Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

Ординатура / Хирургия / @xirurgi_2025 / @xirurgi_2025 - 279 - файл

.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
28.08.2026
Размер:
66 Мб
Скачать
SMALL BOWEL 167
https://t.me/med1917
LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT
As soon as the patient is stabilized and sepsis is controlled, then long­term management begins, usually starting within 2 days of diagnosis and lasting months to years. This chronic management consists of fluid and electrolyte repletion, nutritional optimization, pharmaco­logic control of effluent volume, and wound care, all of which are performed in parallel, using multidisciplinary expertise (Fig. 2). With this treatment, approximately 30% to 35% of EC fistulas will heal spontaneously within 5 to 6 weeks of diagnosis. Therefore, long-term management aims to increase the likelihood of spontaneous closure while also optimizing the patient for possible operative intervention.
Fluid and Electrolyte Repletion
Patients with EC fistulas, particularly high-output EC fistulas, can develop severe dehydration and electrolyte derangements. Quantify­ing fistula output and resuscitating adequately are crucial for the acute
FIG. 1 CT scan shows enterocutaneous fistula with no drainable abscesses.
precludes safely running the bowel and identifying the leak. Perform­ing an extensive lysis of adhesions in this state is fraught with danger, as healthy loops of bowel can be injured, leading to unnecessary bowel resections or missed enterotomies. If the source of the leak is identified, bowel resection can be performed; however, an anastomo­sis should not be created, as the risk of a recurrent leak is substantial. Similarly, primary repairs tend to not be durable solutions. Surgeons should have a low threshold to perform fecal diversions and/or leave drains to create a controlled fistula. It is important to remember that these are damage-control operations to address intraabdominal sep­sis, not to definitively repair the enteric leak.
Once a patient has been stabilized and abscesses have been drained, antibiotics can be stopped in 4 to 7 days, pending clinical improvement. Longer courses of antibiotics are unnecessary for controlled EC fistulas and could lead to multiresistant organisms, which could make further antimicrobial management difficult. If a patient develops recurrent fevers, leukocytosis, or abdominal pain, clinicians should have a low threshold to reimage, as new abscesses could develop even after initial source control has been obtained.
and long-term management of these patients. Many patients with high-output EC fistulas utilize total parenteral nutrition (TPN) for not only nutrition but also volume resuscitation. These patients often have long-term central access (such as peripherally inserted central catheters) for TPN, which enables them to also administer extra intravenous fluid infusions at home if needed based on fistula output.
The most common electrolyte abnormalities are hyponatremia, hypokalemia, and hypomagnesemia. Hyponatremia often normal­izes with fluid resuscitation, and potassium and magnesium should be aggressively repleted. Patients with duodenal fistulas can develop metabolic acidosis requiring sodium bicarbonate replacements. After starting parenteral nutrition or resuming enteral nutrition, patients must be closely monitored for refeeding syndrome, with frequent serum phosphorus checks and phosphorus repletion.
Nutritional Optimization
Patients with EC fistulas can develop profound malnutrition, as they can lose up to 500 g of protein daily. Markers of nutritional status such as prealbumin, albumin, and transferrin should be monitored closely. Patients with low-output fistulas require 20 kcal/kg per day of carbohydrates and fat and 1 g/kg per day of protein, which can increase to 30 kcal/kg per day and 1.5 to 2.5 g/kg per day for patients with high-output fistulas.
Fluid and
electrolyte
repletion
Sepsis control and
drainage of abscesses
Nutritional
optimization
• Enteral
• Parenteral
• Fistuloclysis
Spontaneous closure
(approximately 33%)
FIG. 2 Algorithm for the management of enterocutaneous fistulas.
Diagnosis of enterocutaneous
fistula
Use of
pharmacologic
agents to decrease
fistula output
Determine if low-, moderate-, or
high-output fistula
Wound
care
Operative intervention
(wait at least 6 months)
Characterize
anatomy
fistula
168 MANAGEMENT OF ENTEROCUTANEOUS FISTULAS
https://t.me/med1917
Enteral feeding is preferred to parenteral nutrition because it pro­motes mucosal integrity, maintains intestinal function, and supports immune function. However, oral intake can often increase fistula output substantially, which can be a problem for wound care in some patients. TPN is usually needed as a bridge to enteral feeding or for longer-term nutrition in patients who cannot tolerate oral intake.
A common approach for patients with newly diagnosed fistulas is to attempt a few days of bowel rest, with or without TPN depending on the patient’s nutritional status, to see if the fistula spontaneously closes or if the output decreases. If the output persists, then an oral diet is gradually introduced. If the fistula output increases signifi­cantly and there are concerns for malabsorption, then TPN is started. Pharmacologic measures, as discussed later, should be used to slow fistula output. As long as fistula output is controlled and wound care is manageable, most patients are able to continue an oral diet, with or without TPN for nutritional support. This holds true even for high-output fistulas, assuming that ostomy appliances are well seated and capture the output, and assuming that patients can provide themselves with additional IV fluids as needed.
