Annals of Coloproctology

Original Article

Transanal Tube Drainage as a Conservative Treatment for Anastomotic Leakage Following a Rectal Resection: Mostafa Shalaby, Waleed Thabet, Oreste Buonomo, Nicola Di Lorenzo, Mosaad Morshed, Giuseppe Petrella, Mohamed Farid, Pierpaolo Sileri; Ann Coloproctol. 2018;34(6):317-321. Published online December 20, 2018; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2017.10.18

6,018 View
178 Download
11 Web of Science
13 Citations

Purpose
We evaluate the role of transanal tube drainage (TD) as a conservative treatment for patients with anastomotic leakage (AL).
Methods
Patients treated for AL who had undergone a low or an ultralow anterior resection with colorectal or coloanal anastomosis for the treatment of rectal cancer between January 2013 and January 2017 were enrolled in this study. The data were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively. The primary outcomes were the diagnosis and the management of AL.
Results
Two hundred thirteen consecutive patients, 122 males and 91 females, were included. The mean age was 66.91 ± 11.15 years, and the median body mass index was 24 kg/m2 (range, 20–35 kg/m2 ). The median tumor distance from the anal verge was 8 cm (range, 4–12 cm). Ninety-three patients (44%) received neoadjuvant therapy for nodal disease and/or locally advanced rectal cancer. Only 13 patients (6%) developed AL. Six patients developed subclinical AL as they had a defunctioning ileostomy at the time of the initial procedure. They were treated conservatively with TD under endoscopic guidance in the endoscopy unit and received intravenous antibiotics. Six weeks after discharge, these 6 patients underwent follow-up flexible sigmoidoscopy which showed a completely healed anastomotic defect with no residual stenosis. Seven patients developed a clinically significant AL and required reoperation with pelvic abscess drainage and Hartmann colostomy formation.
Conclusion
These results suggest that TD for management of patients with AL is safe, cheap, and effective. Salvaging the anastomosis will help decrease the need for Hartmann colostomy formation. Proper patient selection is important.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Challenges in the interdisciplinary treatment of leakages after left-sided colorectal surgery: endoscopic negative pressure therapy, open-pore film drainage therapy and beyond
Pasquale Scognamiglio, Anja Seeger, Matthias Reeh, Nathaniel Melling, Karl F Karstens, Thomas Rösch, Jakob R Izbicki, Marcus Kantowski, Michael Tachezy
International Journal of Colorectal Disease.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Significance of information obtained during transanal drainage tube placement after anterior resection of colorectal cancer
Yuki Okazaki, Masatsune Shibutani, Hisashi Nagahara, Tatsunari Fukuoka, Yasuhito Iseki, En Wang, Kiyoshi Maeda, Kosei Hirakawa, Masaichi Ohira, Zubing Mei
PLOS ONE.2022; 17(8): e0271496. CrossRef
The usefulness of transanal tube for reducing anastomotic leak in mid rectal cancer: compared to diverting stoma
Seok Hyeon Cho, In Kyu Lee, Yoon Suk Lee, Min Ki Kim
Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research.2021; 100(2): 100. CrossRef
Treatment Modalities for Anastomotic Leakage in Rectal Cancer Surgery
Deborah S. Keller, K. Talboom, C.P.M van Helsdingen, Roel Hompes
Clinics in Colon and Rectal Surgery.2021; 34(06): 431. CrossRef
Retrospective study of active drainage in the management of anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer
Xiaojie Tan, Mei Zhang, Lai Li, He Wang, Xiaodong Liu, Haitao Jiang
Journal of International Medical Research.2021;[Epub] CrossRef
Improved colorectal anastomotic leakage healing by transanal rinsing treatment after endoscopic vacuum therapy using a novel patient-applied rinsing catheter
Marcus Kantowski, Andreas Kunze, Eugen Bellon, Thomas Rösch, Utz Settmacher, Michael Tachezy
International Journal of Colorectal Disease.2020; 35(1): 109. CrossRef
Surgical complications in colorectal cancer patients
Haleh Pak, Leila Haji Maghsoudi, Ali Soltanian, Farshid Gholami
Annals of Medicine and Surgery.2020; 55: 13. CrossRef
Effect comparison of three different types of transanal drainage tubes after anterior resection for rectal cancer
Yun Luo, Chang-Kang Zhu, Ding-Quan Wu, Liang-Bi Zhou, Chong-Shu Wang
BMC Surgery.2020;[Epub] CrossRef
Percutaneous transesophageal gastro-tubing for the management of anastomotic leakage after upper GI surgery: a report of two clinical cases
Yutaka Tamamori, Katsunobu Sakurai, Naoshi Kubo, Ken Yonemitsu, Yasuhiro Fukui, Junya Nishimura, Kiyoshi Maeda, Yukio Nishiguchi
Surgical Case Reports.2020;[Epub] CrossRef
Long-Term Results after Anastomotic Leakage following Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Comparison of Treatment with Endo-Sponge and Transanal Irrigation
Alice Weréen, Martin Dahlberg, Göran Heinius, Emil Pieniowski, Deborah Saraste, Karolina Eklöv, Jonas Nygren, Klas Pekkari, Åsa H. Everhov
Digestive Surgery.2020; 37(6): 456. CrossRef
Preventive strategies for anastomotic leakage after colorectal resections: A review
Mostafa Shalaby, Waleed Thabet, Mosaad Morshed, Mohamed Farid, Pierpaolo Sileri
World Journal of Meta-Analysis.2019; 7(8): 389. CrossRef
Transanal surgery: A tool in colorectal anastomotic leakage
Pere Planellas Giné, Júlia Gil Garcia, Ramon Farrés Coll, Antoni Codina Cazador
Cirugía Española (English Edition).2019; 97(10): 590. CrossRef
La cirugía transanal como herramienta en la dehiscencia de la anastomosis colorrectal
Pere Planellas Giné, Júlia Gil Garcia, Ramon Farrés Coll, Antoni Codina Cazador
Cirugía Española.2019; 97(10): 590. CrossRef

