Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCinar, H.
dc.contributor.authorBerkesoglu, M.
dc.contributor.authorDerebey, M.
dc.contributor.authorKaradeniz, E.
dc.contributor.authorYildirim, C.
dc.contributor.authorKarabulut, K.
dc.contributor.authorErzurumlu, K.
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-21T13:11:04Z
dc.date.available2020-06-21T13:11:04Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.issn1119-3077
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.4103/njcp.njcp_172_17
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12712/11597
dc.descriptionWOS: 000439044700007en_US
dc.descriptionPubMed: 29888718en_US
dc.description.abstractPurpose: Anorectal foreign bodies (AFBs) inserted into anus constitute one of the most important problems needing surgical emergency due to its complications. We describe our experience in the diagnosis and treatment of AFBs retained in the rectosigmoid colon. Materials and Methods: Between the years 2006 and 2015, a total of 11 patients diagnosed with AFBs were admitted to an emergency room and general surgery clinics. They were diagnosed and treated in four different hospitals in four different cities in Turkey. Information on the AFBs, clinical presentation, treatment strategies, and outcomes were documented. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of these unusual patients. Results: Eleven patients were involved in this study. All patients were male with their mean age was 49.81 (range, 23-71) years. The time of the presentation to the removal of the foreign bodies ranged between 2 h and 96 h with a mean of 19.72 h. Ten patients inserted AFBs in the anus with the purpose of eroticism but one patient's reason to relieve constipation. The objects were one body spray can, two bottles, three dildos, two sticks, one water hose, one corncob, and one pointed squash. Three objects were removed transanally after anal dilatation under general anesthesia. Eight of the patients required laparotomy (milking, primary suture, and colostomy). Five of the patients had perforation of the rectosigmoid colon. Abdominal abscess complicated extraction in one patient after the postoperative period. The hospitalization time of the patients was 6.18 (1-16) days. None of the patients died. Conclusions: A careful assessment is a key point for the correct diagnosis and treatment of AFBs. Clinical conditions of patients and type of AFBs are important in the choice of treatment strategy. If the AFBs are large, proximally migrated or the patients with an AFB have acute abdomen due to perforation, pelvic abscess, obstruction, or bleeding, surgery is needed as soon as possible. There are different types of surgical approaches such as less invasive transanal extraction under anesthesia and more invasive abdominal routes such as laparotomy or laparoscopy. The stoma can be done if there is colonic perforation. In the management of AFBs, the priority must be less invasive methods as possible.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherWolters Kluwer Medknow Publicationsen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.4103/njcp.njcp_172_17en_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectAcute abdomenen_US
dc.subjectanorectal foreign bodyen_US
dc.subjecteroticismen_US
dc.subjectsurgical treatmenten_US
dc.titleSurgical Management of Anorectal Foreign Bodiesen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentOMÜen_US
dc.identifier.volume21en_US
dc.identifier.issue6en_US
dc.identifier.startpage721en_US
dc.identifier.endpage725en_US
dc.relation.journalNigerian Journal of Clinical Practiceen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record