Добавил:
Sekretar
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 / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_927_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
X
- •Contributors
- •Acknowledgments
- •Contents
- •Inferior Mesenteric Artery
- •Collateral Circulation
- •VENOUS DRAINAGE
- •Superior Mesenteric Vein
- •Inferior Mesenteric Vein
- •LYMPHATIC DRAINAGE
- •INNERVATION
- •COLON AND RECTUM PHYSIOLOGY
- •Colonic Physiology
- •Absorption and Secretion
- •Digestion
- •Propulsion and Storage
- •ANAL CANAL ANATOMY
- •Lining
- •Muscles of the Anorectal Region
- •Perineal Body
- •Pelvic Floor Muscles
- •Innervation of the Anus
- •Motor Innervation
- •Sensory Innervation
- •Arterial Supply of the Anus
- •Lymphatic Drainage of the Anus
- •Venous Drainage of the Anus
- •ANAL CANAL PHYSIOLOGY
- •Mechanisms of Continence
- •Defecation
- •Physiologic Testing
- •Anal Manometry
- •Defecography by Fluoroscopy or Magnetic Resonance Imaging
- •Balloon Expulsion Test
- •Colon
- •Saline Continence Test
- •Rectal Compliance
- •Electromyography
- •Nerve Stimulation Techniques
- •Course and Peritoneal Coverings
- •Rectum
- •Peritoneal Relations and Fascial Attachments
- •ARTERIAL SUPPLY
- •Superior Mesenteric Artery
- •Suggested Reading
- •EXTERNAL HEMORRHOIDS
- •CLINICAL EVALUATION
- •NONEXCISIONAL OPTIONS
- •Medical Management
- •Sclerotherapy
- •Energy-Based Destruction
- •Hemorrhoidal Ligation with Rubber Bands
- •EXCISIONAL HEMORRHOIDECTOMY
- •Instrumentation for Excisional Hemmorrhoidectomy
- •PROCEDURE FOR PROLAPSING HEMORRHOIDS (STAPLED HEMMORHOIDOPEXY)
- •DOPPLER-GUIDED HEMORRHOIDAL DEARTERIALIZATION
- •POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT AFTER HEMORRHOID SURGERY
- •CONCLUSION
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •DIAGNOSIS
- •PATHOPHYSIOLOGY
- •High-Pressure Chronic Anal Fissure
- •Low- and Normal-Pressure Chronic Anal Fissure
- •MANAGEMENT
- •Topical Creams
- •Botulinum Toxin
- •Fissurectomy
- •Cutaneous Advancement Flap
- •Lateral Internal Sphincterotomy
- •Surgical Technique
- •Risk of Incontinence
- •Tailored Sphincterotomy
- •SUMMARY: CHOICE OF TREATMENT
- •Suggested Reading
- •CLASSIFICATION
- •PRESENTATION
- •DIAGNOSIS AND EVALUATION
- •Preparation and Examination
- •TREATMENT
- •INTERSPHINCTERIC ANAL FISTULA
- •Clinical Findings
- •TREATMENT
- •Incontinence Risk
- •TRANSSPHINCTERIC ANAL FISTULA
- •Clinical Findings
- •Treatment
- •Cutting Seton
- •Sphincter-Preserving Techniques
- •LIFT
- •ADVANCEMENT FLAP
- •PARTIAL FISTULOTOMY
- •SUPRASPHINCTERIC ANAL FISTULA
- •Fistula Plugs
- •EXTRASPHINCTERIC ANAL FISTULA
- •SPECIAL SITUATIONS
- •Crohn Disease
- •Deep Postanal Space Abscess with a Horseshoe Fistula
- •SUMMARY
- •Suggested Reading
- •DEFINITION
- •CAUSES
- •HISTORY AND PHYSICAL EXAMINATION
- •SURGICAL ANATOMY
- •ETIOLOGY
- •NATURAL HISTORY OF THE DISEASE AND SPREAD PATHWAYS
- •CLINICAL FEATURES
- •Perianal Abscess
- •Ischiorectal Abscess
- •Intersphincteric Abscess
- •Supralevator Abscess
- •Deep Postanal Abscess
- •Submucosal Abscess
- •DIAGNOSIS
- •Treatment of Anorectal Abscesses
- •Large Abscesses
- •Searching for a Fistula
- •Ischiorectal Abscess
- •Intersphincteric Abscesses
- •Supralevator Abscess
- •Submucosal Abscess
- •Role of Antibiotics and Biopsy
- •Postoperative Care
- •Complications
- •RECURRENCE AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF FISTULA IN ANO
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •ETIOLOGY
- •TREATMENT OPTIONS
- •Medical
- •Nonsurgical Closure
- •Fistula Plug
- •Fibrin Glue
- •Surgical Closure
- •Anal Approach
- •Rectal Advancement Flap
- •Advancement Sleeve Flap
- •Turnbull-Cutait Anastomosis
- •Transvaginal Approach
- •Perineal Approach
- •Ligation of the Intersphincteric Fistula Tract
- •Episioproctotomy
- •Tissue Interposition
- •SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
- •Use of a Stoma
- •Postoperative Care
- •Sexual Function/Vaginal Dryness
- •Recurrence
- •CONCLUSION
- •Suggested Reading
- •ETIOLOGY
- •PRESENTATION
- •TREATMENT
- •Asymptomatic Pilonidal Sinus
- •Pilonidal Abscess
- •Chronic Pilonidal Sinus
- •NONOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT
- •Hair Removal
- •SURGERY
- •Lateral Drainage, Curettage, and Midline Pit Excision
- •Local Excision and Healing by Secondary Intention
- •FLAP-BASED PROCEDURES
- •Karydakis Procedure
- •Cleft Lift Procedure
- •Rhomboid Excision and Flap Repair
- •Cavity Drainage
- •CONCLUSION
- •Suggested Reading
- •ETIOLOGY
- •CLINICAL PRESENTATION AND EVALUATION
- •ANTIBIOTIC TREATMENT
- •NONANTIBIOTIC TREATMENT
- •SURGICAL TREATMENT
- •SUMMARY
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •ETIOLOGY
- •PRIMARY CAUSES OF PRURITUS ANI
- •Pathophysiology
- •HISTORY
- •EXAMINATION
- •TREATMENT
- •SECONDARY PRURITUS ANI TREATMENT
- •Anorectal Conditions
- •Infections
- •Dermatologic Conditions
- •Neoplastic Causes
- •Systemic Disease
- •REFRACTORY OR PERSISTENT PRURITUS ANI
- •SUMMARY
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •DEFINITION
- •CLASSIFICATION OF ANAL STENOSIS
- •Cause
- •Spasm
- •Postoperative Scarring
- •Stenosis Due to Chronic Diarrhea
- •Age-Related Stenosis
- •SYMPTOMS
- •Examination Findings
- •PREVENTION OF POSTOPERATIVE ANAL STENOSIS
- •TREATMENT
- •Nonoperative Management
- •Anal Dilation
- •Surgical Management
- •Anoplasty
- •Postoperative Complications of Anoplasty
- •Suggested Reading
- •BACKGROUND AND EPIDEMIOLOGY
- •PRESENTATION OF DISEASE AND DIAGNOSIS
- •TREATMENT OF ANAL CONDYLOMA
- •Medical Therapies
- •Trichloracetic and Bichloracetic Acid
- •Imiquimod
- •Other Medical Treatments
- •Ablative Therapies
- •Cryotherapy
- •Surgical Excision/Fulguration
- •Laser
- •Recurrent Disease
- •Treatment Algorithm
- •CONCLUSION
- •Suggested Reading
- •BACTERIAL INFECTIONS
- •Gonorrhea
- •Preferred Clinical Approach
- •Chlamydia trachomatis and Lymphogranuloma venereum
- •Preferred Clinical Approach
- •Chancroid
- •Preferred Clinical Approach
- •Granuloma Inguinale
- •Preferred Clinical Approach
- •Syphilis (“The Great Masquerader”)
- •Preferred Clinical Approach
- •VIRAL INFECTIONS
- •Herpes Simplex Virus
- •Preferred Clinical Approach
- •Condylomata Acuminata
- •Clinical Manifestations
- •Treatment
- •Preferred Clinical Approach
- •Electrocautery
- •OTHER DISORDERS
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •HIGH-GRADE SQUAMOUS INTRAEPITHELIAL LESION (FORMERLY BOWEN DISEASE)
- •Management
- •PERIANAL PAGET DISEASE
- •Management
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •EPIDEMIOLOGY AND RISK FACTORS
- •PATHOPHYSIOLOGY
- •CLINICAL PRESENTATION AND DIAGNOSIS
- •SURGERY
- •Management of the Primary Tumor
- •Management of Lymph Nodes
- •SURVIVAL
- •BASAL CELL CANCER OF THE PERIANAL REGION
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •ANATOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
- •EPIDEMIOLOGY
- •SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA OF THE ANAL CANAL
- •Surveillance
- •Local Excision
- •Inguinal Lymph Node Management
- •Extrapelvic Metastases
- •PERIANAL SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA
- •ANAL CANCER AND HIV INFECTION
- •Suggested Reading
- •A GENERAL APPROACH
- •CHRONIC PROCTALGIA
- •LEVATOR ANI SYNDROME
- •Diagnosis
- •Treatment
- •PROCTALGIA FUGAX
- •COCCYGODYNIA
- •CONCLUSION
- •Selected Readings
- •DESCRIPTION OF DEFECTS
- •Perineal Fistula
- •Rectal Atresia
- •Vestibular Fistula
- •Imperforate Anus without Fistula
- •Rectourethral Bulbar Fistula
- •Rectourethral Prostatic Fistula
- •Cloaca
- •Recto-Bladder-Neck Fistula
- •NEONATAL MANAGEMENT
- •Anoplasty
- •Management of Functional Sequelae
- •ETIOLOGY, PATHOPHYSIOLOGY, AND INCIDENCE
- •DIAGNOSIS
- •Anorectal Manometry
- •Rectal Biopsy
- •Resuscitation
- •Main Repair
- •Duhamel Procedure
- •Soave Procedure
- •Dehiscence and Retraction
- •Constipation
- •ASSESSMENT
- •Medical Management
- •Postanal Repair
- •Anal Encirclement
- •Muscle Transposition
- •Continence Enemas
- •Stem Cells, Bulking Agents, and Other Techniques
- •Fecal Diversion
- •CONCLUSIONS
- •DEFINITION
- •ETIOLOGY
- •BENIGN RECTAL STRICTURES
- •Medical Treatment
- •Digital Evacuation
- •Enemas and Colonic Lavage
- •Oral Solutions
- •Stool Softeners
- •Laxatives
- •Endoscopic Disimpaction
- •SURGERY
- •Acute
- •PREVENTION
- •CONCLUSION
- •PATHOPHYSIOLOGY
- •Recommendations
- •Nonoperative Management
- •CONCLUSIONS
- •DEFINITION
- •DIAGNOSIS
- •Transanal Repairs
- •Transvaginal Repairs
- •EPIDEMIOLOGY
- •Location of the Foreign Body
- •Intraperitoneal or Extraperitoneal
- •Tailgut Cysts
