No abstract

No abstract

A syndesmosis is defined as a fibrous joint in which two adjacent bones are linked by a strong membrane or ligaments. This definition also applies for the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis, which is a syndesmotic joint formed by two bones and four ligaments. The distal tibia and fibula form the osseous part of the syndesmosis and are linked by the distal anterior tibiofibular ligament, the distal posterior tibiofibular ligament, the transverse ligament and the interosseous ligament. Although the syndesmosis is a joint, in the literature the term syndesmotic injury is used to describe injury of the syndesmotic ligaments. In an estimated 1-11% of all ankle sprains, injury of the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis occurs. Forty percent of patients still have complaints of ankle instability 6 months after an ankle sprain. This could be due to widening of the ankle mortise as a result of increased length of the syndesmotic ligaments after acute ankle sprain. As widening of the ankle mortise by 1 mm decreases the contact area of the tibiotalar joint by 42%, this could lead to instability and hence early osteoarthritis of the tibiotalar joint. In fractures of the ankle, syndesmotic injury occurs in about 50% of type Weber B and in all of type Weber C fractures. However, in discussing syndesmotic injury, it seems the exact proximal and distal boundaries of the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis are not well defined. There is no clear statement in the Ashhurst and Bromer etiological, the LaugeHansen genetic or the Danis-Weber topographical fracture classification about the exact extent of the syndesmosis. This joint is also not clearly defined in anatomical textbooks, such as Lanz and Wachsmuth. Kelikian and Kelikian postulate that the distal tibiofibular joint begins at the level of origin of the tibiofibular ligaments from the tibia and ends where these ligaments insert into the fibular malleolus. As the syndesmosis of the ankle plays an important role in the stability of the talocrural joint, understanding of the exact anatomy of both the osseous and ligamentous structures is essential in interpreting plain radiographs, CT and MR images, in ankle arthroscopy and in therapeutic management. With this pictorial essay we try to fill the hiatus in anatomic knowledge and provide a detailed anatomic description of the syndesmotic bones with the incisura fibularis, the syndesmotic recess, synovial fold and tibiofibular contact zone and the four syndesmotic ligaments. Each section describes a separate syndesmotic structure, followed by its clinical relevance and discussion of remaining questions.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leakage remains a major complication after surgery for colorectal carcinoma, but its origin is still unknown. Our hypothesis was that early anastomotic leakage is mostly related to technical failure of the anastomosis, and that late anastomotic leakage is mostly related to healing deficiencies. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess differences in risk factors for early and late anastomotic leakage. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. Settings: The Dutch ColoRectal Audit is a nationwide project that collects information on all Dutch patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. PATIENTS: All patients undergoing surgical resection for colorectal cancer in the Netherlands between 2011 and 2015 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Late anastomotic leakage was defined as anastomotic leakage leading to reintervention later than 6 days postoperatively. RESULTS: In total, 36,929 patients were included; early anastomotic leakage occurred in 863 (2.3%) patients, and late anastomotic leakage occurred in 674 (1.8%) patients. From a multivariable multinomial logistic regression model, independent predictors of early anastomotic leakage relative to no anastomotic leakage and late anastomotic leakage relative to no anastomotic leakage included male sex (OR, 1.8; p < 0.001 and OR, 1.2; p = 0.013) and rectal cancer (OR, 2.1; p < 0.001 and OR, 1.6; p = 0.046). Additional independent predictors of early anastomotic leakage relative to no anastomotic leakage included BMI (OR, 1.1; p = 0.001), laparoscopy (OR, 1.2; p = 0.019), emergency surgery (OR, 1.8; p < 0.001), and no diverting ileostomy (OR, 0.3; p < 0.001). Independent predictors of late anastomotic leakage relative to no anastomotic leakage were Charlson Comorbidity Index of ≥II (OR, 1.3; p = 0.003), ASA score III to V (OR, 1.2; p = 0.030), preoperative tumor complications (OR, 1.1; p = 0.048), extensive additional resection because of tumor growth (OR, 1.7; p = 0.003), and preoperative radiation (OR, 2.0; p = 0.010). LIMITATIONS: This was an observational cohort study. CONCLUSIONS: Most risk factors for early anastomotic leakage were surgery-related factors, representing surgical difficulty, which might lead to technical failure of the anastomosis. Most risk factors for late anastomotic leakage were patient-related factors, representing the frailty of patients and tissues, which might imply healing deficiencies. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A730.

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose This study aims to increase knowledge of colorectal anastomotic leakage by performing an incidence study and risk factor analysis with new potential risk factors in a Dutch tertiary referral center. Methods All patients whom received a primary colorectal anastomosis between 1997 and 2007 were selected by means of operation codes. Patient records were studied for population description and risk factor analysis. Results In total 739 patients were included. Anastomotic leakage (AL) occurred in 64 (8.7%) patients of whom nine (14.1%) died. Median interval between operation and diagnosis was 8 days. The risk for AL was higher as the anastomoses were constructed more distally (p=0.019). Univariate analysis showed duration of surgery (p=0.038), BMI (p=0.001), time of surgery (p=0.029), prophylactic drainage (p=0.006) and time under anesthesia (p=0.012) to be associated to AL. Multivariate analysis showed BMI greater than 30 kg/m 2 (p=0.006; OR 2.6 CI 1.3-5.2) and "after hours" construction of an anastomosis (p=0.030; OR 2.2 CI 1.1-4.5) to be independent risk factors. Conclusion BMI greater than 30 kg/m 2 and "after hours" construction of an anastomosis were independent risk factors for colorectal anastomotic leakage.

It has been suggested that early development of the incisional hernia is caused by perioperative factors, such as surgical technique and wound infection. Late development may implicate other factors, such as connective tissue disorders. Our objective was to establish whether incisional hernia develops early after abdominal surgery (i.e., during the first postoperative month). Patients who underwent a midline laparotomy between 1995 and 2001 and had had a computed tomography (CT) scan of the abdomen during the first postoperative month were identified retrospectively. The distance between the two rectus abdominis muscles was measured on these CT scans, after which several parameters were calculated to predict incisional hernia development. Hernia development was established clinically through chart review or, if the chart review was inconclusive, by an outpatient clinic visit. The average and maximum distances between the left and right rectus abdominis muscles were significantly larger in patients with subsequent incisional hernia development than in those without an incisional hernia (P < 0.0001). Altogether, 92% (23/25) of incisional hernia patients had a maximum distance of more than 25 mm compared to only 18% (5/28) of patients without an incisional hernia (P < 0.0001). Incisional hernia occurrence can thus be predicted by measuring the distance between the rectus abdominis muscles on a postoperative CT scan. Although an incisional hernia develops within weeks of surgery, its clinical manifestation may take years. Our results indicate perioperative factors as the main cause of incisional hernias. Therefore, incisional hernia prevention should focus on perioperative factors.