Abstract Purpose Anal abscesses are common and, despite correct treatment with surgical drainage, carry the risk of developing fistulas. Studies identifying risk factors for the development of anal fistulas are sparse. This study aimed to identify the risk factors for anal fistulas after anal abscess surgery. Methods This was a multicentre, retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing acute surgery for anal abscesses in the Capital Region of Denmark between 2018 and 2019. The patients were identified using ICD-10 codes for anal abscesses. Predefined clinicopathological factors and postoperative courses were extracted from patient records. Results A total of 475 patients were included. At a median follow-up time of 1108 days (IQR 946–1320 days) following surgery, 164 (33.7%) patients were diagnosed with an anal fistula. Risk factors for developing fistulas were low intersphincteric (OR 2.77, 95CI 1.50–5.06) and ischioanal (OR 2.48, 95CI 1.36–4.47) abscesses, Crohn’s disease (OR 5.96, 95CI 2.33–17.2), a history of recurrent anal abscesses (OR 4.14, 95CI 2.47–7.01) or repeat surgery (OR 5.96, 95CI 2.33–17.2), E. coli -positive pus cultures (OR 4.06, 1.56–11.4) or preoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) of more than 100 mg/L (OR 3.21, 95CI 1.57–6.71). Conclusion Several significant clinical risk factors were associated with fistula development following anal abscess surgery. These findings are clinically relevant and could influence the selection of patients for specialised follow-up, facilitate expedited diagnosis, and potentially prevent unnecessarily long treatment courses.
Anal abscesses are well-known conditions worldwide. The golden standard of acute treatment is incision and drainage. Knowledge of the anatomy of the anal area and the abscess involvement of perianal spaces is crucial in order to perform safe and correct surgical treatment as summarised in this review. Pre- and perioperative imaging with magnetic resonance imaging, endoanal ultrasonography or CT facilitates correct incision and drainage, while antibiotics as conservative approach have no place in the treatment of abscesses. One third of the patients have an underlying fistula, and if suspected referral to a fistula centre is warranted.
Two studies were done on cryptosporidiosis in children. A retrospective survey showed that from 2005 to 2015, Cryptosporidium species was detected by microscopy of stool from 0.25% of children with diarrhea. In a subsequent prospective study, polymerase chain reaction detected Cryptosporidium species in 4 (1.3%) of 304 children. Cryptosporidium species is as frequent as other intestinal pathogens in childhood diarrhea. Testing is relevant.
Microscopically positive (R1) margins are associated with poorer outcomes in patients with colorectal cancer. However, the impact of subdivisions of R1 margins, be they to the primary tumour (R1 tumour) or to lymph node metastases (R1LNM), on patterns of relapse is unknown.Patients treated for stage III colorectal cancer from 01 January 2016 to 31 December 2019 in four specialist centres were identified from the Danish national cancer registry. Patients were stratified into three groups according to margin status (R0 vs. R1 tumour vs. R1LNM). The primary outcomes were local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), distant metastases-free survival (DMFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS).A total of 1,164 patients were included, with R1 margins found in 237 (20.4%). Irrespective of tumour location, R1 tumour and R1LNM margins were independent prognostic factors for systemic relapse (R1 tumour HR 1.84, CI: 1.17-2.88, p = 0.008; R1LNM HR 1.59, CI: 1.12-2.27, p = 0.009) and disease-related death (R1 tumour HR 2.08, CI: 1.12-3.85, p = 0.020; R1LNM HR 1.84, CI: 1.12-3.02, p = 0.016). Whereas R1 tumour margins were associated with poorer 3-year LRFS in both colon and rectum cancer, R1LNM margins only reduced LRFS in patients with rectal cancer. Patterns of relapse differed between R1 subdivisions, with R1 tumour margins more likely to affect multiple anatomical sites, with a predilection for extra-hepatic/pulmonary metastases.Subdivisions of R1 margins have a distinct impact on the oncological outcomes and patterns of disease relapse in patients with stage III colorectal cancer.
A tailgut cyst is a rare tumour originating from the embryonic remnant of the retrorectal space. The cyst is often asymptomatic, but it can cause abdominal or rectal pain and urogenital symptoms. When diagnosed, resection is the choice of treatment, and traditionally open surgery has been preferred. In this case report, we present a 30-year-old female patient with a painful tailgut cyst. She was found to be candidate for transanal endoscopic microsurgery, which was successfully performed.
Microscopically positive margins to lymph node metastases (R1LNM) are associated with poorer oncological outcomes in patients with Stage 3 colon cancer. These poorer outcomes were seen despite a greater proportion of these patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy when compared to those with microscopically negative (R0) margins. We sought to determine if differences in the type or duration of adjuvant chemotherapy could account for the differences in outcomes seen between patients with R0 and R1LNM margins.A multicentre retrospective study including patients undergoing surgery for Stage 3 colon cancer between 2016-2019 at specialist centres. Patients were stratified according to margins status (R0 vs R1LNM). Type/duration of chemotherapy and oncological outcomes were compared between groups.718 patients were included, of whom 100 had R1LNM margins (13.1%). Patients with R1LNM margins had significantly poorer 3-year distant metastases-free (R0 78.2% (95% CI 74.5-81.3) versus R1LNM 58.8% (95% CI 47.2-68.6), p < 0.001) and disease specific survival (R0 88.3% (95% CI 85.2-90.9) versus R1LNM 78.5% (95% CI 68.0-85.8), p < 0.001) when compared to those with R0 margins. No differences were noted in the proportion of patients who completed long-course chemotherapy or were treated with oxaliplatin-based combinations between the R1LNM and R0 groups. Differences in outcomes between R0 and R1LNM groups persisted even when only those patients who completed long-course chemotherapy were compared.Differences in adjuvant chemotherapy do not appear to account for the poorer oncological outcomes seen in patients with R1LNM margins after surgery for Stage 3 colon cancer. This suggests that adjuvant chemotherapy may be less effective in this patient group. Further studies to elucidate a potential biological basis for this difference are warranted.
