HIGHLIGHTSGastrointestinal tract recurrences from cutaneous melanoma are not uncommon.Patients may present with anemia and/or melena or with obstructive symptoms.Surgical resection provides effective palliation and, potentially, improves survival.

No abstract

Aim The aim of the study was to compare the incidence of perineal hernia and the perineal wound morbidity following extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) between two groupsprimary perineal closure and reconstruction with a biological mesh. Method One hundred and forty-seven consecutive patients who underwent ELAPE for primary rectal cancer between January 2007 and December 2018 in two tertiary referral centres were retrospectively identified from prospective databases. Perineal closure was carried out via primary closure or with a biological mesh (porcine dermal collagen mesh). Outcome measures were perineal hernia and perineal wound morbidity (infection, dehiscence, persistent sinus and chronic pain). Results A total of 139 patients were included in the study. A prophylactic mesh was used in 80 (57.5%) and primary closure was practised in 59 (42.4%) patients. The median follow-up was 30 (interquartile range 46.88) months. Thirty patients (21.6%) developed perineal hernia. No significant differences were found between prophylactic mesh and primary closure (16.3% vs 23.3%, P = 0.07). The median period between surgery and hernia diagnosis was 8 months in the primary closure group and 24 months in the mesh group (P < 0.01). Perineal wound morbidity was significantly higher in the prophylactic mesh group (55% vs 33.9%, P < 0.01). Conclusion In our study, the use of a biological mesh did not reduce the rate of perineal hernia, although it did delay its appearance. Perineal closure using a biological mesh may increase perineal morbidity, both acute and chronic. Keywords Biological mesh, extralevator abdominoperineal excision, perineal wound morbidity, rectal cancer, primary perineal wound closure What does this paper add to literature? Although diverse methods have been described for repairing the pelvic floor defect after extralevator abdominoperineal excision there is still no consensus as to which closure technique should be applied. This paper shows similar results between primary closure and biological mesh in perineal closure in one of the largest series in Europe.

AIMTo analyze the anatomy of sacral venous plexus flow, the causes of injuries and the methods for controlling presacral hemorrhage during surgery for rectal cancer.METHODSA review of the databases MEDLINE® and Embase™ was conducted, and relevant scientific articles published between January 1960 and June 2016 were examined. The anatomy of the sacrum and its venous plexus, as well as the factors that influence bleeding, the causes of this complication, and its surgical management were defined.RESULTSThis is a review of 58 published articles on presacral venous plexus injury during the mobilization of the rectum and on techniques used to treat presacral venous bleeding. Due to the lack of cases published in the literature, there is no consensus on which is the best technique to use if there is presacral bleeding during mobilization in surgery for rectal cancer. This review may provide a tool to help surgeons make decisions regarding how to resolve this serious complication.CONCLUSIONA series of alternative treatments are described; however, a conventional systematic review in which optimal treatment is identified could not be performed because few cases were analyzed in most publications.