Annals of Coloproctology

Skip Navigation: Skip to contents

SEARCH: Search

Advanced Search

mobile menu button

Page Path: HOME > Browse Articles

Sun Jin Park

4 Articles

Postoperative Outcomes of Stoma Takedown: Results of Long-term Follow-up: Bomina Paik, Chang Woo Kim, Sun Jin Park, Kil Yeon Lee, Suk-Hwan Lee; Ann Coloproctol. 2018;34(5):266-270. Published online October 10, 2018; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2017.12.13

5,536 View
164 Download
6 Web of Science
8 Citations

Abstract PDF

Purpose
Stoma takedown is a frequently performed procedure with considerable postoperative morbidities. Various skin closure techniques have been introduced to reduce surgical site infections. The aim of this study was to assess postoperative outcomes after stoma takedown during a long-term follow-up period.
Methods
Between October 2006 and December 2015, 84 consecutive patients underwent a colostomy or ileostomy takedown at our institution. Baseline characteristics and perioperative outcomes were analyzed through retrospective reviews of medical records.
Results
The proportion of male patients was 60.7%, and the mean age of the patients was 59.0 years. The overall complication rate was 28.6%, with the most common complication being prolonged ileus, followed by incisional hernia, anastomotic leakage, surgical site infection, anastomotic stenosis, and entero-cutaneous fistula. The mean follow-up period was 64.3 months. The univariate analysis revealed no risk factors related to overall complications or prolonged ileus.
Conclusion
The postoperative clinical course and long-term outcomes following stoma takedown were acceptable. Stoma takedown is a procedure that can be performed safely.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Complicated diverticulitis: Diagnostic precision and surgical solutions in a patient with chronic kidney disease
Sharon L. Hsieh, Nathaniel Grabill, Mena Louis, Bradley Kuhn
Radiology Case Reports.2025; 20(1): 346. CrossRef
Comparing Surgical Site Infection Rate Between Primary Closure and Rhomboid Flap After Stoma Reversal
Che-Ming Chu, Chih-Cheng Chen, Yu-Yao Chang, Kai-Jyun Syu, Shih-Lung Lin
Annals of Plastic Surgery.2024; 92(1S): S33. CrossRef
TIMING OF THE STOMA REVERSAL, WHAT IS THE SAFE PERIOD?: A RETROSPECTIVE OBSERVATIONAL STUDY
GIRIDHAR ASHWATH, ESHWAR KATHIRESAN MANASIJAN, ANTHONY P ROZARIO
Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research.2024; : 181. CrossRef
Diverting ileostomy in benign colorectal surgery: the real clinical cost analysis
F. Ascari, G. Barugola, G. Ruffo
Updates in Surgery.2024; 76(5): 1761. CrossRef
Laparoscopic versus open Hartmann reversal: a propensity score matching analysis
Li Tan, Xiao-Yu Liu, Bin Zhang, Lian-Lian Wang, Zheng-Qiang Wei, Dong Peng
International Journal of Colorectal Disease.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Defunctioning stoma in anterior resection for rectal cancer does not impact anastomotic leakage: a national population-based cohort study
Eihab Munshi, Marie-Louise Lydrup, Pamela Buchwald
BMC Surgery.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Surgical Site Infection After Stoma Reversal: A Comparison Between Linear and Purse-String Closure
Muhammad Awais Khan, Khurram Niaz, Shahzeb Asghar, Maaz A Yusufi, Mohtamam Nazir, Syed Muhammad Ali, Aryan Ahmed, Akeel Ahamed Salahudeen, Talha Kareem
Cureus.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Factors Predicting the Reversal of Hartmann’s Procedure
Ömer Yalkın, Fatih Altıntoprak, Mustafa Yener Uzunoğlu, Yasin Alper Yıldız, Muhammet Burak Kamburoğlu, Necattin Fırat, Fehmi Çelebi, Mihajlo Jakovljevic
BioMed Research International.2022;[Epub] CrossRef

Impact of Adjuvant Therapy Type on Survival in Stage II/III Rectal Cancer Without Preoperative Chemoradiation: A Korean Multicenter Retrospective Study: Byung Mo Kang, Jeong-Heum Baek, Sun Jin Park, Seong Kyu Baek, Ki-Jae Park, Hong-Jo Choi, Byung-Noe Bae, Sun Keun Choi, Kap Tae Kim, Jin-Su Kim, Suk-Hwan Lee; Ann Coloproctol. 2018;34(3):144-151. Published online June 30, 2018; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2017.09.26.1

