Cargando…

A comparative multicentre study evaluating gluteal turnover flap for wound closure after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare perineal wound healing between gluteal turnover flap and primary closure in patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection (APR) for rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients who underwent APR for primary or recurrent rectal cancer with gluteal turnover flap i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sharabiany, S., van Dam, J. J. W., Sparenberg, S., Blok, R. D., Singh, B., Chaudhri, S., Runau, F., van Geloven, A. A. W., van de Ven, A. W. H., Lapid, O., Hompes, R., Tanis, P. J., Musters, G. D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8419133/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34263363
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10151-021-02496-7
_version_ 1783748685784416256
author Sharabiany, S.
van Dam, J. J. W.
Sparenberg, S.
Blok, R. D.
Singh, B.
Chaudhri, S.
Runau, F.
van Geloven, A. A. W.
van de Ven, A. W. H.
Lapid, O.
Hompes, R.
Tanis, P. J.
Musters, G. D.
author_facet Sharabiany, S.
van Dam, J. J. W.
Sparenberg, S.
Blok, R. D.
Singh, B.
Chaudhri, S.
Runau, F.
van Geloven, A. A. W.
van de Ven, A. W. H.
Lapid, O.
Hompes, R.
Tanis, P. J.
Musters, G. D.
author_sort Sharabiany, S.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare perineal wound healing between gluteal turnover flap and primary closure in patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection (APR) for rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients who underwent APR for primary or recurrent rectal cancer with gluteal turnover flap in two university hospitals (2016–2021) were compared to a multicentre cohort of primary closure (2000–2017). The primary endpoint was uncomplicated perineal wound healing within 30 days. Secondary endpoints were long-term wound healing, related re-interventions, and perineal herniation. The perineal hernia rate was assessed using Kaplan Meier analysis. RESULTS: Twenty–five patients had a gluteal turnover flap and 194 had primary closure. The uncomplicated perineal wound-healing rate within 30 days was 68% (17/25) after gluteal turnover flap versus 64% (124/194) after primary closure, OR 2.246; 95% CI 0.734–6.876; p = 0.156 in multivariable analysis. No major wound complications requiring surgical re-intervention occurred after flap closure. Eighteen patients with gluteal turnover flap completed 12-month follow-up, and none of them had chronic perineal sinus, compared to 6% (11/173) after primary closure (p = 0.604). The symptomatic 18-month perineal hernia rate after flap closure was 0%, compared to 9% after primary closure (p = 0.184). CONCLUSIONS: The uncomplicated perineal wound-healing rate after the gluteal turnover flap and primary closure after APR is similar, and no chronic perineal sinus or perineal hernia occurred after flap closure. Future studies have to confirm potential benefits of the gluteal turnover flap.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8419133
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84191332021-09-22 A comparative multicentre study evaluating gluteal turnover flap for wound closure after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer Sharabiany, S. van Dam, J. J. W. Sparenberg, S. Blok, R. D. Singh, B. Chaudhri, S. Runau, F. van Geloven, A. A. W. van de Ven, A. W. H. Lapid, O. Hompes, R. Tanis, P. J. Musters, G. D. Tech Coloproctol Original Article BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare perineal wound healing between gluteal turnover flap and primary closure in patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection (APR) for rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients who underwent APR for primary or recurrent rectal cancer with gluteal turnover flap in two university hospitals (2016–2021) were compared to a multicentre cohort of primary closure (2000–2017). The primary endpoint was uncomplicated perineal wound healing within 30 days. Secondary endpoints were long-term wound healing, related re-interventions, and perineal herniation. The perineal hernia rate was assessed using Kaplan Meier analysis. RESULTS: Twenty–five patients had a gluteal turnover flap and 194 had primary closure. The uncomplicated perineal wound-healing rate within 30 days was 68% (17/25) after gluteal turnover flap versus 64% (124/194) after primary closure, OR 2.246; 95% CI 0.734–6.876; p = 0.156 in multivariable analysis. No major wound complications requiring surgical re-intervention occurred after flap closure. Eighteen patients with gluteal turnover flap completed 12-month follow-up, and none of them had chronic perineal sinus, compared to 6% (11/173) after primary closure (p = 0.604). The symptomatic 18-month perineal hernia rate after flap closure was 0%, compared to 9% after primary closure (p = 0.184). CONCLUSIONS: The uncomplicated perineal wound-healing rate after the gluteal turnover flap and primary closure after APR is similar, and no chronic perineal sinus or perineal hernia occurred after flap closure. Future studies have to confirm potential benefits of the gluteal turnover flap. Springer International Publishing 2021-07-14 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8419133/ /pubmed/34263363 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10151-021-02496-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Sharabiany, S.
van Dam, J. J. W.
Sparenberg, S.
Blok, R. D.
Singh, B.
Chaudhri, S.
Runau, F.
van Geloven, A. A. W.
van de Ven, A. W. H.
Lapid, O.
Hompes, R.
Tanis, P. J.
Musters, G. D.
A comparative multicentre study evaluating gluteal turnover flap for wound closure after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer
title A comparative multicentre study evaluating gluteal turnover flap for wound closure after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer
title_full A comparative multicentre study evaluating gluteal turnover flap for wound closure after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer
title_fullStr A comparative multicentre study evaluating gluteal turnover flap for wound closure after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer
title_full_unstemmed A comparative multicentre study evaluating gluteal turnover flap for wound closure after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer
title_short A comparative multicentre study evaluating gluteal turnover flap for wound closure after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer
title_sort comparative multicentre study evaluating gluteal turnover flap for wound closure after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8419133/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34263363
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10151-021-02496-7
work_keys_str_mv AT sharabianys acomparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT vandamjjw acomparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT sparenbergs acomparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT blokrd acomparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT singhb acomparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT chaudhris acomparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT runauf acomparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT vangelovenaaw acomparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT vandevenawh acomparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT lapido acomparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT hompesr acomparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT tanispj acomparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT mustersgd acomparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT sharabianys comparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT vandamjjw comparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT sparenbergs comparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT blokrd comparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT singhb comparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT chaudhris comparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT runauf comparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT vangelovenaaw comparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT vandevenawh comparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT lapido comparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT hompesr comparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT tanispj comparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer
AT mustersgd comparativemulticentrestudyevaluatingglutealturnoverflapforwoundclosureafterabdominoperinealresectionforrectalcancer