| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Angenete, Eva, 1972, et al.
(författare)
-
Ostomy function after abdominoperineal resection-a clinical and patient evaluation.
- 2012
-
Ingår i: International journal of colorectal disease. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1432-1262 .- 0179-1958. ; 27:10, s. 1267-74
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSE: Abdominoperineal resection (APR) for rectal cancer results in a permanent colostomy. As a consequence of a recent change in operative technique from standard (S-APR) to extralevator resection (E-APR), the perineal part of the procedure is now performed with the patient in a prone jackknife position. The impact of this change on stoma function is unknown. The aim was to determine stoma-related complications and the individual patient experience of a stoma. METHODS: Consecutive patients with rectal cancer operated on with APR in one institution in 2004 to 2009 were included. Recurrent cancer, palliative procedures, pre-existing stoma and patients not alive at the start of the study were excluded. Data were collected from hospital records and the national colorectal cancer registry. A questionnaire was sent out to patients. The median follow-up was 44 months (13-84) after primary surgery. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients were alive in February 2011. Seventy seven agreed to participate. Sixty-nine patients (90 %) returned the questionnaire. Stoma necrosis was more common for E-APR, 34 % vs. 10 %, but bandaging problems and low stoma height were more common for S-APR. There were no differences in the patients' experience of stoma function. In all, 35 % of the patients felt dirty and unclean, but 90 % felt that they had a full life and could engage in leisure activities of their choice. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory study indicates no difference in stoma function after 1 year between S-APR and E-APR. Over 90 % of the patients accept their stoma, but our study indicates that more information and support for patients are warranted.
|
|
| 10. |
- Asheer, Z. E., et al.
(författare)
-
Scandinavian surveillance follow-up programmes in patients with malignant colorectal polyps
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Danish Medical Journal. - 2245-1919. ; 68:2
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- INTRODUCTION: Following endoscopic removal of malignant colorectal polyps, patients may undergo completion radical resection or surveillance. The optimal surveillance strategy remains unknown. This study included colorectal departments in Scandinavian countries with a focus on follow-up periods and examination modalities for patients with endoscopically removed malignant polyps with a resection margin > 1 mm. METHODS: This study was conducted as an internet-based survey. A questionnaire was sent to all Scandinavian surgical departments performing > 20 colorectal procedures annually. Questions differed between follow-up on rectal and colonic malignant polyps with presence or absence of histological risk factors. The follow-up period was defined as short (one year), intermediate (three years) or long (five years). RESULTS: The majority of the departments used a long (five years) (38-59%) or intermediate (three years) (26-38%) follow-up programme. In patients with rectal malignant polyps and presence of histological risk factors, a significant difference was observed in the use of endoscopy according to length of follow-up. No difference in the use of the different modalities was seen according to length of follow-up in patients with colonic malignant polyps. CONCLUSIONS: The follow-up on patients with endoscopically removed malignant polyps and a surveillance strategy varies both in terms of length and performed modalities. Future studies should compare long-term patient outcomes in departments employing different follow-up strategies.
|
|
