Correspondence
4 Barussaud M-L, Mantoo S, Wyart V, Meurette G, Lehur P-A. The magnetic anal sphincter in faecal incontinence: is initial success sustained over time? Colorectal Dis 2013; 15: 1499–503. 5 Wong MTC, Meurette G, Stangherlin P, Lehur PA. The magnetic anal sphincter versus the artificial bowel sphincter: comparison of 2 treatments for fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 2011; 54: 773–9. 6 Wong MTC, Meurette G, Wyart V, Lehur PA. Does the magnetic anal sphincter device compare favourably with sacral nerve stimulation in the management of foecal incontinence? Colorectal Dis 2012; 14: 323–9. 7 Ganz RA, Gostout CJ, Grudem J, Swanson W, Berg T, DeMeester TR. Use of magnetic sphincter for the treatment of GERD: a feasibility study. Gastrointest Endosc 2008; 67: 287–94. 8 Bortolotti M, Grandis A, Mazzero G. A novel magnetic device to prevent fecal incontinence (preliminary study). Int J Colorectal Dis 2008; 23: 499–501.
Robotic transanal fistula repair – a video vignette doi:10.1111/codi.12799
Dear Sir, We present the case of a 59-year-old woman with a history of diverticulitis complicated by a stricture in her right ureter. She underwent a sigmoid colectomy and ultimately developed a colonic ureteral fistula. After radiological and endoscopic evaluation and diagnosis, a robotic natural orifice repair was performed. We achieved a robotic transanal fistula repair by utilizing a self-locking absorbable suture to close the fistula. The remaining track was obliterated by injecting fibrin glue via a cystoscopy. The patient was started on a clear liquid diet and was discharged on postoperative day one. The patient has been symptom free for 8 months and a follow-up computed tomography demonstrated successful closure of the fistula. This robotic transanal fistula repair is a technique that advanced robotic surgeons should possess in their armamentarium. The motion and degrees of freedom are unmatched compared with standard transanal surgery. This allows more complex surgery to be performed in a minimally invasive fashion.
R. Laird* and V. J. Obias† *Department of Surgery, George Washington University Hospital, 2150 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 6B, Washington, District of Columbia, 20037, USA and †Department of Colon and Rectal Surgery, George Washington University Hospital, Washington, District of Columbia, USA E-mail: [email protected]
Supporting Information The video may be found in the online version of this article and also on the Colorectal Disease Journal YouTube and Vimeo channels: Video S1. Robotic Transanal Fistula Repair. Data S1. Supporting Information.
Laparoscopic modified Sugarbaker technique for the repair of an urostomal hernia – a video vignette doi:10.1111/codi.12795
Dear Sir, Parastomal hernia is the most common long-term complication after radical cystectomy and ileal conduit diversion, occurring in approximately 30% of patients [1]. Most parastomal hernias are asymptomatic and can therefore be treated conservatively. The primary indication for surgical repair is poorly fitting ostomy appliances because of abdominal wall distortion, resulting in urine leakage. This leads to regular appliance changes and dramatically affects quality of life in these patients. Surgical repair is challenging and associated with high recurrence rates. The modified Laparoscopic Sugarbaker repair has been shown to have lower recurrence rates compared with other techniques for the repair of parastomal hernia [2]. We present a case of a 61-year-old man who had undergone a cystoprostatectomy with retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy and formation of an ileal conduit 1 year previously. He had a progressive parastomal hernia leading to appliance problems that required regular bag changes throughout the day. A CT scan showed a fascial defect cranial to the conduit (as is usually the case), and a small umbilical hernia. We performed a laparoscopic modified Sugarbaker repair with a ParietexTM Composite mesh (Covidien, Mansfield, MA, USA) with simultaneous covering of the umbilical defect (see Video S1). The patient had an uneventful postoperative course and was discharged home on postoperative day 5. A CT scan, 6 months later, showed no recurrence. The patient was extremely satisfied with the aesthetic result and reported no further problems with urine leakage or stoma appliance problems.
Received 12 August 2014; accepted 15 September 2014; Accepted Article online 14 October 2014
90
Colorectal Disease ª 2014 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland. 17, 87–91
Correspondence
M. P. Gosselink, A. Mishra, N. J. Mortensen, B. George, C. Cunningham, I. Lindsey, R. Guy, O. M. Jones and R. Hompes
2 Hansson BM, Slater NJ, van der Velden AS et al. Surgical techniques for parastomal hernia repair: a systematic review of the literature. Ann Surg 2012; 255: 685–95.
Department of Colorectal Surgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, Oxford, UK E-mail: [email protected]
Supporting Information
Received 30 September 2014; accepted 30 September 2014; Accepted Article online 8 October 2014
References
The video may be found in the online version of this article and also on the Colorectal Disease Journal YouTube and Vimeo channels: Video S1. A step-by-step overview of the technique for a modified sugerbaker repair of an urostomal hernia.
1 Liu NW, Hackney JT, Gullahs PT et al. Incidence and risk factors of parastomal hernia in patients undergoing radical cystectomy and ileal conduit diversion. J Urol 2014; 191: 1313–8.
