Search

Aim: Locally advanced and recurrent colorectal cancer can require extended surgery, including reconstruction of the vagina. This complex surgery carries high morbidity. The aim of this study was to analyse the impact on female sexual functioning of pelvic exenteration (PE), with or without vaginal flap reconstruction, for locally advanced or recurrent colorectal cancer., Method: The protocol with search strategies for PubMed (Medline), EMBASE and the Cochrane Library was registered in PROSPERO. Studies published from 2000 onwards meeting the inclusion criteria were considered. Study selection (Rayyan), data extraction, rating of evidence (GRADE) and risk of bias (ROBINS-I) were conducted independently by two reviewers., Results: Six of 2479 identified records were included: four retrospective and two cross-sectional studies. Of all 860 patients included, PE was performed in 314 patients. Seven hundred and thirty-two had rectal cancer (85.1%), 80 nonadvanced rectal cancer (10.9%), 393 locally advanced rectal cancer (53.7%) and 217 locally recurrent rectal cancer (29.6%); for 45 patients the type of rectal cancer remained unspecified (6.1%). Three studies reported on both preoperative and postoperative female sexual activity. Of the 153 women who were sexually active preoperatively, 64 (41.8%) reported postoperative sexual activity. The VRAM flap was used the most frequently and resulted in a sexual activity ratio of 18% postoperatively. Four studies, using six different validated questionnaires, reported mostly lowered sexual functioning postoperatively., Conclusion: Most studies showed that PE can result in severe sexual dysfunction despite reconstruction. Future prospective studies can fill the current knowledge gap by assessing long-term sexual outcomes in women., (© 2023 Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Aim: The burden of abdominal wound failure can be profound. Recent clinical guidelines have highlighted the heterogeneity of laparotomy closure techniques. The aim of this study was to investigate current midline closure techniques and practices for prevention of surgical site infection (SSI)., Method: An online survey was distributed in 2021 among the membership of the European Society of Coloproctology and its partner societies. Surgeons were asked to provide information on how they would close the abdominal wall in three specific clinical scenarios and on SSI prevention practices., Results: A total of 561 consultants and trainee surgeons participated in the survey, mainly from Europe (n = 375, 66.8%). Of these, 60.6% identified themselves as colorectal surgeons and 39.4% as general surgeons. The majority used polydioxanone for fascial closure, with small bite techniques predominating in clean-contaminated cases (74.5%, n = 418). No significant differences were found between consultants and trainee surgeons. For SSI prevention, more surgeons preferred the use of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) alone over MBP and oral antibiotics combined. Most surgeons preferred 2% alcoholic chlorhexidine (68.4%) or aqueous povidone-iodine (61.1%) for skin preparation. The majority did not use triclosan-coated sutures (73.3%) or preoperative warming of the wound site (78.5%), irrespective of level of training or European/non-European practice., Conclusion: Abdominal wound closure technique and SSI prevention strategies vary widely between surgeons. There is little evidence of a risk-stratified approach to wound closure materials or techniques, with most surgeons using the same strategy for all patient scenarios. Harmonization of practice and the limitation of outlying techniques might result in better outcomes for patients and provide a stable platform for the introduction and evaluation of further potential improvements., (© 2023 The Authors. Colorectal Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Aim: Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) has a large impact on patients' quality of life. Several heterogeneous intervention pathways are suggested in the literature. The steps and timing of the different steps in the pathways are unclear. This systematic scoping review aims to map the range of intervention pathways for LARS after sphincter-saving rectal cancer surgery., Methods: A search was undertaken on four databases (CINAHL, EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science). Any type of paper describing intervention pathways for patients with LARS following sphincter-saving surgery was included. Excluded were patients with a stoma, no full paper, no intervention pathway and not being written in English or Dutch. The review was registered with Open Science Framework (10.17605/OSF.IO/JB5H8). Narrative synthesis of the results was performed by charting and summarising key results., Results: A total of 373 records were screened and 12 papers were included. There was a high variability among the intervention pathways, including which patients should be included. The number of pathway steps ranged from 2-6. Most intervention pathways were treatment-led. Intervention options ranged from conservative measures to a permanent stoma. Pathway flow was highly variable and sometimes not well described, with different or no timings provided for the start, progression, or end of the pathways. Three studies discussed the use of a nurse to coordinate the pathway., Conclusion: This systematic scoping review shows that despite similarities in treatment options there are variations in which treatments are included, when treatments should be instigated, and even which patients should be treated., (© 2022 Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Aim: Pelvic exenteration (PE) carries high morbidity. Our aim was to analyse the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in PE patients., Method: Search strategies were protocolized and registered in PROSPERO. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched with the terms 'patient reported outcomes', 'pelvic exenteration' and 'colorectal cancer'. Studies published after 1980 reporting on PROMs for at least 10 PE patients were considered. Study selection, data extraction, rating of certainty of evidence (GRADE) and risk of bias (ROBINS-I) were performed independently by two reviewers., Results: Nineteen of 173 studies were included (13 retrospective, six prospective). All studies were low to very low quality, with an overall moderate/serious risk of bias. Studies included data on 878 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (n = 344), recurrent rectal cancer (n = 411) or cancer of unknown type (n = 123). Thirteen studies used validated questionnaires, four used non-validated measures and two used both. Questionnaires included the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal questionnaire (n = 6), Short Form Health Survey (n = 6), European Organization for Research and Treatment for Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (n = 6), EORTC-CR38 (n = 4), EORTC-BLM30 (n = 1), Brief Pain Inventory (n = 2), Short Form 12 (n = 1), Assessment of Quality of Life (n = 1), Short Form Six-Dimension (n = 1), the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Sphincter Function Scale (n = 1), the Cleveland Global Quality of Life (n = 1) or other (n = 4). Timing varied between studies., Conclusions: Whilst the use of validated questionnaires increased over time, this study shows that there is a need for uniform use and timing of PROMs to enable multicentre studies., (© 2021 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

This is a comprehensive and rigorous review of currently available data on the use of mesh in the pelvis in colorectal surgery. This guideline outlines the limitations of available data and the challenges of interpretation, followed by best possible recommendations., (© 2021 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Aim: Pelvic exenteration surgery remains the only curative option for recurrent rectal cancer. Microscopically involved surgical margins (R1) are associated with a higher risk of local recurrence and decreased survival. Our study aimed to develop a post hoc multidisciplinary case conference review and investigate its potential for identifying areas for improvement., Method: Patients who underwent pelvic exenteration surgery for recurrent rectal cancer with R1 resections at a tertiary referral centre between April 2014 and January 2016 were retrospectively reviewed from a prospectively maintained database. Patients with non-rectal cancers or who underwent palliative surgery were excluded. Cases, imaging and histopathology were evaluated by a dedicated panel including colorectal surgeons, an abdominal radiologist and a gastrointestinal pathologist., Results: R1 resections were reported in 32 of 110 pelvic exenterations. Patients with other tumours were excluded and one patient had a palliative resection. Nine male patients with 11 exenterations were included with a median age of 56 years. All patients had positive soft tissue margins, and one patient also had an involved bony margin. Failures were due to (interdisciplinary) communication problems, specific management of tumour biology (multifocality, spiculated tumours), which can lead to radiological undercalling, and inadequate surgical technical planning. In hindsight, surgery would have been withheld from one patient., Conclusion: A retrospective multidisciplinary case evaluation of pelvic exenteration patients with involved surgical margins led to a list of recommendations which included the need to plan for wider surgical soft tissue resections and improvement in interdisciplinary communication. Lessons learned may increase clear margin rates in future resections., (© 2018 The Authors. Colorectal Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)