Fistuloclysis
Fistuloclysis has become a popular method of enteral feeding distal to the EC fistula. With this technique, the distal limb of the EC fistula is identified using a fistulogram, which can be performed by interventional radiology or in the operating room using fluoroscopy (Fig. 3). The interventional radiologist or surgeon cannulates the distal limb with a catheter, which can then be used to instill tube feeds. Ideally, the surgeon tunnels the catheter under the skin, which
enables securing of the catheter more firmly in place and facilitates easier wound care. For patients with high-volume liquid output, their effluent can be collected, strained, and then refed into the distal feeding tube. This method should only be used in patients who have fistulas that are not expected to close spontaneously, as cannulating the distal limb of the fistula will prevent it from closing.
Fistuloclysis enables maintenance of mucosal integrity and pro­motes intestinal adaptation and lengthening, which is beneficial for patients who will likely require operative intervention. It also enables patients to wean off parenteral nutrition. Furthermore, fistuloclysis has been shown to activate an “ileal brake,” in which refeeding of succus leads to decreases in gastric acid secretion, pancreatic enzyme secretion, and peristalsis, thereby decreasing EC fistula output.
The careful balance between oral intake, distal tube feeds, suc­cus refeeding, and parenteral nutrition requires collaboration with nutritionists who follow these patients closely as inpatients and outpatients and whose expertise is key to the long-term optimization of these patients.
Pharmacologic Management of Fistula Output
Another key component to the long-term management of EC fistu­las is controlling effluent volume. First-line pharmacologic agents include opiate receptor agonists such as loperamide, diphenoxylate/ atropine, codeine, and distilled tincture of opium, which act on the circular and longitudinal intestinal muscles to decrease peristalsis. These medications can be titrated up as needed to slow fistula output. Proton pump inhibitors and histamine-2 receptor antagonists are also part of the first-line treatment of high-output EC fistulas, as they lower the acidity of fistula output, while also decreasing volume due to their antisecretory effects.
Other agents can be added to the first-line pharmacologic thera­pies. Amitriptyline is a tricyclic antidepressant that causes constipa­tion via anticholinergic pathways. Clonidine, an alpha 2-adrenergic agonist, increases mucosal absorption of fluids and electrolytes. Bulking agents such as psyllium or banana flakes can also be helpful to thicken enteric contents. Cholestyramine, a bile acid sequestrant, is useful in decreasing the output of more proximal EC fistulas, such as those originating from the duodenum or proximal jejunum. Octreotide, a somatostatin analog, has been recommended for use in high-output fistulas. It acts by reducing gastric acid and pancreatic enzyme secretions, as well as enhancing fluid and electrolyte absorp­tion by prolonging intestinal transit time. Numerous studies have demonstrated that octreotide does not increase the likelihood of spontaneous fistula closure; however, it does decrease fistula output and the time it takes for fistulas to close.
With these pharmacologic agents, even high-output EC fistulas can be slowed to the point that many patients resume oral intake while keeping fistula output within a goal of <1 to 1.5 L per day.
FIG. 3 Example of a fistulogram, in which a catheter is inserted into the
fistula, enteric contrast is injected, and the bowel is opacified.
Wound Care
The skin surrounding EC fistulas often becomes excoriated due to spillage of acidic succus, similar to ileostomies that are difficult to pouch (Fig. 4A). Patients with EC fistulas benefit from the expertise of wound and ostomy nurses who develop plans for isolating the fistulas and protecting the surrounding skin. These complex wounds usually require a combination of stoma paste and powders, barrier rings, and hydrocolloid dressings, as well as specialty ostomy appli­ances that can be cut to fit the fistulas (Fig. 4B and 4C). Pouches need to accommodate fistuloclysis catheters that directly enter the wound, which is why catheters that tunnel under the skin and come out away from the wound are preferred. EA fistulas sometimes require sump drains to collect the effluent and divert it away from the surrounding skin.
Vacuum dressings can be used to promote granulation of the surrounding tissues and protect those tissues from effluent. How­ever, they must be used with caution. If vacuum dressings are placed
SMALL BOWEL 169
https://t.me/med1917
ABC
FIG. 4 A patient with multiple enterocutaneous (EC) and enteroatmospheric (EA) fistulas along a prior midline incision. (A) Note the skin excoriation
around the fistulas. There is an ileostomy in the right lower quadrant that was distal to the fistulas. (B) The wound care plan included protecting the sur­rounding skin with stoma paste and barrier rings molded to the shape of the wound, thus also isolating the main fistulas. (C) Stoma appliances were then placed over the fistulas and the ileostomy to catch the effluent. Note that the main stoma appliance is further secured by adhesive dressings.
on granulation tissue directly over bowel or on a skin graft directly over bowel, the suction force could promote the development of new fistulas. Nevertheless, numerous small studies have demonstrated that, when used appropriately, vacuum dressings can promote wound healing and may even accelerate spontaneous closure.