5,269 View
105 Download
3 Web of Science
3 Citations

Abstract PDF

Purpose
This study compared the oncologic impact of postoperative chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy on patients with rectal cancer without preoperative chemoradiation.
Methods
This retrospective study analyzed 713 patients with a mean follow-up of 58 months who had undergone radical resection for stage II/III rectal cancer without preoperative treatment in nine hospitals from January 2004 to December 2009. The study population was categorized a chemotherapy group (CG, n = 460) and a chemoradiotherapy group (CRG, n = 253). Five-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were analyzed, and independent factors predicting survival were identified.
Results
The patients in the CRG were significantly younger (P < 0.001) and had greater incidences of low rectal cancer (P < 0.001) and stage III disease (P < 0.001). Five-year OS (P = 0.024) and DFS (P = 0.012) were significantly higher in the CG for stage II disease; however, they were not significantly different for stage III disease. In the multivariate analysis, independent predictive factors were male sex, low rectal cancer and stage III disease for OS and male sex, abdominoperineal resection, stage III disease and tumor-positive circumferential margin for DFS. However, adjuvant therapy type did not independently affect OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.243; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.794–1.945; P = 0.341) and DFS (HR, 1.091; 95% CI, 0.810–1.470; P = 0.566).
Conclusion
Adjuvant therapy type did not affect survival of stage II/III rectal cancer patients without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. These results suggest that adjuvant therapy can be chosen based on the patient’s condition and the policies of the surgeons and hospital facilities.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Management and Outcomes of Pathologic Upstaging of Clinical Stage I Rectal Cancers: An Exploratory Analysis
Alisha Lussiez, Samantha J. Rivard, Kamren Hollingsworth, Sherif R.Z. Abdel-Misih, Philip S. Bauer, Katherine A. Hrebinko, Glen C. Balch, Lillias H. Maguire
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum.2023; 66(4): 543. CrossRef
The oncological outcomes of postoperative radiotherapy in patients with stage II and III upper rectal cancer
Ilknur ALSAN CETIN, Sıtkı Utku AKAY
Marmara Medical Journal.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Selection of Adjuvant Treatment Without Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Patients With Rectal Cancer: Room for Further Investigation
In Ja Park
Annals of Coloproctology.2018; 34(3): 109. CrossRef

Influence of Shorter Duration of Prophylactic Antibiotic Use on the Incidence of Surgical Site Infection Following Colorectal Cancer Surgery: Youn Young Park, Chang Woo Kim, Sun Jin Park, Kil Yeon Lee, Jung Joo Lee, Hye Ok Lee, Suk-Hwan Lee; Ann Coloproctol. 2015;31(6):235-242. Published online December 31, 2015; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2015.31.6.235

5,348 View
56 Download
15 Web of Science
16 Citations

Abstract PDF

Purpose

This study aimed to identify the risk factors for surgical site infections (SSIs) in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery and to determine whether significantly different SSI rates existed between the short prophylactic antibiotic use group (within 24 hours) and the long prophylactic antibiotic use group (beyond 24 hours).

Methods

The medical records of 327 patients who underwent colorectal resection due to colorectal cancer from January 2010 to May 2014 at a single center were retrospectively reviewed, and their characteristics as well as the surgical factors known to be risk factors for SSIs, were identified.

Results

Among the 327 patients, 45 patients (13.8%) developed SSIs. The patients were divided into two groups according to the duration of antibiotic use: group S (within 24 hours) and group L (beyond 24 hours). Of the 327 patients, 114 (34.9%) were in group S, and 213 (65.1%) were in group L. Twelve patients (10.5%) in group S developed SSIs while 33 patients (15.5%) in group L developed SSIs (P = 0.242). History of diabetes mellitus and lung disease, long operation time, and perioperative transfusion were independent risk factors for SSIs.

