To drain or not to drain extraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Systematic review of preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative risk factors for colorectal anastomotic leaks

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leak (AL) represents a dreaded complication following colorectal surgery, with a prevalence of 1-19 per cent. There remains a lack of consensus regarding factors that may predispose to AL and the relative risks associated with them. The objective was to perform a systematic review of the literature, focusing on the role of preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative factors in the development of colorectal ALs.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed to identify adjustable and non-adjustable preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative factors in the pathogenesis of AL. Additionally, a severity grading system was proposed to guide treatment.

RESULTS

Of 1707 papers screened, 451 fulfilled the criteria for inclusion in the review. Significant preoperative risk factors were: male sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists fitness grade above II, renal disease, co-morbidity and history of radiotherapy. Tumour-related factors were: distal site, size larger than 3 cm, advanced stage, emergency surgery and metastatic disease. Adjustable risk factors were: smoking, obesity, poor nutrition, alcohol excess, immunosuppressants and bevacizumab. Intraoperative risk factors were: blood loss/transfusion and duration of surgery more than 4 h. Stomas lessen the consequences but not the prevalence of AL. In the postoperative period, CT is the most commonly used imaging tool, with or without rectal contrast, and a C-reactive protein level exceeding 150 mg/l on day 3-5 is the most sensitive biochemical marker. A five-level classification system for AL severity and appropriate management is presented.

CONCLUSION

Specific risk factors and their potential correction or indications for stoma were identified. An AL severity score is proposed to aid clinical decision-making.

Safe anastomosis in laparoscopic and robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a narrative review and outcomes study from an expert tertiary center

Anastomotic leak and stricture formation are recognised complications of colorectal anastomoses. Surgical technique has been implicated in its aetiology. The use of innovative anastomotic techniques and technical standardisation may facilitate risk modification. Early detection of complications using novel diagnostic tests can lead to reduction in delay of diagnosis as long as a standard system is used. We review our practice for creation a safe anastomosis for minimal invasive rectal cancer resection. Several technical points discussed and evaluated based on the evidence. We propose several recommendations aiming to standardize the technique and to minimize anastomotic complications.

To drain or not to drain elective uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has largely replaced conventional cholecystectomy in the past decade. However, there are still limited data about the value of prophylactic sub-hepatic drainage for elective uncomplicated LC. We carried out a systematic review of the literature in order to perform a meta-analysis about this issue. An unrestricted search in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library up to 31 December 2013 was performed. Overall, seven high-methodological quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in the meta-analysis, resulting in 1310 patients totally. The incidence of abdominal collections, wound infection and overall mortality according to the presence or absence of the sub-hepatic drainage were meta-analyzed. Sub-hepatic drainage showed an increase in the abdominal collection rate in patients who underwent elective uncomplicated LC (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.00-2.43) if compared to patients without drainage. A non-significant correlation was found in overall mortality and infection rates. The meta-analysis shows that the presence of the sub-hepatic drainage does not reduce the incidence of abdominal collection after uncomplicated LC, whereas it does not influence wound infection and mortality rates, postoperative pain and hospital stay.

Intra-abdominal drainage after pancreatic resection: is it really necessary? A meta-analysis of short-term outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic fistula (PF) is the most dreadful complication of patients after pancreatic resection. The use of operative site drains is considered routine all along in pancreatic surgery in order to remove any collections and to act as a warning of hemorrhage or anastomotic leakage. To date few studies investigated the potential benefit and safety of routine drainage compared with no drainage after pancreatic resection and the evidence by literature is not clear.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was carried out performing an unrestricted search in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library up to 28th February 2014. Reference lists of retrieved articles and review articles were manually searched for other relevant studies. The currently available data regarding the incidence of post-operative short-term outcomes after pancreatic resection were meta-analyzed according to the presence or absence of the intra-abdominal drainage.

RESULTS

Overall 7 studies were included in the meta-analysis, that is 2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 5 non-RCTs resulting in 2704 patients totally. Intra-abdominal drainage showed to increase the PF (OR 2.31, 95% CI 1.52-3.51), the total post-operative complications (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.30-1.78) and the re-admission (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.06-1.61) rates. A non-significant correlation was found with the presence/absence of the drainage about biliary and enteric fistula, post-operative hemorrhage, intra-abdominal infected collection, wound infection and overall mortality rates.

CONCLUSION

The meta-analysis shows that the presence of an intra-abdominal drainage does not improve the post-operative outcome after pancreatic resection.