Wound care plans often change over time as the wounds ideally heal and contract. Wound and ostomy nurses work very closely with patients and their families, teaching them tips and tricks to care for their wounds during the months- to years-long process.
Define the Fistula Anatomy
Next, it is critical to characterize the anatomy of the EC fistula, utilizing imaging studies such as CT scans with oral contrast, upper gastrointestinal swallow studies with small bowel follow through, contrast enemas, and fistulograms in which the proximal and distal limbs of the fistula are cannulated and injected with oral contrast under fluoroscopy (see Fig. 3). The goal of these studies is to delin­eate the location of the fistula, how much bowel is proximal and distal to the fistula, and assess if there are multiple fistulas. They can also determine if fistuloclysis will be possible. Furthermore, these studies can assess for distal obstructions, which would make sponta­neous closure unlikely, and can help with operative planning.
SPONTANEOUS CLOSURE
Approximately 30% to 35% of EC fistulas will close within 2 months of diagnosis without operative intervention (Box 2). Fistulas with tracts longer than 2 cm, defect sizes of <1 cm
2
, and decreasing output are more likely to heal spontaneously. Distal obstructions, ongoing sepsis or abscess, and malnutrition are all predictors of requir­ing operative intervention. EC fistulas caused by Crohn’s disease, malignancy, radiation, or a foreign body are also less likely to close spontaneously.
OPERATIVE INTERVENTION
EC fistulas that have not spontaneously closed within 2 months will likely require operative management. Most surgeons recommend waiting at least 6 months after the diagnosis of the fistula before
BOX 2 Characteristics Predictive of Spontaneous
Closure of Enterocutaneous Fistulas
Increased Likelihood of Spontaneous Closure
Postoperative etiology Fistula tract longer than 2 cm Fistula defect <1 cm Healthy surrounding bowel Good nutritional status Low fistula output
Decreased Likelihood of Spontaneous Closure
Non-postoperative etiology (inflammatory bowel disease,
cancer, radiation) Distal obstruction Presence of a foreign body Continued sepsis or abscess present Epithelialized fistula tract Steroid use Malnourished High fistula output
considering an operation. Over this period of time, intraabdominal adhesions soften and become more filmy, thus making the operation easier and less prone to causing enterotomies. The “pinch test” for EA fistulas, in which tissue or skin graft overlying bowel is pinched to see if the underlying bowel separates easily, can also be used to deter­mine readiness for surgery. Surgeons should wait until the patient is nutritionally optimized, sepsis is controlled, and the patient is at or close to their baseline functional status.
In the operating room, surgeons should prepare for a difficult, lengthy procedure. Ideally, the case should start in the morning, and, for complex fistulas, no other operations should be planned for the same day. Anesthesiologists should be prepared for high insensible losses and should resuscitate accordingly, using a urinary catheter for
2
170 MANAGEMENT OF ENTEROCUTANEOUS FISTULAS
AB
https://t.me/med1917
FIG. 5 The same patient from Figure 4 was taken to the operating room for an enterocutaneous (EC) fistula takedown. (A) Opening the wound revealed
multiple loops of small bowel densely adhered to the prior incision, which were the sources of the numerous EC and enteroatmospheric (EA) fistulas. (B) At the conclusion of the case, a unilateral anterior component separation was used to close the fascia primarily. The loop ileostomy was converted to an end ileostomy.
accurate recording of urine output. Epidural catheters or transversus abdominis blocks should be considered for postoperative pain man­agement. The incision should be made away from prior incisions, if possible, usually subxiphoid, and dissection should be started away from the EC fistula. An extensive lysis of adhesions with sharp dissection should be performed and the bowel should be fully mobi­lized, such that the exact location of the fistula, the amount of bowel involved in the fistula, and the presence of any other enterotomies can be identified. It is not uncommon for multiple loops of bowel to be involved in the inflammatory mass surrounding EC fistulas (Fig. 5A). Any foreign material such as previous mesh should be removed. The surgeon should look for any distal obstruction so that it can be fully addressed. At this point, the amount of bowel to resect can be determined with the goal of preserving as much small bowel as possible to prevent future short-gut syndrome. Fistula defects should not be repaired primarily, as it will likely lead to recurrent leaks. The amount of remaining bowel should be documented.
Most of these operations require closure of a large abdominal wall defect. Due to the contamination of the wound, many surgeons would not recommend placing synthetic mesh to aid in abdominal closure. Instead, component separations should be used to close the fascia if simple primary closure is not possible (Fig. 5B). Biologic mesh can be placed in an underlay fashion if needed. Involving gen­eral surgeons or plastic surgeons who specialize in abdominal wall reconstruction can be beneficial, particularly for large and complex abdominal wall defects.
