The surgeon : journal of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons of Edinburgh and Ireland · 2026
Post-operative mobilisation and mobility outcomes after pelvic exenteration surgery for colorectal cancer.
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.
Foley Stella, Cawte Caitlain, Hawkins Ellie, Jackson Charlotte, Kiemann Charlotte, Kim Andrew, Moore Meg, Paxman Nanette, Snoswell Ashlee, Statham Andrew, Willis Bronte, Window Peter, Young Nadine, Thomas Peter
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Total pelvic exenteration surgery varies in the level of resection performed and requirement for reconstructive surgery. This study aimed to describe the recovery of mobility in the post-operative period and how it varies according to the surgery performed.
METHODS: A retrospective audit of 104 patients was conducted, reflecting surgery conducted over a 7-year period. Data was collected until hospital discharge. Mobility was measured using the Intensive Care Mobility Scale. Results were analysed based on three levels of perineal resection (pelvic exenteration without abdominoperineal resection; abdominoperineal resection without flap reconstruction; and with flap reconstruction).
RESULTS: Flap reconstruction resulted in a longer time to the first stand (median [interquartile range] = 4 [3, 7] days) compared to abdominoperineal resection without a flap (3 [2, 5]) and exenteration surgery without abdominoperineal resection (2 [2, 3], P = <0.001). Differences in mobility were still present at hospital discharge, with 15 (49%) patients with flap reconstruction, 26 (61%) with abdominoperineal resection without flap reconstruction and 27 (90%) patients without abdominoperineal resection able to walk independently (P = 0.012). Patients undergoing flap reconstruction were more often transferred for rehabilitation (n = 9, 29%) after a prolonged hospital stay (37 [30, 85] days). They were less frequently discharged home (n = 11, 36%) compared to patients with abdominoperineal resection without flap reconstruction (n = 24, 60%) or without abdominoperineal resection (n = 21, 70%, P = 0.019).
CONCLUSIONS: Reconstructive surgery was associated with lower levels of mobility at hospital discharge and discharge to a rehabilitation facility.
METHODS: A retrospective audit of 104 patients was conducted, reflecting surgery conducted over a 7-year period. Data was collected until hospital discharge. Mobility was measured using the Intensive Care Mobility Scale. Results were analysed based on three levels of perineal resection (pelvic exenteration without abdominoperineal resection; abdominoperineal resection without flap reconstruction; and with flap reconstruction).
RESULTS: Flap reconstruction resulted in a longer time to the first stand (median [interquartile range] = 4 [3, 7] days) compared to abdominoperineal resection without a flap (3 [2, 5]) and exenteration surgery without abdominoperineal resection (2 [2, 3], P = <0.001). Differences in mobility were still present at hospital discharge, with 15 (49%) patients with flap reconstruction, 26 (61%) with abdominoperineal resection without flap reconstruction and 27 (90%) patients without abdominoperineal resection able to walk independently (P = 0.012). Patients undergoing flap reconstruction were more often transferred for rehabilitation (n = 9, 29%) after a prolonged hospital stay (37 [30, 85] days). They were less frequently discharged home (n = 11, 36%) compared to patients with abdominoperineal resection without flap reconstruction (n = 24, 60%) or without abdominoperineal resection (n = 21, 70%, P = 0.019).
CONCLUSIONS: Reconstructive surgery was associated with lower levels of mobility at hospital discharge and discharge to a rehabilitation facility.