Comparison of transanal stent with defunctioning stoma in low anterior resection for rectal cancer

Can the Heald anal stent help to reduce anastomotic or rectal stump leak in elective and emergency colorectal surgery? A single-center experience

Anastomotic and rectal stump leaks are feared complications of colorectal surgery. Diverting stomas are commonly used to protect low rectal anastomoses but can have adverse effects. Studies have reported favorable outcomes for transanal drainage devices instead of diverting stomas. We describe our use of the Heald anal stent and its potential impact in reducing anastomotic or rectal stump leak after elective or emergency colorectal surgery. We performed a single-center retrospective analysis of patients in whom a Heald anal stent had been used to "protect" a colorectal anastomosis or a rectal stump, in an elective or emergency context, for benign and malignant pathology. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were reviewed using clinical and radiological records. The Heald anal stent was used in 93 patients over 4 years. Forty-six cases (49%) had a colorectal anastomosis, and 47 (51%) had an end stoma with a rectal stump. No anastomotic or rectal stump leaks were recorded. We recommend the Heald anal stent as a simple and affordable adjunct that may decrease anastomotic and rectal stump leak by reducing intraluminal pressure through drainage of fluid and gas.

Clinical Impact of Transanal Drainage Tube on Anastomosis Leakage Following Minimally Invasive Resection Without Diverting Stoma in Patients With Rectal Cancer: A Propensity Score-matched Analysis

OBJECTIVES

As one of the most serious complications of rectal cancer (RC) surgery, preventing anastomotic leakage (AL) is crucial. Several studies have suggested a positive role of the transanal drainage tube (TaDT) in AL prevention. However, whether TaDT is beneficial for AL in patients with RC remains controversial. The present study aimed to evaluate the clinical impact of TaDT on AL following minimally invasive resection without diverting stoma (DS) in patients with RC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 392 consecutive patients with RC who had undergone minimally invasive resection without DS between 2010 and 2021. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to reduce selection bias. AL was classified as grade A, B, or C.

RESULTS

A TaDT was used in 214 patients overall. After PSM, we enrolled 316 patients (n=158 in each group). Before PSM, significant group-dependent differences were observed in terms of age, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status, and the use of antiplatelet/anticoagulant agents. The frequency of AL was 7.3% in the overall cohort and was significantly lower in the TaDT group (3.7%) than in the non-TaDT group (11.8%). The rate of grade B AL was significantly lower in the TaDT group than in the non-TaDT group (before PSM, P <0.01; after PSM, P =0.02). However, no significant differences between groups were found for grade C AL. Moreover, multivariate analysis identified the lack of a TaDT as an independent risk factor for AL in the overall and matched cohorts [before PSM, odds ratio, 3.64, P <0.01; after PSM, odds ratio, 2.91, P =0.02].

CONCLUSION

These results indicated that TaDT may play a beneficial role in preventing AL, particularly of grade B, for patients with RC undergoing minimally invasive resection without DS. However, further randomized controlled trials, including patient-reported outcomes, are still needed to understand better the role of TaDT in preventing ALs in patients with RC undergoing minimally invasive resection without DS.

Transanal drainage tube for the prevention of anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a serious complication of anterior resection for rectal cancer. The use of transanal drainage tubes (TDT) during surgery to prevent AL remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the efficacy of TDT in reducing AL.

Methods

Relevant data and studies published from inception until November 1, 2022, were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to compare the incidence of AL after anterior resection for rectal cancer with and without TDT.

Results

This meta-analysis included 5 RCTs comprising 1385 patients. The results showed that the intraoperative use of TDT could not reduce the incidence of AL after rectal cancer surgery (risk ratio [RR], 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52-1.59; p = 0.75). A subgroup analysis of different degrees of AL revealed that TDT did not reduce the incidence of postoperative grade B AL (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.67-2.09; p = 0.56) but decreased the incidence of grade C AL (RR, 0.28; 95% CI: 0.12-0.64; p = 0.003). Further, TDT did not reduce the incidence of AL in patients with rectal cancer and a stoma (RR, 2.40; 95% CI, 1.01-5.71; p = 0.05).

Conclusion

TDT were ineffective in reducing the overall incidence of AL, but they might be beneficial in reducing the incidence of grade C AL in patients who underwent anterior resection. However, additional multicenter RCTs with larger sample sizes based on unified control standards and TDT indications are warranted to validate these findings.

Efficacy of a transanal drainage tube versus diverting stoma in protecting colorectal anastomosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is the most fearsome complication in low rectal resection. The temporary diverting stoma (DS) is recommended to prevent AL, but it may cause relevant morbidity and needs a second surgical procedure to be closed. Therefore, the use of a transanal drainage tube (TDT) has been proposed as an alternative. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis concerning the peri-operative outcomes in patients undergoing elective anterior rectal resection (ARR) with TDT alone or DS alone. Six studies were meta-analyzed, including a total of 735 patients. The meta-analysis showed that the incidences of AL, surgery-related complications, infective complications, and 30-day reoperation after ARR with low colorectal or coloanal anastomosis did not differ significantly between patients undergoing positioning of TDT and those undergoing DS. Furthermore, overall complications were significantly rarer in patients undergoing TDT. A meta-analysis of the randomized control trial (RCT) and no-RCT subgroups did not detect any statistically significant differences in any outcomes. These results suggest that it might be reasonable to employ a TDT in place of a DS to protect low colorectal and coloanal anastomosis, with consequent considerable advantages in terms of the short- and long-term post-operative outcomes. However, more well-designed RCTs are needed to definitively assess this issue.

