Perineal Wound Healing Following Abdominoperineal Resection of the Rectum
- PMID: 39238678
- PMCID: PMC11377100
- DOI: 10.7759/cureus.66318
Perineal Wound Healing Following Abdominoperineal Resection of the Rectum
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to investigate perineal wound healing rates following abdominoperineal resection (APR) or extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) for rectal cancer, with a focus on identifying associated risk factors and outcomes.
Methodology: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients undergoing APR or ELAPE for rectal cancer in a tertiary centre between 2013 and 2020. Data on demographics, comorbidities, surgical techniques, and perineal wound outcomes were collected and analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, IBM Corp., Version 27.0, Armonk, NY). Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.
Results: A total of 87 patients were included, with a mean age of 64 years and the majority being male (66.7%). Neoadjuvant radiotherapy was administered in 87.4% of cases. Perineal wound complications were documented in 52 cases (59.8%), with major complications observed in 11 cases (12.6%). Healing within six months was achieved in 48 patients (55.2%), while 39 patients (44.8%) developed chronic perineal wounds. Logistic regression analysis revealed omentoplasty as a significant predictor of perineal wound healing rate showing a significant negative association (p=0.0289).
Conclusion: Perineal wound healing rates following APR or ELAPE varied. While most patients achieved complete healing, chronic perineal wounds presented challenges. Omentoplasty was associated with lower odds of healing, suggesting the need for further investigation into its role. These findings underscore the importance of patient counselling and multidisciplinary management strategies to optimize outcomes in rectal cancer surgery.
Keywords: abdomino-perineal resection; complications; elape; omentoplasty; perineal wound healing; rectal cancer; risk factors.
Copyright © 2024, Khattak et al.
Conflict of interest statement
Human subjects: Consent was obtained or waived by all participants in this study. Animal subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve animal subjects or tissue. Conflicts of interest: In compliance with the ICMJE uniform disclosure form, all authors declare the following: Payment/services info: All authors have declared that no financial support was received from any organization for the submitted work. Financial relationships: All authors have declared that they have no financial relationships at present or within the previous three years with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work. Other relationships: All authors have declared that there are no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.
References
-
- Bowel cancer incidence statistics. 2011. https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/s... https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/s...
-
- Extended abdominoperineal resection with gluteus maximus flap reconstruction of the pelvic floor for rectal cancer. Holm T, Ljung A, Häggmark T, Jurell G, Lagergren J. Br J Surg. 2007;94:232–238. - PubMed
-
- Total mesorectal excision - the new golden standard of surgery for rectal cancer. Enker WE. Ann Med. 1997;29:127–133. - PubMed
-
- Wound complications and perineal pain after extralevator versus standard abdominoperineal excision: a nationwide study. Colov EP, Klein M, Gögenur I. Dis Colon Rectum. 2016;59:813–821. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous