Abstract
Poor visualization and restricted access often make tumor lesions in the lower rectum difficult to excise, particularly in a narrow male pelvis. The aim of this study was therefore to study whether (and if so to what extent) different positions of the patient on the operating table might improve accessibility. Twenty consecutive patients (men and women) undergoing laparotomy with surgery of the lower rectum were studied. The geometric configuration of the pelvis was studied and compared on lateral radiographs obtained at the operating table in each of four positions. Compared with the conventional lithotomy position, the thighs-flat” position caused significant extension movement of the lumbosacral joint. Augmentation of the lumbar lordosis widened the pelvic view and enabled a more vertical view of the lower rectum (27.5 degrees in lithotomy position, 13.0 degrees in the thighs-flat position). Insertion of a “lumbar pad“ contributed further to the augmentation (7 degrees). When compared on radiographic studies, the thighs-flat position is preferable to the conventional lithotomy position in terms of facilitating low rectal surgery by improving both visibility and accessibility to the pelvic cavity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
TM Ross HS Stern (1993) Patient positioning for colorectal surgery LP Fielding SM Goldberg (Eds) Rob & Smith’s Operative Surgery: Surgery of the Colon, Rectum and Anus Butterworth-Heinemann London 47–50
RJ Heald J Goligher (1993) Anterior resection of the rectum LP Fielding SM Goldberg (Eds) Rob & Smith’s Operative Surgery: Surgery of the Colon, Rectum and Anus Butterworth-Heinemann London 456–471
PH Gordon (1992) Malignant neoplasm of the rectum PH Gordon S Nivatvongs (Eds) Principles and Practice of Surgery for the Colon, Rectum and Anus Quality Medical Publishing Milwaukee 598–616
RJ Nicholls (1997) Surgery for rectal carcinoma RJ Nicholls RR Dozois (Eds) Surgery of the Colon & Rectum Churchill-Livingstone New York 442–462
NS Williams (1993) Surgical treatment of rectal cancer MRB Keighley NS Williams (Eds) Surgery of the Anus, Rectum and Colon Saunders London 958–986
TR Schrock (1995) Abdominoperineal resection: technique and complications AM Cohen SJ Winawer (Eds) Cancer of the Colon, Rectum, and Anus Mcgraw-Hill New York 595–604
RD Fry JW Fleshman IJ Kodner (1990) Sphincter-preserving procedures for rectal cancer SL Schwartz H Ellis (Eds) Maingot’s Abdominal Operations NJ, Prentice-Hall Englewood Cliffs 1119–113
J Goligher (1984) Surgery of the Anus Rectum and Colon Bailliere Tindall London 619–622
Lloid-Davies OV, Lond MS. Lithotomy-Trendelenburg position. Lancet 1939;July 8:74–76
K Maeda M Maruta M Hashimoto et al. (1996) ArticleTitleThe usefulness of lithotomy position with the back stretch for operation in the lower rectum Jpn. J. Gastroenterol. Surg. 27 1964–1967
Basmajian JV. Grant’s Method of Anatomy, Baltimore, Williams & Wilkins, 1975;268–278
RW Soames (1999) Vertebral column PL Williams (Eds) Gray’s Anatomy Harcourt Brace London 511–539
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Maeda, K., Maruta, M., Sato, H. et al. “On Table” Positioning for Optimal Access for Cancer Excision in the Lower Rectum. World J. Surg. 28, 416–419 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-003-7305-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-003-7305-0