- •Duplication Cysts
- •Transanal Excision
- •Anterior Resection
- •Physical Examination
- •Locoregional Evaluation
- •Nodal Staging
- •Extramural Venous Invasion
- •Locoregional Imaging Synoptic Reports
- •Distant Metastatic Evaluation
- •RADIATION-RELATED TOXICITIES
- •Boosting the Dose
- •HIGH-DOSE-RATE ENDORECTAL BRACHYTHERAPY
- •Total Mesorectal Excision
- •Ligation of the Inferior Mesenteric Artery
- •Distal Resection Margins
- •Drainage
- •Positioning and Equipment
- •Trocar Placement
- •Exposure of the Operating Field
- •Division of the Vessels and Splenic Flexure Mobilization
- •Mobilization and Division of the Rectum
- •Exteriorization of the Specimen
- •Creation of the Anastomosis
- •Abdominoperineal Resection
- •Closure of the Anal Opening
- •Mobilization of the Rectum
- •Proximal Division of the Left Colon
- •Perineal Dissection and Exteriorization
- •Closure of Pelvic Wound and Trocar Incisions and Creation of the Colostomy
- •INITIAL SELECTION
- •Patient Preparation
- •Transanal Excision
- •MANAGEMENT OF THE SPECIMEN
- •Salvage Resection after Local Excision
- •Axial Recurrences
- •Anterior Recurrences
- •Posterior Recurrences
- •Lateral Recurrences
- •THERAPY
- •Patient Selection
- •Procedures
- •Complications
- •PREVENTION
- •SUMMARY
- •RISK ASSESSMENT
- •PREOPERATIVE PULMONARY ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT
- •MANAGEMENT OF PATIENTS RECEIVING ANTITHROMBOTIC THERAPY
- •Diagnosis
- •Diet
- •5-Aminosalycilic Acid
- •Mild to Moderate Ulcerative Colitis
- •Proctitis and Left-Sided Ulcerative Colitis
- •Left-Sided Disease
- •Extensive Disease
- •Lack of Response to 5-Aminosalycilic Acid
- •Oral Budesonide
- •Corticosteroids
- •Severe Ulcerative Colitis
- •Cyclosporine
- •Azathioprine and 6-Mercaptopurine
- •Biologic Agents
- •Adalimumab
- •Golimumab
- •How to Choose an Anti-TNF-α Agent
- •Complications
- •What to Do Before Starting Anti-TNF-α Therapy
- •What to Do Once Treatment with an Anti-TNF-α Agent Is Started
- •Antiadhesion Molecules
- •Alternative Therapies
- •Nicotine
- •Clinical Scenarios
- •Quiescent Disease
- •Fulminant or Toxic Colitis
- •Flexible Sigmoidoscopy with Biopsies
- •Deep Vein Thrombosis Prophylaxis
- •Evaluate for Tuberculosis and Hepatitis B
- •Avoid Narcotics and Antidiarrheal Medications
- •Do Not Use Antibiotics
- •Diet as Tolerated
- •Perform Close Observation and Consult Colorectal Surgery upon Admission
- •Vaccinations
- •Pregnancy
- •Cancer Risk
- •Drug-Induced Colitis
- •Proctectomy Surgical Technique
- •Staging the Procedure
- •Technique of Creation of an Ileoanal J Pouch
- •Problems with Reach of the Pouch
- •Complications after Ileal Pouch–Anal Anastomosis
- •Overall Quality of Life
- •Function of the Pouch
- •Pouchitis
- •Pouch Failure
- •Salvage of the Failed Pelvic Pouch
- •PRESENTATION
- •EVALUATION
- •Surgical Options
- •CONCLUSION
- •Pelvis Sepsis and Anastomotic Leak
- •Postoperative Bleeding from the Pouch
- •Pouch-Perineal and Pouch-Vaginal Fistulae
- •Outlet Dysfunction
- •POUCHITIS
- •Genetic Factors
- •CONCLUSIONS
- •Late Complications
- •Valve Slippage
- •Parastomal Hernia
- •Crohn Disease
- •Pouchitis
- •Valve Stenosis
- •Pouch Excision
- •CONCLUSIONS
- •Crohn Disease
- •Radiation
- •PREVENTION
- •Reconstruction of the Perineum with a Flap
- •5-Aminosalicylates
- •Antibiotics
- •Biologic Agents
- •SMOKING
- •NUTRITION
- •Disease of the Colon and Rectum
- •SPECIAL SITUATIONS
- •Medications
- •Abscess
- •Fistula
- •Neoplasia
- •OUTCOME
- •Anal Sepsis
- •Stenosis
- •CONCLUSION
- •CONCLUSION
- •CYTOMEGALOVIRUS COLITIS
- •KAPOSI SARCOMA
- •COMPLICATED DIVERTICULITIS
- •INTRODUCTION
- •ETIOLOGY
- •Right-Sided Obstruction
- •Left-Sided Obstruction
- •Self-Expanding Metallic Stents
- •COLONIC VOLVULUS
- •Signs and Symptoms
- •Diagnostic Imaging
- •Signs and Symptoms
- •Diagnostic Imaging
- •TRANSVERSE COLON VOLVULUS
- •Pathophysiology
- •Diagnostic Imaging
- •Signs and Symptoms
- •Treatment
- •EPIDEMIOLOGY
- •ETIOLOGY
- •Initial Management
- •Pharmacologic Management
- •BIOLOGY
- •MARGIN
- •NODES
- •COMORBIDITIES
- •SUMMARY
- •SCREENING FOR COLORECTAL CANCER
- •Flexible Sigmoidoscopy
- •Stool DNA
- •Surveillance Colonoscopy after Endoscopic Resection of a Malignant Polyp
- •Surveillance Colonoscopy in Patients with Colorectal Cancer
- •Surveillance Colonoscopy in Patients with a Family History of Colorectal Cancer or Adenomatous Polyps
- •CONCLUSION
- •INTRODUCTION
- •GROWTH CONTROL
- •DNA REPAIR
- •COMPLEXITY
- •REGISTRIES
- •DEFINITIONS
- •Genotype/Phenotype
- •Surgical Options for the Large Bowel
- •Extracolonic Manifestations
- •Hepatoblastoma
- •Surveillance
- •The IRA
- •The IPAA
- •Oligopolyposis/Attenuated Familial Adenomatous Polyposis
- •PTEN Tumor Hamartoma Syndrome
- •INTRODUCTION
- •BIOLOGY
- •EPIDEMIOLOGY
- •GENETICS AND DESMOID RISK
- •DESMOID SEVERITY: A STAGING SYSTEM
- •MANAGEMENT
- •Setting Expectations
- •A Philosophy of Care
- •Extra-abdominal Desmoid Tumors
- •Abdominal Wall Tumors
- •Intra-abdominal Desmoid Disease
- •Workup
- •Medical Treatment
- •Role of Surgery
- •Complications of Desmoid Disease
- •Small Bowel Obstruction
- •Ureteric Obstruction
- •Abscess/Enterocutaneous Fistula
- •Superior Mesenteric Artery Aneurysm
- •Points about Operating on Persons with Desmoid Disease
- •SUMMARY AND GENERAL COMMENTS ABOUT THE EFFECT OF DESMOID DISEASE ON SURGICAL STRATEGY IN FAMILIAL ADENOMATOUS POLYPOSIS
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE AND CLARIFICATION OF TERMS
- •GENETIC AND MOLECULAR CAUSE OF LYNCH SYNDROME
- •HISTOLOGIC FEATURES OF LYNCH TUMORS
- •DIAGNOSING LYNCH SYNDROME
- •Clinical Criteria
- •Models
- •Tumor Testing
- •GENETIC COUNSELING AND TESTING
- •CLINICAL MANIFESTATIONS AND MANAGEMENT
- •COLORECTAL CANCER RISK MANAGEMENT
- •Surveillance Colonoscopy and Polypectomy
- •Chemoprevention
- •Surgery
- •Colectomy in the Absence of Cancer
- •Treatment of Colon Cancer
- •Rectal Cancer in Persons with Lynch Syndrome
- •RISK MANAGEMENT OF EXTRACOLONIC MANIFESTIONS
- •Endometrial and Ovarian Cancer
- •Upper Gastrointestinal Tract
- •Urinary Tract
- •Skin Neoplasms
- •Other Cancers
- •CLINICAL VARIATIONS OF HNPCC AND LYNCH SYNDROME
- •Familial Colorectal Cancer Type X
- •Tumor Lynch
- •SUMMARY
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •PATHOLOGY OF APPENDICEAL MALIGNANT TUMORS
- •Carcinoid Tumors
- •Epithelial (Noncarcinoid) Tumors of the Appendix
- •Mucinous Adenoma and Adenocarcinoma
- •Nonmucinous Adenocarcinoma
- •DIAGNOSIS OF APPENDICEAL MALIGNANT TUMORS
- •Carcinoid
- •Adenocarcinoma and Mucinous Adenocarcinoma
- •Pseudomyxoma Peritonei Syndrome
- •Carcinoid Tumors
- •Appendiceal Adenocarcinoma
- •Management of Appendiceal Neoplasms with Peritoneal Dissemination
- •Perioperative Chemotherapy
- •Serial Debulking
- •CYTOREDUCTIVE SURGERY AND PERIOPERATIVE CHEMOTHERAPY
- •Survival by Completeness of Cytoreduction
- •Survival by Histologic Assessment
- •Survival by Prior Surgical Score
- •Morbidity and Mortality Rates
- •Peritonectomy
- •Perioperative Chemotherapy
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •EPIDEMIOLOGY
- •Prognostic Factors
- •PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION
- •PREOPERATIVE PREPARATION
- •OPERATIVE PRINCIPLES AND TECHNIQUES
- •Exploration
- •Surgical Treatment of Right Colon Cancer
- •Surgical Treatment of Transverse Colon Cancer
- •Surgical Treatment of Splenic Flexure and Descending Colon Cancer
- •Surgical Treatment of Sigmoid Colon Cancer
- •LAPAROSCOPIC COLECTOMY
- •SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
- •Obstruction and Perforation
- •Prophylactic Oophorectomy
- •POSTOPERATIVE SURVEILLANCE
- •SUMMARY
- •Suggested Readings
- •INTRODUCTION
- •CHEMOTHERAPY
- •5-Fu
- •Capecitabine
- •Irinotecan
- •Oxaliplatin
- •MAINTENANCE CHEMOTHERAPY
- •BIOLOGIC AGENTS
- •FIRST-LINE TARGETED OPTIONS
- •THIRD- AND FOURTH-LINE OPTIONS
- •OLIGOMETASTATIC DISEASE
- •ROLE OF RESECTION OF PRIMARY LESION
- •IMMUNOTHERAPY
- •CONCLUSIONS
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •DIAGNOSIS AND PREOPERATIVE WORKUP
- •Imaging
- •Serologic and Molecular Markers
- •Histology
- •Needle Biopsy
- •Multidisciplinary Planning
- •STAGING AND PROGNOSIS
- •PROGNOSTIC SCORES
- •TREATMENT
- •Chemotherapy
- •Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Resectable Liver Disease
- •Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Unresectable Liver Disease
- •Adjuvant Chemotherapy
- •Hepatic Arterial Infusion
- •Resectability
- •Resectable Liver Disease
- •Synchronous Liver Metastasis
- •Unresectable Liver Disease
