Intraoperative Colonic Lavage Research Articles

Evaluation of The Outcomes of Intra-Operative Colonic Lavage in Non-Elective Colonic Resection and Primary Anastomosis for Sigmoid Volvulus

Evaluation of The Outcomes of Intra-Operative Colonic Lavage in Non-Elective Colonic Resection and Primary Anastomosis for Sigmoid Volvulus

Surgical Infection Society Guidelines for Total Abdominal Colectomy versus Diverting Loop Ileostomy with Antegrade Intra-Colonic Lavage for the Surgical Management of Severe or Fulminant, Non-Perforated Clostridioides difficile Colitis.

Background: Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) can result in life-threatening illness requiring surgery. Surgical options for managing severe or fulminant, non-perforated C. difficile colitis include total abdominal colectomy with end ileostomy or creation of a diverting loop ileostomy with antegrade vancomycin lavage. Methods: The Surgical Infection Society's Therapeutics and Guidelines Committee convened to develop guidelines for summarizing the current SIS recommendations for total abdominal colectomy versus diverting loop ileostomy with antegrade lavage for severe or fulminant, non-perforated C. difficile colitis. PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane database were searched for pertinent studies. Severe infection was defined as laboratory diagnosis of C. difficile infection with leukocytosis (white blood cell count of ≥15,000 cells/mL) or elevated creatinine (serum creatinine level >1.5 mg/dL). Fulminant infection was defined as laboratory diagnosis of C. difficile infection with hypotension or shock, ileus, or megacolon. Perforation was defined as complete disruption of the colon wall. Total abdominal colectomy was defined as resection of the ascending, transverse, descending, and sigmoid colon with end ileostomy. For the purpose of the guideline, the terms subtotal colectomy, total abdominal colectomy, and rectal-sparing total colectomy were used interchangeably. Diverting loop ileostomy with antegrade enema was defined as creation of both a diverting loop ileostomy with intra-operative colonic lavage and post-operative antegrade vancomycin unless otherwise specified. Evaluation of the published evidence was performed using the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Using a process of iterative consensus, all committee members voted to accept or reject each recommendation. Results: We recommend that total abdominal colectomy be the procedure of choice for definitive therapy of severe or fulminant, non-perforated C. difficile colitis. In select patients, colon preservation using diverting loop ileostomy with intra-colonic vancomycin may be associated with higher rates of ostomy reversal and restoration of gastrointestinal continuity but may lead to development of recurrent C. difficile colitis. Conclusions: This guideline summarizes the current Surgical Infection Society recommendations regarding use of total abdominal colectomy versus diverting loop ileostomy with antegrade lavage for adults with severe or fulminant, non-perforated C. difficile infection.

Is colonic lavage a suitable alternative for left-sided colonic emergencies?

BACKGROUNDThe use of intra-operative colonic lavage (IOCL) with primary anastomosis remains controversial in the emergency left-sided large bowel pathologies, with alternatives including Hartmann’s procedure, manual decompression and subtotal colectomy.AIMTo compare the peri-operative outcomes of IOCL to other procedures.METHODSElectronic databases were searched for articles employing IOCL from inception till July 13, 2020. Odds ratio and weighted mean differences (WMD) were estimated for dichotomous and continuous outcomes respectively. Single-arm meta-analysis was conducted using DerSimonian and Laird random effects. RESULTSOf 28 studies were included in this meta-analysis, involving 1142 undergoing IOCL, and 634 other interventions. IOCL leads to comparable rates of wound infection when compared to Hartmann’s procedure, and anastomotic leak and wound infection when compared to manual decompression. There was a decreased length of hospital stay (WMD = -7.750; 95%CI: -13.504 to -1.996; P = 0.008) compared to manual decompression and an increased operating time. Single-arm meta-analysis found that overall mortality rates with IOCL was 4% (CI: 0.03-0.05). Rates of anastomotic leak and wound infection were 3% (CI: 0.02-0.04) and 12% (CI: 0.09-0.16) respectively.CONCLUSIONIOCL leads to similar rates of post-operative complications compared to other procedures. More extensive studies are needed to assess the outcomes of IOCL for emergency left-sided colonic surgeries.

