Monika Carpelan-Holmström

Smoking Increases the Incidence of Complicated Diverticular Disease of the Sigmoid Colon

Backround and Aims: The aim of this study was to establish whether smoking is associated with complicated diverticular disease and adverse outcomes of operative treatment of diverticular disease. Smoking has been associated with increased rate of perforations in acute appendicitis as well as failure of colonic anastomosis in patients resected for colonic tumours. It has also been suggested that smoking is a risk factor for complicated diverticular disease of the colon. Material and Methods: Retrospective investigation of records of 261 patients electively operated for diverticular disease in Helsinki university Central Hospital during a period of five years. Results: The smokers underwent sigmoidectomy at a younger age than the non-smokers (p = 0.001) and they had an increased rate of perforations (p = 0.040) and postoperative recurrent diverticulitis episodes (p = 0.019). Conclusions: We conclude that smoking increases the likelihood of complications in diverticulosis coli. The development of complicated disease also seems to proceed more rapidly in smokers.

CEA, CA 242, CA 19-9, CA 72-4 and hCGβ in the Diagnosis of Recurrent Colorectal Cancer

Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the utility of serum CEA, CA 19-9, CA 242, CA 72-4 and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG)β in the follow-up of 102 surgically treated colorectal cancer patients, out of which 40 patients developed clinical recurrence. Methods: In patients with recurrent disease, serum samples were obtained at the time of clinical recurrence, and in the disease-free group, they were obtained postoperatively. The combined use of the markers was evaluated with logistic regression analysis. The sensitivities of the different tumour markers at various specificity levels were compared by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Results: When the five tumour markers, Dukes stage and location of the primary tumour were evaluated together in the same model, only CEA provided significant diagnostic information (p < 0.0005) in addition to the location of the primary tumour (p = 0.003). The diagnostic information provided by the other serum tumour markers was insignificant, although CA 72-4 approached borderline significance (p = 0.053). ROC curves were constructed and the difference in the values of the area under the curve (AUC) between the different serum tumour markers was determined at the time of clinical recurrence. Of the individual markers, the highest AUC was observed for CEA (AUC = 0.931). The difference in AUC values between CEA and the other tumour markers was highly significant (p ≤ 0.001). Conclusions: CEA had the highest diagnostic accuracy in detecting recurrent colorectal cancer. Inclusion of CA 19-9, CA 242, CA 72-4 or hCGβ in the model did not improve the accuracy, although CA 72-4 approached borderline significance (p = 0.053). Thus, CEA seems to retain its position as the surveillance marker of choice for patients surgically treated for colorectal cancer.

Prospective, Randomized Study on the Use of a Prosthetic Mesh for Prevention of Parastomal Hernia of Permanent Colostomy.

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic placement of a mesh has been suggested to prevent parastomal hernia, but evidence to support this approach is scarce. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether laparoscopic placement of a prophylactic, dual-component, intraperitoneal onlay mesh around a colostomy is safe and prevents parastomal hernia formation after laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection. DESIGN: This is a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at 2 university and 3 central Finnish hospitals. PATIENTS: From 2010 to 2013, 83 patients undergoing laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer were recruited. After withdrawals and exclusions, the outcome of 70 patients, 35 patients in each study group, could be examined. INTERVENTIONS: In the intervention group, an end colostomy was created with placement of a intraperitoneal, dual-component onlay mesh and compared with a group with a traditional stoma. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measures were the incidence of clinically and radiologically detected parastomal hernias and their extent 12 months after surgery. Stoma-related morbidity and the need for surgical repair of parastomal hernia were secondary outcome measures. RESULTS: Parastomal hernia was observed by clinical inspection in 5 intervention patients (14.3%) and in 12 control patients (32.3%; p = 0.049). Surgical repair of parastomal hernia was performed in 1 control patient (3.2%) and in none of the patients in the intervention group. CT detected parastomal hernia in 18 intervention patients (51.4%) and in 17 control patients (53.1%; p = 1.00). The extent of hernias was similar according to European Hernia Society classification (p = 0.41). Colostomy-related morbidity (32.3% vs 14.3%; p = 0.140) did not differ between the study groups. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its small size and short follow-up time. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic laparoscopic placement of intraperitoneal onlay mesh does not significantly reduce the overall risk of radiologically detected parastomal hernia after laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection. However, prophylactic mesh repair was associated with significantly lower risk of clinically detected parastomal hernia.

Laparoscopic rectal prolapse surgery combined with short hospital stay is safe in elderly and debilitated patients

BackgroundWe report the results of patients treated from January 2000 to June 2004 for full-thickness rectal prolapse with trans-abdominal surgery in Helsinki.MethodsSixty-five of 75 patients were treated laparoscopically, with a 6% conversion rate. Ten patients were operated on openly. Half of the patients were scored as American Society for Anesthesiologists III or IV.ResultsThe operation time was similar in the laparoscopic and the open rectopexy procedures (p = 0.15), whereas laparoscopic resection rectopexy was more time-consuming compared to the open procedure (p = 0.007). Intraoperative bleeding during laparoscopic surgery was minimal in comparison to open surgery (p = 0.006). Patients treated laparoscopically had a shorter median hospital stay than those treated with an open procedure (rectopexy, 3 and 7 days, respectively; resection rectopexy, 4 and 7.5 days, respectively) (p < 0.00001). There was no mortality and minor morbidity. During follow-up, there were two prolapse recurrences. All surgical techniques improved fecal continence considerably. Eighty-four percent of rectopexy patients and 92% of resection rectopexy patients considered the surgical outcome to be excellent or good.ConclusionsBoth rectopexy and resection rectopexy cure prolapse with good results and can be performed safely in older and debilitated patients. The laparoscopic approach enables a shortened hospital stay and is well tolerated in elderly patients.

Differences in serum tumor markers between colon and rectal cancer

PURPOSE: We investigated whether there are differences in serum levels of CA 242 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) between patients with colon and rectal cancer. METHODS: Preoperative serum levels of CA 242 and CEA were determined in 153 patients with colon cancer and in 107 patients with rectal cancer. RESULTS: At the recommended cut-off levels for CA 242 and CEA, the overall sensitivity of CA 242 was 39 percent for both colon and recta! cancer, whereas the sensitivity of CEA was 40 percent for colon and 47 percent for rectal cancer. A combination of CA 242 and CEA increased overall sensitivity to 57 percent in colon cancer and to 62 percent in rectal cancer, whereas specificity decreased by 10 percent, compared with CEA alone. In colon cancer either or both markers were elevated in 38, 46, 56, and 84 percent of patients with Dukes Stages A, B, C, and D, respectively. Corresponding figures for rectal cancer were 52, 46, 71, and 87 percent, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: CA 242 showed equal sensitivity for colon and rectal cancer. In Stages A, C, and D, sensitivity of CEA and of a combination of CEA and CA 242 was higher in rectal than in colon cancer, but the difference was not significant. Concomitant use of markers increased sensitivity sharply compared with use of a single marker both in colon and rectal cancer.