Affiliation:
1. Ryzhikh National Medical Research Center of Coloproctology
2. Ryzhikh National Medical Research Center of Coloproctology; Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: the wound following Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEM) is traditionally closed by suturing. However, some studies suggest that leaving the wound open after TEM might be a viable alternative. STUDY OBJECTIVE: to compare two methods of managing rectal wounds in patients after TEM. PATIENTS AND METHODS: patients were divided into 2 groups: the main group (open wound management) and the control group (suture wound management). The primary endpoint of the study was the morbidity rate. The secondary endpoints included the need and duration of antibacterial therapy, post-op hospital stay, the severity of the inflammatory response, the wound healing time and the quality of life. RESULTS: from November 2021 to November 2023, 177 patients were included in the randomized study: 68 in the open wound management group and 109 in the suture wound group. The analysis included 50 patients in eachgroup. It was found that the operation time in the main group was significantly shorter (30 (20; 40) minutes versus 55 (40; 60), p < 0.0001). The infectious complications rate was lower in the open wound management group: 11/50 (22 %) versus 16/50 (32 %), p = 0.26; the postoperative bleeding rate was higher: 4/50 (8 %) versus 2/50 (4 %), p = 0.7. Post-op hospital stay did not differ: 6 (4;7) days versus 6 (5; 7), p = 0.22. The duration of antibiotic therapy for infectious complications was longer in the open wound management group: 6 (5;6) days versus 5 (5;6.5), p = 0.02. In the case of infectious complication the inflammatory response was higher in the group of the open wound management: white blood cell counts (15.9 (14.3; 19.5) × 109/L versus 13.1 (12; 15.6) × 109/L, p = 0.01) and temperature (38.6 ± 0.7 °C versus 38 ± 0.6 °C, p = 0.02). Wounds in both groups healed by the 30th day, and the quality of life did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: the results of the randomized study demonstrated the efficacy and safety of open rectal wound management after TEM.
Publisher
Russian Association of Coloproctology
Reference23 articles.
1. Saclarides TJ. Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2015 Sep;28(3):165–75. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1562889 PMID: 26491409; PMCID: PMC4593923.
2. Dvornichenko V.V., Rasulov R.I., Minakin N.I., et al. Results of Palliative and Radical Treatment of Rectal Neoplasms by Transanal Endomicrosurgery Method. Palliative Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2007;1:11–12. (in Russ.).
3. Shelygin Y.A., Chernyshev S.V., Peresada I.V., et al. The first experience of transanal endoscopic operations. Koloproktologia. 2012;2(40):34–39. (in Russ.).
4. Buess G, Theiss R, Günther M, et al. Transanale endoskopische Mikrochirurgie [Transanal endoscopic microsurgery]. Leber Magen Darm. 1985 Nov;15(6):271–9. German. PMID: 4079630.
5. Kim BC. Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery. Ann Coloproctol. 2017 Feb;33(1):5–6. doi: 10.3393/ac.2017.33.1.5 Epub 2017 Feb 28. PMID: 28289656; PMCID: PMC5346782.