Colorectal (rectum, anus and colon)

Permanent URI for this collection

Research outputs from the Colorectal Surgery team at the RD&E.


Recent Submissions

Now showing 1 - 5 of 204
  • Item
    Clinical management of high-output stoma: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis
    (Springer, 2023-06-01) Lederhuber, H.; Massey, L. H.; Kantola, V. E.; Siddiqui, M. R. S.; Sayers, A. E.; McDermott, F. D.; Daniels, I. R.; Smart, N. J.
    PURPOSE: High output is a common complication after stoma formation. Although the management of high output is described in the literature, there is a lack of consensus on definitions and treatment. Our aim was to review and summarise the current best evidence. METHODS: MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, BNI, CINAHL, EMBASE, EMCARE, and were searched from 1 Jan 2000 to 31 Dec 2021 for relevant articles on adult patients with a high-output stoma. Patients with enteroatmospheric fistulas and case series/reports were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB2 and MINORS. The review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021226621). RESULTS: The search strategy identified 1095 articles, of which 32 studies with 768 patients met the inclusion criteria. These studies comprised 15 randomised controlled trials, 13 non-randomised prospective trials, and 4 retrospective cohort studies. Eighteen different interventions were assessed. In the meta-analysis, there was no difference in stoma output between controls and somatostatin analogues (g - 1.72, 95% CI - 4.09 to 0.65, p = 0.11, I(2) = 88%, t(2) = 3.09), loperamide (g - 0.34, 95% CI - 0.69 to 0.01, p = 0.05, I(2) = 0%, t(2) = 0) and omeprazole (g - 0.31, 95% CI - 2.46 to 1.84, p = 0.32, I(2) = 0%, t(2) = 0). Thirteen randomised trials showed high concern of bias, one some concern, and one low concern. The non-randomised/retrospective trials had a median MINORS score of 12 out of 24 (range 7-17). CONCLUSION: There is limited high-quality evidence favouring any specific widely used drug over the others in the management of high-output stoma. Evidence, however, is weak due to inconsistent definitions, risk of bias and poor methodology in the existing studies. We recommend the development of validated core descriptor and outcomes sets, as well as patient-reported outcome measures.
  • Item
    Parameters affecting outcomes of transumbilical and periumbilical median incisions in ovarian cancer patients
    (Galenos, 2023-06-01) Iavazzo, C.; Gkegkes, I. D.; Peitsidis, P.; Spiliotis, J.
  • Item
    Endometrioid endometrial cancer treated with open or laparoscopic approach: is there a dilemma?
    (Galenos, 2023-06-01) Iavazzo, C.; Fotiou, A.; Gkegkes, I. D.; Vrachnis, N.
  • Item
    Two-year outcomes of conservatively managed appendicitis during the COVID-19 pandemic-a multicentre cohort study
    (Springer, 2023-08-01) Habib Bedwani, N.; Smith, C.; Kelada, M.; Pattern, D. K.; Mak, W. K.; English, W.; Shatkar, V.
    PURPOSE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the new RCSEng guidelines resulted in appendicitis being more commonly managed conservatively to avoid aerosol-generating procedures. This resulted in shorter hospital stays without increased short-term complications. The 2-year outcomes of this change, specifically recurrence and re-admission rates remain unknown. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, prospective, observational study including all adult patients treated as appendicitis after the implementation of the new surgical guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic. Outcomes included initial management failure, re-admission rate, appendicitis recurrence, and interval appendicectomy. A historical cohort prior to the COVID-19 pandemic was used for comparison. Patients were followed up for 2-years post index admission. Categorical and continuous variables were compared using Fisher's exact test and Student's T or Mann-Whitney U tests as appropriate. RESULTS: Sixty-three and 79 patients with appendicitis were included from four NHS trusts, before (A) and after (B) the new intercollegiate guidelines respectively. Operative management was used less frequently in cohort B (28/79 vs 52/63; p<0.001). More patients re-presented in cohort B (14/79 vs 3/63; p=0.020), but not when comparing only those managed conservatively (2/11 vs 13/52; p=1.000). A similar trend was observed for appendicitis recurrence although without statistical significance (2/63 vs 9/79; p=0.112); with loss of trend when comparing those managed conservatively-only (2/11 vs 9/52; p=1.000). Among all patients, four (2.8%) were found to have underlying neoplasia of which three were initially managed conservatively (3/63; 4.8%). CONCLUSION: Conservative management of appendicitis has previously been shown to have short-term benefits in expedited hospital discharge without early complications. The present study shows it has a higher readmission and appendicitis recurrence rates. The risks of this alongside missed/delayed management of neoplasia needs to be considered alongside the benefits including avoidance of aerosol-generating general anaesthesia and laparoscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic or similar future health crises. Small case numbers limit analysis.
  • Item
    Pelvic splenosis: A systematic review of the literature
    (Unknown, 2023-07-01) Peitsidis, P.; Iavazzo, C.; Tsikouras, P.; Gkegkes, I. D.
    BACKGROUND: Splenosis is the presence of ectopic autotransplantation of splenic tissue in various compartments of the human body, occurring after rupture of the splenic parenchyma. METHODS: A systematic PubMed and Scopus search was conducted. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 51.7 years. The majority of patients were of female gender. An emergency presentation was noted in 30 out of 85 patients, having abdominal pain as main symptom. The principal reason for splenectomy were traffic accidents. The time span between splenectomy and the initial symptoms ranged between 1 and 57 years. The most frequent symptom at presentation of pelvic splenosis was abdominal pain. Almost a quarter of the included patients were without any symptom. Presence of extrapelvic splenosis was de-scripted in almost half of the included patients. With regards to the type of treatment provided, exploratory laparotomy, laparoscopic surgical exploration / laparoscopy, robotic removal of splenium and watchful waiting, were performed in 35 (41.2%), 32 (37.6%), 3 (3.5%) and 15 (16.3%) patients, respectively. No fatality was reported. CONCLUSION: Pelvic splenosis is a rare clinical condition. It may mimic several clinical conditions and mislead diagnosis. The clinical history of splenectomy for trauma or different other reasons may es-tablish diagnosis and exclude other morbidities. Excision and complete removal of pelvic splenosis nodules is not always necessary and it depends on the clinical symptomatology. Careful imaging and precise assessment with the assistance of nuclear medicine may lead to correct diagnosis and avoid unnecessary surgical interventions.