Surgeons and patients must be prepared for the possibility of a frozen abdomen. If it becomes clear that the EC fistula itself cannot be resected safely, other options include creating a diverting stoma, if one is not already present, or placing a venting gastrostomy tube and/ or a distal feeding jejunostomy tube.
Though the morbidity and mortality rates of EC fistula take­downs have been improving over time, patients must still be coun­seled preoperatively on the risks of the procedure and the long postoperative recovery. Approximately 16% to 36% of EC fistulas will recur after surgery, though some recent studies quote oper­ative success rates as high as 92%. Mortality has decreased from approximately 40% in the 1970s to approximately 20% currently, with some studies citing mortality rates as low as 2%. Nevertheless, 30-day morbidity rates have been reported to be nearly 50% based on analysis of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement dataset. Although significant improvements have been made over the years, EC fistula takedowns remain com­plex, morbid operations, and patient expectations should be set preoperatively.
The postoperative recovery period typically lasts for several months. Parenteral nutrition can be weaned off as enteral nutrition improves. Many patients benefit from postoperative physical therapy, and some require stays in rehabilitation facilities.
SUMMARY
EC fistulas are complex, debilitating conditions that require multidis­ciplinary, long-term management. By using the algorithm of sepsis control followed by simultaneous fluid and electrolyte management, nutritional optimization, decreasing the volume of effluent, and wound care, approximately one-third of EC fistulas will close on their own. For patients who require operative intervention, waiting at least 6 months to allow for preoperative optimization and soften­ing of adhesions has led to decreasing mortality rates and increasing rates of operative success.
SMALL BOWEL 171
https://t.me/med1917
S u g g e S t e d R e a d i n g S
Bhama AR. Evaluation and management of enterocutaneous fistula. Dis
Colon Rectum. 2019;62(8):906–910.
Christensen MA, Gaitanidis A, Parks J, et al. Thirty-day outcomes in the
operative management of intestinal-cutaneous fistulas: A NSQIP analysis. Am J Surg. 2021;221(5):1050–1055.
Evenson AR, Fischer JE. Current management of enterocutaneous fistula.
J Gastrointest Surg. 2006;10(3):455–464.
Management of Radiation-Induced Injury to the Small and Large Bowel
Sophia Y. Chen, MD, MPH, and Chady Atallah, MD
INTRODUCTION
Radiation therapy plays an important role in the multimodal man­agement of anorectal, gynecologic, and urogenital pelvic malig­nancies. Approximately 70% of cancer patients undergo radiation therapy for the treatment of these malignancies to prolong their disease-free survival and reduce local recurrence. Although radia­tion delivery is directed at the target tissue for maximum benefit, radiation fields required to treat these malignancies may neverthe­less include normal small intestine, colon, and/or rectum, leading to potential injury of otherwise healthy tissue. Radiation-induced injury to the bowel therefore remains a critical issue requiring careful management considerations and preventative strategies.
PATHOPHYSIOLOGY AND HISTOPATHOLOGY
Radiation therapy is most commonly delivered via external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), which uses a linear accelerator to produce ionizing radiation. EBRT can directly or indirectly damage DNA within malignant and normal cells through its interaction with water and the release of free radicals. Depending on the extent of DNA damage, EBRT can result in mitotic inhibition or cellular apoptosis. Brachytherapy is another method of radiation delivery and involves the placement of a radiation source within the body, often in the form of pellets or beads.
The pathophysiology of radiation damage to the bowel has been described in the literature via the “target cell” theory, in which acute effects of radiation-induced injury target cells of the bowel epithe­lium, whereas chronic effects of radiation-induced injury target cells with slower turnover, such as endothelial cells and fibroblasts. Rapidly dividing cells like those in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract are most susceptible to radiation injury; as such, radiation affects the cells of the mucosa first, followed by the submucosa, muscularis, and serosa. Chronic radiation injury to the bowel is often associated with ischemic injury. Reaction of fibroblasts to cytokines, growth factors, and chemokines leads to fibrosis. Cellular death leads to intestinal atrophy and subsequent malabsorption and stricture formation. Radiation can also result in vascular damage, leading to dilatation of small blood vessels presenting as telangiectasias. Furthermore, arte­riolar constriction can result in bowel ischemia and necrosis.
Ortiz LA, Zhang B, McCarthy MW, etal. Treatment of enterocutaneous fistu-
las, then and now. Nutr Clin Pract. 2017;32(4):508–515.
Teubner A, Morrison K, Ravishankar HR, etal. Fistuloclysis can successfully
replace parenteral feeding in the nutritional support of patients with enterocutaneous fistula. Br J Surg. 2004;91(5):625–631.