- •Repeat Resections for Multiple Liver Metastases
- •Local Ablative Therapy
- •Radiofrequency Ablation
- •Microwave Ablation
- •Cryotherapy
- •Irreversible Electroporation
- •Colorectal Liver Metastases with Extrahepatic Spread
- •Lung
- •Peritoneal
- •Lymph Node Involvement
- •Inferior Vena Cava
- •Recurrence
- •SURVEILLANCE
- •CONCLUSION
- •Suggested Readings
- •INTRODUCTION
- •INDICATIONS FOR RESECTION OF COLORECTAL METASTASES
- •OUTCOMES OF PATIENTS UNDERGOING RESECTION AND PROGNOSTIC FACTORS
- •LUNG AND LIVER METASTASIS
- •SURGICAL APPROACH
- •DEVELOPMENT OF A PROSPECTIVE RANDOMIZED TRIAL: THE PULMONARY METASTASECTOMY IN COLORECTAL CANCER TRIAL
- •CONCLUSION
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •BENIGN NONADENOMATOUS LESIONS OF THE COLON AND RECTUM
- •Benign Lymphoid Hyperplasia
- •Lipomas
- •Treatment
- •CAVERNOUS HEMANGIOMA
- •Characteristic Features
- •Treatment
- •Surgery (Laparotomy/Laparoscopic)
- •LEIOMYOMA AND LEIOMYOSARCOMA
- •Characteristic Features
- •Surgery
- •PRIMARY LYMPHOMA OF THE COLON AND RECTUM
- •SUMMARY
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •ETIOLOGY AND PATHOGENESIS
- •CLASSIFICATION
- •CLINICAL PRESENTATION
- •DIAGNOSIS
- •MANAGEMENT
- •OUTCOME
- •SPECIAL TOPICS
- •Ischemic Colitis after Aortic Surgery
- •Colonic Ischemia after Cardiopulmonary Bypass
- •Ischemic Colitis Associated with Colon Carcinoma and Obstructing Colon Lesions
- •Total Colonic Ischemia
- •Ischemic Proctosigmoiditis
- •CONCLUSION
- •Suggested Readings
- •INTRODUCTION
- •ETIOLOGY
- •DIAGNOSIS
- •Physical Examination
- •Imaging
- •Diagnostic Peritoneal Lavage
- •Laparoscopy
- •TREATMENT
- •Colon Injuries
- •Damage Control
- •Rectal Injuries
- •Overview
- •Diversion
- •Direct Repair
- •Drainage
- •Distal Washout
- •Rectal Foreign Bodies
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •PAIN
- •INFERTILITY
- •DIAGNOSIS
- •Physical Examination
- •Endoscopy
- •Imaging
- •SURGICAL MANAGEMENT
- •Results after Surgical Therapy
- •Combined Medical and Surgical Therapy
- •CONCLUSION
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •ETIOLOGY
- •CLASSIFICATION
- •HISTOLOGY AND GROSS PATHOLOGY
- •SYMPTOMS
- •DIAGNOSIS
- •TREATMENT
- •Suggested Readings
- •INTRODUCTION
- •CAUSES
- •CLASSIFYING CONSTIPATION
- •ASSESSMENT
- •History
- •Physical Examination
- •INVESTIGATIONS
- •TREATMENT
- •Medical
- •Newer Promotility Agents
- •Biofeedback for Pelvic Floor Dyssynergia
- •Change in Position of Defecation
- •Surgery
- •Outlet Obstruction Constipation
- •Suggested Reading
- •EXTENT OF THE PROBLEM
- •CLINICAL PRESENTATION
- •IMAGING
- •MRI and Ultrasound
- •MANAGEMENT OF SMALL BOWEL OBSTRUCTION
- •Nonadhesive Obstruction
- •Hernias
- •Crohn Disease
- •Malignancy
- •Intussusception
- •Gallstone Ileus
- •Bariatric Patient
- •Surgical Technique
- •Adhesive Obstruction
- •Hernias
- •Malignancy
- •Intussusception
- •Gallstone Ileus
- •The Bariatric Patient
- •Laparoscopic versus Open Lysis of Adhesions
- •Early Postoperative Bowel Obstruction
- •Prevention of Adhesions
- •SUMMARY
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •DIETARY MANAGEMENT OF SHORT BOWEL SYNDROME
- •PHARMACOLOGIC TREATMENT OF SHORT BOWEL SYNDROME
- •PARENTERAL AND ENTERAL NUTRITION
- •HORMONAL TREATMENT FOR SHORT BOWEL SYNDROME
- •COMPLICATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH SHORT BOWEL SYNDROME
- •CONCLUSION
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •GUT ADAPTATION
- •MEDICAL MANAGEMENT
- •SURGICAL REHABILITATION
- •Strategy
- •Autologous Reconstruction
- •Intestinal Lengthening
- •INTESTINAL AND MULTIVISCERAL TRANSPLANTATION
- •Types
- •Indications
- •Contraindications
- •Early Referral
- •Transplantation Surgery
- •Postoperative Management
- •Current Global Activities
- •Long-Term Survival
- •Allograft Function
- •Quality of Life
- •New Insights
- •SUMMARY
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •CLINICAL PRESENTATION
- •INVESTIGATIONS IN UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL CROHN DISEASE
- •MEDICAL TREATMENT
- •ENDOSCOPIC TREATMENT
- •SURGERY
- •SUMMARY
- •Suggested Readings
- •INTRODUCTION
- •MEDICAL MANAGEMENT
- •INDICATIONS FOR SURGERY
- •PREOPERATIVE CONSIDERATIONS
- •OPERATIVE APPROACH
- •SURGICAL OPTIONS
- •Bypass
- •Resection
- •Strictureplasty
- •SPECIAL SITUATIONS
- •Medications
- •Abscess
- •Free Perforation
- •Hemorrhage
- •Growth Retardation
- •Fistula
- •Neoplasia
- •Obstruction
- •OUTCOME
- •SUMMARY
- •Selected Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •PRESENTATION
- •DIAGNOSIS
- •MANAGEMENT
- •Adenocarcinoma without Metastatic Disease
- •Carcinoid Tumors
- •Lymphomas
- •GIST Tumors
- •CONCLUSION
- •ACKNOWLEDGMENT
- •Suggested Readings
- •DEFINITION
- •INCIDENCE, EPIDEMIOLOGY, AND RESEARCH
- •CLINICAL PRESENTATION
- •DIAGNOSIS
- •CLASSIFICATION
- •SURGICAL TREATMENT
- •Small Intestine
- •Appendix
- •Colon
- •Rectum
- •Locally Advanced and Metastatic Disease
- •Hedinger Syndrome
- •ADJUVANT THERAPY
- •FOLLOW-UP
- •PROGNOSIS
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •PATHOGENESIS
- •GENERAL ASPECTS OF CARE
- •COMPLICATIONS
- •PLAN OF CARE
- •Prevention
- •Stabilization
- •Wound Care
- •Nutritional Support
- •Nasogastric Tubes and Other Drainage Tubes
- •Protection of the Gastric, Duodenal, and Upper Gastrointestinal Tract Mucosa from Ulceration
- •Other Supplements
- •Investigation/Elucidation
- •Therapeutic Decisions
- •Will It Close?
- •The Decision to Operate
- •Timing of Surgery
- •Surgery
- •Choice of Incision
- •The Operation Itself
- •Anastomosis
- •Abdominal Wound Closure
- •What Type of Operation Should One Undertake?
- •Gastrostomy and Feeding Jejunostomy
- •The Healing Phase
- •Fibrin Glue
- •Short Bowel Syndrome
- •PROGNOSIS
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •ACUTE MESENTERIC ISCHEMIA
- •Clinical Presentation
- •Evaluation
- •Treatment
- •SMA Embolus
- •SMA Thrombus
- •Mesenteric Venous Thrombosis
- •Nonocclusive Mesenteric Ischemia
- •Bowel Viability
- •Laparoscopy
- •CHRONIC MESENTERIC ISCHEMIA
- •Presentation
- •Evaluation
- •Operative Treatment
- •Angioplasty
- •CONCLUSION
- •Suggested Readings
- •BACKGROUND
- •PATHOPHYSIOLOGY
- •PREDISPOSING RISK FACTORS
- •GRADING SYSTEMS
- •DIAGNOSTIC WORKUP
- •PREVENTION
- •MANAGEMENT OF RADIATION ENTERITIS
- •Management of Radiation Injury to the Small Bowel
- •Acute Radiation Enteritis
- •Chronic Radiation Enteritis
- •Management of Radiation Injury to the Colon
- •Acute Radiation Colitis
- •Chronic Radiation Colitis
- •Management of Radiation Injury to the Rectum
- •Topical Therapy
- •Hyperbaric Oxygen
- •Medical Therapy
- •Endoscopic Management
- •Surgery
- •CONCLUSION
- •Suggested Readings
- •INTRODUCTION
- •IDENTIFICATION OF THE HIGH-RISK PATIENT
- •MINIMIZING RISK ASSOCIATED WITH EMERGENCY SURGERY
- •MINIMIZING RISK ASSOCIATED WITH CARDIAC DISEASE
- •MINIMIZING RISK ASSOCIATED WITH PULMONARY DISEASE
- •MINIMIZING RISK ASSOCIATED WITH IMMUNOSUPPRESSION
- •Steroids
- •Diabetes
- •Chemoradiotherapy
- •MINIMIZING RISK ASSOCIATED WITH MALNUTRITION
- •MINIMIZING RISK ASSOCIATED WITH HEPATIC DISEASE
- •MINIMIZING RISK ASSOCIATED WITH RENAL DISEASE
- •MINIMIZING RISK IN MORBIDLY OBESE PATIENTS
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •ANATOMIC FACTORS
- •The Ureters
- •Presacral Veins
- •Pelvic Nerves
- •POSTOPERATIVE CHANGES IN THE PELVIS
- •Approach to Reoperative Pelvic Surgery
- •Preoperative Planning
- •Timing
- •Patient Preparation
- •Functional Considerations
- •Intraoperative Conduct
- •Patient Positioning
- •Optimizing Visibility and Exposure
- •Access to the Pelvis
- •Ureter
- •Bladder
- •Rectal Stump
- •Vagina
- •Autonomic Nerves
- •Control of Bleeding
- •Drainage
- •SPECIFIC CLINICAL SITUATIONS
- •Reversal of Hartmann Procedure for Diverticulitis
- •Recurrent Rectal Cancer
- •Redo Ileoanal Pelvic Pouch Procedure
- •SUMMARY
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •NUTRITIONAL ASSESSMENT
- •INDICATIONS FOR NUTRITIONAL SUPPORT
- •General Indications
- •Severe Malnutrition
- •Postoperative Nutrition
- •Colorectal Cancer
- •ESTIMATION OF NUTRIENT REQUIREMENTS
- •Calories
- •Protein
- •PREVENTION
- •Preventive Measures
- •Bowel Preparation
- •Prophylactic Antibiotics
- •Intact Anastomosis
- •Tension-Free Anastomosis
- •Well-Vascularized Anastomosis
- •Consideration for Diversion
- •Appropriate Use of Drains
- •Goal-Directed Hemodynamic Support
- •Evaluation
- •Nonoperative Interventions
- •Operation versus Observation
- •Open Abdomen
- •Return to the Operating Room
- •Suggested Readings
- •INTRODUCTION
- •WHAT DEFINES A LEAK?
