months | Re-operation without surgical bowel resection |
| 3. 73/M | Sigmoid colon | 2 months | Re-operation with surgical bowel resection |
F: female, M: male, SRA: superior rectal artery.
Clinical characteristics and development of internal hernia.
| Internal hernia | ||
|---|---|---|
| Negative (n = 305) | Positive (n = 3) | |
| Male | 174 (98.9%) | 2 (1.1%) |
| Female | 131 (99.2%) | 1 (0.8%) |
| ≤65 | 142 (99.3%) | 1 (0.7%) |
| >65 | 163 (98.8%) | 2 (1.2%) |
| ≤25 | 237 (99.2%) | 2 (0.8%) |
| >25 | 68 (98.6%) | 1 (1.4%) |
| Malignant tumor | 294 (99.7%) | 1 (0.3%) |
| Non-malignant disease | 11 (84.6%) | 2 (15.4%) |
| Descending colon | 56 (100%) | 0 (0%) |
| Sigmoid colon | 249 (98.8%) | 3 (1.2%) |
| Preserved | 98 (97.0%) | 3 (3.0%) |
| Transected | 207 (100%) | 0 (0%) |
| Yes | 71 (100%) | 0 (0%) |
| No | 234 (98.7%) | 3 (1.3%) |
| Yes | 11 (78.6%) | 3 (21.4%) |
| No | 294 (100%) | 0 (0%) |
BMI: body mass index, SRA: superior rectal artery.
Fig. 2Distance between the superior rectal artery (SRA) and abdominal aorta at the aortic bifurcation level. Ostomy patients had a larger space behind the SRA than non-ostomy patients (p < 0.001).
Fig. 3Axial computed tomography (CT) of Case 3 showing dilated and edematous small bowel (arrowheads). It also shows passage of the small bowel through the defect behind the superior rectal artery (SRA; arrow).
Fig. 43D computed tomography (CT) angiogram of Case 3 showing a branch of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) passing through the space behind the superior rectal artery (SRA). Red: SMA; yellow: SRA. . (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
Fig. 5Intraoperative photograph of Case 3 showing a congested and ischemic segment of the strangulated ileum requiring resection.