Efficacy of tube Cecostomy in preventing post appendectomy fistula

Maryam Tariq, Javeria Kanwal, Shahreen Gillani

Abstract


Objective: This study was conducted to determine role of tube cecostomy in preventing fecal fistula formation after appendectomy in the patients with appendicular mass or abscess.

Study design and Duration: It is a descriptive case series study. Study was started in July 2017 and it was completed in December 2017 comprising on 6 months duration.

Setting: This study was conducted in surgical unit of Bahawal Victoria Hospital Bahawalpur, Pakistan.

Patients and Methods: In this study 34 cases were included having appendicular mass or appendicular abscess. These cases were admitted in the ward via emergency department. Initially detailed history was taken and thorough examination was done. All necessary investigations were carried out to confirm the diagnosis. An inclusion criterion was formed on which basis only those cases were included in this study which presented with appendicular abscess or phlegmon formation. After investigations, which cases had other diagnosis, they were excluded from the study. All data of the patients in study group was documented properly. After taking anesthesia fitness these cases were operated and tube cecostomy was performed after appendectomy. These cases were retained in the ward for 4-6 days. Monitoring was done. Findings per operating were noted down. Complications during operation or after it were observed. Which cases developed any complication they were retained for more time and other cases were discharged on good antibiotics and they were called on follow-up after 10 days. Proper consent was taken from the patients for including their data in the study. Consent was also taken from the in charge of ward for conducting this study. Data was analyzed on Microsoft office and SPSS version 2017 and results were calculated in the form of frequencies and expressed in tables and graphs.     

Results: Total 34 cases were studied. Ages of these cases was ranging from 15-50 years with mean age of 27.5 years. Minimum age of the patient was 15 years and maximum age reported was 46 years. Most of the cases were between 20-30 years age. During operation findings were gangrenous appendix in 14 cases, perforated appendix with abscess formation in 12 cases and in 8 cases there was perforated appendix without abscess formation which presented relatively earlier. Complications after tube cecostomy included leakage from pericatheter in 3 cases, early dislodgement of catheter occurred in one case and retained catheter in 2 cases. After removal of catheter fistula formation was not seen in any patient that indicated this method prevents fecal fistula formation and it is much safe method with less morbidity and early recovery. Post operative complications were seen in 6 cases and in rest of 28 cases no complications occurred. There were both male and female patients In this study accounting 22 males and 12 females.     

Conclusion: After appendectomy for appendicular abscess or appendicular mass fecal fistula formation is much common, this can be prevented by tube cecostomy. It is a very effective procedure and simple to perform with good outcome


Keywords


Appendicular mass, Appendicular bscess, tube cecostomy

Full Text:

PDF

References


Khan A W, Sheikh S H, Rahman M A. Results of emergency appendectomy for appendicular mass. Mymensingh Med J 2007; 16: 209-13.

De U, Ghosh S. Acute appendicectomy for appendi-cular mass: a study of 87 patients. Ceylon Med J 2002; 47: 117-8.

Taj M H, Qureshi S A. Early surgical management of appendicular mass. J Surg Pakistan 2006; 11: 52-6.

Erdooan D, Karaman I, Narci A, Karaman A, Cavu-poolu Y H, Aslan M K, Cakmak O. Comparison of two methods for the management for appendicular mass in children. Pediatr Surg Int 2005; 21: 81-3.

Ho C M, Chen Y, Lai H S, Lin W H, Hsu W M, Chen W J. Comparison of critical conservative treatment versus emergency operation in children with ruptured appendicitis with tumor formation. J Formos Med Assoc 2004; 103: 359-63.

Lasson A, Lundagards J, Loren I, Nilsson P E. Appendiceal abscesses: primary percutaneous drainage and selective interval appendicectomy. Eur J Surg 2002; 168: 264-9.

Ali N, Javaid A. Role of tube cecostomy in preven-ting post appendicectomy abscess and fistula forma-tion. Pak J Med Sci 2005; 21: 285-88.

Rafi M, Arshad M S, Ahmad S, Haq R U. Appendi-cectomy; non-invagination vs. invagination of appendicular stump. Ann King Edward Med Coll 2006; 12: 58-60.

Hrivo A, Besznyak I. Changing diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to the ‘Ogilvie syndrome’. Acta Chir Hung 1998; 37: 1-9.

Clark D D, Hubay C A. Tube cecostomy: an evalua-tion of 161 cases. Ann Surg 1972; 175: 55-61.

Benacci J C, Wolff B G. Cecostomy. Therapeutic indications and results. Dis colon Rectum 1995; 38: 530-4.

Vaughn P, Schilinkert R T. Management of ceacel perforation secondary to Ogilvie’s syndrome by laparoscopic tube cecostomy. J Laparo-endoscopic Surgery 1995; 5: 339-34.

Lewin J, Fenyo G, Engstrom L. Treatment of appendiceal abscess. Acta Chir Scand 1988; 154: 123-5.

Rintoul R F. Operations on appendix. Rintoul R F. Farquharson’s Textbook of Operative Surgery. Churchill Livingstone New York 1995: 451-8.

Ellis B W. Acute appendicitis. Ellis B W. Hamilton Bailey’s Emergency Surgery. Cambridge: Butter-worth Heinmann 1995; 411-3.

Thompson J E, Bennion R S, Schmit P J, Hiyama D T. Cecostomy for complicated appendicitis. J Am Coll Surg 1994; 179: 135-8.

Lane J S, Schmit P J, Chandler C F, Bennion R S. Ileostomy is definitive treatment for advanced appendicitis. Am Surg 2001; 67: 1117-22.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.