The Use оf Intraoperative Colonic Irrigation in Surgical Treatment 
 of Obstructing Cancer of the Left Colon

Purpose. Study of technical options and immediate results of primary anastomoses using intraoperative colonic irrigation in the surgical treatment of left-sided colonic tumor obstruction.Material and methods. Of the 128 patients with left-sided colonic obstruction, 20 patients underwent surgery with intraoperative colonic lavage and the formation of a primary colonic anastomosis. The mean age was 61.7 1.4 years. In 5 patients, the compensated stage of colonic malignant obstruction was detected, in 8 patients - subcompensated, in 7 patients - decompensated. Colon icirrigation was carried out by means of antegrade jet injection of 8 -10 liters of isoosmolar solution of electrolytes and was terminated by the introduction of enterosorbent microsorb-P. In 11 cases left-sided hemicolectomy was performed in patients and in 9 cases - resection of the sigmoid colon with primary anastomosis.Results. After surgical interventions various complications were observed in 7 patients. In 2 patients afailure of anastomosis was revealed, the successful treatment of which did not require repeated surgical procedures. In the postoperative period 1 (5.0%) patient died on the 4th day after surgical intervention from cardiopulmonary insufficiency on the basis of concomitant pathology.Conclusion. In the conditions of specialized surgical hospitals after careful evaluation of operational risk with obstructing cancer of the left colon it is possible to use segmental resections of the colon with the imposition of a primary anastomosis with mandatory use of intraoperative colonic lavage . This tactic helps to increase the effectiveness of surgical interventions and provides early rehabilitation of operated patients.

Current Status of the Self-Expandable Metal Stent as a Bridge to Surgery Versus Emergency Surgery in Colorectal Cancer: Results from an Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Literature.

Background: The current use of endoscopic stenting as a bridge to surgery is not always accepted in standard clinical practice to treat neoplastic colonic obstructions. Objectives: The role of colonic self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) positioning as a bridge to resective surgery versus emergency surgery (ES) for malignant obstruction, using all new data and available variables, was studied and we focused on short- and long-term results. Materials and Methods: A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed. PubMed, SCOPUS and Web of Science databases were included. The search comprised only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the interventions that included SEMS positioning versus ES. The primary outcomes were the rates of overall postoperative mortality, clinical and technical success. The secondary outcomes were the short- and long-term results. Results: A total of 12 studies were eligible for further analyses. A laparoscopic colectomy was the most common operation performed in the SEMS group, whereas the traditional open approach was commonly used in the ES group. Intraoperative colonic lavage was seldomly performed during ES. There were no differences in mortality rates between the two groups (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.04; I2 = 0%). In the SEMS group, the rate of successful primary anastomosis was significantly higher in of SEMS (69.75%) than in the ES (55.07%) (RR 1.26, 95% 245 CI 1.01 to 1.57; I2 = 86%). Conversely, the upfront Hartmann procedure was performed more frequently in the ES (39.1%) as compared to the SEMS group (23.4%) (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.85; I2 = 23%). The overall postoperative complications rate was significantly lower in the SEMS group (32.74%) than in the ES group (48.25%) (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.91; I2 = 65%). Conclusions: In the presence of malignant colorectal obstruction, SEMS is safe and associated with the same mortality and significantly lower morbidity than the ES group. The rate of successful primary anastomosis was significantly higher than the ES group. Nevertheless, recurrence and survival outcomes are not significantly different between the two groups. The analysis of short- and long-term results can suggest the use of SEMS as a bridge to resective surgery when it is performed by an endoscopist with adequate expertise in both colonoscopy and fluoroscopic techniques and who performed commonly colonic stenting.

Colon cancer with perforation.

