↓ Skip to main content

Segmental resection with primary anastomosis is not always safe in splenic flexure perforation

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Segmental resection with primary anastomosis is not always safe in splenic flexure perforation
Published in
BMC Research Notes, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13104-016-1841-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elroy P. Weledji, Martin D. Mokake, Motaze Sinju

Abstract

Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is caused by a rare mutation of the adenomatous polyposis coli gene on Chromosome 5q. The risk of colorectal cancer in patients with FAP is nearly 100 % and intensive endoscopic surveillance or prophylactic colectomy are mandatory. If extensive endoscopic surveillance is chosen, there is a cumulative risk of perforation and bleeding especially after polypectomy. We discussed the problems and options in the management of the late diagnosis of an iatrogenic perforation of the splenic flexure complicating endoscopic surveillance in FAP. We present a 35-year-old black African man with FAP who sustained a splenic flexure perforation following a colonoscopic polypectomy of a suspicious lesion. He underwent a splenic flexure resection and primary anastomosis that dehisced and the patient benefited from an emergency definitive colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis. Resection with primary anastomosis following iatrogenic perforation of the splenic flexure is not safe because of a high chance of anastomotic dehiscence. Following a late diagnosis in an unstable patient exteriorization of the perforation as a stoma is a better option prior to a definitive prophylactic colectomy.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 2 13%
Researcher 2 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Librarian 1 6%
Unspecified 1 6%
Other 3 19%
Unknown 5 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 31%
Computer Science 1 6%
Unspecified 1 6%
Social Sciences 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 44%