Anastomotic Leak Rate and Prolonged Postoperative Paralytic Ileus in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgery for Colo-Rectal Cancer After Placement of No-Coil Endoanal Tube

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common gastrointestinal tumor in men and the third in women. Left-hemicolectomy (LC) and low anterior resection (LAR) are considered the gold standard curative treatment. In this retrospective study, we evaluated the presence or absence of post-operative complications, in all patients who underwent Video-laparoscopic (VLS) LAR/LC with No Coil trans-anal tube positioning, and compared the data with the current literature on the topic.

METHODS

Thirty-nine patients diagnosed with CRC of the descending colon, splenic flexure, sigma, and rectum were recruited. LC was performed for sigmoid and descending colon cancers, while LAR was applied for tumors of the upper two-thirds of the rectum. The No Coil trans-anal tube (SapiMed Spa, Alessandria, Italy) was placed in all patients of the study at the end of surgical treatment.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients received a LAR-VLS (46%) and 21 patients received a LC-VLS (54%). The average length of hospital stay after surgery was 7 days. PPOI occurred in only one in 39 patients (2.6%) who had undergone LAR-VLS. As for complications, in no patient of the study did AL (0%) occur.

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing LAR-VLS and LC-VLS, we performed colorectal anastomosis and in the same surgical operation we introduced the No-Coil device. Although this is a preliminary study and subject to further investigation, we believe that the No Coil tube positioning may reduce the time of presence of first flatus and feces and the risk of AL.

Left hemicolectomy and low anterior resection in colorectal cancer patients: Knight-griffen vs. transanal purse-string suture anastomosis with no-coil placement

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is considered one of the most frequent neoplasms of the digestive tract with a high mortality rate. Left hemicolectomy (LC) and low anterior resection (LAR) with minimally invasive laparoscopic and robotic approaches or with the open technique are the gold standard curative treatment.

Materials and methods

Seventy-seven patients diagnosed with CRC were recruited between September 2017 and September 2021. All patients underwent a preoperative staging with a full-body CT scan. The goal of this study was to compare both types of surgeries, LC-LAR LS with Knight-Griffen colorectal anastomosis and LC-LAR open with Trans-Anal Purse-String Suture Anastomosis (the TAPSSA group), by positioning a No-Coil transanal tube (SapiMed Spa, Alessandria, Italy), in terms of postoperative complications such as prolonged postoperative ileus (PPOI), anastomotic leak (AL), postoperative ileus (POI), and hospital stay.

Results

The patients were divided into two groups: the first with 39 patients who underwent LC and LAR in LS with Knight-Griffen anastomosis (Knight-Griffen group) and the second with 38 patients who underwent LC and LAR by the open technique with the TAPSSA group. Only one patient who underwent the open technique suffered AL. POI was 3.76 ± 1.7 days in the TAPSSA group and 3.07 ± 1.3 days in the Knight-Griffen group. There were no statistically significant differences in terms of AL and POI between the two different groups.

Conclusion

The important point that preliminarily emerged from this retrospective study was that the two different techniques showed similarities in terms of AL and POI, and therefore, all the advantages reported in the previous studies pertaining to No-Coil also hold good in this study regardless of the surgical technique used. However, randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Could Stoma Be Avoided after Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer? Experience with Transanal Tube in 195 Cases

Anastomotic leakage is the most-feared complication of rectal surgery. Transanal devices have been suggested for anastomotic protection as an alternative to defunctioning stoma, although evidence is conflicting, and no single device is widely used in clinical practice. The aim of this paper is to investigate the safety and efficacy of a transanal tube for the prevention of leakage following laparoscopic rectal cancer resection. A transanal tube was used in the cases of total mesorectal excision with low colorectal or coloanal anastomosis, undamaged doughnuts, and negative intraoperative air-leak test. The transanal tube was kept in place until the seventh postoperative day. A total of 195 consecutive patients were retrieved from a prospective surgical database and included in the study. Of these, 71.8% received preoperative chemoradiotherapy. The perioperative mortality rate was 1.0%. Anastomotic leakage occurred in 19 patients, accounting for an incidence rate of 9.7%. Among these, 13 patients underwent re-laparoscopy and ileostomy, while 6 patients were managed conservatively. Overall, the stoma rate was 6.7%. The use of a transanal tube may be a suitable strategy for anastomotic protection following restorative rectal cancer resection. This approach could avoid the burden of a stoma in selected patients with low anastomoses.

Does rectal tube/transanal stent placement after an anterior resection for rectal cancer reduce anastomotic leak? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is increasing evidence that either a transanal stent (TAS) or rectal tube (RT) can decrease the risk of anastomotic leakage (AL) after anterior resection for rectal cancer, in which a diverting stoma may not be required.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to investigate the efficacy and safety of RT/TAS in preventing AL after anterior resections.