- •PRINCIPLES OF MANAGEMENT
- •EARLY DIAGNOSIS
- •IMAGING
- •CRP LEVELS
- •ENDOSCOPY
- •VARIABLES DIRECTING MANAGEMENT
- •Location: Intraperitoneal versus Extraperitoneal
- •Symptoms: Sepsis versus Symptomatic versus Asymptomatic
- •Previously Diverted: Proximal Diverting Ostomy versus Nondiverted
- •LEAK MANAGEMENT TOOLS
- •ENDO-VACUUM ASSISTED CLOSURE
- •ENDOSCOPIC STENTS, CLIPS, AND GLUE
- •DIETARY COMPOSITION AND DELIVERY
- •Hospital-Based Diets
- •Clear Liquid Diet
- •Regular Diet
- •Low-Residue Diet
- •Oral Supplements
- •Liquid Formula Diets
- •Enteral Nutrition
- •Access for EN
- •Early Postoperative Feeding: “Fast Track”
- •Parenteral Nutrition
- •Access for PN
- •Concomitant EN and PN
- •Overfeeding
- •NEW DIRECTIONS
- •Immunonutrition
- •Preoperative Carbohydrate Loading
- •SUMMARY
- •Suggested Reading
- •BACKGROUND
- •TRANSANAL REPAIR TECHNIQUES
- •TURNBULL-CUTAIT PULL THROUGH
- •SUMMARY
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •RISK MANAGEMENT
- •HEMORRHAGE
- •Steps Prior to Colonoscopy
- •Risk Factors for Bleeding
- •Prevention of Bleeding
- •Treatment of Bleeding
- •PERFORATION
- •Causes of Perforation
- •Diagnosis of Perforation
- •Management of Perforation
- •Suggested Readings
- •INTRODUCTION
- •PERTINENT ANATOMY
- •BLEEDING
- •Major Vessel Bleeding
- •Iliac Vessels
- •Minor Vessel Bleeding
- •Presacral Bleeding
- •Pelvic Packing
- •Suture Ligation
- •Thumbtacks
- •Muscle Fragment Welding
- •Bipolar Electrocautery
- •Hemostasis Step-by-Step Technique
- •Hemostatic Agents
- •Mechanical Hemostatic Agents
- •Active Hemostatic Agents
- •Flowable Hemostatic Agents
- •Fibrin Sealants
- •CONCLUSION
- •Selected Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •INFECTION
- •URETER
- •BLADDER
- •URETHRA
- •REPRODUCTIVE STRUCTURES
- •NERVES
- •BLOOD VESSELS
- •Suggested Readings
- •INTRODUCTION
- •GENERAL COMPLICATIONS
- •Contraindications
- •Peritoneal Access Complications
- •Pneumoperitoneum Complications
- •Thromboembolic Complications
- •Electrosurgical Complications
- •Positioning Complications
- •Bleeding Complications
- •Contamination
- •Anastomosis Complications
- •Urologic Complications
- •CONCLUSIONS
- •Suggested Reading
- •INTRODUCTION
- •OSTOMY CREATION
- •Preoperative Discussion and Consent
- •Siting the Stoma
- •Creating and Maturing the Stoma
- •End Ileostomy
- •Loop Ileostomy
- •COMPLICATIONS
- •Early Complications
- •Appliance Issues/Skin Irritation
- •Ischemia
- •Stoma Stenosis
- •Retraction
- •Late Complications
- •Parastomal Hernia
- •Prolapse
- •Stricture
- •Peristomal Pyoderma
- •Parastomal Ulcer
- •Abscess and Fistula
- •SUMMARY
- •Suggested Reading
- •PREOPERATIVE PREPARATION
- •Preoperative Counseling
- •Stoma Site Marking
- •POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT
- •SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
- •Continent ileostomy
- •WOUND MANAGEMENT
- •POSTDISCHARGE FOLLOW-UP
- •COLOSTOMY IRRIGATION

DIETARY COMPOSITION AND DELIVERY
Options for feeding surgical patients include standard hospital-based
oral diets, oral supplements, enteral liquid formula diets, and parenteral nutrition.
COMPLICATIONS 441
initiation of standard diets, when compared with clear liquid diets,
has been reported aer elective colorectal surgery. As the result of the
wide variety of food intolerances and preferences among patients of
diering ethnic, religious, and socioeconomic groups, the ingestion
of approximately one third of the standard hospital diet is generally
sucient for hospital discharge. Appetite and food intake usually
increase signicantly when the patient is discharged to his or her
usual environment.
Hospital-Based Diets
e composition and array of hospital-based diets has changed little
in the past 40 years. Diets relevant to patients undergoing colorectal
surgery include clear liquid, regular, and low residue.
Clear Liquid Diet
Clear liquid diets contain water, broth, clear juices, Popsicles, and gelatin. ey are relatively distasteful and provide minimal nutritional
benet. In some patients, these diets help stimulate swallowing in the
early postoperative state. Similar to other types of oral intake, these
diets should not be prescribed if the patient is abnormally distended
because of the potentiation of gastric distension with swallowed air.
Regular Diet
Regular diets are used to provide nutrition for patients without special needs. ey are well tolerated by most postoperative patients
who have some return of appetite and the absence of contraindications to oral/enteral feeding (Box 83-2). Patient preference for early
TABLE 83-1: Daily Caloric and Protein Prescription
Based on Body Mass Index
BMI <30 BMI 30-40 BMI >40
Calories 25-30 kcal/kg
ABW
Protein 1.2-2.0 kg ABW
ABW, Actual body weight; BMI, body mass index; IBW, ideal body weight.
Modied from McClave SA, Martindale RG, Vanek VW, etal. Guidelines
for the provision and assessment of nutrition support therapy in the adult
critically ill patient: Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) and American
Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (A.S.P.E.N.). JPEN J Parenter
Enteral Nutr. 2009;33:277-316.
BOX 83-2: Contraindications to Enteral Nutrition
Severe abdominal distension, vomiting
Intolerance to enteral nutrition
High-output gastrointestinal stula(s)
Hemodynamic instability/vasopressors
Intestinal ischemia
Severe sepsis
22-25 kcal/kg
IBW
>2.0g/kgIBW >2.5g/kgIBW
22-25 kcal/kg
IBW
Low-Residue Diet
Low-residue diets are formulated similarly to a low-ber diet but
typically limit components that increase bowel activity, such as milk
products. ey contain less than 7 to 10 g of dietary ber per day.
Oral Supplements
Oral supplements are similar in formulation to, although more palatable than, enteral tube feeds. Oral supplements provide a high
caloric density of 1.0 to 2.0 kcal/mL. ey are prescribed for patients
with decreased intake of food. Prescription of oral supplements
has improved quality of life, nutritional status, and intake and has
decreased infection rates in postoperative patients.
Liquid Formula Diets
Liquid formula diets used for EN dier in osmolarity, caloric density,
electrolytes, vitamins, and ber contents. In general, formulas are categorized as standard, concentrated, predigested, and immune modulating (Table 83-2). Standard formulas are relatively inexpensive and
meet the basic nutritional needs of most postoperative CRS and critically ill patients. Concentrated EN formulations are hyperosmolar
with high caloric densities and may be advantageous in patients who
require volume restriction. Predigested formulas are valuable in certain malabsorptive situations such as short bowel syndrome and in
patients with chyle leaks. Immune-modulating formulas are supplemented with arginine, glutamine, nucleic acid, omega-3 fatty acids,
and antioxidants and are more costly than standard formulations.
Some studies support use of immune-modulating formulas in surgical patients in the intensive care unit. Although no signicant reduction in mortality occurs, decreased length of hospital stay and fewer
infections occur in certain patient populations. Recent evidence supports increasing use of these diets (see the Immunonutrition section).
Enteral Nutrition
EN is feeding either orally or by tube directly into the gastrointestinal
(GI) tract. For purpose of this discussion, EN is restricted to delivery
of liquid formula diets by tube. If patients are unable to ingest nutrients and the GI tract is functioning safely, EN is the preferred method
of nutrient delivery. Despite a lack of large, prospectively randomized
trials, enteral feeding is, in general, preferred over PN. When compared with PN, EN is more physiologic, promotes growth of intestinal mucosa, and decreases infectious complications by preserving
TABLE 83-2: Categories of Liquid Formula Diets
Standard Concentrated Predigested Immune Modulating
Caloric density ≥1.0 kcal/mL 1.2-2.0 kcal/mL 1.2-1.5 kcal/mL 1.5 kcal/mL
Advantages or uses Meets nutritional needs of
most postoperative and
critically ill patients
Volume restriction Malabsorption,
chyle leaks
Surgical intensive care unit
Mechanically ventilated, reduced infectious
morbidity and length of stay

NutritioNal Support iN ColoreCtal Surgery442
Free water decit = 0.6 × current total body weight(kg)×
[(current sodium/140) − 1]
immune function. e benets of EN on immune function have been
demonstrated in animal models and suggested in human studies as
well. e oral route is preferred, but feeding by tube may be necessary
to meet caloric needs in patients with the inability to ingest sucient
calories by mouth.
Further comparative advantages of EN include improving gut
mucosal integrity, preserving gut-associated lymphoid tissue, reducing inammation, improving wound healing, decreasing the rate
of infections and septic morbidity, and reducing costs (Box 83-3).
Contraindications to postoperative EN are shown in Box 83-2 and
include moderate to severe abdominal distension, vomiting, intestinal obstruction, high-output GI stulas, hemodynamic instability,
intestinal ischemia, and severe sepsis.
Prior to starting postoperative oral intake, our practice is to assess
each patient for absence of severe distention, nausea, eructations,
BOX 83-3: Advantages of Enteral Nutrition
Improves gut mucosal integrity
Preserves gut-associated lymphoid tissue
Reduces inammation
Improves wound healing
Reduces rate of infections and septic morbidity
Decreases hyperglycemic episodes
Clinical signs/symptoms of
worsening ileus (POD 0-1):
Increasing abdominal pain
Nausea
Eructations
Hiccups
Bloating
Vomiting
Moderate abdominal distension
hiccups, bloating, and vomiting. Once clear liquids are tolerated,
patients are advanced to either a regular or low-residue diet as shown
in Figure 83-1.
Patients receiving EN may experience hypernatremia as a result
of a decit of free water. is can be calculated and replaced through
the GI tract:
Rapid repletion of free water decit can lead to detrimental neurologic consequences, and thus serum sodium should be lowered
slowly. Treatment goals are to lower serum sodium by 10 mEq/L in
24 hours.