Conclusion

This study shows that discontinuation of prophylactic antibiotics within 24 hours after colorectal surgery has no significant influence on the incidence of SSIs. This study also showed that history of diabetes mellitus and lung disease, long operation time, and perioperative transfusion were associated with increased SSI rates.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

RETRACTED: A meta‐analysis of the risk factors for surgical site infection in patients with colorectal cancer
Yani Chen, Hua Guo, Tian Gao, Jiale Yu, Yujia Wang, Haiquan Yu
International Wound Journal.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Evaluation after implementation of chemical bowel preparation for surgical site infections in elective colorectal cancer surgery and role of antimicrobial stewardship pharmacist: Retrospective cohort study
Yasuhiro Sasaki, Akira Kurishima, Chieko Miyamoto, Kenichiro Hataji, Toru Tezuka, Hideo Katsuragawa
Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Care and Sciences.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Antibiotic use during radical surgery in stage I-III colorectal cancer: correlation with outcomes?
Mingyue Xu, Yuanyuan Chen, Panhua Li, Qianwen Ye, Shouhan Feng, Bing Yan
BMC Cancer.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Surgical Site Infections in Colorectal Cancer Surgeries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Surgical Approach and Associated Risk Factors
Valentin Calu, Catalin Piriianu, Adrian Miron, Valentin Titus Grigorean
Life.2024; 14(7): 850. CrossRef
Potent antibacterial activity in surgical wounds with local administration of D-PLEX100
Noam Emanuel, Goldi A. Kozloski, Shlomo Nedvetzki, Sefi Rosenfeld
European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences.2023; 188: 106504. CrossRef
Worldwide incidence of surgical site infections in general surgical patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 488,594 patients
Brigid M. Gillespie, Emma Harbeck, Megan Rattray, Rhea Liang, Rachel Walker, Sharon Latimer, Lukman Thalib, Annette Erichsen Andersson, Bronwyn Griffin, Robert Ware, Wendy Chaboyer
International Journal of Surgery.2021; 95: 106136. CrossRef
Risk factors for surgical site infection in patients undergoing colorectal surgery: A meta-analysis of observational studies
ZhaoHui Xu, Hui Qu, ZeZhong Gong, George Kanani, Fan Zhang, YanYing Ren, Shuai Shao, XiaoLiang Chen, Xin Chen, Zubing Mei
PLOS ONE.2021; 16(10): e0259107. CrossRef
Update on risk factors of surgical site infection in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Zhaohui Xu, Hui Qu, George Kanani, Zhong Guo, Yanying Ren, Xin Chen
International Journal of Colorectal Disease.2020; 35(12): 2147. CrossRef
Appropriate Prophylactic Antibiotic Use in Clean Wound Surgery Under Local Anesthesia
Han Gyu Cha, Jin Geun Kwon, Hyun Ho Han, Jin Sup Eom, Eun Key Kim
Journal of Korean Medical Science.2019;[Epub] CrossRef
Patterns of antibiotics and pathogens for anastomotic leakage after colorectal cancer surgery
Geunhyeok Yang, Chang Woo Kim, Suk-Hwan Lee
Korean Journal of Clinical Oncology.2019; 15(2): 79. CrossRef
Challenging surgical dogma in the management of proximal esophageal atresia with distal tracheoesophageal fistula: Outcomes from the Midwest Pediatric Surgery Consortium
Dave R. Lal, Samir K. Gadepalli, Cynthia D. Downard, Daniel J. Ostlie, Peter C. Minneci, Ruth M. Swedler, Thomas H. Chelius, Laura Cassidy, Cooper T. Rapp, Deborah Billmire, Steven Bruch, R. Carland Burns, Katherine J. Deans, Mary E. Fallat, Jason D. Fras
Journal of Pediatric Surgery.2018; 53(7): 1267. CrossRef
Comparison of intraoperative handling and wound healing between (NEOSORB® plus) and coated polyglactin 910 suture (NEOSORB®): a prospective, single-blind, randomized controlled trial
Bum Sik Tae, Ju Hyun Park, Jung Kwon Kim, Ja Hyeon Ku, Cheol Kwak, Hyeon Hoe Kim, Chang Wook Jeong
BMC Surgery.2018;[Epub] CrossRef
Impact of a change in duration of prophylactic antibiotics on infectious complications after radical cystectomy with a neobladder
Chung-Jong Kim, Kwang Hyun Kim, Wan Song, Dong Hyeon Lee, Hee Jung Choi
Medicine.2018; 97(47): e13196. CrossRef
Colorectal surgery and surgical site infection: is a change of attitude necessary?
Manuela Elia-Guedea, Elena Cordoba-Diaz de Laspra, Estibaliz Echazarreta-Gallego, María Isabel Valero-Lazaro, Jose Manuel Ramirez-Rodriguez, Vicente Aguilella-Diago
International Journal of Colorectal Disease.2017; 32(7): 967. CrossRef
Influence of a Shorter Duration of Post-Operative Antibiotic Prophylaxis on Infectious Complications in Patients Undergoing Elective Liver Resection
Masahiko Sakoda, Satoshi Iino, Yuko Mataki, Yota Kawasaki, Hiroshi Kurahara, Kosei Maemura, Shinichi Ueno, Shoji Natsugoe
Surgical Infections.2017; 18(2): 149. CrossRef
Efforts to Prevent Surgical Site Infection After Colorectal Surgery
Byung Wook Min
Annals of Coloproctology.2015; 31(6): 211. CrossRef

