| 1. |
- Angenete, Eva, 1972, et al.
(författare)
-
Laparoscopic Lavage Is Feasible and Safe for the Treatment of Perforated Diverticulitis With Purulent Peritonitis The First Results From the Randomized Controlled Trial DILALA
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Annals of Surgery. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 0003-4932 .- 1528-1140. ; 263:1, s. 117-122
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective:To evaluate short-term outcomes of a new treatment for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis in a randomized controlled trial.Background:Perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis (Hinchey III) has traditionally been treated with surgery including colon resection and stoma (Hartmann procedure) with considerable postoperative morbidity and mortality. Laparoscopic lavage has been suggested as a less invasive surgical treatment.Methods:Laparoscopic lavage was compared with colon resection and stoma in a randomized controlled multicenter trial, DILALA (ISRCTN82208287). Initial diagnostic laparoscopy showing Hinchey III was followed by randomization. Clinical data was collected up to 12 weeks postoperatively.Results: Eighty-three patients were randomized, out of whom 39 patients in laparoscopic lavage and 36 patients in the Hartmann procedure groups were available for analysis. Morbidity and mortality after laparoscopic lavage did not differ when compared with the Hartmann procedure. Laparoscopic lavage resulted in shorter operating time, shorter time in the recovery unit, and shorter hospital stay.Conclusions:In this trial, laparoscopic lavage as treatment for patients with perforated diverticulitis Hinchey III was feasible and safe in the short-term.
|
|
| 2. |
- Danielsen, Anne K, et al.
(författare)
-
Early Closure of a Temporary Ileostomy in Patients With Rectal Cancer: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Annals of surgery. - 1528-1140. ; 265:2, s. 284-290
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The objective was to study morbidity and mortality associated with early closure (8-13 days) of a temporary stoma compared with standard procedure (closure after > 12 weeks) after rectal resection for cancer.A temporary ileostomy may reduce the risk of pelvic sepsis after anastomotic dehiscence. However, the temporary ileostomy is afflicted with complications and requires a second surgical procedure (closure) with its own complications. Early closure of the temporary ileostomy could reduce complications for rectal cancer patients.Early closure (8-13 days after stoma creation) of a temporary ileostomy was compared with late closure (>12 weeks) in a multicenter randomized controlled trial, EASY (www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01287637) including patients undergoing rectal resection for cancer. Patients with a temporary ileostomy without signs of postoperative complications were randomized to closure at 8 to 13 days or late closure (>12 weeks after index surgery). Clinical data were collected up to 12 months. Complications were registered according to the Clavien-Dindo Classification of Surgical Complications, and Comprehensive Complication Index was calculated.The trial included 127 patients in eight Danish and Swedish surgical departments, and 112 patients were available for analysis. The mean number of complications after index surgery up to 12 months follow up was significantly lower in the intervention group (1.2) compared with the control group (2.9), P < 0.0001.It is safe to close a temporary ileostomy 8 to 13 days after rectal resection and anastomosis for rectal cancer in selected patients without clinical or radiological signs of anastomotic leakage.This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0, where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0.
|
|
| 3. |
- Petersson, Josefin, et al.
(författare)
-
Bowel Obstruction and Ventral Hernia After Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer in A Randomized Trial (COLOR II).
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Annals of surgery. - 1528-1140. ; 269:1, s. 53-57
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The aim of this study was to evaluate the risk of bowel obstruction, incisional, and parastomal hernia following laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer.Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer has been adopted worldwide, after trials reported similar oncological outcomes compared with open surgery. Little is known about long-term morbidity, including bowel obstruction, incisional, and parastomal hernia following surgery.Patients included in the international, multicenter, noninferior, open-label, randomized COLOR II trial were followed for five years. Primary endpoint was local recurrence at 3-year follow-up. Secondary endpoints included bowel obstruction, incisional and parastomal hernia within 5 years, and the current article reports on these secondary endpoints.All 1044 patients included in the COLOR II trial were analyzed. There was no difference in risk of bowel obstruction, incisional, or parastomal hernia following laparoscopic or open surgery for rectal cancer.Based on long-term morbidity outcomes, laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer could be considered a routine technique as there are no differences with open surgery.
|
|
