Annals of Coloproctology

Display

Sort by :

Technical Note

Can the Heald anal stent help to reduce anastomotic or rectal stump leak in elective and emergency colorectal surgery? A single-center experience: Michael Jones, Brendan Moran, Richard John Heald, John Bunni; Ann Coloproctol. 2024;40(1):82-85. Published online February 26, 2024; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2023.00038.0005

4,798 View
219 Download
1 Citations

Anastomotic and rectal stump leaks are feared complications of colorectal surgery. Diverting stomas are commonly used to protect low rectal anastomoses but can have adverse effects. Studies have reported favorable outcomes for transanal drainage devices instead of diverting stomas. We describe our use of the Heald anal stent and its potential impact in reducing anastomotic or rectal stump leak after elective or emergency colorectal surgery. We performed a single-center retrospective analysis of patients in whom a Heald anal stent had been used to “protect” a colorectal anastomosis or a rectal stump, in an elective or emergency context, for benign and malignant pathology. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were reviewed using clinical and radiological records. The Heald anal stent was used in 93 patients over 4 years. Forty-six cases (49%) had a colorectal anastomosis, and 47 (51%) had an end stoma with a rectal stump. No anastomotic or rectal stump leaks were recorded. We recommend the Heald anal stent as a simple and affordable adjunct that may decrease anastomotic and rectal stump leak by reducing intraluminal pressure through drainage of fluid and gas.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Techniques in coloproctology - controversies in coloproctology: resection rectopexy is an underutilised procedure in the management of both symptomatic high-grade internal and external rectal prolapse
J. Bunni, E. D. Courtney
Techniques in Coloproctology.2026;[Epub] CrossRef

Original Article

A Comparative Study of Outcomes between Emergency and Elective Surgeries for Colon Cancer.: Yoo, Dae Hyung , Yon, Joon Moh , Lee, Mun Seob , Shin, Dong Jun , Ahn, Byeong Yul , Kim, Byung Wook; J Korean Soc Coloproctol. 2006;22(2):113-117.

1,676 View
26 Download

Abstract PDF: PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of curative emergency surgery for complicated colon cancer in terms of tumor recurrence and survival compared with that of elective surgery.
METHODS
A total of 238 primary surgeries for colon cancer were performed. All patients were deemed to have undergone a curative resection. Patients were classified into an emergency surgery group for complicated colon cancers (n=40) and an elective surgery group for uncomplicated colon cancers (n=198).
RESULTS
Emergency colonic cancers present at a more advanced stage (P=0.002). The postoperative mortality rate in the emergency group was significantly higher than it was in the elective group (15.0% vs. 2.5%, P= 0.004). There were differences between the two groups in tumor recurrence (32.5% vs. 13.1%, P=0.003), overall survival (52.5% vs. 71.7%, P=0.017), and disease-free survival (50.0% vs. 69.7%, P=0.016). However, after the patients were stratified according to tumor stage, no statistical differences were observed.
CONCLUSIONS
When compared with uncomplicated colon cancers, complicated colon cancers present at a more advanced stage with a higher postoperative mortality and an overall worse prognosis. However, the difference decreases when patients are stratified according to the tumor stage. The negative prognostic efficacy of emergency surgery for complicated colon cancers appears to be confined to the perioperative period. Despite the more advanced stage of tumors in patients undergoing emergency surgery, the aim of the surgeon should be to offer a curative resection for better survival, if possible.

First
Prev
Page of 1
Next
Last

Search