Histopathologically, acute radiation injury to the bowel is often characterized by extensive mucosal inflammation, crypt atrophy/ abscesses, nuclear atypia with bizarre mitoses, and eosinophilic sub­mucosal infiltration. Chronic radiation injury to the bowel is often characterized by obliterative enteritis (irregularly shaped endothelial cells, fibroblasts, myofibroblasts, and foamy cells within arteries), small-vessel vasculopathy (dilated, thickened, hyalinized blood ves­sels), ulceration, fibrous induration, and superimposed episodes of ischemic changes (Fig. 1).
RISK FACTORS
Risk factors associated with radiation-induced bowel injury include both patient factors and radiation treatment-related factors. Patient comorbidities associated with an increased risk for radiation-induced injury include smoking, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, vascular and collagen disorders, atherosclerosis, coronary artery disease, inflam­matory bowel disease, and prior intestinal surgery. Chemotherapy such as fluoropyrimidines, taxanes, platinum agents, mitomycin C, gemcitabine, methotrexate, actinomycin D, topotecan, and doxorubi­cin can act as radiosensitizers and potentiate the effects of radiation. Low body mass index (BMI) has also been associated with increased risk for radiation injury due to higher rate of radiation toxicity.
Radiation treatment-related factors associated with increased risk for radiation-induced injury include higher radiation dose, longer length of bowel irradiated, fewer dose fractionation, and larger radi­ation field size.
FIG. 1 Histopathology (magnification ×20) showing submucosal
fibrosis with atypical fibroblasts, endothelial cells, and increased inflammatory cell infiltrate. (From Theis VS, Sripadam R, Ramani V, Lal S.
Chronic radiation enteritis. Clin Oncol. 2010; 22[1]:70–83.)
172 MANAGEMENT OF RADIATION-INDUCED INJURY TO THE SMALL AND LARGE BOWEL
https://t.me/med1917
RADIATION THERAPY TOXICITY GRADING SYSTEMS
Although various radiation toxicity grading systems exist in the literature, the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOC) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Can­cer (EORTC) grading system is one of the most commonly used (Table 1). The RTOC/EORTC grading system differentiates acute radiation morbidity (day 1 through 90) from chronic radiation morbidity (after day 90) on a scale from 0 to 5 based on presenting symptoms. Although these grading systems provide a standardized assessment based on patient symptoms, they do not include endo­scopic and histopathologic information. Other available grading systems include the Late Effects Normal Tissue (LENT) system; the Subjective, Objective, Management, and Analytic (SOMA) grading system for chronic radiation injury; and the National Cancer Insti­tute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE).
CLINICAL FEATURES
Acute radiation-induced bowel injury can occur from the time of radiation treatment up to 6 months after treatment completion. Because acute radiation damage leads to mucosal inflammation and damaged mucosal surface, diarrhea is one of the most common symptoms. Injury to the mucosal barrier also increases the risk for bacterial translocation and subsequent bacteremia and sepsis. Other symptoms of acute radiation-induced bowel injury include nausea, bloating, cramping, abdominal pain, and GI dysmotility. Acute radi­ation colitis and proctitis can present with additional symptoms of bleeding, mucus discharge, urgency, and tenesmus.
Chronic radiation-induced bowel injury can continue from the acute phase or present after a latent period. Chronic radiation injury symptoms typically present 8 to 12 months after treatment completion; however, symptoms have been reported up to 30 years after a latent period. Like acute radiation-induced injury, diarrhea is one of the most common symptoms. Chronic radiation proctitis can also commonly present with rectal bleeding due to telangiectasias. Patients with chronic radiation-induced bowel injury can also have ulcerations from ischemia, abscesses, and fistula formation. Chronic ischemic changes can lead to stricture formation and subsequent bowel obstruction. Full thickness necrosis of the bowel can result in fistulae or free perforation.
DIAGNOSIS
Acute radiation-induced injury to the small intestine, colon, and rectum is generally diagnosed based on the patient’s presenting symptoms and history. Chronic radiation-induced bowel injury is diagnosed not only by symptoms but also may require additional imaging such as a CT scan or MR enterography to evaluate the anat­omy and assess for strictures, fistulae, or bowel wall thickness abnor­malities. Patients with suspicion for radiation colitis or proctitis may occasionally undergo barium and water-soluble contrast enemas, which can reveal shortening, narrowing, lack of distensibility, and absent haustral/mucosal folds of the bowel. Fistulae may need to be further evaluated with MRI, fistulograms, cystograms, and pelvic examinations.
Definitive diagnosis can be made endoscopically with biopsies demonstrating histologic features pertaining to radiation injury, as described previously. Upper endoscopy may be considered for suspected radiation injury to the duodenum; however, lower endos­copy may not be effective in reaching more distal areas of radiation enteritis. Capsule endoscopy should only be considered if intestinal strictures have been excluded. Lower endoscopy via colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy is beneficial in diagnosing radiation colitis and proc­titis. These are characterized by neovascularization with fragile ves­sels on lower endoscopy (Fig. 2). Other features of radiation-induced bowel injury include pallor and friability. Rectal biopsies should be performed judiciously, as they have been associated with increased risk of rectal fistula formation.
MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
Medical Management
Between 50% and 75% of patients with acute radiation-induced bowel injury present with symptoms. Fortunately, these symptoms are often self-limited and can be managed medically. Diarrhea can be managed with antidiarrheal medications such as loperamide and fiber supplements, and with dietary modifications (e.g., lactose-free diet, low-fat diet, low-residue diet, or elemental diet). Patients with severe diarrhea, dehydration, and nutritional deficits may need to be admitted to the hospital for intravenous fluids and/or parenteral nutrition. If first-line antidiarrheals are ineffective, octreotide may be given. Nausea can be managed with antiemetics. Anticholinergics,
TABLE 1 RTOG/EORTC Radiation Toxicity Grading System
Grade 1 2 3 4 5
Acute radiation
morbidity
(Days 1–90)
Late radiation
morbidity
(Days >90)
RTOG/EORTC, Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer
Increased frequency or change in bowel habits
Rectal discomfort
No medication
Mild diarrhea and
cramping
Bowel movement
≤5 times daily
Slight rectal discharge or bleeding
Diarrhea requiring parasympatholytic drugs
Mucus discharge not
requiring sanitary pads
Rectal or abdomi-
nal pain requiring analgesics
Moderate diarrhea and
cramping
Bowel movement
>5 times daily
Excessive rectal
mucus or intermittent bleeding
Diarrhea requiring
parenteral support
Severe mucus or blood
discharge requiring sanitary pads
Abdominal distension
Obstruction or bleed-
ing requiring surgery
Acute/subacute obstruction, fistula, or perforation
GI bleed requiring
transfusion
Abdominal pain or
tenesmus requiring tube decompression or bowel diversion
Necrosis, perforation, or fistula
N/A
Death
SMALL BOWEL 173
https://t.me/med1917
FIG. 2 Endoscopic appearance of radiation proctitis showing tel-
angiectasias. (From Hogan NM, Kerin MJ, Joyce MR. Gastrointestinal compli-
cations of pelvic radiotherapy: medical and surgical management strategies. Curr Probl Surg. 2013; 50[9]:395–407.)
antispasmodics, bile acid–binding agents like cholestyramine, and antisecretory agents can also be considered.
Butyrate enemas have been shown to provide some benefit for the management of acute radiation proctitis due to the provision of short chain fatty acids as nutrient for colonocytes; however, they have had mixed results for the management of chronic radiation procti­tis. Recent Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer
FIG. 3 Argon plasma coagulation of rectal ulcer.
(From Araujo IK, Muñoz-Guglielmetti D, Mollà M. Radiation-induced damage in the lower gastrointestinal tract: Clinical presentation, diagnostic tests and treatment options. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2020; 48–49:101707.)
(MASCC) guidelines for patients with chronic proctitis in patients with rectal bleeding recommend the use of sucralfate enemas, given sucralfate’s ability to evoke a protective barrier and promote epithe­lial healing. Other enemas such as mesalamine (5-ASA) enemas, short-chain fatty acid enemas, and steroid enemas have had mixed findings and require further investigation.
neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd:YAG) laser ther­apy, radiofrequency ablation, and cryotherapy are alternative endo­scopic treatments that can be performed to treat bleeding, they are now rarely performed due to the effectiveness of APC.
Formalin therapy has been found to be an effective form of topical treatment for bleeding from chronic radiation proctitis by chemically cauterizing telangiectasias and ulcers. Formalin (4%–10% concentration) can be delivered via irrigation with aliquots of 20 to 50 mL for a total volume of 400 to 500 mL or via direct application of formalin-soaked gauze onto mucosa via rigid proctoscopy. Washout with formaldehyde is typically recommended after application of for­malin. Although formalin therapy is effective, multiple application sessions may be required. It is important to avoid direct contact of formalin to the anoderm because this may cause irritation and pain. Potential complications of formalin therapy include anal/pelvic pain, stricture, rectal wall necrosis, and fistula formation.
Other medical treatments that can be considered for radia­tion-induced bowel injury include antioxidants (vitamins E and C), probiotics, and hyperbaric oxygen to facilitate angiogenesis. A few studies have suggested that a 4-week course of oral metronidazole may be associated with decreased bleeding, ulceration, and diarrhea in radiation proctitis.
Surgical Management
More than 30% of patients with chronic radiation-induced bowel injury will require surgical intervention. Surgery is indicated for patients whose symptoms are unable to be managed medically or endoscopically, as well as for patients with complications including perforations, fistulae, strictures, obstruction, intractable pain, and incontinence. Surgery for patients with radiation-induced bowel injury is fraught with technical challenges and a high potential for complications. Morbidity and mortality rates after surgical interven­tion can range from 30% to 65% and 6.7% to 25%, respectively. The irradiated abdomen can contribute to a hostile operative environ­ment with friable tissue, extensive adhesions, and high risk for bowel injury and poor healing. Careful preoperative planning based on individual patient factors in a multidisciplinary/specialized setting and a structured approach to operative intervention is therefore critical to achieving safe and effective surgery. It is important to also appreciate the risk of recurrence or de novo malignancy in the
Endoscopic Management
Endoscopic therapy can play an important role in the treatment of chronic radiation-induced bowel injury. Argon plasma coagulation (APC) is currently the treatment of choice for bleeding, before con­sidering the use of formalin therapy. APC has been found to stop bleeding in 80% to 90% of cases and is a safe approach because it coagulates at a superficial depth (Fig. 3). Some studies also demon­strate improvement of bowel function after APC. However, like formalin therapy, patients may require multiple APC treatments. It is important when performing APC to avoid the dentate line because contact may result in anorectal pain. Potential complications for APC include anorectal pain and abdominal cramping. Although
irradiated bowel segment during preoperative planning. Once the decision to proceed with surgery is made, effort must be made to correct modifiable factors and optimize the patient preoperatively. This may entail correcting electrolyte derangements and providing enteral nutrition for severely malnourished patients. Surgical options for radiation-induced bowel injury include limited bowel resection, bypass/exclusion procedures, stricturoplasty, and fecal diversion.
The choice of surgical incision for patients with chronic radiation injury should be carefully considered because patients who undergo radiation therapy have impaired wound healing. Some surgeons may prefer a low transverse incision inferior to the umbilicus to avoid the irradiated area. Others may prefer a lower midline incision to allow for adequate exposure and in case further interventions are needed
174 MANAGEMENT OF RADIATION-INDUCED INJURY TO THE SMALL AND LARGE BOWEL
https://t.me/med1917
in the future. A Pfannenstiel incision may be considered for thin female patients. The role of minimally invasive surgery for radia­tion-induced bowel injury is controversial. A diagnostic laparoscopy with abdominal entry via open Hasson technique would determine whether a minimally invasive approach is feasible, with dense adhesions or pelvic fibrosis serving as contraindications. Once the abdomen is entered and the severity of disease is assessed, dissection should begin proximally, where radiation-induced damage is less severe, and move distally. Gentle handling and extreme care of tissue via sharp dissection using Metzenbaum scissors is recommended to prevent bowel injury. Blunt dissection can be associated with a high risk of enterotomy and should be avoided.
For patients with extensive, dense adhesions, limited adhesiolysis should be performed only in the area of interest and only if the bowel is resectable because there is increased risk for fistula formation and bowel injury. Patients with pelvic adhesions generally have small bowel segments adherent in the pelvis; bowel adherent to the sacrum may be extracted from the pelvis with careful dissection, although it is important to avoid damage to the presacral veins and to be able to deal with any ensuing hemorrhage that could occur. Enterotomies would commit the surgeon to extracting the bowel from the pelvis. If a bowel segment were fibrosed to the sacrum, it may be safer to leave this segment attached while applying diathermy to the mucosal surface. Hydrodissection via saline injection into dense interloop adhesions can prevent serosal injuries.
Limited bowel resection of the involved segment is generally pre­ferred over other surgical alternatives such as bypass/exclusion because it is associated with decreased rates of reoperation and increased sur­vival. During bowel resection, careful consideration is necessary when selecting the two pieces of bowel to be used for bowel anastomosis. Grossly irradiated bowel can appear pale, mottled, yellowish/gray, or telangiectatic with features of vascular insufficiency (Fig. 4). How­ever, irradiated bowel can also appear indistinguishable from normal bowel. Anastomotic leak rates between two pieces of irradiated bowel can be as high as 50%; as such, anastomosis between nonirradiated bowel is recommended when possible. If an anastomosis is necessary, the cecum and terminal ileum should be avoided as these segments often experience severe radiation injury. Hand-sewn anastomosis is favored when possible to avoid staple-line ischemia. Because radiation can lead to friable, thickened, and foreshortened mesentery, it is also
FIG. 4 Intraoperative comparison of radiation-damaged small
bowel (left) with healthy bowel (right). (From Hogan NM, Kerin MJ, Joyce
MR. Gastrointestinal complications of pelvic radiotherapy: medical and surgical management strategies. Curr Probl Surg. 2013; 50[9]:395–407.)
recommended to over-sew the mesentery with an interlocking heavy #1 chromic suture between clamps rather than simply ligating the mesentery with vessel sealers or a clamp, cut, tie technique.