Colorectal Disease ª 2014 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland. 17, 87–91
91
Copyright of Colorectal Disease is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
4 Barussaud M-L, Mantoo S, Wyart V, Meurette G, Lehur P-A. The magnetic anal sphincter in faecal incontinence: is initial success sustained over time? Colorectal Dis 2013; 15: 1499–503. 5 Wong MTC, Meurette G, Stangherlin P, Lehur PA. The magnetic anal sphincter versus the artificial bowel sphincter: comparison of 2 treatments for fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 2011; 54: 773–9. 6 Wong MTC, Meurette G, Wyart V, Lehur PA. Does the magnetic anal sphincter device compare favourably with sacral nerve stimulation in the management of foecal incontinence? Colorectal Dis 2012; 14: 323–9. 7 Ganz RA, Gostout CJ, Grudem J, Swanson W, Berg T, DeMeester TR. Use of magnetic sphincter for the treatment of GERD: a feasibility study. Gastrointest Endosc 2008; 67: 287–94. 8 Bortolotti M, Grandis A, Mazzero G. A novel magnetic device to prevent fecal incontinence (preliminary study). Int J Colorectal Dis 2008; 23: 499–501.
Robotic transanal fistula repair – a video vignette doi:10.1111/codi.12799
Dear Sir, We present the case of a 59-year-old woman with a history of diverticulitis complicated by a stricture in her right ureter. She underwent a sigmoid colectomy and ultimately developed a colonic ureteral fistula. After radiological and endoscopic evaluation and diagnosis, a robotic natural orifice repair was performed. We achieved a robotic transanal fistula repair by utilizing a self-locking absorbable suture to close the fistula. The remaining track was obliterated by injecting fibrin glue via a cystoscopy. The patient was started on a clear liquid diet and was discharged on postoperative day one. The patient has been symptom free for 8 months and a follow-up computed tomography demonstrated successful closure of the fistula. This robotic transanal fistula repair is a technique that advanced robotic surgeons should possess in their armamentarium. The motion and degrees of freedom are unmatched compared with standard transanal surgery. This allows more complex surgery to be performed in a minimally invasive fashion.
R. Laird* and V. J. Obias† *Department of Surgery, George Washington University Hospital, 2150 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 6B, Washington, District of Columbia, 20037, USA and †Department of Colon and Rectal Surgery, George Washington University Hospital, Washington, District of Columbia, USA E-mail: [email protected]
Supporting Information The video may be found in the online version of this article and also on the Colorectal Disease Journal YouTube and Vimeo channels: Video S1. Robotic Transanal Fistula Repair. Data S1. Supporting Information.
Laparoscopic modified Sugarbaker technique for the repair of an urostomal hernia – a video vignette doi:10.1111/codi.12795
Dear Sir, Parastomal hernia is the most common long-term complication after radical cystectomy and ileal conduit diversion, occurring in approximately 30% of patients [1]. Most parastomal hernias are asymptomatic and can therefore be treated conservatively. The primary indication for surgical repair is poorly fitting ostomy appliances because of abdominal wall distortion, resulting in urine leakage. This leads to regular appliance changes and dramatically affects quality of life in these patients. Surgical repair is challenging and associated with high recurrence rates. The modified Laparoscopic Sugarbaker repair has been shown to have lower recurrence rates compared with other techniques for the repair of parastomal hernia [2]. We present a case of a 61-year-old man who had undergone a cystoprostatectomy with retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy and formation of an ileal conduit 1 year previously. He had a progressive parastomal hernia leading to appliance problems that required regular bag changes throughout the day. A CT scan showed a fascial defect cranial to the conduit (as is usually the case), and a small umbilical hernia. We performed a laparoscopic modified Sugarbaker repair with a ParietexTM Composite mesh (Covidien, Mansfield, MA, USA) with simultaneous covering of the umbilical defect (see Video S1). The patient had an uneventful postoperative course and was discharged home on postoperative day 5. A CT scan, 6 months later, showed no recurrence. The patient was extremely satisfied with the aesthetic result and reported no further problems with urine leakage or stoma appliance problems.
Received 12 August 2014; accepted 15 September 2014; Accepted Article online 14 October 2014
90
Colorectal Disease ª 2014 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland. 17, 87–91
Correspondence
M. P. Gosselink, A. Mishra, N. J. Mortensen, B. George, C. Cunningham, I. Lindsey, R. Guy, O. M. Jones and R. Hompes
2 Hansson BM, Slater NJ, van der Velden AS et al. Surgical techniques for parastomal hernia repair: a systematic review of the literature. Ann Surg 2012; 255: 685–95.
Department of Colorectal Surgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, Oxford, UK E-mail: [email protected]
Supporting Information
Received 30 September 2014; accepted 30 September 2014; Accepted Article online 8 October 2014
References
The video may be found in the online version of this article and also on the Colorectal Disease Journal YouTube and Vimeo channels: Video S1. A step-by-step overview of the technique for a modified sugerbaker repair of an urostomal hernia.
1 Liu NW, Hackney JT, Gullahs PT et al. Incidence and risk factors of parastomal hernia in patients undergoing radical cystectomy and ileal conduit diversion. J Urol 2014; 191: 1313–8.
Colorectal Disease ª 2014 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland. 17, 87–91
91
Copyright of Colorectal Disease is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