DATA SOURCES

An up-to-date systematic review was performed on the available literature between 2000 and 2020 on PubMed, EMBASE, Medline and Cochrane Library databases.

STUDY SELECTION

All studies reporting on anterior resections in adults, comparing transanal tube/stent versus non-tube/stent, were analysed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The primary outcome was rates of AL, whereas secondary outcomes compared associated unplanned re-operation for AL and hospital length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

Two randomized controlled trials and 13 observational studies were included, with 1714 patients receiving RT/TAS and 1741 patients without. There were 119 (7%) patients with AL in the RT/TAS group compared to 216 (12.3%) patients in the non-RT/TAS group (OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.38-0.62, p < 0.001). There were 47 (2.9%) patients with AL complications requiring surgery in the RT/TAS group compared to 132 (8%) patients in the non-RT/TAS group (OR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.20-0.42, p < 0.001) and no significant difference identified with the standardized mean difference (SMD) favouring the RT/TAS group for hospital LOS (SMD: -0.23, 95% CI: -0.51 to 0.06, p = 0.115).

CONCLUSION

The use of RT/TAS post restorative anterior resection for rectal cancer should be considered, given the benefits shown from this meta-analysis.

No Coil® placement in patients undergoing left hemicolectomy and low anterior resection for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the most common tumor of the gastrointestinal tract. Anastomotic leak (AL) and prolonged postoperative ileus (PPOI) are two important complications of colorectal surgery. In this observational retrospective study, we evaluated the positive effects of transanal tube No Coil® in patients with CRC undergoing low anterior resection (LAR) and left hemicolectomy (LC).

METHODS

Thirty-eight cases and forty controls resulted eligible for the final sample. No Coil® placement (SapiMed Spa, Alessandria, Italy) was considered an inclusion criteria for the case group. No Coil® was placed immediately after the end of surgical treatment.

RESULTS

PPOI was significantly more frequent in the control group. AL was evident in 1 patient (2.6%) of cases and 3 patients (7.5%) of controls. No statistical difference was found in AL occurrence between groups. POI days and AL resulted associated with hospital stay. POI days were negatively associated with No Coil placement and positively with AL.

CONCLUSION

With our preliminary data, we suggest that No Coil® placement can be considered as a valuable procedure assisting colorectal surgery, but further studies are required to confirm and enlarge actual evidence.

The impact of transanal tube design for preventing anastomotic leak in anterior resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Placement of a transanal tube (TAT) into the rectum is a strategy used to attempt to prevent anastomotic leak (AL) in anterior resection surgery. There is a wide variation in materials and tube design in devices used as TATs and previous meta-analyses have not considered TAT design in their analyses. This study reviews the impact that design of TAT has on AL rates.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed with the aim of identifying studies evaluating the use of TATs for preventing AL and then defining the design of TATs. Studies were then compared in groups based on TAT design in a meta-analysis to evaluate whether design is an important variable in outcomes.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies were included. There was a wide variety of tubes used as TATs. On meta-analysis, catheter-type TATs were associated with a substantially lower rate of AL (OR: 0.46; 95% CI 0.30, 0.68). By contrast, stent-type TATs were not associated with any reduction in the incidence of AL (OR: 1.06, 95% CI 0.50, 2.22). Catheter-type TATs were also associated with substantial reductions in the rate of reoperation (OR: 0.32; 95% CI 0.20, 0.50), whereas stent-type TATs showed no benefit in the rate of reoperation (OR: 0.79; 95% CI 0.37, 1.65).

CONCLUSIONS

Off-the-shelf catheter-type transanal tubes appeared effective in preventing AL, whereas custom-designed stent-type TATs were not demonstrated to be effective; although high quality evidence is limited. TAT design should be an important consideration in further research of the use of TATs in anterior resection surgery.

Application of the cuff rectum drainage tube in total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer: A retrospective case-controlled study

To investigate therapeutic effect of cuff rectum drainage tube (CDT) in preventing the postoperative complications of total mesorectal excision (TME) and promoting the recovery of the patients.The clinical data of 84 cases of low rectal cancer performed TME from June 2015 to June 2017 in the First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University were analyzed retrospectively. All the cases were performed anus-retained operation without preventive colostomy. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the material of the anorectal drainage tube placed in the colonic cavity. Group I (CDT group) was transanal cuff rectal drainage tube placement (Patent No. ZL 201320384337.8) (n = 48), and group II (conventional group) was transanal clinical conventional drainage tube placement (n = 36). Anastomotic fistula incidence, the time of anal exsufflation, postoperative first ambulation time, intestinal function recovery time, the incidence of interrelated complications of drainage tube and postoperative hospital stay between 2 groups were analyzed retrospectively.Both postoperative first ambulation and anal exhaust time in CDT group were shorter than those in the conventional group ([2.3 ± 0.4] d vs [3.0 ± 0.2] d, P < .05; [3.3 ± 0.3] d vs [3.9 ± 0.5] d, P < .05). Meanwhile, the postoperative hospital stay of CDT group was significantly decreased than that in the conventional group ([10.3 ± 1.6] d vs [11.8 ± 1.1] d, P < .05). Significant different occurrence of complications existed in anastomotic fistula (2.1% [1/48] vs 16.7% [6/36], P < .05), frequent defecation (8.3% [4/48] vs 27.8% [10/36], P < .05), defecating unfinished feeling (12.5% [6/48] vs 30.6% [11/36], P < .05), drainage tube complication (4.2% [2/48] vs 22.2% [8/36], P < .05).The cuff rectum drainage tube may reduce incidence of anastomotic fistula after TME, shorten postoperative first ambulation and anal exsufflation time, enable faster recovery with good toleration and decrease postoperative hospital stay.