Erratums

Corrigendum: Correction of the First Author's Affiliation. Outcome of Colorectal Surgery in Elderly Populations: Mostafa Shalaby, Nicola Di Lorenzo, Luana Franceschilli, Federico Perrone, Giulio P. Angelucci, Silvia Quaresima, Achille L. Gaspari, Pierpaolo Sileri; Ann Coloproctol. 2017;33(6):254-254. Published online December 31, 2017; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2017.33.6.254

3,722 View
26 Download

PDF

Corrigendum: Correction of the Fourth Author's Affiliation. Synthetic Versus Biological Mesh-Related Erosion After Laparoscopic Ventral Mesh Rectopexy: A Systematic Review: Andrea Balla, Silvia Quaresima, Sebastian Smolarek, Mostafa Shalaby, Giulia Missori, Pierpaolo Sileri; Ann Coloproctol. 2017;33(6):253-253. Published online December 31, 2017; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2017.33.6.253

4,467 View
27 Download
1 Web of Science
1 Citations

PDF

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

A quantitative study to explore functional outcomes following laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy for rectal prolapse
O Olatunbode, S Rangarajan, V Russell, YKS Viswanath, A Reddy
The Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England.2022; 104(6): 449. CrossRef

Review

Synthetic Versus Biological Mesh-Related Erosion After Laparoscopic Ventral Mesh Rectopexy: A Systematic Review: Andrea Balla, Silvia Quaresima, Sebastian Smolarek, Mostafa Shalaby, Giulia Missori, Pierpaolo Sileri; Ann Coloproctol. 2017;33(2):46-51. Published online April 28, 2017; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2017.33.2.46

7,064 View
136 Download
44 Web of Science
41 Citations

Abstract PDF

Purpose

This review reports the incidence of mesh-related erosion after ventral mesh rectopexy to determine whether any difference exists in the erosion rate between synthetic and biological mesh.

Methods

A systematic search of the MEDLINE and the Ovid databases was conducted to identify suitable articles published between 2004 and 2015. The search strategy capture terms were laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy, laparoscopic anterior rectopexy, robotic ventral rectopexy, and robotic anterior rectopexy.

Results

Eight studies (3,956 patients) were included in this review. Of those patients, 3,517 patients underwent laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (LVR) using synthetic mesh and 439 using biological mesh. Sixty-six erosions were observed with synthetic mesh (26 rectal, 32 vaginal, 8 recto-vaginal fistulae) and one (perineal erosion) with biological mesh. The synthetic and the biological mesh-related erosion rates were 1.87% and 0.22%, respectively. The time between rectopexy and diagnosis of mesh erosion ranged from 1.7 to 124 months. No mesh-related mortalities were reported.

