Search

Your search keyword '"Pierie, J. P. E. N."' showing total 3 results
Start Over Author "Pierie, J. P. E. N." Database Supplemental Index
3 results on '"Pierie, J. P. E. N."'

1. Pelvic Floor Rehabilitation After Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial (FORCE Trial).

Author

van der Heijden, J. A. G., Kalkdijk-Dijkstra, A. J., Pierie, J. P. E. N., van Westreenen, H. L., Broens, P. M. A., Klarenbeek, B. R., de Wilt, JHW, Stommel, MWJ, Bremers, AJA, Rosman, C, de Reuver, PR, Bouwense, SAW, van der Kolk, BM, Garms, LM, Meerten-van den Belt, K, Olde Hartman-Hofste, MRM, Peters, JWM, Olsder, L, Huizing, I, and Trzpis, M

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the effects of PFR after LAR compared to usual care without PFR. Summary of background data: Functional complaints, including fecal incontinence, often occur after LAR for rectal cancer. Controversy exists about the effectiveness of PFR in improving such postoperative functional outcomes. Methods: This was a multicenter, randomized controlled trial involving 17 Dutch centers. Patients after LAR for rectal cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) to usual care or PFR and stratified by sex and administration of neoadjuvant therapy. Selection was not based on severity of complaints at baseline. Baseline measurements were taken 3 months after surgery without temporary stoma construction or 6 weeks after stoma closure. The primary outcome measure was the change in Wexner incontinence scores 3 months after randomization. Secondary outcomes were fecal incontinence-related quality of life, colorectal-specific quality of life, and the LARS scores. Results: Between October 2017 and March 2020, 128 patients were enrolled and 106 randomly assigned (PFR n = 51, control n = 55); 95 patients (PFR n = 44, control n = 51) were assessable for final analysis. PFR did not lead to larger changes in Wexner incontinence scores in nonselected patients after LAR compared to usual care [PFR: –2.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) –3.3 to –1.4, control: –1.3, 95% CI –2.2 to –0.4, P = 0.13]. However, PFR was associated with less urgency at follow-up (odds ratio 0.22, 95% CI 0.06–0.86). Patients without near-complete incontinence reported larger Wexner score improvements after PFR (PFR: –2.1, 95% CI –3.1 to –1.1, control: –0.7, 95% CI –1.6 to 0.2, P = 0.045). For patients with at least moderate incontinence PFR resulted in relevant improvements in all fecal incontinence-related quality of life domains, while the control group deteriorated. These improvements were even larger when patients with near-complete incontinence were excluded. No serious adverse PFR-related events occurred. Conclusion: No benefit was found of PFR in all patients but several subgroups were identified that did benefit from PFR, such as patients with urgency or with at least moderate incontinence and no near-complete incontinence. A selective referral policy (65%–85% of all patients) is suggested to improve postoperative functional outcomes for patients after LAR for rectal cancer. Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Registration, NTR5469, registered on 3 September 2015. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

