Cargando…

Surgical management of rectal foreign bodies: A single-center experience

BACKGROUND: Rectal foreign bodies (RFBs) are one of the rare clinical presentations in colorectal surgical practice, with an increasing incidence over the recent years. Due to the lack of standardized treatment options, the management of RFBs can be challenging. This study aimed to evaluate our diag...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bisgin, Tayfun, Sogucak, Seçkin, Manoğlu, Berke, Derici, Zekai Serhan, Atila, Koray, Sokmen, Selman
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Kare Publishing 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10225831/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36880626
http://dx.doi.org/10.14744/tjtes.2022.62543
_version_ 1785050459262681088
author Bisgin, Tayfun
Sogucak, Seçkin
Manoğlu, Berke
Derici, Zekai Serhan
Atila, Koray
Sokmen, Selman
author_facet Bisgin, Tayfun
Sogucak, Seçkin
Manoğlu, Berke
Derici, Zekai Serhan
Atila, Koray
Sokmen, Selman
author_sort Bisgin, Tayfun
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Rectal foreign bodies (RFBs) are one of the rare clinical presentations in colorectal surgical practice, with an increasing incidence over the recent years. Due to the lack of standardized treatment options, the management of RFBs can be challenging. This study aimed to evaluate our diagnostic and therapeutic approach to RFBs and to suggest a management algorithm. METHODS: All patients with RFBs who hospitalized between January 2010 and December 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, RFB insertion mechanism, inserted objects, diagnostic findings, management, complications, and outcomes were all evaluated. An algorithm for clinical management was developed depending on the center’s experience. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 21 patients, 17 (81%) were males. The median age was 33 years (ranging, 19–71). Sexual preferences were the reason for RFB in 15 (71.4%) patients. In 17 (81%) patients, the RFB size over 10 cm. In 4 (19%) patients, RFBs were removed transanally without anesthesia in the emergency department; in the remaining 17 (81%), they were removed under anesthesia. Among these, RFBs were removed transanally under general anesthesia in 2 (9.5%) patients; with the assistance of a colonoscope under anesthesia in 8 (38%) patients; by milking towards the transanal route during laparotomy in 3 (14.2%) patients; and with the Hartmann procedure without restoration of bowel continuity in 4 (19%) patients. The median hospital stay was 6 days (ranging, 1–34 days). The Clavien-Dindo grade III-IV complication rate was 9.5%, and no post-operative mortality was observed. CONCLUSION: RFBs can usually be successfully removed transanally in the operating room with appropriate anesthetic technique and proper surgical instrument selection.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10225831
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Kare Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102258312023-06-02 Surgical management of rectal foreign bodies: A single-center experience Bisgin, Tayfun Sogucak, Seçkin Manoğlu, Berke Derici, Zekai Serhan Atila, Koray Sokmen, Selman Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg Original Article BACKGROUND: Rectal foreign bodies (RFBs) are one of the rare clinical presentations in colorectal surgical practice, with an increasing incidence over the recent years. Due to the lack of standardized treatment options, the management of RFBs can be challenging. This study aimed to evaluate our diagnostic and therapeutic approach to RFBs and to suggest a management algorithm. METHODS: All patients with RFBs who hospitalized between January 2010 and December 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, RFB insertion mechanism, inserted objects, diagnostic findings, management, complications, and outcomes were all evaluated. An algorithm for clinical management was developed depending on the center’s experience. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 21 patients, 17 (81%) were males. The median age was 33 years (ranging, 19–71). Sexual preferences were the reason for RFB in 15 (71.4%) patients. In 17 (81%) patients, the RFB size over 10 cm. In 4 (19%) patients, RFBs were removed transanally without anesthesia in the emergency department; in the remaining 17 (81%), they were removed under anesthesia. Among these, RFBs were removed transanally under general anesthesia in 2 (9.5%) patients; with the assistance of a colonoscope under anesthesia in 8 (38%) patients; by milking towards the transanal route during laparotomy in 3 (14.2%) patients; and with the Hartmann procedure without restoration of bowel continuity in 4 (19%) patients. The median hospital stay was 6 days (ranging, 1–34 days). The Clavien-Dindo grade III-IV complication rate was 9.5%, and no post-operative mortality was observed. CONCLUSION: RFBs can usually be successfully removed transanally in the operating room with appropriate anesthetic technique and proper surgical instrument selection. Kare Publishing 2023-03-01 /pmc/articles/PMC10225831/ /pubmed/36880626 http://dx.doi.org/10.14744/tjtes.2022.62543 Text en Copyright © 2023 Turkish Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
spellingShingle Original Article
Bisgin, Tayfun
Sogucak, Seçkin
Manoğlu, Berke
Derici, Zekai Serhan
Atila, Koray
Sokmen, Selman
Surgical management of rectal foreign bodies: A single-center experience
title Surgical management of rectal foreign bodies: A single-center experience
title_full Surgical management of rectal foreign bodies: A single-center experience
title_fullStr Surgical management of rectal foreign bodies: A single-center experience
title_full_unstemmed Surgical management of rectal foreign bodies: A single-center experience
title_short Surgical management of rectal foreign bodies: A single-center experience
title_sort surgical management of rectal foreign bodies: a single-center experience
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10225831/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36880626
http://dx.doi.org/10.14744/tjtes.2022.62543
work_keys_str_mv AT bisgintayfun surgicalmanagementofrectalforeignbodiesasinglecenterexperience
AT sogucakseckin surgicalmanagementofrectalforeignbodiesasinglecenterexperience
AT manogluberke surgicalmanagementofrectalforeignbodiesasinglecenterexperience
AT dericizekaiserhan surgicalmanagementofrectalforeignbodiesasinglecenterexperience
AT atilakoray surgicalmanagementofrectalforeignbodiesasinglecenterexperience
AT sokmenselman surgicalmanagementofrectalforeignbodiesasinglecenterexperience