Search

The article focuses on the surgical developments for colorectal diseases in Great Britain and the U.S. The laparoscopic resection of advanced colorectal cancer had higher rates for successful operation. A study has revealed the adverse effects of endoscopy to the chronic abdominal pain (CAP) of children in Houston, Texas.

Background Surgeons are increasingly considering resection and primary anastomosis when treating left-sided colonic obstruction or perforation in preference to the more traditional staged procedures. Previous studies in the United Kingdom (UK) and United States of America (USA) have suggested a greater interest in single-staged procedures amongst UK surgeons. This study was aimed to directly compare the treatment preferences between UK and US surgeons. Method A questionnaire, designed to determine the procedure of choice when faced with left-sided colonic emergencies in patients with good and poor anaesthetic risk, was sent to 500 surgeons in the UK and 500 surgeons in the USA. Results UK surgeons were more likely to perform resection, primary anastomosis and on-table colonic lavage in patients with sigmoid obstruction (good anaesthetic risk: P < 0.0001; poor risk: P < 0.01) and sigmoid perforation (good risk: P < 0.0001). In good-risk patients with sigmoid obstruction, US surgeons were more likely than UK to choose Hartmann’s procedure ( P < 0.0001). US surgeons performing primary anastomosis were less likely to perform on-table lavage. Conclusion Single-stage procedures are widely accepted as viable treatment options in both the UK and the USA when dealing with left-sided colonic emergencies. British surgeons are more likely to favour single-staged procedures, particularly with on-table colonic lavage, when compared with US surgeons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim Validated guidelines for the surgical and non-surgical treatment of rectal prolapse (RP) do not exist. The aim of this international questionnaire survey was to provide an overview of the evaluation, follow-up and treatment of patients with an internal or external RP. Method A 36-question questionnaire in English about the evaluation, treatment and follow-up of patients with RP was distributed amongst surgeons attending the congresses of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery and the European Society of Coloproctology in 2010. It was subsequently sent to all the members of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons and the European Society of Coloproctology by e-mail. Results In all, 391 surgeons in 50 different countries completed the questionnaire. Evaluation, surgical treatment and follow-up of patients with RP differed considerably. For healthy patients with an external RP, laparoscopic ventral rectopexy was the most popular treatment in Europe, whereas laparoscopic resection rectopexy was favoured in North America. There was consensus only on frail and/or elderly patients with an external prolapse, with a preference for a perineal technique. After failure of conservative therapy, internal RP was mostly treated by laparoscopic resection rectopexy in North America. In Europe, laparoscopic ventral rectopexy and stapled transanal rectal resection were the most popular techniques for these patients. Conclusion The treatment of RP differs between surgeons, countries and regions. Guidelines are lacking. Prospective comparative studies are warranted that may result in universally accepted protocols. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]