Conclusion

The incidence of mesh-related erosion after LVR is low and is more common after the placement of synthetic mesh. The use of biological mesh for LVR seems to be a safer option; however, large, multicenter, randomized, control trials with long follow-ups are required if a definitive answer is to be obtained.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Feasibility and safety of biologic OviTex mesh in ventral mesh rectopexy: a prospective pilot study
M. A. Boom, E. M. van der Schans, N. A. T. Wijffels, P. M. Verheijen, E. C. J. Consten
Techniques in Coloproctology.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Ventral mesh rectopexy for recurrent rectal prolapse after Altemeier perineal proctosigmoidectomy: feasibility and outcomes
Lukas Schabl, Tracy Hull, Kamil Erozkan, Ali Alipouriani, Kristen A. Ban, Scott R. Steele, Anna R. Spivak
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Treatment of complete rectal prolapse using the TEO® platform (transanal endoscopic operation) – a video vignette
Antonio D'Urso, Alfonso Lapergola, Jacques Marescaux, Didier Mutter, Xavier Serra‐Aracil
Colorectal Disease.2024; 26(4): 820. CrossRef
Now is the time to establish a registry for mesh rectopexy
Yui Kaneko, Corina Behrenbruch, James Keck
ANZ Journal of Surgery.2024; 94(7-8): 1209. CrossRef
Mesh-associated complications in minimally invasive ventral mesh rectopexy: a systematic review
Gabriel Fridolin Hess, Fabio Nocera, Stephanie Taha-Mehlitz, Sebastian Christen, Marco von Strauss Und Torney, Daniel C. Steinemann
Surgical Endoscopy.2024; 38(12): 7073. CrossRef
Anatomic and functional results of ventral biological mesh rectopexy for posterior pelvic floor disorders
F. Rogier-Mouzelas, F. Drissi, J. Podevin, E. Duchalais, G. Meurette
Journal of Visceral Surgery.2023; 160(3): 188. CrossRef
Building a Multidisciplinary Pelvic Floor Clinic: Why Bother?
Alison Hainsworth, Linda Ferrari, Sachin Malde, Lucia Berry
Seminars in Colon and Rectal Surgery.2023; 34(1): 100933. CrossRef
Management of full thickness rectal prolapse
Charlotte M. Rajasingh, Brooke H. Gurland
Seminars in Colon and Rectal Surgery.2023; 34(1): 100938. CrossRef
Résultats anatomiques et fonctionnels de la rectopexie ventrale avec renfort par bio-prothèse pour trouble de la statique rectale
F. Rogier-Mouzelas, F. Drissi, J. Podevin, E. Duchalais, G. Meurette
Journal de Chirurgie Viscérale.2023; 160(3): 203. CrossRef
Evaluation of the Safety and Efficacy of Modified Laparoscopic Suture Rectopexy for Rectal Prolapse
Rina Takahashi, Tetsuo Yamana, Risa Nishio, Kazuhiro Sakamoto, Shuko Nojiri, Kiichi Sugimoto
Journal of the Anus, Rectum and Colon.2023; 7(2): 102. CrossRef
Comparing the Outcomes and Complication Rates of Biologic vs Synthetic Meshes in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction
Nathan Makarewicz, David Perrault, Ayushi Sharma, Mohammed Shaheen, Jessica Kim, Christian Calderon, Brian Sweeney, Rahim Nazerali
Annals of Plastic Surgery.2023; 90(5): 516. CrossRef
Current diagnostic tools and treatment modalities for rectal prolapse
Mustafa Oruc, Timucin Erol
World Journal of Clinical Cases.2023; 11(16): 3680. CrossRef
Moving from Laparoscopic Synthetic Mesh to Robotic Biological Mesh for Ventral Rectopexy: Results from a Case Series
Farouk Drissi, Fabien Rogier-Mouzelas, Sebastian Fernandez Arias, Juliette Podevin, Guillaume Meurette
Journal of Clinical Medicine.2023; 12(17): 5751. CrossRef
Robotic mesh rectopexy for rectal prolapse: The Geneva technique—A video vignette
Jeremy Meyer, Emilie Liot, Vaihere Delaune, Alexandre Balaphas, Bruno Roche, Guillaume Meurette, Frédéric Ris
Colorectal Disease.2023; 25(12): 2469. CrossRef
The international variability of surgery for rectal prolapse
Jesse K Kelley, Edward R Hagen, Brooke Gurland, Andrew RL Stevenson, James W Ogilvie
BMJ Surgery, Interventions, & Health Technologies.2023; 5(1): e000198. CrossRef
Trends in the surgical management of rectal prolapse: An Asian experience
Yvonne Ying‐Ru Ng, Emile John Kwong Wei Tan, Cherylin Wan Pei Fu
Asian Journal of Endoscopic Surgery.2022; 15(1): 110. CrossRef
Mesh-related complications and recurrence after ventral mesh rectopexy with synthetic versus biologic mesh: a systematic review and meta-analysis
E. M. van der Schans, M. A. Boom, M. El Moumni, P. M. Verheijen, I. A. M. J. Broeders, E. C. J. Consten
Techniques in Coloproctology.2022; 26(2): 85. CrossRef
Case series of mesh migration after rectopexy surgery for rectal prolapse
Omar Marghich, Benjamin Benichou, Efoé-Ga Yawod Olivier Amouzou, Alexandre Maubert, Jean Hubert Etienne, Emmanuel Benizri, Mohamed Amine Rahili
Journal of Surgical Case Reports.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Mesh erosion into the rectum after laparoscopic posterior rectopexy: A case report
Shun Yamanaka, Tsuyoshi Enomoto, Shoko Moue, Yohei Owada, Yusuke Ohara, Tatsuya Oda
International Journal of Surgery Case Reports.2022; 95: 107136. CrossRef