Perforation of the colon is a rare complication for patients with colon cancer and usually requires emergent surgery. The characteristics of perforation differ based on the site of perforation, presenting as either perforation at the cancer site or perforation proximal to the cancer site. Peritonitis due to perforation tends to be more severe in cases of perforation proximal to the cancer site; however, the difference in the outcome between the two types remains unclear. Surgical treatment of colon cancer with perforation has changed over time. Recently, many reports have shown the safety and effectiveness of single-stage operation consisting of resection and primary anastomosis with intraoperative colonic lavage. Under certain conditions, laparoscopic surgery can be feasible and help minimize the invasion. However, emergent surgery for colon cancer with perforation is associated with a high rate of mortality and morbidity. The long-term prognosis seems to have no association with the existence of perforation. Oncologically curative resection may be warranted for perforated colon cancer. In this report, we perform a literature review and investigate the characteristics and surgical strategy for colon cancer with perforation.

Reviewing the Management of Obstructive Left Colon Cancer: Assessing the Feasibility of the One-stage Resection and Anastomosis After Intraoperative Colonic Irrigation

BackgroundThe management of obstructive left colon cancer (OLCC) remains debatable with the single-stage procedure of primary colonic anastomosis after cancer resection and on-table intracolonic lavage now being supported. Patients and MethodsPatients with acute OLCC who were admitted between January 2008 and January 2015 were distributed into 5 different groups. Group ICI underwent emergency laparotomy for primary anastomosis following colonic resection and intraoperative colonic lavage; Group HP underwent emergency Hartmann's Procedure; Group CON consisted of patients treated by conservative management with subsequent elective open cancer resection; Group COL were colostomy patients; and Group INT consisted of patients who had interventional radiology followed by open elective colon cancer resection. The demographics of the patients and comorbidity, intraoperative data, and postoperative data were collected, with P < .05 as significant. ResultsThere were 4 deaths in 138 cases (2.90%). There was only 1 patient who had anastomotic leakage (5.56%) in Group ICI, compared with none in Group HP and Group COL, 1 case in Group INT (7.69%), and 2 cases in Group CON (6.06%) (P > .05). Group INT and Group CON, when compared to the three surgical groups, Groups ICI, Group COL, and Group HP, individually, were statistically significant for the duration of surgery (P < .05). ConclusionsPrimary anastomosis following colonic resection after irrigation can be safely performed in selected patients, with the necessary surgical expertise, with no increased risk in mortality, anastomotic leakage, and other postoperative complications.

Diagnostic program and tactical approaches to treatment of patients with obturative colonic obstruction of tumor genesis

Aim. To determine the value of ultrasound investigations, colonoscopy and laparoscopy in the complex diagnosis of acute obturative colonic obstruction of tumor genesis and in selecting the optimal treatment strategy. Methods. Conducted was an anlysis of results of treatment of 112 patients with obturative colonic obstruction of tumor genesis. A set of diagnostic procedures was carried out for every admitted patient: digital rectal examination, radiography of the abdomen, ultrasound examination, fiber colonoscopy, and laboratory studies. Results. Based on the clinical and radiographic the diagnosis of obturative colonic obstruction was established in 64.3%, ultrasound investigation revealed the presence of bowel obstruction without specifying its location in 92% of the cases. Emergency colonoscopy was informative only in 55.5% of cases due to inadequate prior preparation of the colon. Using the developed methodology of preparing the colon, it was possible to perform colonoscopy up to the level of the tumor in 26 patients (92.9%) out of 28 patients. In the 32 cases minimal surgical intervention were performed by way of formation of an ileotransverse anastomosis by-pass, double-barreled ileostomy or colostomy. 80 patients underwent resection of the bowel with the tumor, including operations with the formation of a primary anastomosis, which were performed in 20 patients when the tumor was located in the right segments of the colon. In 22 patients an intraoperative colonic lavage was performed. Postoperative complications were recorded in 30 (26.8%) patients. Postoperative mortality was 24.1% (27 patients). Conclusion. Based on the radiographic and ultrasound investigations of the abdominal cavity it is possible to establish the presence of bowel obstruction without specifying the localization of the obstruction zone; in order to determine the cause of the obturative colonic obstruction it is necessary to perform an emergency colonoscopy with rigorous preparation of the colon according to the developed technique, while the volume of surgical intervention should be determined in each case individually.

