Cargando…

Management of Colorectal Trauma

Although the treatment strategy for colorectal trauma has advanced during the last part of the twentieth century and the result has improved, compared to other injuries, problems, such as high septic complication rates and mortality rates, still exist, so standard management for colorectal trauma is...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Choi, Won Jun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Society of Coloproctology 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3180596/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21980586
http://dx.doi.org/10.3393/jksc.2011.27.4.166
_version_ 1782212660295630848
author Choi, Won Jun
author_facet Choi, Won Jun
author_sort Choi, Won Jun
collection PubMed
description Although the treatment strategy for colorectal trauma has advanced during the last part of the twentieth century and the result has improved, compared to other injuries, problems, such as high septic complication rates and mortality rates, still exist, so standard management for colorectal trauma is still a controversial issue. For that reason, we designed this article to address current recommendations for management of colorectal injuries based on a review of literature. According to the reviewed data, although sufficient evidence exists for primary repair being the treatment of choice in most cases of nondestructive colon injuries, many surgeons are still concerned about anastomotic leakage or failure, and prefer to perform a diverting colostomy. Recently, some reports have shown that primary repair or resection and anastomosis, is better than a diverting colostomy even in cases of destructive colon injuries, but it has not fully established as the standard treatment. The same guideline as that for colonic injury is applied in cases of intraperitoneal rectal injuries, and, diversion, primary repair, and presacral drainage are regarded as the standards for the management of extraperitoneal rectal injuries. However, some reports state that primary repair without a diverting colostomy has benefit in the treatment of extraperitoneal rectal injury, and presacral drainage is still controversial. In conclusion, ideally an individual management strategy would be developed for each patient suffering from colorectal injury. To do this, an evidence-based treatment plan should be carefully developed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3180596
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher The Korean Society of Coloproctology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31805962011-10-06 Management of Colorectal Trauma Choi, Won Jun J Korean Soc Coloproctol Review Although the treatment strategy for colorectal trauma has advanced during the last part of the twentieth century and the result has improved, compared to other injuries, problems, such as high septic complication rates and mortality rates, still exist, so standard management for colorectal trauma is still a controversial issue. For that reason, we designed this article to address current recommendations for management of colorectal injuries based on a review of literature. According to the reviewed data, although sufficient evidence exists for primary repair being the treatment of choice in most cases of nondestructive colon injuries, many surgeons are still concerned about anastomotic leakage or failure, and prefer to perform a diverting colostomy. Recently, some reports have shown that primary repair or resection and anastomosis, is better than a diverting colostomy even in cases of destructive colon injuries, but it has not fully established as the standard treatment. The same guideline as that for colonic injury is applied in cases of intraperitoneal rectal injuries, and, diversion, primary repair, and presacral drainage are regarded as the standards for the management of extraperitoneal rectal injuries. However, some reports state that primary repair without a diverting colostomy has benefit in the treatment of extraperitoneal rectal injury, and presacral drainage is still controversial. In conclusion, ideally an individual management strategy would be developed for each patient suffering from colorectal injury. To do this, an evidence-based treatment plan should be carefully developed. The Korean Society of Coloproctology 2011-08 2011-08-31 /pmc/articles/PMC3180596/ /pubmed/21980586 http://dx.doi.org/10.3393/jksc.2011.27.4.166 Text en © 2011 The Korean Society of Coloproctology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review
Choi, Won Jun
Management of Colorectal Trauma
title Management of Colorectal Trauma
title_full Management of Colorectal Trauma
title_fullStr Management of Colorectal Trauma
title_full_unstemmed Management of Colorectal Trauma
title_short Management of Colorectal Trauma
title_sort management of colorectal trauma
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3180596/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21980586
http://dx.doi.org/10.3393/jksc.2011.27.4.166
work_keys_str_mv AT choiwonjun managementofcolorectaltrauma