Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Postoperative Pathophysiology and Choice of Incision

  • Conference paper
Rectal Cancer Treatment

Part of the book series: Recent Results in Cancer Research ((RECENTCANCER,volume 165))

  • 932 Accesses

Abstract

In the few days following major surgical procedures, there are three main physiologic processes which are amenable to surgical management: restoration of fluid and electrolyte homeostasis, management of pain, and attention to gastrointestinal function. New information regarding optimizing the management of these processes is presented, which may accelerate recovery and give improved comfort following abdominal surgery. The type of incision used seems not to be a major factor in such recovery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Waters JH, Gottlieb A, Schoenwald P, et al. (2001) Normal saline versus lactated Ringer's solution for intraoperative fluid management in patients undergoing abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: an outcome study. Anesth Analg 93:817–822

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Lobo DN, Dube MG, Neal KR, et al. (2002) Peri-operative fluid and electrolyte management: a survey of consultant surgeons in the UK. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 84:156–160

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cataldo P, Senagore A, Kilbride M. Ketorolac and Patient Controlled Analgesia in the Treatment of Postoperative Pain (1993) Surg Gynecol Obst 176:435–438

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dowling R, Thielmeier K, Ghaly A, et al. (2003) Improved pain control after cardiac surgery: results of a randomized, double-blind, clinical trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 126:1271–1278

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ilfeld BM, Morey TE, Enneking FK (2003) Portable infusion pumps used for continuous regional analgesia: delivery rate accuracy and consistency. Reg Anesth Pain Med 28:424–432

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kulkarni M, Elliot D (2003) Local anaesthetic infusion for postoperative pain. J Hand Surg [Br] 28:300–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Holte K, Kehlet H (2002) Postoperative ileus: progress towards effective management. Drugs 62:2603–2615

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kehlet H, Holte K (2001) Review of postoperative ileus. Am J Surg 182(5A Suppl):3S–10S

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Holte K, Kehlet H (2000) Postoperative ileus: a preventable event. Br J Surg 87:1480–1493

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Liu SS, Carpenter RL, Mackey DC, et al. (1995) Effects of perioperative analgesic technique on rate of recovery after colon surgery. Anesthesiology 83:757–765

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Paulson E, Porter M, Helmer S, et al. (2001) Thoracic epidural vs. patient-controlled analgesia in elective bowel resections. Am J Surg 182:570–577

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Burger JW, van 't Riet M, Jeekel J (2002) Abdominal incisions: techniques and postoperative complications. Scand J Surg 91:315–321

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Grantcharov TP, Rosenberg J (2001) Vertical compared with transverse incisions in abdominal surgery. Eur J Surg 167:260–267

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lindgren PG, Nordgren SR, Oresland T, Hulten L (2001) Midline or transverse abdominal incision for right-sided colon cancer-a randomized trial. Colorectal Dis 3:46–50

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cheatham ML, Chapman WC, Key SP, JL S (1995) A meta-analysis of selective versus routine nasogastric decompression after elective laparotomy. Ann Surg 221:469–478

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Moss G, Regal M, Lichtig L (1986) Reducing postoperative pain, narcotics, and length of hospitalization. Surgery 99:206–209

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Holte K, Kehlet H (2002) Prevention of postoperative ileus. Minerva Anestesiol 68:152–156

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Pearl ML, Valea FA, Fischer M, et al. (1998) A randomized controlled trial of early postoperative feeding in gynecologic oncology patients undergoing intra-abdominal surgery. Obstet Gynecol 92:94–97

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Reissman P, Teoh T, Wexner S, et al. (1995) Is Early oral feeding safe after elective colorectal surgery? Ann Surg 222:73–77

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Steed HL, Capstick V, Flood C, et al. (2002) A randomized controlled trial of early versus “traditional” postoperative oral intake after major abdominal gynecologic surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 186:861–865

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Binderow S, Cohen S, SD W, Nogueras J (1994) Must early postoperative oral intake be limited to laparoscopy? Dis Colon Rectum 37(6):584–89

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Bisgaard T, Kehlet H (2002) Early oral feeding after elective abdominal surgery-what are the issues? Nutrition 18:944–948

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Choi J, O' Connell T (1996) Safe and effective early postoperative feeding and hospital discharge after open colon resection. American Surgeon 62:853–856

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Melbert R, Kimmins M, JT I, et al. (2002) Use of a critical pathway for colon resections. J Gastrointest Surg 6:745–752

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Delaney C, Fazio V, Senegore A, et al. (2001) “Fast track” postoperative management protocol for patients with high co-morbidity undergoing complex abdominal and pelvic colorectal surgery. Br J Surg 88:1533–1538

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hotokezaka M, Dix J, Mentis EP, et al. (1996) Gastrointestinal recovery following laparoscopic vs. open colon surgery. Surg Endosc 10:485–489

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Shang AB, Gan TJ (2003) Optimising postoperative pain management in the ambulatory patient. Drugs 63:855–867

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hutchinson R, Griffiths C (1992) Acute colonic pseudo-obstruction: a pharmacological approach. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 74:364–367

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Trevisani GT, Hyman NH, Church JM (2000) Neostigmine: safe and effective treatment for acute colonic pseudo-obstruction. Dis Colon Rectum 43:599–603

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Bungard TJ, Kale-Pradhan PB (1999) Prokinetic agents for the treatment of postoperative ileus in adults: a review of the literature [In Process Citation]. Pharmacotherapy 19:416–423

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Miedema BW, Johnson JO (2003) Methods for decreasing postoperative gut dysmotility. Lancet Oncol 4:365–372

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Kehlet H, Dahl JB (2003) Anaesthesia, surgery, and challenges in postoperative recovery. Lancet 362:1921–1928

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Taguchi A, Sharma N, Saleem R, et al. (2001) Selective postoperative inhibition of gastrointestinal opioid receptors. NEJM 345:935–940

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Wolff BG, Michelassi F, Gerkin TM, Group TAS. Alvimopan, a novel, peripherally-acting mu opioid antagonist: results of a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III clinical trial of major abdominal surgery and postoperative ileus (Study 14CL313) (2004) American Surgical Association Annual Scientific Meeting 2004

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

    Richard P. Billingham

Authors
  1. Richard P. Billingham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Abteilung für Allgemeine, Viszerale, Unfallchirurgie und Poliklinik, Chirurgische Universitätsklinik Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany

    Markus W. Büchler  & Jürgen Weitz  & 

  2. Chirurgie, Krankenhaus Gerresheim, Kliniken der Landeshauptstadt, Gräulinger Straße 120, 40625, Düsseldorf, Germany

    Bernward Ulrich

  3. The Pelican Cancer Foundation, North Hampshire Hospital, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG24 9NA, UK

    Richard John Heald (OBE, Surgical Director) (OBE, Surgical Director)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Billingham, R.P. (2005). Postoperative Pathophysiology and Choice of Incision. In: Büchler, M.W., Weitz, J., Ulrich, B., Heald, R.J. (eds) Rectal Cancer Treatment. Recent Results in Cancer Research, vol 165. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-27449-9_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-27449-9_1

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-23341-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-27449-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation