A Comparative Study between the Outcome of Primary Repair versus Loop Ileostomy in Traumatic and Non traumatic Ileal Perforation

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-61
Author(s):  
R.K. Singh ◽  
◽  
A.K. Chaudhary ◽  
Ashfaque Khan ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Primary Repair ◽  
Loop Ileostomy ◽  
Ileal Perforation ◽  
Versus Loop

scholarly journals A Comparative Study between the Outcome of Primary Repair versus Loop Ileostomy in Ileal Perforation

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sushil Mittal ◽  
Harnam Singh ◽  
Anand Munghate ◽  
Gurpreet Singh ◽  
Anjna Garg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Indian Subcontinent ◽  
Primary Repair ◽  
Loop Ileostomy ◽  
Ileal Perforation ◽  
Defunctioning Ileostomy ◽  
Surgical Emergency ◽  
Abdominal Emergencies ◽  
Group A ◽  
Perforation Peritonitis ◽  
Group B

Introduction. Ileal perforation peritonitis is a common surgical emergency in the Indian subcontinent and in tropical countries. It is reported to constitute the fifth common cause of abdominal emergencies due to high incidence of enteric fever and tuberculosis in these regions.Methods. Sixty proven cases of ileal perforation patients admitted to Surgical Emergency were taken up for emergency surgery. Randomisation was done by senior surgeons by picking up card from both the groups. The surgical management was done as primary repair (group A) and loop ileostomy (group B).Results. An increased rate of postoperative complications was seen in group A when compared with group B with 6 (20%) patients landed up in peritonitis secondary to leakage from primary repair requiring reoperation as compared to 2 (6.67%) in ileostomy closure. A ratio of 1 : 1.51 days was observed between hospital stay of group A to group B.Conclusion. In cases of ileal perforation temporary defunctioning loop ileostomy plays an important role. We recommend that defunctioning ileostomy should be preferred over other surgical options in cases of ileal perforations. It should be recommended that ileostomy in these cases is only temporary and the extra cost and cost of management are not more than the price of life.

Loop Ileostomy versus Loop Colostomy for Defunctioning Low Anastomoses during Rectal Cancer Surgery

2001 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 274-278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Rullier ◽  
Nathalie Le Toux ◽  
Christophe Laurent ◽  
Jean-Luc Garrelon ◽  
Michel Parneix ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Loop Ileostomy ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Loop Colostomy ◽  
Rectal Cancer Surgery ◽  
Versus Loop

A Comparative Study of Two Methods of Controlled Mobilization of Flexor Tendon Repairs in Zone 2

1998 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
F H. PECK ◽  
C. A. BÜCHER ◽  
J. S. WATSON ◽  
A. ROE
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Prospective Study ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Flexor Tendon ◽  
Primary Repair ◽  
Tendon Injuries ◽  
Matched Pairs ◽  
Motion Group ◽  
Active Motion ◽  
Injury Characteristics

This prospective study compares subjects following primary repair of flexor tendons in zone 2 using either controlled active motion or a modified Kleinert regime. A matched pairs design was employed, subjects being matched for gender, age and injury characteristics. Twenty-six pairs of subjects with 92 tendon injuries in 52 digits were assessed 12 weeks postoperatively in respect of range of motion and dehiscence. Outcomes were defined using the Strickland criteria. No statistically significant differences in respect of range of motion were demonstrated between the groups. Incidence of rupture, however, was significantly less in the modified Kleinert group (7.7%) than in the controlled active motion group (46%).

scholarly journals A study of surgical approach to typhoid ileal perforation at a tertiary care hospital of South Gujarat, India

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 1758
Author(s):  
Archana A. Nema ◽  
Jitendra R. Darshan
Keyword(s):  
Primary Closure ◽  
Loop Ileostomy ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Exploratory Laparotomy ◽  
High Rate ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Ileal Perforation ◽  
Mortality And Morbidity ◽  
Clinical Presentations ◽  
Enteric Perforation

Background: Even with variety of procedures, typhoid (enteric) perforation still has a high rate of morbidity and mortality. The aim of the present study is to study clinical presentations, to evaluate management pattern of typhoid ileal perforation, to determine mortality and morbidity of perforation and to study the re-exploration rate and causes of re-exploration and its effect on mortality and morbidityMethods: This prospective observational study was conducted in the Departments of Surgery at Surat Municipal Institute of Medical Education and Research, Surat during June 2008 till October 2010. A total 45 patients with typhoid ileal perforation were included in the study. Among them, 32 cases (71%) undergone the simple primary closure of the perforation and peritoneal lavage after refreshing the edge, 7 cases (16%) undergone exploratory laparotomy with proximal loop ileostomy with primary closure and 6 (13%) were operated by exploratory laparotomy with resection anastomosis.Results: Mean duration of the stay for patient undergone PC+PL was 10.20 days and for ileostomy it was 18.4 days and for RA + PL it was 18.6 days. Total 37 incidence of complications were found in 45 cases. Among them wound infection was presented in 16 (43%) and burst abdomen presented in 2 (5%) cases. Fecal fistulae, post-operative collection and pneumonitis were present in 4 (11%) cases each.Conclusion: The overall mortality was found nearly 4 percent in our study. The typhoid ileal perforation should be always treated surgically. There are many operative techniques to deal with, but no one is full proof.

scholarly journals Open versus primary repair following hemorrhoidectomy for Grade III hemorrhoids: a prospective comparative study

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (10) ◽  
pp. 3377
Author(s):  
Abdul Ghader Barazandeh Moghadam ◽  
Shoaibuddin Mohammad ◽  
Bushra Khan
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Analysis ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Return To Work ◽  
Primary Repair ◽  
Anal Stenosis ◽  
P Value ◽  
Duration Of Surgery ◽  
Prospective Comparative Study ◽  
Open Versus ◽  
Grade Iii

Background: The debate on open versus primary closure following haemorrhoidectomy continues to be active.  Despite other methods like doppler guided haemorrhoidal artery ligation, sclerotherapy, cryotherapy, banding; open haemorrhoidectomy is performed at many places. The never-ending discussion on the better choice between open versus primary repair led to the initiation of this work.Methods: This is a prospective comparative study of a contiguous and continuous cohort of 105 cases. Alternate cases were assigned for either of the procedures. Only grade III haemorrhoids were included. Grade I and II haemorrhoids, cases treated earlier and recurrent haemorrhoids were excluded. Multiple parameters like duration of surgery, intraoperative and post-operative bleeding, pain duration and severity, time taken to return to work, use of dressings and sitz bath, wound healing time and stenosis were studied. A blinded statistical analysis was done by a third-party statistician. Results: Primary haemorrhoidectomy took a significantly longer time (P value- 0.0043). Pain was significantly less with open haemorrhoidecomy (P value- 0.0023). Post-operative pain was significant in primary repair. Pain was assessed using visual analogue scale and verbal rating scale. Open haemorrhoidectomy took a significantly longer time to heal (P value: 0.0004) and return to work (P value: 0.0001). Primary repair had stenosis requiring dilatation in a few cases. Statistical analysis was done in all cases. Conclusions: Primary repair seems to be preferred because of shorter duration of recovery despite more pain and occasional anal stenosis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document