Roel Bakx

Morbidity of Temporary Loop Ileostomies

Background/Aims: A temporary loop ileostomy is constructed to protect a distal colonic anastomosis. Closure is usually performed not earlier than 8–12 weeks after the primary operation. During this period, stoma-related complications can occur and enhance the adverse effect on quality of life. The aim of this study was to evaluate the length of time between ileostomy construction and closure, to quantify stoma-related morbidity and to examine the potential advantages of early ileostomy closure. Methods: Sixty-nine patients with a temporary, protective loop ileostomy (constructed between January 1996 and December 2000) were retrospectively analysed. The analysis was done by reviewing the medical records and the notes of the stoma care nurse. Results: Sixty ileostomies (87%) were closed after a median period of 24 weeks (range 2–124 weeks). Stoma-related complications occurred in 29 of the 69 patients (42%), and 11 patients (18%) had complications after ileostomy closure. Conclusion: The length of time between ileostomy construction and closure was substantially longer than initially planned. Earlier ileostomy closure (preferably even during the initial admission) could reduce the frequently occurring stoma-related morbidity in these patients and thus improve quality of life.

Feasibility of early closure of loop ileostomies: a pilot study.

PurposeA loop ileostomy is constructed to protect a distal anastomosis, and closure is usually performed not earlier than after two to three months. Earlier closure might reduce stoma-related morbidity, improve quality of life, and still effectively protect the distal anastomosis. This pilot study was designed to investigate the feasibility of early closure of loop ileostomies, i.e., during the same hospital admission as the initial operation. METHODS: Twenty-seven consecutive patients with a protective loop ileostomy were included. If patient’s recovery was uneventful, water-soluble contrast enema examination was performed, preferably after seven to eight days. If no radiologie signs of leakage were detected, the ileostomy was closed during the same hospital admission. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients (8 females; mean age, 60 years) were analyzed. Eighteen patients had early ileostomy closure on average 11 (range, 7-21) days after the initial procedure. In nine patients the procedure was postponed because of leakage of the anastomosis (n = 3), delayed recovery (n = 1), small bowel obstruction (n = 1), gastroparesis (n = 1), logistic reasons (n = 2), or irradical cancer resection followed by radiotherapy (n = 1). There was no mortality and four mild complications occurred after early closure: superficial wound infection (n = 2), intravenous-catheter sepsis (n = 1), small bowel obstruction (n = 1). CONCLUSION: Closure of a loop ileostomy early after the initial operation was feasible in 18 of 27 patients and was associated with low morbidity and no mortality.

J-pouch vs side-to-end coloanal anastomosis after preoperative radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a multicentre randomized trial

Aim  Comparison of functional and surgical outcome of the J‐pouch with the side‐to‐end coloanal anastomosis after preoperative radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision in rectal cancer patients.

Neorectal Irritability After Short-Term Preoperative Radiotherapy and Surgical Resection for Rectal Cancer

OBJECTIVES:Preoperative radiotherapy followed by rectal resection with total mesorectal excision (TME) and colo-anal anastomosis severely compromises anorectal function, which has been attributed to a decrease in neorectal capacity and neorectal compliance. However, to what extent altered motility of the neorectum is involved, is still unknown. The aim of the study was to compare the motor response to (prolonged) filling of the (neo-)rectum in patients after preoperative radiotherapy and rectal resection with that in healthy volunteers (HV).METHODS:Neorectal function (J-pouch or side-to-end anastomosis) was studied in 15 patients (median age 61 years, 10 males) 5 months after short-term preoperative radiotherapy (5×5 Gy) and rectal resection with TME for rectal cancer and compared with that of 10 volunteers (median age 41 years, 7 males). Furthermore, patients with a colonic J-pouch anastomosis (n=6) were compared with patients with a side-to-end anastomosis (n=9). (Neo-)rectal sensitivity was assessed using a stepwise isovolumetric and isobaric distension protocol. (Neo-)rectal motility was determined during prolonged distension at the threshold of the urge to defecate.RESULTS:The neorectal volume of patients at the threshold of the urge to defecate (125 ±45 ml) was significantly lower when compared with that of HV (272±87 ml, P<0.05). The pressure threshold, however, did not differ between patients (26±9 mm Hg) and HV (21±5 mm Hg) and neither did the pressure threshold differ between patients with a J-pouch and those with side-to-end anastomosis. In HV, no rectal contractions were observed during prolonged rectal distension. In contrast, in all 15 patients, prolonged isovolumetric and isobaric distension induced 3 (range 0–5) rectal contractions/10 min, which were associated with an increase in sensation in half of the patients.CONCLUSIONS:Patients who underwent preoperative radiotherapy and rectal resection with TME, but not HV, developed contractions of the neo-rectum in response to prolonged distension. We suggest that this neorectal “irritability” represents a new pathophysiological mechanism contributing to the urgency for defecation after this multimodality treatment.

