Loading…

Patient‐reported and physician‐recorded bowel dysfunction following colorectal resection and radical cystectomy: a prospective, comparative study

Aim Bowel dysfunction following anterior resection (AR) is termed low anterior resection syndrome. It is unclear whether such dysfunction occurs following other bowel/pelvic operations as well. This study aimed to characterize and compare bowel dysfunction following AR, right hemicolectomy (RH) and...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Colorectal disease 2020-10, Vol.22 (10), p.1336-1347
Main Authors: Ng, K.‐S., Gladman, M. A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Aim Bowel dysfunction following anterior resection (AR) is termed low anterior resection syndrome. It is unclear whether such dysfunction occurs following other bowel/pelvic operations as well. This study aimed to characterize and compare bowel dysfunction following AR, right hemicolectomy (RH) and radical cystectomy (RC). Method A prospective study of consecutive patients undergoing AR, RH and RC (2002–2012) was performed at a tertiary referral centre in Sydney, Australia. Outcome measures included (i) patient‐reported satisfaction with bowel function, self‐described bowel function and self‐reported change in bowel function; (ii) objective assessment of bowel function using validated criteria to identify symptoms and stratify patients into those with constipation and/or faecal incontinence (FI); and (iii) health‐related quality of life (SF‐36v2 Health Survey). Results Of 743 eligible patients, 70% participated [AR, n = 338, mean age 69.6 years (SD 11.9), 59% men; RH, n = 150, 75.8 years (SD 10.5), 54% men; RC, n = 34, 71.1 years (SD 14.1), 71% men]. AR patients were three times more likely to report change in bowel function post‐surgery and self‐judged their bowel function as abnormal more frequently (64%) than RH patients (35%) and RC patients (35%) (P 
ISSN:1462-8910
1463-1318
DOI:10.1111/codi.15041