Journal of laparoendoscopic & advanced surgical techniques. Part A · 2018
Laparoscopic Enteropexy for Prolapsing Stoma: A Case Series Describing a Novel Technique.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Davidson Joseph, Healy Costa, Blackburn Simon C, Curry Joe
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Ileostomy prolapse has a cumulative risk of 11% and represents a significant complication with associated morbidity, which may result in multiple admissions and procedures requiring a general anesthetic. We have developed a laparoscopic technique for managing stoma prolapse-so-called laparoscopic enteropexy for prolapsing stoma (LEPS).
METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained departmental surgical logbook was performed alongside clinical case history review for patients undergoing LEPS. Primary outcome was defined as recurrent prolapse. Secondary outcomes were any postoperative complication or complication occurring at the time of stoma closure.
RESULTS: A total of 15 LEPS procedures were performed on 14 patients with stoma prolapse-13 were patients with ileostomy and 1 with a loop colostomy. Median operative time was 75 minutes (range 50-95). Median postoperative stay was 1 day (1-4 days). There was one return to theater for a small bowel intussusception on the second postoperative day wherein taking down of the bowel and repeat LEPS were necessary. There was one recurrence of prolapse in a separate patient (1/14 [7%]). Three patients have since had their stoma closed without complication.
CONCLUSION: We describe here the initial case series of our LEPS procedure for managing stoma prolapse. This is a reproducible and technically straightforward laparoscopic procedure with an excellent success rate in preventing further prolapse.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained departmental surgical logbook was performed alongside clinical case history review for patients undergoing LEPS. Primary outcome was defined as recurrent prolapse. Secondary outcomes were any postoperative complication or complication occurring at the time of stoma closure.
RESULTS: A total of 15 LEPS procedures were performed on 14 patients with stoma prolapse-13 were patients with ileostomy and 1 with a loop colostomy. Median operative time was 75 minutes (range 50-95). Median postoperative stay was 1 day (1-4 days). There was one return to theater for a small bowel intussusception on the second postoperative day wherein taking down of the bowel and repeat LEPS were necessary. There was one recurrence of prolapse in a separate patient (1/14 [7%]). Three patients have since had their stoma closed without complication.
CONCLUSION: We describe here the initial case series of our LEPS procedure for managing stoma prolapse. This is a reproducible and technically straightforward laparoscopic procedure with an excellent success rate in preventing further prolapse.