Diverting Loop Ileostomy and Colonic Lavage

To determine whether a minimally invasive, colon-preserving approach could serve as an alternative to total colectomy in the treatment of severe, complicated Clostridium difficile-associated disease (CDAD). C. difficile is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Most cases will respond to antibiotic therapy, but 3% to 10% of patients progress to a severe, complicated, or "fulminant" state of life-threatening systemic toxicity. Although the advocated surgical treatment of total abdominal colectomy with end ileostomy improves survival in severe, complicated CDAD, outcomes remain poor with associated mortality rates ranging from 35% to 80%. All patients who were diagnosed with severe, complicated ("fulminant") CDAD and were treated at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center or VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System between June 2009 and January 2011 were treated with this novel approach. The surgical approach involved creation of a loop ileostomy, intraoperative colonic lavage with warmed polyethylene glycol 3350/electrolyte solution via the ileostomy and postoperative antegrade instillation of vancomycin flushes via the ileostomy. The primary end point for the study was resolution of CDAD. The matching number of patients treated with colectomy for CDAD preceding the initiation of this current treatment strategy was analyzed for historical comparison. Forty-two patients were treated during this time period. There was no significant difference in age, sex, pharmacologic immunosuppression, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-II scores between our current cohort and historical controls. The operation was accomplished laparoscopically in 35 patients (83%). This treatment strategy resulted in reduced mortality compared to our historical population (19% vs 50%; odds ratio, 0.24; P = 0.006). Preservation of the colon was achieved in 39 of 42 patients (93%). Loop ileostomy and colonic lavage are an alternative to colectomy in the treatment of severe, complicated CDAD resulting in reduced morbidity and preservation of the colon.

Prospective, Controlled, Randomized Study of Intraoperative Colonic Lavage Versus Stent Placement in Obstructive Left‐sided Colonic Cancer

The main aim of this study was to compare short-term results and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent intraoperative colonic lavage (IOCL) with primary anastomosis with those who had stent placement prior to scheduled surgery for obstructive left-sided colonic cancer (OLCC). We conducted a prospective, controlled, randomized study of patients diagnosed with OLCC. Patients were divided into two groups: stent and deferred surgery (group 1) and emergency IOCL (group 2). Demographic variables, risk prediction models, postoperative morbidity and mortality, staging, complications due to stent placement, surgical time, clinical follow-up, health costs, and follow-up of survival were recorded. Twenty-eight patients (15 group 1 and 13 group 1) were enrolled. The study was suspended upon detecting excess morbidity in group 2. The two groups were homogeneous in clinical and demographic terms. Overall morbidity in group 1 was 2/15 (13.3%) compared with 7/13 (53.8%) in group 2 (p = 0.042). None of the 15 patients in group 1 presented anastomotic dehiscence compared with 4/13 (30.7%) in group 2 (p = 0.035). Surgical site infection was detected in 2 (13.3%) patients in group 1 and in 6 (46.1%) in group 2 (p = 0.096). Postoperative stay was 8 days (IQR 3, group 1) and 10 days (IQR 10, group 2) (p = 0.05). The mean follow-up period was 37.6 months (SD = 16.08) with no differences in survival between the groups. In our setting, the use of a stent and scheduled surgery is safer than IOCL and is associated with lower morbidity, shorter hospital stay, and equally good long-term survival.

Comparison of One-Stage Managements of Obstructing Left-Sided Colon and Rectal Cancer: Stent-Laparoscopic Approach vs. Intraoperative Colonic Lavage

PurposeWe evaluated the operative outcomes of laparoscopic surgery following self-expandable metallic stent compared to one-stage emergency surgical treatment. MethodsFrom April 1996 to October 2007, 95 consecutive patients with left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction were enrolled. Twenty-five patients were assigned to the preoperative stenting and elective laparoscopic surgical treatment group (SLAP) and 70 to the emergency open surgery with intraoperative colon lavage group (OLAV). ResultsAmong the 25 patients in the SLAP group, a primary anastomosis was possible in all patients and a diverting stoma was needed in one patient. The operative time was shorter in the SLAP group (198.53 vs. 262.17 min, P = 0.002). Tumor size, number of retrieved lymph nodes, and pathological stage were similar in both groups. The rate of anastomotic failure was similar and postoperative complications occurred less in the SLAP group (5.9% vs. 31.4%, P = 0.034). The passage of flatus and oral intake were resumed earlier in the SLAP group (2.88 vs. 3.68 days, P = 0.046 and 5.18 vs. 6.65 days, P < 0.001, respectively). The postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the SLAP group (10 vs. 15.4 days, P = 0.013). ConclusionsIn patients with left-sided malignant colon and rectal obstruction, laparoscopic surgery after SEMS could be safely performed with successful early postoperative outcomes.

Pilot study on one-stage colonic resection without lavage in obstructed left colon in children in an emergency setting

Classically, left-sided colon obstruction is managed by a multi-staged resection and defunctioning colostomy. The purpose of this study was to examine the feasibility of single-stage resection and anastomosis without intraoperative colonic lavage for acute left-sided colonic obstruction in children. Between October 2000 and May 2006, nine consecutive patients who had a one-stage left-sided colon resection without preceding colonic lavage were evaluated. The main outcome measures were anastomotic leakage, wound infection and death. There were nine patients: six were males and three were females (M:F = 2:1). Their ages ranged from 2-10 years (mean age 6 years). The obstruction was due to irreducible colo-colic intussusceptions in two patients and colo-colic intussusceptions with colonic perforation in four patients, and colo-colic intussusceptions with gangrene in three. All the patients had resection and primary anastomosis without on-table colonic lavage. There were no anastomotic leakages or deaths. Postoperative complications included superficial wound infections in two patients and dry cough in four other patients. Three patients were lost to follow up after 3 years of follow up, but the remaining six are presently doing well. Primary anastomosis without colonic lavage is safe for resection of the left colon in children in an emergency setting.

One stage procedure in the management of acute sigmoid volvulus without colonic lavage

There is a growing acceptance of one-stage primary resection and anastomosis of left-sided colon obstruction with on-table antegrade colonic lavage to reduce the risk of post-operative infectious complications and anastomotic dehiscence. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety of single-stage resection and anastomosis for acute left-sided colonic obstruction due to acute sigmoid volvulus, without intraoperative colonic lavage, in a consecutive series of patients admitted to our department. Emergency resection of acute sigmoid volvulus was performed by an experienced senior surgeon (consultant grade). This was followed by primary anastomosis without on-table colonic lavage after a manual decompression. A total of 21 patients underwent bowel decompression, resection and primary colorectal anastomosis. Two of the patients who had ileosigmoid knotting and gangrenous bowel had double resection with primary ileoileal and colorectal anastomosis. There were two superficial wound infections. No death or clinical anastomotic failure were recorded in this series. The mean hospital stay was 10.3 days. Our results suggest that resection of acute sigmoid volvulus and primary anastomosis after decompression alone can be carried out safely in reasonably fit patients.

Anastomotic Leakage after Elective Right Versus Left Colectomy for Cancer: Prevalence and Independent Risk Factors

Anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery remains a major challenge because of its early and late consequences. To determine whether prevalence and risk factors for anastomotic leakage (AL) differed between right and left elective colectomy for cancer, we conducted univariate and multivariate analyses and compared 33 variables (15 preoperative, 18 intraoperative) culled prospectively for 520 right and 1,230 left colectomies, followed by immediate anastomosis in 1,750 adult patients with or without AL. The overall AL rate was 4% (71 of 1,750) and was significantly lower (p < 0.0001) for right (7 of 520=1.35%) than for left colectomy (64 of 1,230=5.20%). Overall mortality was 4.1% (68 of 1,750), and was not statistically different (p=0.50) between right (4.6%, 24 of 520) and left (3.6%, 44 of 1,230)) colectomy. In right colectomy, differences in associated mortality rates with (14.3%, 1 of 7) and without (4.5%, 23 of 513) AL were not statistically significant (p=0.28), but in left colectomy, associated mortality was statistically significantly higher (p < 0.006) with AL (10.9%, 7 of 64) than without it (3.2%, 37 of 1,166). Independent risk factors for AL were preoperative in right colectomy: loss of weight (> 10%), odds ratio (OR)=5.62, with 95% CI 1.06 to 29.8; and intraoperative in left colectomy: palliative resection (OR=2.12; 95% CI 1.06 to 4.23), "poor" colonic cleanliness (OR=2.4; 95% CI 1.34 to 4.28), proximal colorectal anastomosis (OR=1.34; 95% CI 1 to 1.8), and distal colorectal anastomosis (OR=3.91; 95% CI 1.64 to 9.81). In right colectomy for cancer, preoperative nutritive support leading to regain of lost weight could reduce postoperative morbidity. Concerning left colectomy, if colonic cleanliness is poor, intraoperative colonic lavage should be done. When poor colonic cleanliness is associated with palliative resection and low distal rectal anastomosis, a protective stoma should be considered.