Patients’ Perception of Long-term Outcome After Laparoscopic Ventral Mesh Rectopexy; Single Tertiary Center Experience
Sandeep Singh, Keshara Ratnatunga, Roel Bolckmans, Naeem Iqbal, Oliver Jones, Ian Lindsey, Kim Gorissen, Chris Cunningham
Annals of Surgery.2022; 276(5): e459. CrossRef
Laparoscopic posterior rectopexy for complete rectal prolapse
Senthil Kumar Ganapathi, Rajapandian Subbiah, Sathiyamoorthy Rudramurthy, Harish Kakkilaya, Parthasarathi Ramakrishnan, Palanivelu Chinnusamy
Journal of Minimal Access Surgery.2022; 18(2): 295. CrossRef
Polyvinylidene Fluoride Mesh Use in Laparoscopic Ventral Mesh Rectopexy in Patients with Obstructive Defecation Syndrome for the First Time
Mahdi Alemrajabi, Behnam Darabi, Behrouz Banivaheb, Nima Hemmati, Sepideh Jahanian, Mohammad Moradi
Journal of Investigative Surgery.2021; 34(10): 1083. CrossRef
Ventral Rectopexy
Kenneth C. Loh, Konstantin Umanskiy
Clinics in Colon and Rectal Surgery.2021; 34(01): 062. CrossRef
Thulium laser to endoscopically manage a rectal erosion and intraluminal mesh migration after ventral rectopexy
Lorenzo Dioscoridi, Francesco Pugliese, Camillo Leonardo Bertoglio, Massimiliano Mutignani
BMJ Case Reports.2021; 14(1): e235807. CrossRef
Operationstechniken aus viszeralchirurgischer Sicht
Mia Kim
coloproctology.2021; 43(5): 314. CrossRef
Suture rectopexy versus ventral mesh rectopexy for complete full-thickness rectal prolapse and intussusception: systematic review and meta-analysis
H S Lobb, C C Kearsey, S Ahmed, R Rajaganeshan
BJS Open.2021;[Epub] CrossRef
Evaluation of a Novel Absorbable Mesh in a Porcine Model of Abdominal Wall Repair
Alexei S. Mlodinow, Ketan Yerneni, Michelle E. Hasse, Todd Cruikshank, Markian J. Kuzycz, Marco F. Ellis
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery - Global Open.2021; 9(5): e3529. CrossRef
Approaching Combined Rectal and Vaginal Prolapse
Shannon Wallace, Brooke Gurland
Clinics in Colon and Rectal Surgery.2021; 34(05): 302. CrossRef
Troubles de la statique rectale de l’adulte. Syndrome du prolapsus rectal
G. Lebreton, B. Menahem, A. Alves
EMC - Gastro-entérologie.2021; 38(2): 1. CrossRef
What happens to the biological prosthesis implanted during laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy? – a video vignette
A. Di Leo, J. Andreuccetti
Colorectal Disease.2020; 22(11): 1754. CrossRef
Minimally invasive organ‐preserving approaches in the management of mesh erosion after laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy
K. Ratnatunga, S. Singh, R. Bolckmans, S. Goodbrand, K. Gorissen, O. Jones, I. Lindsey, C. Cunningham
Colorectal Disease.2020; 22(11): 1642. CrossRef
Position statement by the Pelvic Floor Society on behalf of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland on the use of mesh in ventral mesh rectopexy
M. A. Mercer‐Jones, S. R. Brown, C. H. Knowles, A. B. Williams
Colorectal Disease.2020; 22(10): 1429. CrossRef
Outcome of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy for full-thickness external rectal prolapse: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis of the predictors for recurrence
Sameh Hany Emile, Hossam Elfeki, Mostafa Shalaby, Ahmad Sakr, Pierpaolo Sileri, Steven D. Wexner
Surgical Endoscopy.2019; 33(8): 2444. CrossRef
Ventral rectopexy with biological mesh for recurrent disorders of the posterior pelvic organ compartment
M. Brunner, H. Roth, K. Günther, R. Grützmann, Klaus E. Matzel
International Journal of Colorectal Disease.2019; 34(10): 1763. CrossRef
Ventral rectopexy with biological mesh: short-term functional results
M. Brunner, H. Roth, K. Günther, R. Grützmann, K. E. Matzel
International Journal of Colorectal Disease.2018; 33(4): 449. CrossRef
Short‐ and long‐term clinical and patient‐reported outcomes following laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy using biological mesh for pelvic organ prolapse: a prospective cohort study of 224 consecutive patients
R. McLean, M. Kipling, E. Musgrave, M. Mercer‐Jones
Colorectal Disease.2018; 20(5): 424. CrossRef
Chirurgische Therapie des Rektumprolapses
J. Hardt, P. Kienle
coloproctology.2018; 40(3): 187. CrossRef
Chirurgische Therapie beim Rektumprolaps
A. J. Kroesen
coloproctology.2018; 40(3): 181. CrossRef
A Delorme operation for full‐thickness complete rectal prolapse – a video vignette
W. Omar, H. Elfeki, M. A. Abdel‐Razik, M. Shalaby
Colorectal Disease.2018; 20(12): 1156. CrossRef
Consensus Statement of the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery (SICCR): management and treatment of complete rectal prolapse
G. Gallo, J. Martellucci, G. Pellino, R. Ghiselli, A. Infantino, F. Pucciani, M. Trompetto
Techniques in Coloproctology.2018; 22(12): 919. CrossRef
Erosion after laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy with a biological mesh
M. Shalaby, A. Matarangolo, I. Capuano, G. Petrella, P. Sileri
Techniques in Coloproctology.2017; 21(12): 985. CrossRef