Access for EN
Access for EN includes placement of nasogastric (NG) and nasoenteric (NE) tubes, in addition to tube gastrostomy and tube enterostomy. NG or NE feeding tubes can be placed at the bedside. An
abdominal radiograph should be performed to conrm location of
the tube before initiating feeding. Innovations for tube placement
include devices with electromagnetic tips to allow guidance, use of
uoroscopy, and bedside placement using a corkscrew maneuver.
A greater than 95% accuracy of placement has been reported using
these techniques. If patients are at high risk for aspiration, postpyloric feeding can be used; however, supportive data are conicting.
Yes No
Remain NPO
Reassess clinically
Vomiting NPO
Insert nasogastric tube
for gastric
decompression
Yes No
Advance to
clear liquid diet and
follow progress as
noted above
Yes No
Resolution of severe
ileus or abdominal
discomfort
Advance to
clear liquid diet
Diet Intolerance
Advance to
regular or
low-residue
diet
Remain NPO until
resolution of
abdominal
symptoms
FIGURE 83-1 Oral diet advancement. NPO, Nothing by mouth; POD, postoperative day.

COMPLICATIONS 443
Postoperative regurgitation, aspiration, and pneumonia are reduced
in some studies but not in others. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes are another option if it is anticipated that enteral feeds will
continue beyond 7 to 10 days aer surgery.
If a prolonged postoperative course is anticipated, a gastrostomy
or jejunostomy feeding tube should be placed prophylactically at the
time of the colorectal operation. A jejunostomy is preferred over a
gastrostomy if a newly created gastric anastomosis (e.g., excision of
gastrocolic or gastrojejunal stula) or gastroparesis is a concern.
Complications of enteric tube access and feeding include insertion of
the feeding tube into the respiratory tract, perforation and or obstruction of the esophagus, stomach, or intestine, bowel necrosis, and death.
Early Postoperative Feeding: “Fast Track”
Early studies in canine models by Moss and colleagues suggested
the importance of early postoperative nutrition. ey demonstrated
that the colonic anastomoses in fed animals had signicantly higher
bursting pressures than those in fasting animals aer colon surgery.
Postoperative ileus occurs frequently aer gastrointestinal surgery. Traditionally, oral feeds are started only aer resolution of ileus
and return of bowel function, meaning that the patient fasts until he
or she passes atus or has a bowel movement. e rationale of this
“traditional feeding” protocol is that oral intake before spontaneous
resolution of ileus can lead to increased abdominal discomfort, distention, nausea, and vomiting, with a potential risk for aspiration.
Protocols for early feeding aer surgery have been developed in
an eort to minimize fasting time, enhance recovery, expedite return
of bowel function, and decrease postoperative length of hospital stay.
Such enhanced recovery aer surgery programs incorporate a combination of perioperative nonopioid analgesia to prevent ileus, removal
of the NG tube, expeditious postoperative mobilization, and early oral
feeding. Nutrition initiated on postoperative day 1, or as soon as the
patient desires food, decreases risk of infection and length of hospital
stay, at the expense of increased bloating and vomiting. In fact, nutritional supplementation before and immediately aer surgery eectively supports the patient undergoing colon resection, as well as the
malnourished surgical patient. In a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies involving 198 patients undergoing CRS, Eskicioglu and
colleagues found signicantly decreased hospital stay and postoperative complications in patients following an enhanced recovery aer
surgery protocol. us early initiation of NS in patients undergoing
CRS—which, in the malnourished patient, could start in the preoperative period—provides important nourishment, decreases perioperative complication rates, and decreases length of hospital stay.
Parenteral Nutrition
PN is the provision of partial or total nutrients by vein. Standard PN
mixtures include dextrose, amino acids (essential and nonessential),
sodium, potassium, chloride, magnesium, calcium, phosphorus, multivitamins, and trace elements. Electrolytes can be adjusted based on
the patient’s needs as indicated by a metabolic panel. As mentioned,
lipid is oen prescribed to supply approximately 20% to 30% of the
total calories. A decision-making approach for using postoperative
PN is shown in Figure 83-2. PN is indicated in the severely malnourished patient in whom the gut cannot be used safely for feeding.
ASPEN guidelines recommend starting PN aer the rst 7 days of
hospitalization in critically ill patients, based on the balance of risks
associated with the use of PN and deterioration of nutrition status.
To our knowledge, no evidence-based recommendations are available
specically for patients undergoing CRS and receiving PN. We prescribe PN on postoperative days 5 to 7 if enteral feeding is not feasible.
e Veterans Aairs Total Parenteral Nutrition cooperative study
in 1991 demonstrated the eectiveness of preoperative treatment
with total PN in a nonrandomized subgroup analysis of severely malnourished patients. is study, however, also showed signicantly
increased infectious complication rates of PN in the larger, randomized cohort. In retrospect, the causes of infectious complications
were likely due to overfeeding and increased hospitalization in the
PN group. More recent safe practice guidelines have signicantly
reduced infection rates for central venous catheters, which may promote earlier initiation of parenteral nutritional support in patients
who do not tolerate enteral feeds. As mentioned, most evidence supports the preferential use of enteral compared with parenteral nutrition in patients with a functioning GI tract.
Access for PN
PN is a hyperosmolar solution that causes venous sclerosis in smaller
peripheral veins; therefore, it is typically delivered into a central
vein. Delivery of PN is achieved through a triple lumen, peripherally inserted central catheter, or tunneled catheter. Complications
with PN include catheter-related injuries, pneumothorax, and lineassociated infections.
Concomitant EN and PN
EN and PN are complementary, not competitive. In some conditions
the nutritional goals are to both stimulate gut growth and function
Major colorectal
operation
Return of bowel function within 5-7 days;
contingent upon preoperative nutritional status
NoYes
Advance to regular
diet as tolerated
Yes
FIGURE 83-2 Decisions for use of postoperative parenteral nutrition (PN). NPO, Nothing by mouth.
Remain
NPO Initiate PN
Return of bowel function
No
Continue PN

NutritioNal Support iN ColoreCtal Surgery444
while still meeting total nutrient needs. ese patients can be given
both EN and PN while slowly transitioning from PN to EN.
Overfeeding
Overfeeding can signicantly harm the patient undergoing CRS, particularly when he or she is severely stressed or acutely ill. Overfeed-
ingleads tohyperglycemia(serum glucose >300 mg/dL), resulting
in immunosuppression and nosocomial infections. Nutrition alone
cannot convert a catabolic patient into an anabolic state. Weight
maintenance, not gain, is the overriding goal when feeding severely
ill surgical patients. e caloric prescription is increased only when
the source of catabolism (e.g., pneumonia and an abdominal abscess)
is treated appropriately as signied by return of appetite and normalization of temperature, heart rate, and laboratory indices. When this
occurs, improvement in the metabolic milieu supports anabolism
and leads to improved nutrient utilization and weight gain.
NEW DIRECTIONS
Despite the lack of conrmatory data in patients undergoing CRS,
new directions in perioperative nutritional care include immunonutrition and preoperative carbohydrate loading.
Immunonutrition
Immunonutrition is the perioperative delivery of immunostimulatory
diets, consisting of a combination of arginine, omega-3 fatty acids,
and nucleotides. Marimuthu and colleagues recently reported a metaanalysis of 26 randomized trials involving 2496 patients in which
immunonutrition was compared with standard EN. ese investigators found lower morbidity and a shorter length of stay in patients
undergoing surgery for GI cancer in the immunonutrition group. e
higher cost of immunonutrition was examined by blinded economists
with data gathered from randomized controlled trials. ey concluded that the reduced postoperative infectious complications with
immunonutrition led to a substantial savings of health care resources.
Preoperative Carbohydrate Loading
Body glycogen stores are depleted rapidly during normal preoperative
fasts. is depletion in turn contributes to a reduction of lean body
mass. Carbohydrate loading prior to surgery is analogous to a long distance runner preparing for a marathon. Investigators have proposed
adding 800 mL of an oral glucose-based solution on the day before surgery and 400 mL approximately 4 hours before surgery. Benets include
improved postoperative glucose control, reduction in insulin resistance, enhanced return of bowel function, and improved food intake
without increased risk of aspiration or other anesthetic complications.
SUMMARY
Malnutrition occurs in selected patients undergoing colorectal surgery, particularly those with either IBD or advanced colorectal cancer. Severe malnutrition delays postoperative recovery, increases
complications, and prolongs hospital stay. Initiation of nutritional
support in the preoperative period benets the severely malnourished patient; however, its use must be tempered with prolonged
hospitalization and increased costs. Scant evidence exists to suggest
that patients with mild or borderline malnutrition benet from either
preoperative or postoperative nutritional support.
When adhering to appropriate guidelines, oral or enteral feeding
within 6 to 48 hours aer surgery is associated with fewer surgical
complications, a shorter length of hospital stay, and improved nitrogen balance when compared with those not receiving such feedings.
Parenteral nutrition is an important adjunct for patients who cannot meet their nutrient requirements using oral or enteral nutritional
supplementation. It is oen used as a “bridge” to enteral and oral
feeding. With the exception of the severely malnourished patient, PN
is rarely indicated within the rst week aer surgery.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
We gratefully acknowledge Maureen E. Rombeau, MA, for editorial
assistance.
S u g g e S t e d R e a d i n g
Andersen HK, Lewis SJ, omas S. Early enteral nutrition within 24h of colo-
rectal surgery versus later commencement of feeding for postoperative
complications. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;4: CD004080.
ASPEN Board of Directors and the Clinical Guidelines Task Force. Guidelines
for the use of parenteral and enteral nutrition in adult and pediatric patients. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2002;26S:1SA–138SA.
August DA, Huhmann MB. ASPEN clinical guidelines: nutrition support
therapy during adult anticancer treatment and in hematopoietic cell transplantation. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2009;33:472–500.
Awad S, Vadhan KK, Ljungqvist O. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled
trials on preoperative oral carbohydrate treatment in elective surgery. Clin
Nutr. 2013;32(1):34–44.
Braga M, Ljungqvist O, Soeters P, Fearon K, Weimann A, Bozzetti F. ESPEN
Guidelines on Parenteral Nutrition: surgery. Clin Nutr. 2009;28(4):378–
386.
Burden S, Todd C, Hill J, etal. Pre-operative nutrition in patients undergoing
surgery on the digestive system. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;(11):
CD008879.
Casaer M, Mesotten D, Hermans G, etal. Early versus late parenteral nutrition
in critically ill adults. New Engl J Med. 2011;365:506–517.
Chen Y, Liu BL, Shang B, etal. Nutrition support in surgical patients with
colorectal cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2011;17:1779–1786.
Eskicioglu C, Fobes SS, Aarts MA, et al. Enhanced recovery aer surgery
(ERAS) programs for patients having colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis
of randomized trials. J Gastrointest Surg. 2009;13:2321–2329.
Heyland DK, Novak F, Drover JW, etal. Should immunonutrition become
routine in critically ill patients? A systematic review of the evidence.
