Is proctoscopy sufficient for the evaluation of colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal? A nationwide retrospective analysis of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology Colorectal Cancer Network Collaborative group (SICO-CCN)
Is proctoscopy sufficient for the evaluation of colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal? A nationwide retrospective analysis of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology Colorectal Cancer Network Collaborative group (SICO-CCN)(26 views) Manigrasso M, Degiuli M, Maione F, Venetucci P, Roviello F, De Palma GD, Milone M
Affiliations: Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, 'Federico II' University of Naples, Naples, Italy.
Department of Oncology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
San Luigi University Hospital, Surgical Oncology and Digestive Surgery Unit, Turin, Italy.
Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, "Federico II" University of Naples, Naples, Italy.
Dipartimento di Oncoematologia, Diagnostica per Immagine, Radioterapia e Medicina Legale, "Federico II" University Hospital, Naples, Italy.
Department of Medicine, Surgery and Neurosciences, Unit of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, University of Siena, Siena, Italy.
References: Not available.
Is proctoscopy sufficient for the evaluation of colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal? A nationwide retrospective analysis of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology Colorectal Cancer Network Collaborative group (SICO-CCN)
AIM: Several methods for assessing anastomotic integrity have been proposed, but the best is yet to be defined. The aim of this study was to compare the different methods to assess the integrity of colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal. METHOD: A retrospective cohort analysis on patients between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2020 with a defunctioning stoma for middle and low rectal anterior resection was performed. A propensity score matching comparison between patients who underwent proctoscopy alone and patients who underwent proctoscopy plus any other preoperative method to assess the integrity of colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal (transanal water-soluble contrast enema via conventional radiology, transanal water-soluble contrast enema via CT, and magnetic resonance) was performed. RESULTS: The analysis involved 1045 patients from 26 Italian referral colorectal centres. The comparison between proctoscopy alone versus proctoscopy plus any other preoperative tool showed no significant differences in terms of stenoses (p = 0.217) or leakages (p = 0.103) prior to ileostomy reversal, as well as no differences in terms of misdiagnosed stenoses (p = 0.302) or leakages (p = 0.509). Interestingly, in the group that underwent proctoscopy and transanal water-soluble contrast enema the comparison between the two procedures demonstrated no significant differences in detecting stenoses (2 vs. 0, p = 0.98), while there was a significant difference in detecting leakages in favour of transanal water-soluble contrast enema via CT (3 vs. 12, p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: We can confirm that proctoscopy alone should be considered sufficient prior to ileostomy reversal. However, in cases in which the results of proctoscopy are not completely clear or the surgeon remains suspicious of an anastomotic leakage, transanal water-soluble contrast enema via CT could guarantee its detection.
Is proctoscopy sufficient for the evaluation of colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal? A nationwide retrospective analysis of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology Colorectal Cancer Network Collaborative group (SICO-CCN)
No results.
Is proctoscopy sufficient for the evaluation of colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal? A nationwide retrospective analysis of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology Colorectal Cancer Network Collaborative group (SICO-CCN)
Kim YH, Shin SW, Pellicano R, Fagoonee S, Choi IJ, Kim YI, Park B, Choi JM, Kim SG, Choi J, Park JY, Oh S, Yang HJ, Lim JH, Im JP, Kim JS, Jung HC, Ponzetto A, Figura N, Malfertheiner P, Choi IJ, Kook MC, Kim YI, Cho SJ, Lee JY, Kim CG, Park B, Nam BH, Bae SE, Choi KD, Choe J, Kim SO, Na HK, Choi JY, Ahn JY, Jung KW, Lee J, Kim DH, Chang HS, Song HJ, Lee GH, Jung HY, Seta T, Takahashi Y, Noguchi Y, Shikata S, Sakai T, Sakai K, Yamashita Y, Nakayama T, Leja M, Park JY, Murillo R, Liepniece-karele I, Isajevs S, Kikuste I, Rudzite D, Krike P, Parshutin S, Polaka I, Kirsners A, Santare D, Folkmanis V, Daugule I, Plummer M, Herrero R, Tsukamoto T, Nakagawa M, Kiriyama Y, Toyoda T, Cao X, Corral JE, Mera R, Dye CW, Morgan DR, Lee YC, Lin JT, Garcia Martin R, Matia Cubillo A, Lee SH, Park JM, Han YM, Ko WJ, Hahm KB, Leontiadis GI, Ford AC, Ichinose M, Sugano K, Jeong M, Park JM, Han YM, Park KY, Lee DH, Yoo JH, Cho JY, Hahm KB, Bang CS, Baik GH, Shin IS, Kim JB, Suk KT, Yoon JH, Kim YS, Kim DJ * Helicobacter pylori Eradication for Prevention of Metachronous Recurrence after Endoscopic Resection of Early Gastric Cancer(549 views) N Engl J Med (ISSN: 0028-4793, 0028-4793linking, 1533-4406electronic), 2015 Jun; 30642104201566393291: 749-756. Impact Factor:59.558 ViewExport to BibTeXExport to EndNote
Testino G, Leone S, Fagoonee S, Del Bas JM, Rodriguez B, Puiggros F, Marine S, Rodriguez MA, Morina D, Armengol L, Caimari A, Arola L, Cimini FA, Barchetta I, Carotti S, Bertoccini L, Baroni MG, Vespasiani-gentilucci U, Cavallo MG, Morini S, Nelson JE, Roth CL, Wilson LA, Yates KP, Aouizerat B, Morgan-stevenson V, Whalen E, Hoofnagle A, Mason M, Gersuk V, Yeh MM, Kowdley KV, Lee SM, Jun DW, Cho YK, Jang KS, Kucukazman M, Ata N, Dal K, Yeniova AO, Kefeli A, Basyigit S, Aktas B, Akin KO, Agladioglu K, Ure OS, Topal F, Nazligul Y, Beyan E, Ertugrul DT, Catena C, Cosma C, Camozzi V, Plebani M, Ermani M, Sechi LA, Fallo F, Goto Y, Ray MB, Mendenhall CL, French SW, Gartside PS Serum vitamin A deficiency and increased intrahepatic expression of cytokeratin antigen in alcoholic liver disease(687 views) Hepatology (ISSN: 1827-1669electronic, 0026-4806linking), 1988 Sep; 83120693611123109(5): 1019-1026. Impact Factor:0.913 ViewExport to BibTeXExport to EndNote
90 Records (87 excluding Abstracts). Total impact factor: 295.612 (286.009 excluding Abstracts). Total 5 year impact factor: 297.435 (286.888 excluding Abstracts).