Fecal diverting device for the substitution of defunctioning stoma: preliminary clinical study

BACKGROUND

A novel fecal diverting device (FDD) made for the prevention of sepsis resulting from anastomotic leakage (AL) was tested successfully in an animal study. This study was undertaken to evaluate the clinical safety and effectiveness of the FDD.

METHODS

A prospective observation trial was implemented in a tertiary referral university hospital. The study enrolled patients who needed a defunctioning stoma to preserve low-lying rectal anastomosis. The FDD was fixed to the proximal colon 15 cm from the anastomosis and scheduled to divert feces for 3 weeks. The duration could be extended for more than 3 weeks if AL was noted. Postoperative evaluations of AL were performed by obtaining a computed tomography (CT) scan after 1 week and a contrast study after 3 weeks. The outcomes were FDD-related complications, and the capacity of the FDD to preserve the anastomosis. The median follow-up period was 10 (range 5-40) months.

RESULTS

Thirty-one patients, including 5 benign cases, were evaluated. There was no case of stoma conversion or surgical re-intervention. Evidence of AL was identified in 10 (32%) patients using the CT scan at 1 week after surgery. However, in the contrast study at 3 weeks after surgery, only 5 cases of AL sinus were noted. Conservative treatments including 1-3 weeks prolongation of FDD maintenance were enough to preserve the anastomosis. There were 3 cases of partial colonic wall erosions at the FDD attachment area. All of these patients showed improvement with conservative treatment. The limitations were that the study was performed in a single institute and without a control group.

CONCLUSIONS

The FDD showed a sufficient capacity of fecal diversion and maintenance duration that prevented aggravation of sepsis in the case of AL without significant complications.

Transanal Tube NO COIL® after Rectal Cancer Proctectomy. The “G. Paolo II” Cancer Centre Experience

Aims and background

Covering stoma is the main method used to protect low-lying anastomosis after cancer proctectomy. Intraluminal rectal pressure could be a potential risk factor for anastomotic leakage. We present our personal experience with an alternative and original device, the transanal tube NO COIL®, evaluating its feasibility and safety based on a preliminary manometric study.

Methods

From May 1998 to March 1999, an experimental manometric study on 35 subjects was performed to assess the pathophysiological basis of intraluminal rectal pressure with or without the transanal tube. Subsequently, from April 1999 to December 2009, 184 patients (107 males, 77 females, average age 68.2 ± 10 years) with primary adenocarcinoma of the rectum (≤12 cm from anal verge) were selected. Eighty-two underwent total proctectomy and 102 subtotal proctectomy. No stoma were fashioned. At the end of the operation, the silicone transanal tube NO COIL®, 60–80 mm long, 2 mm thick with a calibre of up to 2 cm, was applied and secured to the perineal skin by two stitches, then removed on the seventhpostoperative day if no signs of leakage occurred.

Results

The intraluminal rectal pressure with transanal tube was strongly reduced from 13.8 + 8.5 mmHg to 4.8 + 3.7 mmHg (P <0.01). Nine patients (4.8%) developed an anastomotic leakage, 2 males and 7 females. In 10 patients, the transanal tube NO COIL® did not remain in situ for the planned seven days, and 18 patients suffered from ulcers in the perianal skin. Leakage subsided with conservative treatment in 4 patients, whereas 5 patients required loop colostomy. The stoma rate was 2.7%. No leakage-related deaths occurred, and overall mortality was 1.3%.

Conclusions

The transanal tube NO COIL® does not abolish the risk of anastomotic leakage but could be an alternative option to covering stoma after cancer proctectomy in selected patients. In our experience, this simple and cheap device could reduce the rate of stoma without leakage-related mortality. Further studies within a randomized controlled trial are required to better define our results.

Emerging Trends in the Etiology, Prevention, and Treatment of Gastrointestinal Anastomotic Leakage

Anastomotic leaks represent one of the most alarming complications following any gastrointestinal anastomosis due to the substantial effects on post-operative morbidity and mortality of the patient with long-lasting effects on the functional and oncologic outcomes. There is a lack of consensus related to the definition of an anastomotic leak, with a variety of options for prevention and management. A number of patient-related and technical risk factors have been found to be associated with the development of an anastomotic leak and have inspired the development of various preventative measures and technologies. The International Multispecialty Anastomotic Leak Global Improvement Exchange group was convened to establish a consensus on the definition of an anastomotic leak as well as to discuss the various diagnostic, preventative, and management measures currently available.