JAMA. 2001;286:944–953.
Huhmann MB, August DA. Perioperative nutrition support in cancer pa-
tients. Nutr Clin Pract. 2012;27:586–592.
Lewis SJ, Egger M, Sylvester PA, etal. Early enteral feeding versus “nil by
mouth” aer gastrointestinal surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis
of controlled trials. BMJ. 2001;323(7316):773–776.
Makela JT, Kiviniemi H, Laitinen S. Risk factors for anastomotic leakage aer
le sided colorectal resection with rectal anastomosis. Dis Colon Rectum.
2003;46:653–660.
Marimuthu K, Varadhan KK, Ljungqvist O, etal. A meta-analysis of the eect
of combinations of immune modulating nutrients on outcome in patients
undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery. Ann Surg. 2012;255:1060–
1068.
McClave SA, Martindale RG, Vanek VW, et al. Guidelines for the provision
and assessment of nutrition support therapy in the adult critically ill patient: Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) and American Society for
Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (A.S.P.E.N. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr.
2009;33:277–316.
Nedeau A, Rombeau JL. Nutrition, digestion and absorption. In: Porrett P,
Frederick J, Roses R, Kaiser L, eds. e Surgical Review: An Integrated Ba-
sic and Clinical Science Study Guide. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2010:31–46.
Veterans Aairs Total Parenteral Nutrition Cooperative Study Group. Perio-
perative total parenteral nutrition in surgical patients. New Engl J Med.
1991;325:525–532.
Wagner IJ, Rombeau JL. Nutritional support of surgical patients with inam-
matory bowel disease. Surg Clin North Am. 2011;91:787–803.
Warren J, Bhalla V, Cresci G. Postoperative diet advancement: surgical dogma
vs evidence-based medicine. Nutr Clin Pract. 2011;26:115–125.

P
M S
Dan Geisler and C. Neal Ellis
BACKGROUND
Sepsis is uncontrolled infection—a potentially fatal condition manifested by tachycardia, leukocytosis, fever, and hypotension. In the
United States, the overall incidence is estimated to be more than 1.1
million cases per year at an annual cost of $24.3 billion. More than
70% of septic patients have associated comorbidities, and more than
60% of episodes occur in persons aged 65 years and older. Despite
advances in antimicrobial agents, supportive care, and surgical management, the in-hospital mortality rate ranges from 14.7% to 29.9%.
Conditions that can progress to abdominal sepsis include perforated
peptic ulcer, diverticulitis, cholecystitis, appendicitis, pancreatitis, bowel
ischemia, trauma, and deep space abscesses. Specic colorectal-related
causes of sepsis include anastomotic leaks, perforation from diverticulitis, malignant or benign obstructions, inammatory strictures, enterocutaneous stula and stula-in-ano, postoperative intra-abdominal
abscesses, and unrecognized bowel injury, especially in patients undergoing a repeat operation. Treatment of sepsis by control of the septic
focus, prompt institution of antimicrobial agents, and goal-directed uid
therapy is usually successful. is chapter presents the principles upon
which eective treatment of abdominal sepsis is based.
PREVENTION
Defining Risk
Smoking, poorly controlled diabetes mellitus, radiation exposure,
immunodeciency, steroid and other immunosuppressant use, extremes
of age, hypothermia, malnutrition, shock, and a lengthy preoperative inpatient course are all signicant risk factors for sepsis in surgical
patients. Wound status is also important. e National Research Council
categorized wounds into four classes in an eort to better predict infection rates for closed wounds (Table 84-1). Wounds classied as contami-
nated or dirty along with any surgery lasting longer than 2 hours, any
intra-abdominal procedure, and the presence of three or more associated
medical diagnoses at the time of discharge were found to be independent
risk factors for surgical site infections. e number of risk factors present
helps to better predict the risk of postoperative infection.
Preventive Measures
Bowel Preparation
e use of mechanical bowel preparation prior to elective bowel resection aims to decrease the total bacterial load and minimize the possibility of fecal contamination of the abdomen while improving the
technical ease of the operation. However, numerous recent studies have
shown similar perioperative infection rates with and without the use
of bowel preparation. For emergency operations, mainly obstructions,
intraoperative colonic lavage is eective in clearing retained stool.
Prophylactic Antibiotics
e timely administration of perioperative parenteral antibiotics (given at the time of induction) aimed at anaerobes and gramnegative rods is geared toward achieving high systemic antibiotic
levels at the time of greatest risk for contamination. Repeat dosing
is encouraged for longer cases and is determined by the half-life of
the antibiotic chosen. A common choice for patients undergoing
bowel resection is ampicillin-sulbactam (Unasyn), 3 g administered
via intravenous piggyback upon the call to the operating room,
with repeat dosing at 3-hour intervals, or long-acting ertapenem
(Invanz).
Intact Anastomosis
A safe, tension-free, well-vascularized anastomosis is the most critical part of any colorectal restorative resection. Anastomotic dehiscence is a primary cause of postoperative intra-abdominal sepsis.
erefore, techniques that decrease the risk of anastomotic leakage
will also decrease the risk of postoperative abdominal sepsis.
Tension-Free Anastomosis
For le colectomy or anterior resection, tension-free anastomosis is
best achieved through full mobilization of the splenic exure, high
ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery, and transection of the inferior mesenteric vein at the level of the ligament of Treitz. For ileal
J pouch anal anastomoses, the terminal ileum must be fully mobilized by dissecting the retroperitoneum to the level of the duodenum.
Occasionally, division of the ileocolic artery is necessary to achieve a
tension-free anastomosis.
Well-Vascularized Anastomosis
Good blood supply is critical in minimizing most anastomotic complications (leak, stricture, or outright failure). Although many new
technological advances have been made in assessing the blood ow to
an anastomosis (e.g., FIREFLY and SPY), seeing pulsatile ow from
the cut edge of the mesentery and bowel is sucient.
Consideration for Diversion
An astute surgeon may prevent an anastomotic leak by opting to
avoid primary anastomosis when patient or procedural risk for
445

Prevention and ManageMent of SePSiS446
TABLE 84-1 National Research Council Classification of Surgical Wounds
Class Definition Example Risk of Wound Infection
Clean Atraumatic
No entry into respiratory, urinary,
gastrointestinal, or biliary tracts
No inammation
No break in sterile technique
Breast biopsy 1%–3%
Clean–contaminated Controlled entry into respiratory, urinary,
gastrointestinal, or biliary tracts
Minor break in sterile technique
Contaminated Traumatic wound, gross spillage from
gastrointestinal tract
Acute nonpurulent infection
Major break in sterile technique
Dirty Existing purulent infection
Perforated viscus
anastomotic dehiscence is high. Here one or both bowel ends are
brought out as stomas. A second strategy, using a diverting stoma
proximal to a primary anastomosis, will facilitate the management of
an anastomotic leak and minimize the severity of the ensuing sepsis.
An anastomosis should be avoided or at least diverted in the settings
of radiation exposure/damage, hypotension, vasopressors, high-dose
corticosteroids, recent use of biologic immunosuppressive agents and
certain chemotherapeutic agents, preoperative albumin levels lower
than 3.0 g/dL, intraoperative blood loss of 500 mL or more, operative time of 200 minutes or more, and/or the need for intraoperative
transfusion.
Appropriate Use of Drains
Although there is no role for the routine use of drains in the prevention of intra-abdominal sepsis, drains are frequently needed in
its management. A well-placed drain, oen placed with CT or ultrasound guidance, along with appropriate antibiotic coverage, will
sometimes prevent the need for a patient to undergo re-exploration
for postoperative sepsis. Once cultures results are obtained, antibiotic
coverage may be tailored accordingly.
MANAGEMENT OF INTRAABDOMINAL SEPSIS
e principle treatment of intra-abdominal sepsis is physiologic support of the patient and control of the source. Although source control
is denitive, resuscitation and physiologic support stabilize the patient
and convert an emergency operation into a semi-elective procedure,
optimizing outcome. Goals of resuscitation include restoration of
intravascular volume with maintenance of end-organ perfusion and
initiation of broad-spectrum antimicrobial therapy. Many institutions
have adopted standardized sepsis order sets that streamline resuscitative protocols for the initial management. Standardized sepsis
protocols have been shown to improve patient outcomes in multiple
settings.
Scoring systems, such as the Acute Physiological and Chronic
Health Evaluation score (APACHE II) and Mannheim Peritonitis Index (MPI), can be used to guide management. Categorizing
patients into dierent risk groups helps predict patient outcome,
selects patients for intensive care, and determines operative risk,
thus facilitating the decision for damage control or a denitive
procedure.
Elective bowel resection 5%–10%
Appendectomy for acute appendicitis 15%
Hartmann procedure for perforated
diverticulitis
40%
Goal-Directed Hemodynamic Support
e Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines recommend that uid challenges in patients with suspected hypovolemia begin with more than 1
L of crystalloids administered over a period of 30 minutes. Although
a colloid volume of 300 to 500 mL is an acceptable alternative to crystalloid, this option is more expensive, with no signicant dierence in
the initial resuscitation. When uid challenge fails to restore adequate
arterial pressure and organ perfusion, clinicians should use vasopressor agents, such as norepinephrine, to maintain adequate blood pressure and optimize organ perfusion. Initial empiric, broad-spectrum
antibiotic therapy should be started immediately, because the patient
needs immediate attention, and culture and susceptibility data can
require up to 48 hours before they are available for a more detailed
analysis. Once the causative pathogen has been identied, antibiotic therapy should be the most appropriate antimicrobial agent that
covers the pathogen and is safe and cost-eective. If candidemia is a
likely pathogen, empiric antifungal therapy should be added to the
treatment regimen. Intravenous hydrocortisone should be avoided
in adult patients with septic shock if adequate uid resuscitation and
vasopressor therapy are able to restore hemodynamic stability. If the
patient remains hemodynamically unstable despite resuscitation and
vasopressors, a continuous infusion of intravenous hydrocortisone at
a dose of 200 mg per day can be added.
Evaluation
Studies to identify the source of the sepsis should not be initiated until
resuscitation is successful and physiologic parameters are stabilized.
If resuscitation is not successful, urgent surgery may be indicated to
identify and control the cause of the sepsis (i.e., a damage control
laparotomy). CT scans have become routine in the assessment and
management of patients with abdominal sepsis. For patients with
le-sided anastomoses, use of rectal contrast material gives valuable additional information regarding the integrity of the anastomoses. Interventional radiology drains oen can be used to denitively
address postoperative uid collections.
Nonoperative Interventions
Nonoperative interventions to control the source of sepsis include
percutaneous abscess drainage, as well as percutaneous and

COMPLICATIONS 447
endoscopic stent placement. ese procedures can be curative or a
bridge to denitive surgery, allowing appropriate resuscitation of the
patient preoperatively.