Although bowel resection is preferred, bypass/exclusion can be considered in patients with extensive adhesions and/or pelvic fixa­tion in which resection is not possible. Bypass is associated with a decreased risk of bowel or mesenteric injury and lower anastomotic leak rate compared with bowel resection; however, it increases the risk of blind loop syndrome and fistula formation from the affected segment left behind, which can contribute to further complications. In select cases, stricturoplasty may be considered as an intestine-pre­serving alternative to more extensive bowel resection or bypass techniques to reduce risk of short gut syndrome and avoid total parenteral nutrition (TPN) dependence.
The management of postradiation enteric and pelvic fistulae are similar to those employed for other types of fistulae, including sep­sis management, nutritional optimization, and fistula maturation/ output optimization. Higher pelvic fistulae (rectovaginal, rectoure­thral) can be treated with proctectomy and anastomosis of colon to distal nonradiated rectum or anus. Hand-sewn coloanal anas­tomosis should only be considered in younger patients with intact sensation, function, and control. Interposition of well-vascularized tissue (omentum or rectus pedicle flap) between the affected organ and anastomosis is highly recommended. Lower pelvic fistulae can be managed similarly or via a perineal (Kraske) or transsphincteric (York-Mason) approach. Flap reconstruction (gracilis, omentum, rectus, bulbocavernosus, or Martius) should be considered for better healing. In severe circumstances, it may be necessary to perform a pelvic exenteration.
Fecal diversion has been found to be effective in the management of pain, tenesmus, incontinence, obstruction, and sepsis and for patients who are not optimal surgical candidates. Because dissection can be difficult in an irradiated pelvis with greater risk for bowel injury, loop ileostomies and transverse/descending colostomies may be safer to perform than sigmoid colostomies.
PREVENTION
The risk of radiation-induced bowel injury can be minimized with careful attention to radiotherapy planning and radiation delivery methods. Recent advances in radiation therapy techniques have sought to maximize radiation dose to the tumor while minimizing radiation to adjacent normal tissues. One method for doing so is 3D conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT), which utilizes 3D plan­ning via CT and computer technology to plan and deliver radiation treatment that matches the shape of the tumor, thereby allowing for higher dose of radiation delivery to the tumor with less effect on nor­mal tissue. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is another technology in which varying intensities of radiation are delivered in a planned field with clear identification of malignant vs. normal tissue. Brachytherapy is another method that can be used alone or in con­junction with EBRT to reduce normal tissue injury. Proton therapy is also a new technology being used by certain tertiary centers as an option to minimize the amount of radiation to structures and organs surrounding the target anatomy.
Other strategies to reduce radiation injury include prone posi­tioning, protective belly boards, and ensuring that the bladder is full during radiation delivery. Amifostine, a prodrug that metabo­lizes into a thiol metabolite that functions as a free radical scaven­ger, has demonstrated benefit in some studies to prevent symptoms of acute radiation proctitis, though these findings have largely been reported in small, single center studies. Operative maneuvers including the use of omental slings and tissue expanders to fill the pelvis can be considered if radiation were to be administered postoperatively.
SMALL BOWEL 175
https://t.me/med1917
S u g g e S t e d R e a d i n g S
Araujo IK, Muñoz-Guglielmetti D, Mollà M. Radiation-induced damage in
the lower gastrointestinal tract: Clinical presentation, diagnostic tests and treatment options. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2020;48–49:101707.
Ashburn JH, Kalady MF. Radiation-Induced Problems in Colorectal Surgery.
Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2016;29(2):85–91.
Hogan NM, Kerin MJ, Joyce MR. Gastrointestinal complications of pelvic
radiotherapy: medical and surgical management strategies. Curr Probl Surg. 2013;50(9):395–407.
Kennedy GD, Heise CP. Radiation colitis and proctitis. Clin Colon Rectal Surg.
2007;20(1):64–72.
Mendenhall WM, McKibben BT, Hoppe BS, Nichols RC, Henderson RH,
Mendenhall NP. Management of radiation proctitis. Am J Clin Oncol. 2014;37(5):517–523.
Raîche I, Moloo H. Radiation, Microscopic, Ischemic Colitis. In: Steele S,
Hull T, Read T, Saclarides T, Senagore A, Whitlow C, (eds). The ASCRS Textbook of Colon and Rectal Surgery. Cham: Springer; 2016:951–969.
Sarin A, Safar B. Management of radiation proctitis. Gastroenterol Clin North
Am. 2013;42(4):913–925.
Shadad AK, Sullivan FJ, Martin JD, Egan LJ. Gastrointestinal radiation injury:
prevention and treatment. World J Gastroenterol. 2013;19(2):199–208.
Tabaja L, Sidani SM. Management of Radiation Proctitis. Dig Dis Sci.
2018;63(9):2180–2188.
Theis VS, Sripadam R, Ramani V, Lal S. Chronic radiation enteritis. Clin
Oncol. 2010;22(1):70–83.
https://t.me/med1917