Erratum

Erratum: Author Name Correction: Outcome of Colorectal Surgery in Elderly Populations: Mostafa Shalaby, Nicola Di Lorenzo, Luana Franceschilli, Federico Perrone, Giulio P. Angelucci, Silvia Quaresima, Achille L. Gaspari, Pierpaolo Sileri; Ann Coloproctol. 2016;32(5):199-199. Published online October 31, 2016; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2016.32.5.199

3,256 View
17 Download
8 Web of Science

PDF

Original Article

Outcome of Colorectal Surgery in Elderly Populations: Mostafa Shalaby, Nicola Di Lorenzo, Luana Franceschilli, Federico Perrone, Giulio P. Angelucci, Silvia Quareisma, Achille L. Gaspari, Pierpaolo Sileri; Ann Coloproctol. 2016;32(4):139-143. Published online August 31, 2016; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2016.32.4.139

4,416 View
48 Download
14 Citations

Abstract PDF

Purpose

The aim of this study is to investigate the impact of age on short-term outcomes after colorectal surgery in terms of the 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality rates.

Methods

The subjects for the study were patients who had undergone colorectal surgery. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to age; groups A and B patients were ≥80 and <80 years old of age, respectively. Both groups were manually matched for body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, Charlson Comorbidity Index and procedure performed.

Results

A total of 200 patients, 91 men (45.5%) and 109 women (54.5%), were included in this retrospective study. These patients were equally divided into 2 groups. The mean ages were 85 years in group A (range, 80 to 104 years) and 55.3 years in group B (range, 13 to 79 years). The overall 30-day postoperative mortality rate was 1% of total 200 patients; both of these 2 patients were in group A. However, this observation had no statistical significance. No intraoperative complications were encountered in either group. The overall 30-day postoperative morbidity rate was 27% (54 of 200) for both groups. The 30-day postoperative morbidity rates in groups A and B were 28% (28 of 100) and 26% (26 of 100), respectively. However, these differences between the groups had no statistical significance importance.

