4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

A prospective, longitudinal study of nonconventional strictureplasty in Crohn's disease

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2004.01.039

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Bowel-sparing techniques have been proposed to avoid extended or repeated resections in patients with Crohn's disease (CD), but without precise indications, prospective evaluation, and with a technically limited repertoire. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective longitudinal study of new nonconventional strictureplasties (NCSP) in order to evaluate the safety, type and site of recurrence, and longterm clinical and surgical efficacy. RESULTS: Between January 1993 and December 2002, 102 among 305 consecutive patients under-went at least one NCSP for complicated CD. Patients were treated following precise indications and then included in a prospective database with scheduled followup. Factors claimed to influence postoperative and longterm outcomes and type and site of recurrence were analyzed. We performed 48 ileoileal side-to-side isoperistaltic strictureplasty (SP), 41 widening ileocolic SP, 32 ileocolic side-to-side isoperistaltic SP, associated with Heineke-Mikulicz SP (in 80 procedures) or with minimal bowel resections or both (in 47 procedures). Postoperative mortality was nil; complication rate was 5.7%. Ten years clinical and surgical recurrence rates were 43% and 27%, respectively. Recurrence rate on an NCSP site was 0.8%. No specific factor was identified as related to postoperative or longterm outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative and longterm results of NCSP are comparable to or even better than both conservative and resective surgery as reported in the literature, with a low recurrence rate on the NCSP site. Considering the unpredictability of the clinical course of CD and the lifetime need for surgical procedures, NCSP, together with minimal resection and classic SP repertoire, should be considered first-line treatment in complicated CD. (C) 2004 by the American College of Surgeons.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据