UK survey of colorectal surgeons on the management of acute obstetric anal sphincter injuries

AIM

The role of colorectal surgeons in the management of acute obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) is an ongoing debate. Their expertise in operating in the anorectal region lends itself to assisting in OASI repair. The aim of this study was to establish the current involvement and recommended management of acute OASI by colorectal surgeons.

METHOD

An online survey of consultant colorectal surgeons was sent to members of the Pelvic Floor Society to assess current involvement in acute OASI management and repair.

RESULTS

Forty completed surveys were collated and analysed. Sixty-five per cent of respondents had seen an acute OASI since being a consultant and 50% stated they were involved in the repair of OASI less than once per year. 37.5% felt that a de-functioning stoma was still necessary sometimes. Many agreed with current guidelines for OASI repair in terms of antibiotics, laxatives and follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Colorectal surgeons have varied opinions on the management of OASI. We suggest that multidisciplinary training of obstetricians and colorectal surgeons could lead to more collaboration regarding the management of women with acute OASI.

An Unusual, Delayed Presentation of a Migrated Intrauterine Contraceptive Device Into the Rectosigmoid Colon

The current literature suggests that serious complications after intrauterine contraceptive device (IUCD) insertion are rare. We present a rare case of a migrated IUCD into the rectosigmoid colon. A 33-year-old woman (parity one) presented to the emergency department with a three-day history of flank pain, upper urinary tract infection symptoms, and a low-grade fever. Differentials initially included renal colic or pyelonephritis. However, subsequent computed tomography of the kidneys, ureters, and bladder (CT-KUB) and magnetic resonance imaging of the pelvis (MRI-pelvis) showed a migrated IUCD posterior to the uterine body, with both ends closely abutting onto the adjacent proximal rectum. During further history-taking, she reported a past surgical history of an emergency caesarean section five years ago and the insertion of a copper-IUCD six weeks postnatally. She was subsequently referred to the gynaecologists. In view of the involvement of the bowels, the colorectal surgeons were consulted, and the patient was managed by a multidisciplinary team. The patient subsequently underwent diagnostic hysteroscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, diagnostic laparoscopy, removal of impacted IUCD, and repair of the rectum. Intraoperatively, her hysteroscopy noted a normal uterus with an intact cavity. Flexible sigmoidoscopy noted the horizontal arm of the IUCD abutting into the lumen of the rectosigmoid region; however, attempted removal with traction was unsuccessful. A partial rectotomy was done eventually to remove the IUCD. Migration of an IUCD is rare, with uterine perforation rates ranging from 0.04% to 0.2%. Albeit a rare complication, this case highlights the need for clinicians to be cognizant of complications arising from IUCD insertion, as symptoms are often non-specific and mild. This case also highlights the importance of a multidisciplinary discussion in the management of a migrated IUCD, which may include gynaecologists, colorectal surgeons, radiologists, and more. Many innovative ways were also discussed regarding the assessment of it, which includes preoperative imaging or endoscopic evaluation. Novel methods of removal of migrated IUCD in the rectosigmoid colon have also been proposed, including manual traction, proctoscopy, rigid sigmoidoscopy, and removal via a snare. They provide an alternative to the traditional diagnostic laparoscopy or laparotomy, thus reducing the need for general anaesthesia or operative intervention. Looking forward, long-term studies can be done to evaluate the need for intervention for asymptomatic patients where the risk of surgery may outweigh the benefits.

Comparison of Colorectal Cancer Surgery Services During COVID-19 First Wave With Pre-COVID Time

Introduction The first confirmed case of COVID-19 in the United Kingdom (UK) was reported on 29 January 2020. The country saw the peak of infection between March and May of 2020. The result was a change in the practice of how we treat most surgical conditions including cancer. We continued providing service to our colorectal cancer patients at a District General Hospital. The aim of this study was to compare our provision of colorectal cancer service during the peak of the pandemic to that of the pre-COVID time in our hospital.  Methods We collected data of all colorectal cancer patients who underwent surgery between 1 March 2020 and 30 April 2020 in our hospital. The comparative data were collected for similar patients during the same time frame in 2019. A detailed data set was compiled on Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Corp, Washington) and analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 21.0 (Released 2012. IBM Corp, Armonk, NY). Results The two groups were comparable in demographics including age, BMI, gender, and Charlson comorbidity index. Time from decision- to-treat to surgery, post-operative HDU/ITU stay, and overall length of stay was shorter in the COVID group than the Pre-COVID group without any significant statistical difference. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in Calvien-Dindo complications grade 1 and 2. No mortality was reported due to direct or indirect consequences of COVID-19 infection. More open procedures were performed in our department during the first wave of COVID-19 in the UK compared to Pre-COVID time. Conclusions Despite the challenges we faced during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, we managed to provide standard care to our colorectal cancer patients with comparable post-operative surgical and oncological outcomes.