Conclusion

Age alone should not be considered to be more of a contraindication or a worse predictor than other factors for the outcome after colorectal surgery on elderly patients.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Preoperative management in octogenarian patients with rectal cancer
Arthur M. Damasceno, Rubens Kesley, Marcus Valadão, Fabrício Braga, Cristiane A. D'Almeida, Marcos B. Pitombo
Heliyon.2025; 11(1): e41469. CrossRef
Predictors of complicated course of perioperative period in patients with rectal cancer and rectosigmoid junction
E. P. Kulikov, S. A. Mertsalov, N. I. Verkin, Yu. D. Kaminskiy, I. S. Pikushin
Experimental and Clinical Gastroenterology.2023; (10): 77. CrossRef
Oncological and surgical outcomes of radical surgery in elderly colorectal cancer patients with intestinal obstruction
Qingbiao Ma, Hongyu Li, Yujuan Jiang, Yingfei Wang, Jianwei Liang
Frontiers in Surgery.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Efficiency of pre-operative preparation of intestines at treatment of sharp intestinal impassability tumoral genesis
H. Sh. Nazarov, Sh. К. Nazarov, N. Sh. Hasanov
Health care of Tajikistan.2022; (2): 59. CrossRef
Before-and-After Study of the First Four Years of the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS®) Programme in Older Adults Undergoing Elective Colorectal Cancer Surgery
Cristina Martínez-Escribano, Francisco Arteaga Moreno, David Cuesta Peredo, Francisco Javier Blanco Gonzalez, Juan Maria De la Cámara-de las Heras, Francisco J. Tarazona Santabalbina
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2022; 19(22): 15299. CrossRef
Perioperative score for octogenarian patients eligible for rectal cancer surgery
Arthur Mota Damasceno, Rubens Kesley, Bruno Souza Paolino, Marcelo Rubens dos Santos do Amaral, Marcos Bettini Pitombo
Journal of Surgical Oncology.2021; 124(8): 1409. CrossRef
Prehabilitation: finally utilizing frailty screening data
Francesco Carli, Amal Bessissow, Rashami Awasthi, Sender Liberman
European Journal of Surgical Oncology.2020; 46(3): 321. CrossRef
Video‐assisted anal fistula treatment for complex anal fistula: a long‐term follow‐up study
G. Giarratano, M. Shalaby, C. Toscana, P. Sileri
Colorectal Disease.2020; 22(8): 939. CrossRef
New prognostic risk score for predicting in-hospital mortality in geriatric patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery: U.S. Nationwide Inpatient Sample analysis
Xiaohong Zhao, Yunmei Yang, Haifeng Gu, Wenjing Zhou, Qin Zhang
Journal of Geriatric Oncology.2020; 11(8): 1250. CrossRef
Impact of ASA-score, age and learning curve on early outcome in the initiation phase of an oncological robotic colorectal program
Hülya Sarikaya, Tahar Benhidjeb, Sergiu I. Iosivan, Theodoros Kolokotronis, Christine Förster, Stephan Eckert, Ludwig Wilkens, Alaa Nasser, Sebastian Rehberg, Martin Krüger, Jan Schulte am Esch
Scientific Reports.2020;[Epub] CrossRef
Prediction of overall survival following colorectal cancer surgery in elderly patients
Isaac Seow-En, Winson Jianhong Tan, Sreemanee Raaj Dorajoo, Sharon Hui Ling Soh, Yi Chye Law, Soo Yeun Park, Gyu-Seok Choi, Wah Siew Tan, Choong Leong Tang, Min Hoe Chew
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery.2019; 11(5): 247. CrossRef
Health-Related Quality of Life in Older Adults with Colorectal Cancer
Evan Lapinsky, Lillian C. Man, Amy R. MacKenzie
Current Oncology Reports.2019;[Epub] CrossRef
Evaluation of short-term outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted surgery for colorectal cancer in elderly patients aged over 75 years old: a multi-institutional study (YSURG1401)
Keisuke Kazama, Toru Aoyama, Tsutomu Hayashi, Takanobu Yamada, Masakatsu Numata, Shinya Amano, Mariko Kamiya, Tsutomu Sato, Takaki Yoshikawa, Manabu Shiozawa, Takashi Oshima, Norio Yukawa, Yasushi Rino, Munetaka Masuda
BMC Surgery.2017;[Epub] CrossRef
Colorectal Surgery in Elderly Patients
Byung Chun Kim
Annals of Coloproctology.2016; 32(4): 126. CrossRef

First
Prev
Page of 1
Next
Last

Search