Search

Pelvic floor dysfunction is prevalent, with multifactorial causes and variable clinical presentations. Accurate diagnosis and assessment of the involved structures commonly requires a multidisciplinary approach. Imaging is often complementary to clinical assessment, and the most commonly used modalities for pelvic floor imaging include fluoroscopic defecography, magnetic resonance defecography, and pelvic floor ultrasound. This collaboration opinion paper was developed by representatives from multiple specialties involved in care of patients with pelvic floor dysfunction (radiologists, urogynecologists, urologists, and colorectal surgeons). Here, we discuss the utility of imaging techniques in various clinical scenarios, highlighting the perspectives of referring physicians. The final draft was endorsed by the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR), American Urogynecologic Society (AUGS), and the American Urological Association (AUA).

Few studies have confirmed a benefit for adjuvant chemotherapy (aCTX) in stage II colon cancer. We used the National Cancer Database to explore the use and efficacy of aCTX in patients with both normal-risk (NR) and high-risk (HR) young stage II colon cancer.We identified patients with stage II colon cancer who underwent colectomy between 2010 and 2015. HR patients included at least: lymphovascular or perineural invasion, 12 lymph nodes, poor/un-differentiation, T4, or positive margins. Rates of aCTX by age and risk were calculated, and adjusted factors associated with aCTX were identified. Overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox multivariable analyses for patients 50 years.Among the 81,066 stage II patients who underwent colectomy, 6093 (7.5%) were 50 years old. Of these, 2669 patients were HR. Thirty percent of NR and almost 60% of HR patients 50 years received aCTX, compared with 8% and 23% of patients50 years (P .001). In NR patients 50 years, 35.3% with microsatellite-stable tumors and 18% with microsatellite unstable tumors received aCTX (P .001), whereas 63.6% and 43.2%, respectively, of HR patients did (P .001). The most significant multivariable predictors of aCTX were risk status and age. On univariate analysis, there was no survival benefit associated with aCTX in patients 50 years. Multivariate analysis failed to demonstrate a survival benefit for aCTX for either group (HR, 0.97; P = .84; NR, 0.1.03; P = .90).Young patients with HR and NR colon cancer received aCXT more frequently than older patients with no demonstrable survival benefit. This bears further evaluation to avoid the real risks of over-treatment in this increasing population.

Evidence suggests that elective primary colon resection (ePCR) in patients with asymptomatic colon tumors and unresectable metastases is not required and may expose patients to unnecessary operative risk.Stage IV colon cancer patients with liver metastases from 2000 to 2011 were identified with SEER-Medicare data. Liver-based therapy or urgent/emergent colectomies were excluded. Chemotherapy alone was compared to ePCR ± chemotherapy. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify predictors of ePCR. Multivariate Cox regression compared survival.5139 patients were identified. The ePCR rate decreased over time; 84% underwent ePCR in 2000, compared to 52% in 2011 (p 0.001). In multivariate analysis, older patients were more likely to undergo ePCR, as were patients from rural areas (OR 1.65, p 0.001). The odds of PCR in high poverty areas (10%) were almost 25% higher than those in low poverty areas (OR 1.23, p = 0.03). African-Americana were less likely to undergo PCR than Caucasians (OR 0.76, p = 0.01). In multivariate survival analysis, PCR was associated with a significant survival benefit (HR 0.59, p 0.001).Although ePCR is not recommended with unresectable metastases and the rate has decreased significantly, over 50% of patients with untreated hepatic metastases underwent ePCR in 2011. Disparities exist in use of ePCR that are likely multifactorial and deserve further study.