Transanal drainage tube reduces rate and severity of anastomotic leakage in patients with colorectal anastomosis: A case controlled study

Background and aims

The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical usefulness of the placement of a transanal drainage tube to prevent anastomotic leakage in colorectal anastomoses.

Material and methods

This single-center retrospective trial included all patients treated with surgery for benign or malign colorectal disease between January 2009 and December 2012. The transanal drainage tube was immediately placed after colorectal anastomosis until day five and was routinely used since 2010. Patients treated with a transanal drainage tube were compared with the control group. Statistical analysis was performed using Fisher's exact or Chi-square tests for group comparison and a linear regression model for multivariate analysis.

Results

This study included 242 patients (46% female; median age 63 years; range 18–93); 34% of the patients underwent a laparoscopic procedure, and 57% of the patients received a placement of a transanal drainage tube. Anastomotic leakage occurred in 19 patients (7.9%). Univariate analysis showed a higher rate of anastomotic leakage in patients with an ASA score 4 (p = 0.02) and a lower rate in patients with transanal drainage placement (3.6% vs. 13.6%; p = 0.007). The grading of the complication of anastomotic leakage was reduced with transanal drainage (e.g., Dindo ≧ 3b: 20.0% vs. 92.9%; p = 0.006), and the hospital stay was shortened (17.6 ± 12.5 vs. 22.1 ± 17.6 days; p = 0.02). Multivariate analysis revealed that transanal drainage was the only significant factor (HR = −2.90; −0.168 to −0.032; p = 0.007) affecting anastomotic leakage.

Conclusions

Placement of a transanal drainage tube in patients with colorectal anastomoses is a safe and simple technique to perform and reduces anastomotic leakage, the severity of the complication and hospital stay.

•

A transanal drainage tube as a mechanism to reduce anastomotic leakage is proposed.

•

Transanal drainage tube reduces anastomotic leakage 3.6% vs. 13.6% (p = 0.007).

•

Transanal drainage reduced the grade of complication (e.g., Dindo ≧ 3b: 20.0% vs. 92.9%; p = 0.006).

Management of low colorectal anastomotic leak: Preserving the anastomosis

Anastomotic leak continues to be a dreaded complication after colorectal surgery, especially in the low colorectal or coloanal anastomosis. However, there has been no consensus on the management of the low colorectal anastomotic leak. Currently operative procedures are reserved for patients with frank purulent or feculent peritonitis and unstable vital signs, and vary from simple fecal diversion with drainage to resection of the anastomosis and closure of the rectal stump with end colostomy (Hartmann’s procedure). However, if the patient is stable, and the leak is identified days or even weeks postoperatively, less aggressive therapeutic measures may result in healing of the leak and salvage of the anastomosis. Advances in diagnosis and treatment of pelvic collections with percutaneous treatments, and newer methods of endoscopic therapies for the acutely leaking anastomosis, such as use of the endosponge, stents or clips, have greatly reduced the need for surgical intervention in selected cases. Diverting ileostomy, if not already in place, may be considered to reduce fecal contamination. For subclinical leaks or those that persist after the initial surgery, endoluminal approaches such as injection of fibrin sealant, use of endoscopic clips, or transanal closure of the very low anastomosis may be utilized. These newer techniques have variable success rates and must be individualized to the patient, with the goal of treatment being restoration of gastrointestinal continuity and healing of the anastomosis. A review of the treatment of low colorectal anastomotic leaks is presented.

Transanal tube placement for prevention of anastomotic leakage following low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

Anastomotic leakage following low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer is a serious complication that increases morbidity and mortality rates. Transanal tube placement may reduce postoperative anastomotic leakage rate by reducing intraluminal pressure and preventing fecal extrusion through the staple line. This meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of transanal tube placement to prevent anastomotic leakage after LAR for rectal cancer using a stapling technique.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature was consistent with the recommendations of the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) statement. Multiple comprehensive databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and KoreaMed, were searched. The main study outcomes were anastomotic leakage.

Results

Two randomized clinical trials and 4 nonrandomized studies involving 1,118 patients were included. Subgroup analyses of randomized clinical trials found that transanal tube placement had no effect on study outcomes. Meta-analysis of nonrandomized studies showed that transanal tube placement was associated with a lower incidence of anastomotic leakage (relative risk, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.15-0.67; I² = 0%).

Conclusion

Transanal tube placement may be effective in preventing or reducing the occurrence of anastomotic leakage after LAR for rectal cancer using a stapling technique. Randomized clinical trials with sufficient power are needed to confirm the benefit of transanal tube placement.

Transanal Tube as a Means of Prevention of Anastomotic Leakage after Rectal Cancer Surgery

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leaks after low anterior resection for rectal cancer remain the most feared complication. The aim of our study was to investigate whether the use of a transanal tube could reduce the leakage rate after this surgical procedure.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of a single-institution experience. The study includes 66 patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal cancer without stoma creation between January 2008 and June 2013. Patients were divided into two groups, i.e. those with a transanal drainage tube (TT; n = 9) and those without tube (NTT; n = 57), and evaluated for clinically evident anastomotic leakage and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

The postoperative anastomotic leakage appeared in 5 patients (9%) in the NTT group while no single case was observed within the TT group. Despite the disadvantageous background in the TT group (a transanal stent was used in the most high-risk patients), these patients had no postoperative complications. In the NTT group, 23% had some kind of postoperative complications, and 5% died. The difference between the two groups is not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that the use of a transanal tube in low anterior resection for rectal cancer could potentially be a simple and effective method of reducing anastomotic leakage. In order to prove our observations, larger prospective randomized studies should be performed.

