Feasibility of a subcutaneous gluteal turnover flap without donor site scar for perineal closure after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer

被引:17
|
作者
Blok, R. D. [1 ,2 ]
Hagemans, J. A. W. [3 ]
Burger, J. W. A. [3 ,4 ]
Rothbarth, J. [3 ]
van der Bile, J. D. W. [5 ]
Lapid, O. [6 ]
Hompes, R. [1 ]
Tanis, P. J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Amsterdam, Med Ctr, Dept Surg, Meibergdreef 9,Post Box 22660, NL-1100 DD Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Univ Amsterdam, Canc Ctr Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, LEXOR,Ctr Expt & Mol Med,Oncode Inst, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] Erasmus MC, Canc Inst, Dept Surg Oncol, Doctor Molewaterpl 40, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[4] Catharina Hosp, Dept Surg, Michelangelolaan 2, Eindhoven, Netherlands
[5] Flevo Hosp, Dept Surg, Hosp Weg 1, Almere, Netherlands
[6] Univ Amsterdam, Dept Plast & Reconstruct Surg, Amsterdam UMC, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
Rectal neoplasms; Abdominoperineal resection; Surgical flaps; Tissue transfer; Gluteal turnover flap; Perineal wound healing; MYOCUTANEOUS FLAP; RECONSTRUCTION; COMPLICATIONS; MORBIDITY;
D O I
10.1007/s10151-019-02055-1
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Background Abdominoperineal resection (APR) carries a high risk of perineal wound morbidity. Perineal wound closure using autologous tissue flaps has been shown to be advantageous, but there is no consensus as to the optimal method. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of a novel gluteal turnover flap (GT-flap) without donor site scar for perineal closure after APR. Methods Consecutive patients who underwent APR for primary or recurrent rectal cancer were included in a prospective non-randomised pilot study in two academic centres. Perineal reconstruction consisted of a unilateral subcutaneous GT-flap, followed by midline closure. Feasibility was defined as uncomplicated perineal wound healing at 30 days in at least five patients, and a maximum of two flap failures. Results Out of 17 potentially eligible patients, 10 patients underwent APR with GT-flap-assisted perineal wound closure. Seven patients had pre-operative radiotherapy. Median-added theatre time was 38 min (range 35-44 min). Two patients developed a superficial perineal wound dehiscence, most likely because of the excessive width of the skin island. Two other patients developed purulent discharge and excessive serosanguinous discharge, respectively, resulting in four complicated wounds at 30 days. No flap failure occurred, and no radiological or surgical reinterventions were performed. Median length of hospital stay was 10 days (IQR 8-12 days). Conclusions The GT-flap for routine perineal wound closure after APR seems feasible with limited additional theatre time, but success seems to depend on correct planning of the width of the flap. The potential for reducing perineal morbidity should be evaluated in a randomised controlled trial.
引用
收藏
页码:751 / 759
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Feasibility of a subcutaneous gluteal turnover flap without donor site scar for perineal closure after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer
    R. D. Blok
    J. A. W. Hagemans
    J. W. A. Burger
    J. Rothbarth
    J. D. W. van der Bilt
    O. Lapid
    R. Hompes
    P. J. Tanis
    Techniques in Coloproctology, 2019, 23 : 751 - 759
  • [2] Gluteal transposition flap without donor site scar for closing a perineal defect after abdominoperineal resection
    R. D. Blok
    O. Lapid
    W. A. Bemelman
    P. J. Tanis
    Techniques in Coloproctology, 2017, 21 : 155 - 157
  • [3] Gluteal transposition flap without donor site scar for closing a perineal defect after abdominoperineal resection
    Blok, R. D.
    Lapid, O.
    Bemelman, W. A.
    Tanis, P. J.
    TECHNIQUES IN COLOPROCTOLOGY, 2017, 21 (02) : 155 - 157
  • [4] Gluteal turnover flap for perineal reconstruction following abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer - a video vignette
    Blok, R. D.
    Kacmaz, E.
    Hompes, R.
    Lapid, O.
    Bemelman, W. A.
    Tanis, P. J.
    COLORECTAL DISEASE, 2019, 21 (09) : 1094 - 1095
  • [5] 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.
    TECHNIQUES IN COLOPROCTOLOGY, 2021, 25 (10) : 1123 - 1132
  • [6] A comparative multicentre study evaluating gluteal turnover flap for wound closure after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer
    S. Sharabiany
    J. J. W. van Dam
    S. Sparenberg
    R. D. Blok
    B. Singh
    S. Chaudhri
    F. Runau
    A. A. W. van Geloven
    A. W. H. van de Ven
    O. Lapid
    R. Hompes
    P. J. Tanis
    G. D. Musters
    Techniques in Coloproctology, 2021, 25 : 1123 - 1132
  • [7] Perineal wound closure using gluteal turnover flap or primary closure after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer: study protocol of a randomised controlled multicentre trial (BIOPEX-2 study)
    Sharabiany, Sarah
    Blok, Robin D.
    Lapid, Oren
    Hompes, Roel
    Bemelman, Wilhelmus A.
    Alberts, Victor P.
    Lamme, Bas
    Wijsman, Jan H.
    Tuynman, Jurriaan B.
    Aalbers, Arend G. J.
    Beets, Geerard L.
    Fabry, Hans F. J.
    Cherepanin, Ivan M.
    Polat, Fatih
    Burger, Jacobus W. A.
    Rutten, Harm J. T.
    Bosker, Robert J., I
    Talsma, Koen
    Rothbarth, Joost
    Verhoef, Cees
    van de Ven, Anthony W. H.
    van der Bilt, Jarmila D. W.
    de Graaf, Eelco J. R.
    Doornebosch, Pascal G.
    Leijtens, Jeroen W. A.
    Heemskerk, Jeroen
    Singh, Baljit
    Chaudhri, Sanjay
    Gerhards, Michael F.
    Karsten, Tom M.
    de Wilt, Johannes H. W.
    Bremers, Andre J. A.
    Vuylsteke, Ronald J. C. L. M.
    Heuff, Gijsbert
    van Geloven, Anna A. W.
    Tanis, Pieter J.
    Musters, Gijsbert D.
    BMC SURGERY, 2020, 20 (01)
  • [8] Perineal wound closure using gluteal turnover flap or primary closure after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer: study protocol of a randomised controlled multicentre trial (BIOPEX-2 study)
    Sarah Sharabiany
    Robin D. Blok
    Oren Lapid
    Roel Hompes
    Wilhelmus A. Bemelman
    Victor P. Alberts
    Bas Lamme
    Jan H. Wijsman
    Jurriaan B. Tuynman
    Arend G. J. Aalbers
    Geerard L. Beets
    Hans F. J. Fabry
    Ivan M. Cherepanin
    Fatih Polat
    Jacobus W. A. Burger
    Harm J. T. Rutten
    Robert J. I. Bosker
    Koen Talsma
    Joost Rothbarth
    Cees Verhoef
    Anthony W. H. van de Ven
    Jarmila D. W. van der Bilt
    Eelco J. R. de Graaf
    Pascal G. Doornebosch
    Jeroen W. A. Leijtens
    Jeroen Heemskerk
    Baljit Singh
    Sanjay Chaudhri
    Michael F. Gerhards
    Tom M. Karsten
    Johannes H. W. de Wilt
    Andre J. A. Bremers
    Ronald J. C. L. M. Vuylsteke
    Gijsbert Heuff
    Anna A. W. van Geloven
    Pieter J. Tanis
    Gijsbert D. Musters
    BMC Surgery, 20
  • [9] Value of Omentoplasty in Abdominoperineal Resection with Primary Perineal Closure for Rectal Cancer
    Sandhu, Lakhbir
    Chang, George J.
    ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2018, 25 (13) : 4049 - 4050
  • [10] Value of Omentoplasty in Abdominoperineal Resection with Primary Perineal Closure for Rectal Cancer
    Lakhbir Sandhu
    George J. Chang
    Annals of Surgical Oncology, 2018, 25 : 4049 - 4050