COMPARATIVE RESULTS OF RECOVERY STAGE IN TWO-STEP TREATMENT OF MALIGNANT COLONIC OBSTRUCTION
https://doi.org/10.24884/0042-4625-2017-176-1-70-75
Abstract
The aim of the study was a comparative analysis of results of different approaches to two-stage treatment of malignant colonic obstruction on the stage of recovery of the integrity of intestinal tract. The main group included 260 patients. A double-barreled colostomy was formed at the first stage, than resection of the colon with tumor removing and stoma excision were performed. The control group consisted of 192 patients. An obstructive resection of the colon was made at the first stage with following reconstructive operation. Intraoperative damage of the small intestine was observed in 6,9% patients of the main group and 18,2% patients of the control group. Postoperative mortality consisted of 1,2% in the main group and it was 1,5% in the control group. The early postoperative complications numbered 9,2% and 17,7%, respectively. The main risk factor of complication development was an expressed adhesion process of the abdominal cavity in the control group of patients. CONCLUSIONS. The method, which included the colostomy formation at the first stage with following radical surgery at the second stage, had advantages in case of elimination of malignant colonic obstruction.
About the Author
V. I. Pomazkin
Sverdlovsk regional clinical hospital for war veterans
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Помазкин В. И., Мансуров Ю. В. Тактика оперативного лечения при опухолевой обтурационной толстокишечной непроходимости // Хирургия. 2008. № 9. С. 15-18.
2. Пугаев А. В., Ачкасов Е. Е. Обтурационная опухолевая толстокишечная непроходимость. М.: ПРОФИЛЬ, 2005. 224 с.
3. Banerjee S., Leather A., Rennie J. et al. Feasibility and morbidity of reversal of Hartmann’s // Colorectal Dis. 2005. Vol. 7. P. 454-459.
4. Berg M., Sloothaak D., Dijkgraaf M. et al. Bridge-to-surgery stent placement versus emergency surgery for acute malignant colonic obstruction // Br. J. Surg. 2014. Vol. 101. P. 807-873.
5. Chereau N., Lefevre J., Lefrancois M. et al. Management of malignant left colonic obstruction: is an initial temporary colostomy followed by surgical resection a better option? // Colorectal Dis. 2013. Vol. 15. P. e646-e653.
6. Coleman M., McLain A., Moran B. Impact of previous surgery on time taken for incision and division of adhesions during laparotomy // Dis. Colon Rectum. 2000. Vol. 43. P. 1297-1299.
7. Cross K. L., Rees J., Soulsby R., Dixon A. Primary anastomosis without colonic lavage for the obstructed left colon // Ann. R. Coll. Surg. Engl. 2008. Vol. 90. P. 302-304.
8. Deans G., Krukowski Z., Irwin S. Malignant obstruction of the left colon // Br. J. Surg. 2005. Vol. 81. P. 1270-1276.
9. Garber A., Hyman N., Osler T. Complications of Hartmann take-down in a decade of preferred primary anastomosis // Am. J. Surg. 2014. Vol. 207. P. 60-64.
10. Frago R., Ramirez E., Milan M. et al. Current management of acute malignant large bowel obstruction: a systematic review // Am. J. Surg. 2014. Vol. 207. P. 127-138.
11. Parker M., Wilson M., Menzies D. et al. Colorectal surgery: the risk and burden of adhesion-related complications // Colorectal Dis. 2004. Vol. 6. P. 506-511.
12. Pokorny H., Herkner H., Jakesz R., Herbst F. Mortality and complications after stoma closure //Arch. Surg. 2005. Vol. 140. Р. 956-960.
13. Roig J., Cantos M,, Balciscueta Z. et al. Hartmann’s operation: how often is it reversed and at what cost? A multicentre study // Colorectal Dis. 2011. Vol. 13. P. e396-e402.
14. Smothers L., Hynan L., Fleming J. et al. Emergency surgery for colon carcinoma // Dis. Colon Rectum. 2003. Vol. 46. P. 24-30.
Review
For citations:
Pomazkin V.I. COMPARATIVE RESULTS OF RECOVERY STAGE IN TWO-STEP TREATMENT OF MALIGNANT COLONIC OBSTRUCTION. Grekov's Bulletin of Surgery. 2017;176(1):70-75. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24884/0042-4625-2017-176-1-70-75
Views:
535
Email this article 