Mitigating the Consequences of Anastomotic Leakage After Laparoscopic Rectal Cancer Resection

Background. With regard to laparoscopic low anterior resection, anastomotic leakage still remains a challenge and continues to account for approximately 30% of postoperative deaths. This study was designed to evaluate whether the intracolonic and perineal drainage is associated with a decreased risk for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery without stool diversion. Patients and Methods. Prospective data were collected from 337 patients with rectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic resection without defunctioning stoma. Results. A total of 157 patients underwent laparoscopic rectal resection, followed by the placement of intracolonic and perineal drainage, while 180 underwent laparoscopic surgery routinely. No difference in clinically significant leakage was observed between the intracolonic and perineal drainage and the control groups (3.8% vs 8.3%, P = .0874). However, reoperation was underwent at a significantly lower rate after the placement of intracolonic and perineal drainage (intracolonic and perineal drainage: 1 of 6 [16.7%] vs control: 14 of 15 [93.3%]; P < .01). In multivariate analysis, extraperitoneal tumor location and operation duration ≥180 minutes were independently associated with anastomotic leakage. Conclusions. Significant risk factors of anastomotic leakage include extraperitoneal tumor location and operation duration ≥180 minutes. The placement of intracolonic and perineal drainage was not found to be significantly associated with anastomotic leakage, but this method could mitigate the clinical consequences of leakage and decrease the rate of reoperation and transverse colostomy after laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal cancer.

Temporary ileostomy versus colostomy for colorectal anastomosis: evidence from 12 studies

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and efficacy of temporary ileostomy and temporary colostomy after a low anterior resection for rectal cancer by comparing the postoperative complications, then investigate which type of stoma is better.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Studies comparing temporary ileostomy with colostomy for colorectal anastomosis were searched. The rates of complications (i.e., clinical anastomotic leak or fistula, stoma prolapse, parastomal hernia, wound infection related to stoma closure, obstruction following stoma closure, and skin trouble) were pooled and compared using a meta-analysis. The risk ratios (RRs) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

The study included five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and seven non-randomized studies involving 1687 patients. The meta-analysis of the RCTs demonstrated a lower risk of stoma prolapse (RR 0.15; 95% CI: 0.04-0.48) in the temporary ileostomy group. Meta-analysis of the non-randomized studies showed a lower risk of stoma prolapse and wound infection after stoma closure in the temporary ileostomy group (both p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Temporary ileostomy has a minor impact on patients; we endorse temporary ileostomy over colostomy after a low anterior resection for rectal cancer.

Double decompression of presacral collection by heald anal stent and foley catheter combination

The authors demonstrate the effective drainage of presacral sepsis following low anterior resection surgery using the novel approach of both the Heald anal stent and a Foley catheter combined. The Heald stent was placed trans-anally without the need for anaesthetic and an 18Fr Foley was placed through this. A presacral collection was drained through the stent, allowing the patient to be discharged after a week without the need to return to the operating theatre. The Heald stent may be used to successfully drain a presacral collection by double decompression of the rectum and the presacral space.

Can intraluminal devices prevent or reduce colorectal anastomotic leakage: A review

Colorectal anastomotic leakage is a serious complication of colorectal surgery, leading to high morbidity and mortality rates. In recent decades, many strategies aimed at lowering the incidence of anastomotic leakage have been examined. The focus of this review will be on mechanical aids protecting the colonic anastomosis against leakage. A literature search was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Collaborative library for all papers related to prevention of anastomotic leakage by placement of a device in the colon. Devices were categorised as decompression devices, intracolonic devices, and biodegradable devices. A decompression device functions by keeping the anal sphincter open, thereby lowering the intraluminal pressure and lowering the pressure on the anastomosis. Intracolonic devices do not prevent the formation of dehiscence. However, they prevent the faecal load from contacting the anastomotic site, thereby preventing leakage of faeces into the peritoneal cavity. Many attempts have been made to find a device that decreases the incidence of AL; however, to date, none of the devices have been widely accepted.

Can transanal tube placement after anterior resection for rectal carcinoma reduce anastomotic leakage rate? A single-institution prospective randomized study

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage is the most significant complication after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal carcinoma, and it is the major cause of postoperative mortality and morbidity. The objective of the present study was to investigate whether the use of a transanal tube as an alternative endoluminal diversion technique for rectal carcinoma can reduce the 30-day leakage rate after LAR.

METHODS

From June 2003 to December 2009, a total of 398 patients were randomized to a transanal tube or not after LAR. Inclusion criteria for randomization were biopsy-proven carcinoma of the rectum located ≤15 cm above the anal verge, measured with a rigid rectoscope; age≥18 years; informed consent; ability to understand the study information; estimated survival of >6 months; anterior resection for the lesion; final negative air leakage test; intact anastomotic stapler rings; and the absence of major intraoperative adverse events.