Mechanical Bowel Preparation and Prophylactic Antibiotic Administration in Colorectal Surgery: A Survey of the Current Status in Korea: Byung Mo Kang, Kil Yeon Lee, Sun Jin Park, Suk-Hwan Lee; Ann Coloproctol. 2013;29(4):160-166. Published online August 29, 2013; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2013.29.4.160

4,694 View
45 Download
19 Citations

Abstract PDF

Purpose

The usefulness of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) in colon surgery was recently challenged by many multicenter clinical trials and meta-analyses. The objectives of this study were to investigate current national opinions about MBP and prophylactic antibiotics (PA) and to provide preliminary data for developing future Korean guidelines for MBP and PA administration in colorectal surgery.

Methods

A questionnaire was mailed to 129 colorectal specialists. The questionnaires addressed the characteristics of the hospital, the MBP methods, and the uses of oral and intravenous antibiotics.

Results

A total of 73 questionnaires (56.6%) were returned. First, in regard to MBP methods, most surgeons (97.3%) used MBP for a mean of 1.36 days. Most surgeons (98.6%) implemented whole bowel irrigation and used polyethylene glycol (83.3%). Oral antibiotic use was indicated in over half (52.1%) of the responses, the average number of preoperative doses was three, and the mean time of administration was 24.2 hours prior to the operation. Finally, the majority of responders stated that they used intravenous antibiotics (95.9%). The responses demonstrated that second-generation cephalosporin-based regimens were most commonly prescribed, and 75% of the surgeons administered these regimens until three days after the operation.

Conclusion

The results indicate that most surgeons used MBP and intravenous antibiotics and that half of them administered oral PA in colorectal surgery preparations. The study recommends that the current Korean guidelines should be adapted to adequately reflect the medical status in Korea, to consider the medical environment of the various hospitals, and to establish more accurate and relevant guidelines.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