Patient selection and preoperative evaluation play a vital role in the application of sacral neuromodulation (SNM) to fecal incontinence (FI). The history and physical should elucidate the nature of the incontinence, including duration, severity, type of leakage, as well as associated pathology (e.g., urinary incontinence, prolapse, etc.). Additionally, the use of a validated incontinence scoring system in obtaining an objective measure is recommended as a way to monitor an individual patient’s response to treatment over time. Despite dramatic success with SNM for severe incontinence, medical therapies should remain first-line treatment, especially for mild to moderate FI. In addition to idiopathic causes of FI, small series have reported successes in patients with disrupted anal sphincters, spinal cord injury, rectal prolapse, and low anterior resection syndrome. In general, studies on sacral neuromodulation have failed to identify consistent predictors correlating with response to treatment. Two considerations unique to SNM, cardiac pacemakers and anomalous anatomy, are not absolute contraindications but do mandate thorough preoperative planning and counseling.

Transanal endoscopic surgery (TES) techniques encompass a variety of approaches, including transanal endoscopic microsurgery and transanal minimally invasive surgery. These allow a surgeon to perform local excision of rectal lesions with minimal morbidity and the potential to spare the need for proctectomy. As understanding of the long-term outcomes from these procedures has evolved, so have the indications for TES. In this study, we review the development of TES, its early results, and the evolution of new surgical techniques. In addition, we evaluate the most recent research on indications and outcomes in rectal cancer.

Colonoscopy is a common procedure performed for screening, diagnostic, or therapeutic indications; nevertheless, it is an invasive procedure that has associated risks. Complications of colonoscopy can be divided into four main categories: (1) bleeding, (2) postpolypectomy syndrome, (3) perforation, and (4) rarely, solid organ injury. In this review, we discuss strategies to avoid and treat complications of colonoscopy. Diligent biopsy and use of electrocautery and avoiding looping and blind advancement of the colonoscope minimize the risk of these complications. Management of complications ranges from non-operative conservative management, to minimally invasive endoscopic or laparoscopic techniques, to operative exploration.

Ileostomy or colostomy formation is an important component of many surgical procedures performed for a wide range of disorders of the gastrointestinal tract. Despite the frequency with which intestinal stomas are created, stoma-related complications remain common and are associated with significant morbidity as well as cost. Some of the most prevalent complications of stoma formation which will be detailed in this article include peristomal skin complications, retraction, stomal necrosis, stomal stenosis, prolapse, bleeding, dehydration from high ostomy output, and parastomal hernia. The authors will review these common complications, detail means to avoid or prevent them, and outline recommendations for management.

Objective: Older patients with cancer value functional outcomes as much as survival, but surgical studies lack functional recovery (FR) data. The value of a standardized frailty assessment has been confirmed, yet it's infrequently utilized due to time restrictions into everyday practice. The multicenter GOSAFE study was designed to (1) evaluate the trajectory of patients' quality of life (QoL) after cancer surgery (2) assess baseline frailty indicators in unselected patients (3) clarify the most relevant tools in predicting FR and clinical outcomes. This is a report of the study design and baseline patient evaluations. Materials & Methods: GOSAFE prospectively collected a baseline multidimensional evaluation before major elective surgery in patients (≥70 years) from 26 international units. Short−/mid−/long-term surgical outcomes were recorded with QoL and FR data. Results: 1003 patients were enrolled in a 26-month span. Complete baseline data were available for 977(97.4%). Median age was 78 years (range 70–94); 52.8% males. 968(99%) lived at home, 51.6% without caregiver. 54.4% had ≥ 3 medications, 5.9% none. Patients were dependent (ADL < 5) in 7.9% of the cases. Frailty was either detected by G8 ≤ 14(68.4%), fTRST ≥ 2(37.4%), TUG > 20 s (5.2%) or ASAIII-IV (48.8%). Major comorbidities (CACI > 6) were detected in 36%; 20.9% of patients had cognitive impairment according to Mini-Cog. Conclusion: The GOSAFE showed that frailty is frequent in older patients undergoing cancer surgery. QoL and FR, for the first time, are going to be primary outcomes of a real-life observational study. The crucial role of frailty assessment is going to be addressed in the ability to predict postoperative outcomes and to correlate with QoL and FR.