RESULTS

Patient demographics, tumor size and location, Duke's stage, preoperative co-morbidity, and operative details were comparable between the two groups in general analysis and subgroup analysis (double-staple technique and handsewn technique). The overall rate of symptomatic leakage was 6.78% (27 of 398 patients). Patients randomized to a transanal tube (n=200) had leakage in 4.0% (8 of 200 patients) and those without a tube (n=198) in 9.6% (19 of 198 patients) (p=0.026). With regard to the double-staple technique subgroup, 3.7% (7 of 188) patients with a tube presented with a symptomatic anastomotic leakage, compared with 9.3% (17 of 182) of those without a tube (p=0.028). Of the patients with anastomotic leakage in the double-staple technique subgroup, the need for urgent abdominal reoperation was 28.6% (two of seven patients) in those randomized to a transanal tube and 82.4% (14 of 17) in those without (p=0.021). The 30-day mortality after LAR was nil. In the double-staple technique subgroup, a quicker resumption of gastrointestinal motility manifested by a smaller ratio of patients with flatus>postoperative day (POD) 3 (p=0.019) and a smaller ratio of poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 (p<0.001) was associated with use of a transanal tube. Additionally, patients with a tube appeared to have a lower rectal resting pressure by POD 3 (4.0±2.2 vs. 5.0±2.2 kPa; p<0.001) or POD 5 (4.3±2.3 vs. 5.6±2.3 kPa; p<0.001), compared to the resting pressures patients without the device, respectively. A shorter length of hospital stay was associated with use of a transanal tube both in the double-staple technique subgroup (p<0.001) and the handsewn technique subgroup (p=0.011). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that body mass index>25 kg/m2 and a poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 were found to be independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in the low anastomosis subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of a transanal tube is effective and safe in decreasing the rate of clinically significant anastomotic leaks and in mitigating the clinical consequences of leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer with the technique of total mesorectal excision and double-staple anastomosis. The potential benefits of transanal tube placement are multifactorial, including drainage, reduction of endoluminal pressure, and promotion of gastrointestinal motility. Obesity and poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 are independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in patients with low anastomosis.

Predicting the risk and diminishing the consequences of anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Anastomotic leakage is one of the most serious early complications of any intestinal anastomosis. The morbidity and mortality are high and patients may be at increased risk of cancer recurrence. In colorectal surgery the risks are particularly high following low anterior resection. Factors which increase and decrease the risks are discussed.

METHODS

A review of the main published risk factors for anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer together with the authors personal experience is reported. A review of a recent large randomized trial of a defunctioning stoma versus no stoma is outlined.

RESULTS

The main factor influencing anastomotic leakage is the height of the anastomosis above the anal verge with the lower the anastomosis the higher the risk. All anastomoses within 7 cm of the anal verge are at increased risk which includes all patients who have had a total mesorectal excision. Neoadjuvant therapy (in particular long course radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) increases the risk. Male sex, older age, smoking, alcohol in excess, short course radiotherapy, obesity, general fitness, immunosuppression have been reported in some series as increasing the risk. A temporary diverting stoma decreases the consequences of leakage and reduces the need for emergency re-operation. Anastomotic leakage is associated with an increased postoperative death rate, reoperative rates, need for a permanent stoma and possibly an increase in local recurrence and decreased cancer specific and overall survival.

CONCLUSION

Anastomotic leakage is a serious early complication following surgery for rectal cancer. The height of the anastomosis and neoadjuvant therapy are the main predictors of an increased risk. A diverting stoma diminishes the consequences of risk and reduces the need for emergency re-operation.

Drainage of a pelvic collection with the Heald Silastic Anal Stent

The Heald Silastic Anal Stent (HSAS) was designed to protect a newly constructed low colorectal anastomosis by keeping the anus open for up to 10 days postoperatively, and has also been used in combination with percutaneous drainage to treat a leak from a low rectal anastomosis. We describe a technique in two patients where the HSAS alone allowed adequate drainage of a leaking low colorectal anastomosis.

Influencing factors of symptomatic anastomotic leakage after anterior resection of the rectum for cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to analyze the factors associated with anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer.

METHODS

Retrospectively collected consecutive data of 738 rectal cancer patients who underwent anterior resection in our hospital between 2005 and 2008 were reviewed. The associations between 15 patient-related and surgery-related variables and anastomotic leakage were studied with both the univariate chi-square test and multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Univariate analysis showed that risk factors associated with anastomotic leakage were low rectal cancer (located 5 cm or less above the dentate line) (5.9% vs. 0.9%; P = 0.003), non-specialized surgeon (3.9% vs. 11.3%; P = 0.031), and defunctioning transanal catheter placement (14.5% vs. 3.6%; P < 0.001). It should be noted that the mean surgeon case volumes of anterior resection of colorectal surgeons and non-specialized general surgeons were 43 per year and 2 per year, respectively (P < 0.001). In addition, there was a tendency for colorectal surgeons to operate on a greater proportion of low rectal cancers (72.1% vs. 52.8%; P = 0.003). In the multivariate analysis, besides low rectal cancer, non-specialized surgeon, and transanal catheter placement, three other factors were associated with anastomotic leakage: diabetes mellitus (P = 0.027), free distal margins less than 1 cm (P = 0.009), and a defunctioning stoma (P = 0.031). In a further analysis of 522 patients with low rectal cancer, the leakage rate in patients with a defunctioning stoma was significantly lower (2.9% vs. 8.5%; P = 0.007). By contrast, the leakage rate in the transanal catheter placement group was higher (15.1% vs. 4.9%; P = 0.008), because of its poor protective effect as well as the selection bias.

