Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

[Colonic pouch].

Authors: V, Schumpelick; S, Willis;

[Colonic pouch].

Abstract

The tendency towards sphincter-preserving resection for distal rectal cancers has led to a revival of the technique of coloanal anastomosis (CAA) in recent years. In order to improve functional results, creation of a colonic J-pouch in conjunction with a coloanal anastomosis (CPA) was proposed. Two different operation techniques exist: i) Double-stapling with the anastomosis close to the dentate line and ii) intersphincteric resection with the anastomosis located immediately at the dentate line. A long rectal remnant after double-stapling leads to urgency in 15% of the patients due to stool retention in the atonic remnant. No propulsive motility patterns were recorded from the pouch which is emptied passively by upper colonic peristalsis. Therefore colonic pouches should be fashioned of descending colon and should not exceed a length of 6 cm in order to prevent stool fragmentation. Under these conditions the average stool frequency is reduced from 2-6/d after CAA to 1-3/d after CPA. This effect is maximal during the first postoperative months, but is still significant after 3 years. Colonic pouch construction also leads, due to better blood supply and prevention of pelvic hematomas, to a significant decrease of the anastomotic insufficiency rate from 10.0% after CAA to 5.4% after CPA. Therefore creation of a colonic J-pouch should be combined with coloanal reconstruction if the oncologic situation allows a sphincter-preserving procedure.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Survival Rate, Postoperative Complications, Surgical Staplers, Risk Factors, Anastomosis, Surgical, Proctocolectomy, Restorative, Suture Techniques, Colorectal Neoplasms, Fecal Incontinence

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    7
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
7
Average
Average
Average
Related to Research communities
Cancer Research
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!