Operation versus Observation
Surgery remains a cornerstone of treatment for intra-abdominal
sepsis. It addresses the need for denitive source control and elimination of bacteria and toxins from the abdominal cavity. e type
and extent of surgery depends on the underlying disease process
and the severity of intra-abdominal infection. e timing and
adequacy of surgical source control is an important determinant
of outcome. e likely presence of dense intra-abdominal adhesions must be considered when contemplating a repeat operation,
especially more than 10 to 14 days aer a prior abdominal procedure. e risk of inadvertent bowel injury resulting in enterocutaneous stulae, loss of small bowel, and potentially a worsening
septic picture must be weighed against the potential benets of a
repeat operation. e surgeon should attempt to diagnose the specic cause of the intra-abdominal sepsis and delineate the anatomy prior to the operation. Imaging studies, such as a CT scan
and ultrasound, should be performed promptly to help dene the
source and facilitate a more ecient procedure.
Open Abdomen
Aer surgery, the abdomen may be closed or le open. e benets
of maintaining an open abdomen include ease of subsequent repeat
exploration, control of abdominal contents, reduced risk of intraabdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome, and
fascial preservation to ensure ultimate closure of the abdominal
wall. Repeated operations or open packing of the abdomen may be
required. is technique is well suited for initial damage control in
patients with extensive peritonitis. Postoperatively, it is essential that
all exposed bowel be continually covered by a moist surface to minimize the formation of stulae.
Return to the Operating Room
In patients with intra-abdominal sepsis, certain disease processes,
such as necrotizing infections and bowel ischemia, mandate a semielective second-look operation for proper source control. Informed
consent and discussion with the patient and family should include
the potential need for repeat operations and fecal diversion.
S u g g e S t e d R e a d i n g S
Angus DC, Linde-Zwirble WT, Lidicker J, etal. Epidemiology of severe sepsis
in the United States: analysis of incidence, outcome, and associated costs
of care. Crit Care Med. 2001;29:1303–1310.
Billing A, Fröhlich D, Schildberg FW. Prediction of outcome using the Man-
nheim peritonitis index in 2003 patients. Peritonitis Study Group. Br J
Surg. 1994;81:209–213.
Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, etal. Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guide-
lines Committee including e Pediatric Subgroup 2012 Surviving Sepsis
Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and
septic shock. Intensive Care Med. 2013;39(2):165–228.
Gaieski DF, Edwards JM, Kallan MJ, Carr BG. Benchmarking the inci-
dence and mortality of severe sepsis in the United States. Crit Care Med.
2013;41(5):1167–1174.
Jesus EC, Karliczek A, Matos D, etal. Prophylactic anastomotic drainage for
colorectal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004;4:CD002100.
Jung B, Pahlman L, Nystrom PO, etal. Mechanical bowel preparation study
group. Multicentre randomized clinical trial of mechanical bowel preparation in elective colonic resection. Br J Surg. 2007;94:689.
Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP, Zimmerman JE. APACHE II: a severity
of disease classication system. Crit Care Med. 1985;13:818–829.
Martin GS, Mannino DM, Eaton S, etal. e epidemiology of sepsis in the
United States from 1979 through 2000. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:1546–1554.
Meakins JL, Solomkin JS, Allo MD, etal. A proposed classication of intra-
abdominal infections. Stratication of etiology and risk for future therapeutic trials. Arch Surg. 1984;119:1372–1378.
Micek ST, Roubinian N, Heuring T, etal. Before-aer study of a standard-
ized hospital order set for the management of septic shock. Crit Care Med.
2006;34(11):2707–2713.
Moore LJ, Turner KL, Todd SR, et al. Computerized clinical decision sup-
port improves mortality in intraabdominal surgical sepsis. Am J Surg.
2010;200(6):839–843.
Nguyen HB, Corbett SW, Steele R, etal. Implementation of a bundle of quality
indicators for the early management of severe sepsis and septic shock is associated with decreased mortality. Crit Care Med. 2007;35(4):1105–1112.
Sebat F, Johnson D, Musthafa AA, etal. A multidisciplinary community hos-
pital program for early and rapid resuscitation of shock in nontrauma patients. Chest. 2005;127(5):1729–1743.
Shorr AF, Micek ST, Jackson WL, etal. Economic implications of an evidence
based sepsis protocol: can we improve outcomes and lower costs? Crit
Care Med. 2007;35(5):1257–1262.
Telem DA, Chin EH, Nguyen SQ, Divino CM. Risk factors for anastomot-
ic leak following colorectal surgery: a case-control study. Arch Surg.
2010;145(4):371–376. discussion 376.
e Study of the Ecacy of Nosocomial Infection Control (SENIC).

M
A L
Nathan Smallwood and James Fleshman
INTRODUCTION
Although signicant improvements in oncologic outcomes aer surgery for colorectal cancer have been achieved, the issue of anastomotic
leaks remains a challenge. In fact, an anastomotic leak is one of the
most serious complications of any restorative colon or rectal resection.
Leaks account for a quarter of all postoperative deaths aer colorectal
surgery and up to one third of all deaths aer low anterior resection. In
addition to mortality, anastomotic leaks are associated with increased
morbidity and decreased quality of life because of the rate of permanent
ostomy (up to 72%), the need for additional surgeries, and the functional consequences of the related sepsis. In the literature, the major
focus has been on the causes of anastomotic leaks, with little attention
given to their management. e mortality rate has not changed in the
past three decades despite signicant improvements in critical care, and
our knowledge of factors contributing to leaks unfortunately has not
resulted in eective leak prevention. Anastomotic leaks traditionally
have been thought to be due to problems with technique, yet the rate of
leaks has remained unchanged despite the introduction of the surgical
stapler. If leaks were the result of technical error, surgeons would be the
best predictors of these events. However, studies have shown that a surgeon’s own judgment in predicting the risk of a leak is very poor. Given
that anastomotic leaks remain both inevitable and unpredictable, the
only way that postoperative outcomes can be improved is through early
detection and better management when they do occur.
WHAT DEFINES A LEAK?
Despite the constant rate of anastomotic leaks, little consensus exists
among surgeons about how to manage the problem. Much of this lack
of consensus could be due to variation in how an anastomotic leak is
dened. e denition of an anastomotic leak used in this chapter will
be consistent with the denition put forth by the International Study
Group of Rectal Cancer. An anastomotic leak is dened as a defect of
the intestinal wall at the anastomotic site leading to a communication
between the intra- and extraluminal compartments. is communication can be conrmed radiographically, endoscopically, or intraoperatively. Anastomotic leaks can be symptomatic (clinical) or asymptomatic
(subclinical). Clinical leaks generally cause symptoms of pelvic discomfort and signs of sepsis and can be identied endoscopically or with
imaging. Subclinical leaks may only be identied at a follow-up endoscopy, prior to stoma closure, or during surveillance for cancer risk.
early diagnosis, control of sepsis, and use of interventions that do not
increase the risk of a permanent stoma.
EARLY DIAGNOSIS
Mortality rates have been shown to increase from 0 to 18% if an anastomotic leak is recognized aer the h postoperative day. A delay of
2½ days in denitive intervention for a recognized leak increased the
mortality by 15%. A leak that is present from the time of the operation is
dicult to diagnose early in the postoperative period because signs and
symptoms take time to appear, especially if a diverting ostomy is present or the patient has a prolonged ileus. Symptomatic leaks are typically
diagnosed between 7 and 12 days aer surgery. Asymptomatic leaks can
be diagnosed months later, especially if the leak is through a portion of
the anastomosis that is not in the direct fecal stream (e.g., the blind end
of a side-to-end anastomosis). Overall, up to 42% of leaks are diagnosed
aer the patient is discharged. An anastomotic leak can cause a variety of nonspecic cardiovascular, pulmonary, and gastrointestinal (GI)
symptoms. Signs and symptoms, such as fever and leukocytosis, are
usually indicative of a postoperative infectious complication and rarely
reach predictive values while the patient is still in the hospital. Peritonitis is unlikely in patients if their anastomosis is either extraperitoneal
or covered by a proximal stoma. Drains placed at surgery can provide
early clues to the presence of a leak but can just as easily be misleading. Goligher examined data from a large series of patients, all of whom
underwent a postoperative contrast enema aer undergoing colorectal
anastomoses, and found a 30% leak rate. e study was performed prior
to the introduction of stapling techniques but still serves to encourage a
high index of suspicion for a leak aer a colorectal anastomosis.
IMAGING
Computerized tomography (CT), CT with rectal contrast material
(CT-RC), and a gentle water-soluble contrast enema (WSCE) are the
preferred techniques for diagnosing a leak but can fail to diagnose
it at the vital early stage. CT-RC has proved to be more sensitive in
identifying anastomotic leaks than WSCE and also permits accurate
identication of any abscess that may be amenable to percutaneous
drainage. Contrast material can be injected down the distal limb of
the ostomy to prevent further disunion of the anastomosis by injection through the rectum.
PRINCIPLES OF MANAGEMENT
e goals of any leak management strategy should be preservation
of the anastomosis, minimal morbidity and mortality, and maintenance of quality of life. ese goals can best be achieved through
448
CRP LEVELS
C-reactive protein (CRP) appears to be a very promising marker for
anastomotic leaks. CRP levels remain elevated beyond the third day
postoperatively in all patients who have had leaks. We have noticed

COMPLICATIONS 449
that the absolute value is less important than the trend. Postoperative CRP levels increase on postoperative days 1 and 2 but begin to
decrease on postoperative day 3 and onward in the vast majority of
patients who do not have a leak. If CRP levels are not declining by
postoperative day 4 or 5, further investigation may be warranted.
However, there is no level 1 evidence to prove that postoperative
serum CRP levels accurately diagnose a leak. ey are another piece
of evidence that guides the clinician and adds minimal cost to the
care of the patient.
ENDOSCOPY
Endoscopy has primarily been used to assess a radiographically
diagnosed colorectal anastomotic leak in the acute setting or prior
to takedown of a diverting ostomy. When used in conjunction with
CT-RC, endoscopy can provide additional information about the
anastomosis that is important for the subsequent management of the
leak. is information includes:
n e presence of ischemia or necrosis
n Exudate or other debris unlikely to adequately drain using per-
cutaneous methods
n Disproving a false-positive WSCE study (a false-positive rate of
up to 6.4% occurs in the setting of a side-to-end anastomosis)
n Evaluation of a suspected leak in more proximal anastomoses,
which are known to be less adequately evaluated by contrast
studies
Endoscopy has been proposed as a primary diagnostic tool to be
used routinely for the evaluation of the esophagogastric anastomosis aer esophageal resection. Patients without signs of a leak who
underwent routine endoscopy were found to have either ischemia or
a leak. Routine endoscopy did not cause an anastomotic complication
or further worsening of the existing dehiscence. A normal anastomosis on endoscopy was a reliable negative predictor for absence of
a leak. No colorectal studies have evaluated the safety and ecacy
of routine endoscopy in diagnosing an anastomotic leak, and thus
endoscopy should only be used to conrm a questionable leak seen
on imaging.