CONCLUSIONS

From the findings of this study, we believe that low rectal cancer, non-specialized surgeons, and diabetes mellitus are risk factors for anastomotic leakage after rectal surgery, and that a defunctioning stoma could significantly reduce the incidence of leakage in low rectal cancer patients.

Comparison of outcomes following ileostomy versus colostomy for defunctioning colorectal anastomoses

BACKGROUND

The present study evaluated outcomes of patients undergoing proximal diversion using either a loop ileostomy or loop colostomy following distal colorectal resection for malignant and non-malignant disease.

METHODS

A literature search of the Medline, Ovid, Embase and Cochrane databases was performed to identify studies published between 1966 and 2006, comparing loop ileostomy and loop colostomy to protect a distal colorectal anastomosis. A random effect meta-analytical technique was used and sensitivity analysis performed on studies published since 2000, higher quality papers, those reporting on 70 or more patients, and those reporting outcomes following colorectal cancer resections.

RESULTS

Seven studies, including three randomised controlled trials, satisfied the inclusion criteria. Outcomes of a total of 1,204 patients were analysed, of whom 719 (59.7%) underwent defunctioning loop ileostomy. High stoma output was more common following ileostomy formation (OR = 5.39, 95% CI: 1.11, 26.12, P = 0.04), but wound infections following their reversal were significantly fewer (OR = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.07, 0.62, P = 0.004). Overall complications were less frequent for ileostomy patients in the subgroup of high quality studies (OR = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.08, 0.59, P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

The results of this meta-analysis suggest that ileostomy may be preferable to colostomy when used to defunction a distal colorectal anastomosis. Wound infections following stoma reversal were reduced, as were overall stoma-related complications and incisional hernia following stoma reversal for ileostomy patients in high quality studies.

Transanal stent in anterior resection does not prevent anastomotic leakage

OBJECTIVE

A defunctioning transanal stent may theoretically reduce the leakage rate after anterior rectal resection. We present a randomized open study with the aim of comparing the leakage rate after anterior resection with a loop ileostomy, a transanal stent, both or neither.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Randomized open trial of 194 patients operated in 11 hospitals during September 2000 to September 2003 with anterior resection for a mobile rectal tumour, 115 men and 79 women, median age 68 years (range 37-90 years). The surgeon decided upon the use of a protective ileostomy, and after completion of the operation the patients were randomized in two groups with and without a transanal stent.

RESULTS

A clinically significant leakage was diagnosed in 25 patients (13%). No significant difference was found 17 of 98 patients with a stent and 8 of 96 without (P = 0.09), or in 9 of 44 ileostomy patients with a stent and in 3 of 45 without (P = 0.07). Several leaks over a short time led to an interim analysis after inclusion of 194 of 448 planned patients. The analysis showed no significant protective effect of the stent, and more leakages in the stent group, although not statistically significant. On this basis it was decided to discontinue the study prematurely for ethical reasons.

CONCLUSION

Decompression of the anastomosis with a transanal stent does not reduce the risk of anastomotic leakage after anterior resection.

Recent randomised trials in colorectal disease

Randomised trials represent the 'gold standard' for surgical research and have an important impact on clinical management. We provide an overview of the randomised trials, specifically related to the practice of colorectal surgery that were published between January and December 2003.

Reducing the incidence and managing the consequences of anastomotic leakage after rectal resection

Anastomotic dehiscence is a serious, life-threatening complication of any rectal anastomosis and may be associated with an increased risk of local cancer recurrence. The leak rate following low anterior resection is in the region of 10% as reported in the recent randomised Dutch rectal cancer trial. Although accurate prediction of risk is impossible, certain factors are known to influence leak rates. There is an inverse relationship between the height of the anastomosis from the anal verge and the leak rate, with the lower anastomoses carrying the highest risk. Proximal defunctioning by a loop stoma mitigates the consequences of leakage and probably reduces, but does not abolish, the risk. There is little difference in rates of dehiscence between stapled and sutured colorectal anastomoses. A short colon pouch may reduce the chance of leakage. The highest risks are in unprotected anastomoses less than 5 cm from the anal verge in men who smoke and/or drink excessively, particularly if they have received pre-operative chemotherapy or chemo-radiotherapy. A high index of suspicion is required in detecting the early non-specific signs of a leak and urgent surgical intervention is usually required to avert a life-threatening situation. Faecal diversion should be regarded as the optimal safety measure to reduce the consequences of leakage and to mange leakage of an unprotected anastomosis.