Current guidelines recommend the evaluation of at least 12 lymph nodes (LNs) in the pathologic specimen following surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC). We sought to examine the role of colorectal specialization on nodal identification.We conducted a retrospective cohort study using SEER-Medicare data to examine the association between colorectal specialization and LN identification following surgery for colon and rectal adenocarcinoma between 2001 and 2009. Our dataset included patients65 years who underwent surgical resection for CRC. We excluded patients with rectal cancer who had received neoadjuvant therapy. The primary outcome measure was the number of LNs identified in the pathologic specimen following surgery for CRC. Multivariate analysis was used to identify the association between surgical specialization and LN identification in the pathologic specimen.In multivariate analysis, odds of an adequate lymphadenectomy following surgery with a colorectal specialist were 1.32 and 1.41 times greater for colon and rectal cancer, respectively, than following surgery by a general surgeon (p 0.001). These odds increased to 1.36 and 1.58, respectively, when analysis was limited to board-certified colorectal surgeons. Hospital factors associated with ≥12 LNs identified included high-volume CRC surgery (colon OR 1.84, p 0.001; rectal OR 1.78, p 0.001) and NCI-designated Cancer Centers (colon OR 1.75, p 0.001; rectal OR 1.64; p = 0.007).Colorectal specialization and, in particular, board-certification in colorectal surgery, is significantly associated with increased LN identification following surgery for colon and rectal adenocarcinoma since the adoption of the 12-LN guideline in 2001.

AIM It is recognized that higher surgeon volume is associated with improved survival in colorectal cancer. However, there is a paucity of national studies that have evaluated the relationship between surgical specialization and survival. METHOD We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Medicare cancer registry to examine the association between colorectal specialization (CRS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) between 2001 and 2009. A total of 21,432 colon cancer and 5893 rectal cancer patients who underwent elective surgical resection between 2001 and 2009 were evaluated. Univariate and multivariate Cox survival analysis was used to identify the association between surgical specialization and cancer-specific survival. RESULTS Colorectal specialists performed 16.3% of the colon and 27% of the rectal resections. On univariate analysis, specialization was associated with improved survival in Stage II and Stage III colon cancer and Stage II rectal cancer. In multivariate analysis, however, CRS was associated with significantly improved DSS only in Stage II rectal cancer [hazard ratio (HR) 0.70, P = 0.03]. CRS was not significantly associated with DSS in either Stage I (colon HR 1.14, P = 0.39; rectal HR 0.1.26, P = 0.23) or Stage III (colon HR 1.06, P = 0.52; rectal HR 1.08, P = 0.55) disease. When analysis was limited to high volume surgeons only, the relationship between CRS and DSS was unchanged. CONCLUSIONS CRS is associated with improved DSS following resection of Stage II rectal cancer. A combination of factors may contribute to long-term survival in these patients, including appropriate surgical technique, multidisciplinary treatment decisions and guideline-adherent surveillance. CRS probably contributes positively to these factors resulting in improved survival.

With increased use of explosive devices in warfare, anal trauma is often seen coupled with more complex pelviperineal injury. While the associated mortality is high, casualties that survive are often left with disabling fecal incontinence from damage to the anosphincteric complex. After resolution of the acute insult, the initial evaluation mandates a thorough physical exam, including endoscopic evaluation with rigid proctoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy, as well as adjunctive testing, specifically anal manometry and endoanal ultrasound. First-line therapy favors bulking agents and antidiarrheals, in conjunction with biofeedback, due to a minimal risk profile. Surgical options range from direct sphincter repairs to complex anosphincteric reconstruction with widely variable results. Most recently, burgeoning therapies in the treatment of fecal incontinence, including sacral nerve stimulation and magnetic anal sphincters, offer excellent alternatives with promising long-term outcomes. In summation, the goal of all interventions is the re-establishment of bowel continence, but, in its absence, permanent fecal diversion for devastating fecal incontinence is a reasonable option with excellent patient satisfaction scores.