Transanal endoscopic tube decompression of acute colonic obstruction: experience with 51 cases

Acute colorectal obstruction is a potentially life-threatening emergency that requires immediate surgical treatment. To avoid major postoperative complications, most surgeons advocate two-step surgery despite the increase in patient discomfort and cost. Various methods for performing one-step surgery have been reported including intraoperative colonic lavage, decompression with self-expandable metal stents, and transanal tube decompression. The authors present their experience performing transanal colonic decompression for 51 patients. Endoscopic tube placement was successful for 43 (84%) of the 51 patients. The emergency clinical situation could be converted to semielective treatment in 37 cases (73%) (30 operations and 6 nonoperative interventions), and to an elective operation in 1 case. After successful colonic decompression, the rate of one-stage operations was 93% (28/30), as compared with 40% (4/10) if the decompression failed. Endoscopic tube decompression of acute colonic obstruction is an easy and cost-effective possibility for avoiding emergency operations with all their sequelae. Emergency surgery can be converted to semielective or elective surgery, markedly reducing the rate of staged operations.

Resection and primary anastomosis in acute complicated diverticulitis, a systematic review of the literature

To determine the safety and feasibility of primary resection and anastomosis with or without a diverting stoma, as compared to Hartmann's procedure, for patients with acute complicated sigmoid diverticulitis. MEDLINE was searched for studies and trials conducted between 1966 and December 2003. This search revealed trials comparing primary resection and anastomosis to Hartmann's procedure. The term "diverticulitis, colonic" with the sub-heading "surgery" was used and the search was limited to human studies and clinical trials. Additional studies were found using the MeSH terms: "surgical procedures, operative", "surgical anastomosis", and "Hartmann procedure", combined with the term "diverticulitis, colonic". The author also searched EMBASE and the Cochrane database for clinical trials using similar terminology. No language restrictions were applied. Eighteen studies met the inclusion criteria and reported 884 patients with acute complicated diverticulitis. None of these studies were randomised; it is likely that there was a significant degree of selection bias. No significant differences were found between primary resection with anastomosis and Hartmann's procedure with respect to mortality, morbidity, sepsis, wound complications and duration of procedure and anti-biotic treatment. Some studies found that primary anastomosis and a protecting stoma, with or without intra-operative colonic lavage, have more favourable results than Hartmann's procedure. This review suggests that surgical resection and primary anastomosis in acute diverticulitis with peritonitis compares favourably with Hartmann's procedure in terms of peri-operative complications. The need for revision of Hartmann's procedure could be subsequently avoided. Some articles showed that patients with severe peritonitis, who had a diverting stoma, in the setting of resection and primary anastomosis, had the lowest complication rate. However, the quality of these studies was poor with the presence of selection bias.

Role of intraoperative prograde colonic lavage and a decompressive loop ileostomy in the management of transmural amoebic colitis