2. Pelvic Floor Rehabilitation After Rectal Cancer Surgery

Author

van der Heijden, J. A. G., Kalkdijk-Dijkstra, A. J., Pierie, J. P. E. N., van Westreenen, H. L., Broens, P. M. A., Klarenbeek, B. R., de Wilt, JHW, Stommel, MWJ, Bremers, AJA, Rosman, C, de Reuver, PR, Bouwense, SAW, van der Kolk, BM, Garms, LM, Meerten-van den Belt, K, Olde Hartman-Hofste, MRM, Peters, JWM, Olsder, L, Huizing, I, Trzpis, M, Furnee, EJB, Havenga, K, Hemmer, PHJ, van Etten, B, Koop, A, van der Heide, L, Kamphuis, D, Koopal, SA, Hoff, C, Eker, H, Junte, HHM, Schoenaker, IJH, Quaedackers, S, Bos, MJ, Gardien, H, van Sprundel, TC, de Vries, PD, Ashruf, JF, Geurts, L, Nielen, I, Pfeil, J, van Ark, M, Polle, SW, Hansson, B, Polat, F, de Vries, H, ten Berge-Groen, E, Talsma, AK, Bosker, R, Veurink, E, Papa, M, Maaskant-Braat, AJG, van den Broek, FJC, Leclercq, WKG, Slooter, GD, Caers, F, Boeijen, M, van den Broek, R, van Schaik, K, Wasowicz-Kemps, DK, Langenhoff, BS, van den Bogaard, MJ, van der Sluis, J, Arisz, D, Bruinsma, S, Hess, DA, Mulder, EJ, Wiering, B, Kok, S, Woltering, J, Raap-van Sleuwen, B, Schoonderwoerd, L, Hendriks, D, van den Elzen, N, van de Laak, I, Valk, M, van der Meij, W, van Wely, BJ, van Hoogstraten, MJ, van der Sluis, M, Paulusma, I, Mollers, MJW, Looijen, R, van der Mijle, HCJ, Pereboom, ITA, Tijink-Callenbach, PMC, Schasfoort, RA, van der Hagen, SJ, van de Meer, W, Lubberink, M, van Haskera, M, Wit, F, Jeeninga, M, ten Hoeve, R, Slootmans, FCW, Inberg, B, de Nes, L, Toonen, D, Wilmsen, MA, Buyne, O, Ferenschild, F, de Vries, M., Adamse, C, Hettema-Beets, BL, Goudswaard, MK, van der Velde, M, Elving, DW, Arends-Smit, RE, Buiter, JR, van der itte-van Aerle, I, Jansma, K, Kooistra, L, Lohof-Venema, S, Kruijer, MR, Dijkstra, G, van der erf-Elling, MA, Kats-de Boer, V, Rinsema, AM, Haarlemmer-Lutjeboer, M, van der Vegt, A, Berends-Pors, SMH, Ponstein, AJ, Klaassen, G, Nieuwint, AM, Veninga-Jansen, M, Dries-Jansen, V, Arends, FJ, Stellingwerf-Goinga, NE, Overmars, NG, van Asma, H, Beverdam, K, Ploumen, MJAC, Tijhuis, M, Visser Duiven, AH, Former, M, Smans-Kaal, MAL, Vorsterman van Oijen-Linthorst, CMJ, Hovels-Kamp, NN, Vorsteveld, LR, Vermeulen, N, Alkemade-van Veghel, A, Steentjes, LJ, Cornelisse-Theunissen, HGM, Strijbosch, J, Sniekers, S, Oerlemans-van Oijen, JMA, Hoefnagels, HMJ, Sniekers, CJDA, Biemans, S, Bomert-Wendt, Y, van Gaal, HGM, Smulders, AHCW, Adams, W, Kappen, JM, Vermeltfoort-Jansen, AM, Zegger, MGC, Vrielink, C, Slotman, HM, Claessens, NJH, Manders-de Groot, AWM, van Beuzekom-van der Vorst, CTPG, Swinkels-Nijssen, MWC, van Oeveren, P, van Leeuwen-Nellestijn, JPF, Bleijenberg, M, Valenteyn-Hidden, JJF, van Rutten-de Groot, MG, van den van der Heijden, M, Nieuwenhuizen, Boorsma, PG, Broodman, N, Elling, ME, Bokkers-Engelen, E, Hilhorst-Droppers, GH, Mein, HJC, and Gielen, M

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

3. Incidence and management of benign anastomotic stricture after cervical oesophagogastrostomy

Author

Pierie, J P E N, de Graaf, P W, Poen, H, van der Tweel, I, and Obertop, H

Abstract

Benign anastomotic stricture after transhiatal oesophagectomy and gastric tube reconstruction constitutes a major problem. From August 1988 to April 1991, 81 patients were followed after cervical oesophagogastrostomy. Twenty-four patients (30 per cent) developed a benign anastomotic stricture 3–23 (median 8) weeks after operation. Poor vascularization of the gastric tube, determined during operation, and postoperative anastomotic leakage were statistically significant risk factors for stricture formation. Symptoms related to stricture were often typical and were confirmed by endoscopy and/or radiography. Radiography did not yield information additional to that obtained from endoscopy. Strictures were treated in the outpatient clinic by dilatation with Savary dilators. Repeated dilatation completely alleviated dysphagia in 20 of the 24 patients (83 per cent). In ten patients dilatations could be discontinued after a median of 8 (range 1–17) sessions. Dilatation was continued until the end of follow-up in nine patients or until death from recurrent disease in five. No complications of dilatation were seen.

Published
1993
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results