Treatment of colonoscopic perforation: outcomes from a major single tertiary institution

2Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: The use of colonoscopy has been increasing in Australia. This case series describes management and outcomes of colonoscopic perforation managed by a single tertiary referral unit. Methods: An analysis of 13 years (2003–2015) of prospectively collected data on patients who had a colonoscopic perforation and were managed by the colorectal unit at a single tertiary referral centre was performed. Main outcomes were time of diagnosis, modality of management, time to theatre, length of stay, cost of admission and complications. Results: Sixty-two patients had perforations (median age of 69 years). Thirty-eight (61.2%) patients had their colonoscopy performed in another institution. The incidence rate decreased to 0.37 perforations per 1000 colonoscopies within Western Health. Overall, diagnostic colonoscopies accounted for 56% of perforations and perforations were likely to occur in the left colon (P = 0.006). Fifty-one (82%) patients underwent surgery during their admission, with 24% of these being laparoscopic procedures. An earlier diagnosis was associated with significantly less intra-abdominal contamination. Gross peritoneal contamination was more likely to be associated with the decision to form a stoma (37%, n = 19, P = 0.04). Thirty-day mortality was 1.6% (n = 1). Conclusions: Colonoscopic perforations occur in experienced hands and may have serious implications. We demonstrated a difference in patterns of injury between therapeutic and diagnostic colonoscopies. Those who have an earlier diagnosis are less likely to have severe intra-abdominal contamination requiring a stoma formation.

Author supplied keywords

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Chew, C. R., Yeung, J. M. C., & Faragher, I. G. (2019). Treatment of colonoscopic perforation: outcomes from a major single tertiary institution. ANZ Journal of Surgery, 89(5), 546–551. https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.15068

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free