A prospective analysis is presented of a selected group of 45 consecutive patients with transmural amoebic colitis treated by laparotomy, colonic lavage and ileostomy (phase 1 surgery) over 3 years. The diagnosis of amoebic colitis and amoebic perforation of the bowel were difficult and therefore all patients with 'acute abdomen' had proctosigmoidoscopy and a trial of metronidazole for 24-48 h before laparotomy. At laparotomy, adhesive wraps were present in all patients; 13 perforations were exposed by inadvertent disturbance of adhesive wraps but were successfully closed by suture to any available organ in close proximity, such as the omentum or small bowel. Four patients (9 per cent) died after phase 1 surgery. After 6 weeks when the acute disease had healed, 33 of the remaining 41 patients (80 per cent) required closure of ileostomy only, five had resection of stricture and three (7 per cent) needed stricturoplasty (phase 2 surgery). Two patients (5 per cent) died after phase 2 surgery. Thus, in surgery for transmural amoebic colitis adhesive wraps should not be disturbed as they mechanically protect the peritoneal cavity from faecal soiling when perforation occurs. The colon should be emptied by lavage and the faecal stream diverted to avoid secondary bacterial effects.

Enhanced intra-anastomotic healing by operative lavage with nutrient solutions in experimental left-sided colonic obstruction.

The influence of intraoperative lavage with various solutions was tested on the healing of experimental colonic anastomoses performed in the presence of obstruction. After 24 h of ligature obstruction to the pelvic colon, male Wistar rats (n = 108) underwent colonic resection and primary anastomosis, using lavage with one of four different fluids: saline, povidone-iodine, 10 per cent hypertonic glucose and short-chain fatty acids (SCFA). Controls had no lavage. The anastomotic segment was excised and studied after 3 or 6 days. At day 3, mean(s.d.) bursting pressure was significantly greater in animals receiving SCFA compared with controls (81.2(23.0) mmHg versus 34.8(34.0) mmHg). Mean(s.d.) bowel wall tension was higher in rats with SCFA (30.6(8.1) N/m x 10(-4) or hypertonic glucose (29.5(10.1) N/m x 10(-4) compared with controls (12.2(12.1) N/m x 10(-4). By day 6, the anastomosis was more resistant to intraluminal pressure in each lavage group; mean(s.d.) hydroxyproline concentration at the anastomosis was greater in rats with SCFA (12.4(1.5) micrograms/mg) or hypertonic glucose (11.6(2.9) micrograms/mg) than in controls (8.9(1.5) micrograms/mg). Anastomotic healing is improved by all types of intraoperative colonic lavage, particularly with SCFA and hypertonic glucose solutions.

One‐stage resection without colonic lavage in emergency surgery of the left colon

Intra-operative colonic lavage is a widespread procedure introduced to decompress and clean the colon of its faecal load during emergency surgery of the left colon in order to perform a safe anastomosis. This type of lavage is never performed at our institution. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and acceptability of emergency left-sided colectomy without colonic lavage in a consecutive series of patients admitted at our department for perforation and obstruction of the left colon. All 44 patients (29 with obstruction and 15 with perforation) on whom a one-stage left-sided colon resection was performed without colonic lavage between January 1998 and June 2004 were evaluated in a retrospective review. During this period all patients with acute disease of the left colon underwent a one stage resection without colonic lavage. The only exclusion criteria for anastomosis were: haemodynamic instability, ASA > 3, unresectable tumour. Death, anastomotic leakage and wound infection were main outcome measures. The leak rate was 4.5% and mortality 2.3% due to one case of postoperative myocardial infarction. A 16% morbidity rate was recorded due to 4 wound infections and 3 minor complications. The procedure is safe. The low morbidity and mortality of one stage resection without colonic lavage can justify future prospective studies enrolling a large number of patients to compare its results with those obtained by one stage resection with colonic lavage.

Intraoperative colonic lavage in emergency surgical treatment of left-sided large bowel lesions

There has been a trend towards resection and primary anastomosis after on-table lavage in patients with left sided colonic emergencies. This study will analyse the outcome in our centre. Thirty-two patients underwent the operation for various lesions of the left colon and the rectum between December 1998 and December 2002. The mean age of the patients was 37.7+/-11.1 years. Mean extra time for the procedure was 37.4+/-5.2 min. The mean hospital stay was 11.2+/-2.9 days. Postoperative complications included four cases (12.5%) of wound infection, and one (3.1%) right sub-phrenic abscess. No clinical anastomotic leakage or mortality was recorded. This study shows that primary anastomosis with on-table colonic lavage can be a safe procedure in selected, low risk patients.