Leaks from proximal colonic anastomoses can present with
more signicant symptoms than those from a colorectal or coloanal anastomosis, including peritonitis, profound sepsis, or septic
shock. In such patients, a repeat exploration is mandatory, and the
leak can be conrmed by either direct examination or intraoperative endoscopy. A stable patient should have a CT scan with oral
contrast material to decide whether the diagnosis of an anastomotic
leak should be further pursued. It is possible for a proximal leak to
be walled o by the omentum or loops of intestine, with the possibility of an associated collection that is amenable to percutaneous
drainage and bowel rest.
VARIABLES DIRECTING MANAGEMENT
Location: Intraperitoneal versus Extraperitoneal
Patients with anastomotic leaks within the peritoneal cavity more oen
present with sepsis from diuse contamination and peritonitis than do
patients whose leaks are extraperitoneal, which is the likely explanation for higher leak-related mortality associated with right-sided colon
resections. Leaking intraperitoneal anastomoses should be resected
and reconstructed (if possible) with diversion if contamination is
severe or the interval from identication of the leak to a repeat operation is prolonged. If intestinal ischemia and an uncertain blood supply
are present, a separated ostomy and mucus stula is constructed.
Patients with distal extraperitoneal leaks may already have undergone diversion and rarely benet from a laparotomy. Fecal diversion
may be necessary if it has not already been performed. Revision of
the low pelvic anastomosis should only be attempted if the defect can
be seen and the risk of further disruption of the suture line is small.
Any established perianastomotic abscess (intraperitoneal or extraperitoneal) should be evaluated to rule out an anastomotic leak by
searching for a connection to the anastomosis. A contained intraperitoneal perianastomotic abscess can undergo successful percutaneous
drainage. Any resulting enterocutaneous stula can be managed conservatively with bowel rest or diversion as needed.
Type of Anastomosis: Ileocolic versus Colorectal/
Ileorectal
An uncontained leak from a colorectal anastomosis can be managed
by abdominal washout and proximal diversion. is management
has been shown to eectively control the sepsis aer a resection for
diverticulitis. Resection of the failed anastomosis and creation of
an end ostomy is associated with increased morbidity and a higher
risk of a permanent stoma. Repair of the anastomosis should only
be attempted if the suture line will not be compromised. e risk of
a leak aer a colorectal anastomosis increases if the site of the anastomosis is lower in the rectum (10% to 17%).
Leakage aer an ileocolic or proximal colon anastomosis occurs
infrequently (at a rate of 2% to 3%). Resection and reanastomosis for
ileocolic, colocolic, and small bowel anastomosis are as safe as diversion alone in patients undergoing staged laparotomies for secondary peritonitis. erefore, in the case of an ileocolic anastomosis, it
might be best to perform a resection and reanastomosis. e decision
to divert will be inuenced by the degree of contamination and the
blood supply of the bowel of the anastomosis. In turn, the degree of
contamination depends on the time from the leak to laparotomy. An
additional factor in the decision about whether to resect and reanastomose with a diverting loop, or to resect and exteriorize, is that operations to close an end stoma typically require a midline incision with
lysis of adhesions and carry increased morbidity (leak and mortality)
compared with a loop ileostomy takedown through a local incision.
A large anastomotic dehiscence or signicant necrosis at an ileocolic anastomosis in an unstable patient with a shortened inamed
mesentery (as a result of Crohn disease) and/or a large body habitus is an absolute indication for an end ileostomy and mucus stula.
Resection, repeat anastomosis, and loop ileostomy creation puts the
patient at risk for another leak, and thus resection and creation of an
end ileostomy and mucus stula is a better choice.
Symptoms: Sepsis versus Symptomatic versus Asymptomatic
Signs of sepsis and septic shock mandate an immediate operation
to control the infectious source because as time passes, mortality
increases. Secondary peritonitis is associated with high mortality
(20% to 60%).
e three key components to controlling the source of infection
include (1) eradicating the source, (2) thorough drainage, and (3)
preventing recurrent sepsis.
Early control of sepsis prevents multiorgan failure, and a quick but
denitive operation is the goal. Laparotomy and washout should be
the standard. Laparoscopic washout, especially if the previous operation was performed laparoscopically, can be considered, and diversion alone can eectively control the source of infection in a proximal
anastomosis. Septic shock is an indication for anastomotic resection
with creation of an end ileostomy and mucus stula. In addition, if a
column of stool is present above the leaking anastomosis, the anastomosis should be taken down and an end colostomy made to resolve
the septic shock.
Abbreviated laparotomies with either a staged damage-control
repeat laparotomy or maintenance of an open abdomen should only

ManageMent of anastoMotic Leak450
be considered if the source of sepsis cannot be controlled at the index
operation. Patients eectively treated with closed abdomens at the
rst operation do far better than when either a repeat laparotomy is
planned or the abdomen is le open. On-demand laparotomy is the
preferred approach. If a signicant improvement in overall status has
not occurred within 48 hours, a repeat laparotomy is indicated. Mortality has been shown to increase by 50% if a repeat laparotomy is
undertaken more than 48 hours aer the initial laparotomy.
Asymptomatic leaks found on imaging have been considered
benign, and treatment is not needed. Unfortunately, all leaks, with or
without symptoms, are associated with perianastomotic inammation and brosis. Despite this traditional view of asymptomatic leaks,
recent research has shown that patients with subclinical leaks from a
colorectal or coloanal anastomosis have higher incontinence scores,
poorer bowel function, and an increased number of surgical or endoscopic procedures, costing up to $3080 per patient. Early diagnosis
allows local drainage of extrarectal collection or placement of an
Endo-SPONGE (B Braun Melsungen AG, Melsungen, Germany) to
prevent the onset of brosis. Defects become less amenable to closure
and rectal dysfunction becomes permanent as time progresses.
Previously Diverted: Proximal Diverting Ostomy versus Nondiverted
Diverted leaks at extraperitoneal anastomoses are less likely to be
associated with poor function than are nondiverted anastomoses. Proximal diversion (either at the initial surgery or aer a leak)
improves healing and future function by allowing for easier and more
eective use of endoscopic treatments of the leak. Continued passage
of stool through the leaked anastomosis results in chronic inammation, with severe pelvic brosis, decreased rectal compliance,
and poor anal function. Although proximal diversion at the time of
colorectal anastomosis may not prevent leakage, it certainly changes
the impact of an anastomotic leak.
LEAK MANAGEMENT TOOLS
Anastomotic defects sometimes spontaneously heal on their own
aer a patient undergoes diversion. It is important to be sure that
any defect or cavity around a leak is completely healed before ostomy
closure to prevent recurrent pelvic sepsis. Unfortunately, not all
defects heal completely, and some require an increased amount of
time before they completely heal. Endoscopic and transanal repair
techniques can be used to expedite leak closure. Surgeries such as the
Turnbull-Cutait pull through can be used to eectively restore bowel
continuity when a low rectal anastomosis cannot be salvaged. e following discussion provides insights into the use of these techniques
to salvage the highest risk, le-sided, and low colorectal anastomosis.
ENDO-VACUUM ASSISTED CLOSURE
Endo-vacuum assisted closure (E-VAC) and endoluminal vacuum
therapy are names used to describe the use of negative pressure
wound therapy to treat anastomotic leakage from a colorectal or
coloanal anastomosis. e Endo-SPONGE, which has been available
in Europe for more than a decade, was not approved by the Food
and Drug Administration until 2012. Surgeons have also adapted the
current Wound V.A.C. (LifeCell Corp., Bridgewater, N.J.) for use as
an internal Wound V.A.C. With either product, no dressing is needed
to provide a seal because the intraluminal or intracavitary location
itself creates the needed seal. e modied Wound V.A.C. (which
henceforth will be referred to as E-VAC) is deployed both within the
wound cavity and within the lumen, with increased negative pressure
(175 mm Hg). In fact, higher pressures may be needed than those
used for external wounds because of the increased uid volume and
to prevent device migration. e black V.A.C. sponge is mounted and
secured on the trimmed nasogastric tube with nylon suture, through
both sponge and tube, and inserted into the rectum through the anus
and into the cavity of the abscess. e tube is connected to V.A.C.
suction. e anus and rectum collapse to seal the area. e sponge is
changed every 3 to 5 days.
E-VAC therapy is eective in resolving pelvic sepsis, closing
anastomotic defects and adjacent abscess cavities, and improving
outcomes compared with those achieved by other methods. Cavity
closure rates range from 56% to 100%, and restoration of intestinal
continuity is reported in 20% to 90% of patients. Removal of infected
secretions, reduction of edema, increased perfusion, and formation
of granulation tissue are accomplished. e major mechanism of
defect closure occurs through wound contraction. However, chronic
infection and inammation lead to brosis, and when present, brosis greatly decreases the amount of wound contraction and the ability
to completely close abscess cavities or anastomotic defects. is outcome was shown by Von Koperen, who was the rst to report lower
healing rates (38%) when E-VAC therapy was begun 6 weeks or more
aer the initial operation compared with higher healing rates (75%)
when it was begun prior to the 6-week period. e increased surface
area of the sponge provides more eective drainage than other types
of drains, and unlike operatively or percutaneously placed drains, it
prevents further leakage through the defect.
In proximal anastomoses, sponge placement and migration are
more of an issue. However, E-VAC therapy is also much more eective in patients with a proximal diverting ostomy, and although the
lack of diversion is not a total contraindication, patients who have
not undergone a diversion procedure can be dicult to treat. Lastly,
the decreased closure rates seen when the initiation of therapy is
delayed possibly can be rectied if E-VAC therapy is combined with
other endoscopic methods of closure such as clipping or transanal
techniques.
ENDOSCOPIC STENTS, CLIPS, AND GLUE
Covered stents facilitate complete resolution of esophageal anastomotic leaks within days to weeks. Studies show that esophageal stents
allow much earlier resumption of oral intake and signicantly shorter
hospital stays and have an 87% to 94% success rate. e principle
behind the use of stents is that they are able to eectively “bridge
the breach” and in doing so provide a scaold that allows for reapproximation of the two ends, mucosal regeneration, and prevention
of further drainage through the anastomotic defect. Only a small
number of studies, mainly composed of case series, include colorectal anastomotic leaks. Reports show varying degrees of success in
treating acute leaks, complete anastomotic disunion, and chronic
stulas. Very limited controlled evidence is available at this time.
Covered stents placed across the leaked anastomosis close the defect
and can create an undrained abscess, and thus it is necessary to place
a counter drain into the cavity of the abscess. Proximal diversion
is sometimes needed with covered stents, because stent migration
remains a signicant problem and recurrent sepsis can result from
stent migration in a patient without proximal diversion. Partially
covered stents with uncovered anges are less prone to migrate, but
tissue in-growth can make removal very dicult. A fully covered
stent can be deployed within the partially covered stent a few days
prior to removal, which allows for pressure-induced necrosis of the
mucosal ingrowth, thereby facilitating stent removal. Migration can
be prevented through the use of full-thickness sutures or endoscopic
clips placed at the ends of the stent, and larger diameter and longer
stents migrate less frequently. Stents migrate far less when traversing
a stricture, and thus a certain degree of stenosis can be helpful when
placing a stent for leaks.
More proximal anastomoses are less amenable to stenting because
of problems with device deployment and the overall larger diameter
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
