These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Application of protective appendicostomy after sphicter-preserving surgery for patients with low rectal carcinoma who are at high-risk of anastomotic leakage].
    Author: You X, Wang Y, Zhao X, Lian Y, Xu N, Huang C.
    Journal: Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2015 Jun; 18(6):573-6. PubMed ID: 26108771.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To explore the application of protective appendicostomy after sphicter-preserving surgery for patients with low rectal carcinoma who are at high-risk of anastomotic leakage. METHODS: Clinical data of 74 low rectal cancer cases with high-risk anastomotic leakage undergoing laparoscope-assisted total mesorectal excision(TME) sphincter-preserving operation in our department from September 2013 to September 2014 were analyzed retrospectively. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: 36 patients received appendicostomy and catheter was removed 4 to 6 weeks after operation when sinus tract formation in abdominal wall was identified; 38 patients received traditional ileostomy and stoma closure was performed 3 to 6 months after operation. RESULTS: The operation time was (149.2±9.4) min vs. (146.7±12.7) min, postoperative complication morbidity was 8.3%(3/36) vs. 13.2%(5/38), anastomotic leakage rate was 2.8%(1/38) vs. 2.6%(1/36), mean drainage volume of 1-week stoma was (203.2±76.9) ml vs. (195.8±76.5) ml, intestinal function recovery time was (25.5±5.6) h vs. (24.0±5.8) h in intubation colostomy group and ileostomy group respectively, and these differences were not significant (all P>0.05). While total hospital stay was shorter and cost was less in intubation colostomy group as compared to ileostomy group [(8.8±1.7) d vs. (18.0±1.7) d, (32 000±3000) yuan vs. (51 000±4000) yuan], and these differences were significant (all P<0.05). CONCLUSION: For low rectal cancer patients who are at high-risk of developing anastomotic leakage undergoing sphincter-preserving anterior resection, protective appendicostomy can decrease anastomotic leakage rate, avoid second stoma closure, shorten hospital stay and reduce hospital cost.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]