RETRACTED: A meta‐analysis of the risk factors for surgical site infection in patients with colorectal cancer
Yani Chen, Hua Guo, Tian Gao, Jiale Yu, Yujia Wang, Haiquan Yu
International Wound Journal.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Surgical Site Infections in Colorectal Cancer Surgeries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Surgical Approach and Associated Risk Factors
Valentin Calu, Catalin Piriianu, Adrian Miron, Valentin Titus Grigorean
Life.2024; 14(7): 850. CrossRef
Uncovering the Function of MBP and Antibiotics in Preventing Surgical Site Infections during Colorectal Procedures
Agnes Sara Shibu, Rojin G. Raj, Rohit Singh Deo
Journal of Coloproctology.2024; 44(03): e209. CrossRef
Single-Dose Versus Multiple-Dose Prophylactic Antibiotics in Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis
Ga Yoon Ku, Beom-jin Kim, Ji Won Park, Min Jung Kim, Seung-Bum Ryoo, Seung-Yong Jeong, Kyu Joo Park
Journal of Korean Medical Science.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Preoperative mechanical bowel preparation using conventional versus hyperosmolar polyethylene glycol-electrolyte lavage solution before laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer (TLUMP test): a phase III, multicenter randomized controlled non-inferiori
Tadashi Yoshida, Shigenori Homma, Nobuki Ichikawa, Yosuke Ohno, Yoichi Miyaoka, Hiroki Matsui, Ken Imaizumi, Hiroyuki Ishizu, Tohru Funakoshi, Masahiko Koike, Hirofumi Kon, Yo Kamiizumi, Yasuhiro Tani, Yoichi Minagawa Ito, Kazufumi Okada, Akinobu Taketomi
Journal of Gastroenterology.2023; 58(9): 883. CrossRef
The risk of surgical site infection of oral sulfate tablet versus sodium picosulfate for bowel preparation in colorectal cancer surgery: a randomized clinical trial
Sung Sil Park, Sung Chan Park, Dong-Eun Lee, Dong Woon Lee, Kiho Yu, Hyoung-Chul Park, Chang Won Hong, Dae Kyung Sohn, Kyung Su Han, Bun Kim, Byung Chang Kim, Jae Hwan Oh
Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research.2022; 103(2): 96. CrossRef
Preoperative Elemental Diet before Laparoscopic Anterior Resection in Patients with Advanced Stenotic Rectal Cancer
Tadashi Yoshida, Shigenori Homma, Nobuki Ichikawa, Hiroaki Iijima, Akinobu Taketomi
Journal of the Anus, Rectum and Colon.2021; 5(4): 395. CrossRef
Orale Antibiotikaprophylaxe zur Darmdekontamination vor elektiver kolorektaler Chirurgie
S. Flemming, C.-T. Germer
Der Chirurg.2020; 91(2): 128. CrossRef
Role of Mechanical Bowel Preparation for Elective Colorectal Surgery
Ik Yong Kim
The Korean Journal of Gastroenterology.2020; 75(2): 79. CrossRef
Update on risk factors of surgical site infection in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Zhaohui Xu, Hui Qu, George Kanani, Zhong Guo, Yanying Ren, Xin Chen
International Journal of Colorectal Disease.2020; 35(12): 2147. CrossRef
Does Mechanical Bowel Preparation Ameliorate Surgical Performance in Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion?
Chang-Hoon Jeon, Han-Dong Lee, Nam-Su Chung
Global Spine Journal.2019; 9(7): 692. CrossRef
Mechanical Bowel Preparation Does Not Affect Clinical Severity of Anastomotic Leakage in Rectal Cancer Surgery
Woong Bae Ji, Koo Yong Hahn, Jung Myun Kwak, Dong Woo Kang, Se Jin Baek, Jin Kim, Seon Hahn Kim
World Journal of Surgery.2017; 41(5): 1366. CrossRef
Comparing Mechanical Bowel Preparation With Both Oral and Systemic Antibiotics Versus Mechanical Bowel Preparation and Systemic Antibiotics Alone for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infection After Elective Colorectal Surgery
Min Chen, Xue Song, Liang-zhou Chen, Zhi-dong Lin, Xue-li Zhang
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum.2016; 59(1): 70. CrossRef
Early Outcomes of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Neoplasms According to Clinical Indications
Eui-Gon Youk, Dae Kyng Sohn, Chang Won Hong, Seong Dae Lee, Kyung Su Han, Byung Chang Kim, Hee Jin Chang, Mi-Jung Kim
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum.2016; 59(5): 403. CrossRef
Benefit of mechanical bowel preparation prior to elective colorectal surgery: current insights
A. C. A. Murray, R. P. Kiran
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery.2016; 401(5): 573. CrossRef
Is mechanical bowel preparation still necessary for gynecologic laparoscopic surgery? A meta‐analysis
Huaping Huang, Haiyan Wang, Mei He
Asian Journal of Endoscopic Surgery.2015; 8(2): 171. CrossRef
Nationwide Analysis of Outcomes of Bowel Preparation in Colon Surgery
Zhobin Moghadamyeghaneh, Mark H. Hanna, Joseph C. Carmichael, Steven D. Mills, Alessio Pigazzi, Ninh T. Nguyen, Michael J. Stamos
Journal of the American College of Surgeons.2015; 220(5): 912. CrossRef
Influence of Shorter Duration of Prophylactic Antibiotic Use on the Incidence of Surgical Site Infection Following Colorectal Cancer Surgery
Youn Young Park, Chang Woo Kim, Sun Jin Park, Kil Yeon Lee, Jung Joo Lee, Hye Ok Lee, Suk-Hwan Lee
Annals of Coloproctology.2015; 31(6): 235. CrossRef
Mechanical Bowel Preparation: Keep It or Abandon It?
Hungdai Kim
Annals of Coloproctology.2013; 29(4): 136. CrossRef

TOP