Categorization of major and minor complications in the treatment of patients with resectable rectal cancer using short-term pre-operative radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision: a Delphi round

Background  To properly balance the benefit (reduction of local recurrence) of short‐term pre‐operative radiotherapy for resectable rectal cancer against its harm (complications), a consensus concerning the severity of complications is required. The aim of this study was to reach consensus regarding major and minor complications after short‐term radiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision in the treatment of rectal carcinoma, using the Delphi technique.

Paediatric femur fractures at the emergency department: accidental or not?

Only a small proportion of all paediatric fractures is caused by child abuse or neglect, especially in highly prevalent long bone fractures. It can be difficult to differentiate abusive fractures from non-abusive fractures. This article focuses on femoral fractures in young children. Based on three cases, this article presents a forensic evidence-based approach to differentiate between accidental and non-accidental causes of femoral fractures. We describe three cases of young children who were presented to the emergency department because of a suspected femur fracture. Although in all cases, the fracture had a similar location and appearance, the clinical history and developmental stage of the child led to three different conclusions. In the first two cases, an accidental mechanism was a plausible conclusion, although in the second case, neglect of parental supervision was the cause for concern. In the third case, a non-accidental injury was diagnosed and appropriate legal prosecution followed. Any doctor treating children should always be aware of the possibility of child abuse and neglect in children with injuries, especially in young and non-mobile children presenting with an unknown trauma mechanism. If a suspicion of child abuse or neglect arises, a thorough diagnostic work-up should be performed, including a full skeletal survey according to the guidelines of the Royal College of Radiologists and the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health. In order to make a good assessment, the radiologist reviewing the skeletal survey needs access to all relevant clinical and social information.

Plain radiography in children with spoke wheel injury: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Bicycle spoke injury (BSI) mostly occurs in children as a result of entrapment of the leg in the bicycle spokes. No guideline or protocol exists that defines what type of radiography is indicated to diagnose or rule out a fracture commonly associated with these injuries. The aim of this study was (1) to evaluate the type of radiographs that are obtained in children with BSI, (2) to assess in which anatomical regions fractures occur and (3) to evaluate on which radiographs a fracture can be detected in children with BSI. PATIENTS AND METHODS A retrospective cohort study was performed in paediatric patients presenting at the Emergency Department (ED) of a university hospital with a paediatric surgery department between June 2008 and December 2013. RESULTS In 99 of the 320 children (31.4%) evaluated with radiography following BSI a fracture was diagnosed. In almost two third of the patients (63%) radiographic imaging of two or more anatomical regions was performed. In 98 children (99%) the fracture was located at the distal tibia or fibula. All fractures were diagnosed on a radiograph of the ankle or lower leg (including the ankle region). No fractures of the foot were diagnosed. CONCLUSION We suggest that in children with a clinical suspicion of a fracture at the ankle region, in which no fracture is seen at the radiograph of the ankle, no additional radiographs are necessary.

Adherence to the guidelines of paediatric cervical spine clearance in a level I trauma centre: A single centre experience.

INTRODUCTION International guidelines define if and what type of radiography is advised in children to clear the cervical spine (C-spine). However, adherence to these guidelines has never been evaluated in a paediatric population. Therefore, we wanted to assess the adherence to the guidelines for C-spine clearance in a level-one trauma centre. METHODS We retrospectively included all children, presented at the ED between January 2006 and December 2013, in whom radiographic imaging of the C-spine was obtained following blunt trauma. Primary outcome was the adherence to the international guidelines with regard to (1) if the indication for radiographic imaging was correct and (2) if the type of radiographic imaging was correct. RESULTS Included were 573 patients; 336 boys (58.7%). Median age was 11 years (IQR 5.25-15). The indication for radiographic imaging was correct in all cases. The type of primary imaging modality was concordant with the guidelines in 99,7%. In 41% of the cases supplementary radiographs were made. The most common supplementary view was the odontoid. In 15% an incomplete set of radiographs was obtained. CONCLUSION The adherence to the international guidelines when to obtain radiographic imaging was 100%. However, in a large proportion of patients (56%), not the recommended number of radiographs was obtained.