Search

INTRODUCTION: Inter-hospital variation in the management of small bowel obstruction (SBO) has been described in other countries, but the extent to which similar variations exist in Denmark remains unknown. This study aimed to compare the management of SBO between hospitals in Denmark and identify potential areas for improvement METHODS. This was a multicentre prospective study performed at six emergency hospitals. Patients aged ≥ 18 years with a diagnosis of SBO were eligible for inclusion. The primary study endpoints were the proportion of patients undergoing operative versus non-operative management, laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery and the success rate of non-operative management.RESULTS: A total of 316 patients were included. No differences were noted in diagnostic pathways or operative versus non-operative management. However, variations were noted in compliance with peri-operative care bundles, ranging from 63.2% to 95.8%. The surgical approach also varied, with the use of laparoscopic surgery ranging from 20.7% to 71.0% (p less-than 0.001). Variations were also noted in duration of surgery (63-124 minutes, p less-than 0.001), time to re-introduction of normal diet and length of hospital stay (3-8.5 days, p less-than 0.001). No differences were observed in 30-day or 90-day mortality rates.CONCLUSION: The management of SBO in Denmark is relatively standardised. Future efforts should focus on improving adherence to multidisciplinary peri-operative protocols, optimising patient selection for laparoscopic surgery and standardising nutritional therapy.FUNDING: None.TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04750811.

Purpose: We aimed to investigate the development of common procedures used as treatment for rectal prolapse over a decade and to determine if the choice of primary operation affects the reoperation rate. Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of operative data from a National Data Registry, Landspatientregisteret (LPR), from the period of January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2014. All hospitalized surgical treatments are registered in LPR. Results: Sixteen hundred and twenty-five patients with rectal prolapse underwent 1834 operations. There were 94% women and mean age at surgery was 71.6 ± 18.1 years, with no difference over the 11 years. The types of operations performed differed (p < 0.0001), with an increase in overall number of operations and increasing use of laparoscopic procedures. There were 209 reoperations, of which 129 patients were primarily operated with a perineal procedure. The mean age at reoperation was 72.8 ± 17.3 years. The most frequently used reoperation was laparoscopic rectopexy. The overall reoperation rate was 16%: 10% for both open and laparoscopic rectopexy, and for perineal procedures 26% (p < 0.001). The overall 30-day mortality was 2.1% and there was no difference in mortality between the procedures (p = 0.23). Conclusions: The overall number of rectal prolapse operations was increasing. There was a clear trend towards extended use of laparoscopic rectopexy both as primary procedure and as reoperation. The highest reoperation rates were for the perineal procedures.

AIM: We report the clinical and anal manometric results of elderly patients treated with laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (LVR) for full-thickness rectal prolapse.METHOD: From March 2009 to June 2012, patients were consecutively included. A modified laparoscopic Orr-Loygue procedure with posterior mobilisation was used. The patients were evaluated preoperatively, 2 months postoperatively and after 1 year. We registered Wexner incontinence scores and laxative uses by a questionnaire and performed simple anal manometry.RESULTS: A total of 46 patients underwent operation, all women. The median age was 83 years (range 34-99), median prolapse size was 8 cm (range 2-15), and 30 % had previous prolapse surgery. The median operative time was 135 min (range 90-215), and the median length of stay was 2 days (range 1-14). The 30-day morbidity rate was 15 %, and there were two (4 %) deaths within 30 days. There was a significant reduction in incontinence scores after 2 months and 1 year. The anal resting pressures improved from 10 cm H(2)O slightly to 16 cm H(2)O after 2 months, significantly, and still significant after 1 year at 13 cm H(2)O. There were no changes in the use of laxatives. The median follow-up time was 1.5 years (range 0.5-3), and there were two prolapse recurrences (4 %) in this period.CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy with posterior mobilisation seems to be effective and relatively well tolerated, although not without mortality in elderly debilitated patients. It improves incontinence. With increased life-year expectance, these patients may benefit from a lower risk of recurrence compared with perineal procedures.