Single versus double stapling anastomotic technique in rectal cancer surgery

IDEAL Stage 2a/b prospective cohort study of transanal transection and single-stapled anastomosis for rectal cancer

AIM

There are several anastomotic techniques available to facilitate restorative rectal cancer surgery after total mesorectal excision (TME), including double-stapled anastomosis (DST) and handsewn coloanal anastomosis (CAA). However, to date no one technique is superior with regard to anastomotic leakage (AL) or functional outcomes. Transanal transection single-stapled anastomosis (TTSS) aims to overcome some of the technical challenges and offer comparable clinical and functional outcomes to traditional anastomotic techniques. The aim of this study was to explore the role of TTSS in modern rectal cancer surgery and to provide comparative clinical and functional outcome data with DST and CAA.

METHOD

A prospective cohort study was undertaken to assess the safety and clinical and patient-reported outcomes associated with the TTSS procedure. All patients undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer with an anastomosis performed within 6 cm of the anal verge between January 2016 and April 2021 were prospectively enrolled into this study. Clinical and patient-reported outcome data, including low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) assessment, were collected. The primary endpoint was anastomotic leakage within 30 days.

RESULTS

A total of 275 patients participated in this study, with 70 (25%) patients undergoing a TTSS, 110 (40%) undergoing a DST and 95 (35%) undergoing a CAA. Patients undergoing a CAA had more distal tumours than those having a TTSS or DST, with a median tumour height of 5, 7 and 9 cm (p < 0.001), respectively. We observed a statistically significant reduction in AL in the TTSS group compared with the DST group, with rates of 8.6% versus 20.9% (p = 0.028). There was no difference in LARS scores between patients undergoing TTSS and DST (p = 0.228), while patients with a CAA had worse LARS scores than TTSS patients (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

TTSS is a technically safe and feasible anastomotic technique in rectal cancer surgery as an alternative to DST and CAA. Its advantages over DST are a reduced AL rate and, over CAA, improved function. It should therefore be considered as an alternative technique to improve clinical and patient-reported outcomes in restorative rectal cancer surgery.

A novel colorectal anastomotic method in natural orifice specimen extraction surgery for colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

We introduced a novel colorectal anastomotic technique, double-angle anastomosis combined with the double stapling technique (DAA-DST), to simplify the anastomosis step during natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) and compared its safety and effectiveness with purse string anastomosis combined with the double stapling technique (PSA-DST).

METHODS

Between January 2018 and March 2021, 63 patients with colorectal cancer underwent NOSES with DAA-DST or PSA-DST. We compared the perioperative and oncological outcomes between the groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the operation time, blood loss, time to first passage of flatus and excrement or hospital stay duration between PSA-DST and DAA-DST groups. The overall postoperative complication rates were similar (DAA-DST vs PSA-DST, 21.2% vs 26.7%, p = 0.78), including the rate of anastomotic leakage (6.1% vs 10%, p = 0.91). The rate of successful DAA-DST was higher than that of PSA-DST (100% vs 93.3%). The DAA-DST group had a lower rate of positive drain fluid culture than the PSA-DST group (18.2% vs 26.7% p = 0.61). Recurrence (3.01% vs 6.67%, p = 0.93) and metastasis rates (6.06% vs 6.67%, p = 0.98) were similar between the groups.

CONCLUSION

DAA-DST is a safe and effective procedure and can simplify the procedure of NOSES.

Anastomosis-Related Complications After Stapled Anastomosis With Reinforced Sutures in Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision for Low Rectal Cancer: A Retrospective Single-Center Study

BACKGROUND

The International Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision Registry group showed that transanal total mesorectal excision included clinical issues regarding anastomosis-related complications.

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated anastomotic complications in patients whose anastomoses were created with the stapler plus reinforced sutures procedure after transanal total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective single-center study.

SETTING

The study was conducted at the National Cancer Center Hospital East, Japan.

PATIENTS

Between June 2016 and December 2019, 150 patients underwent transanal total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer. Stapled anastomosis was performed for 55 patients, and coloanal handsewn anastomosis was performed for 95 patients. Blood perfusion of the colon was routinely evaluated with intraoperative indocyanine green fluorescence angiography. All patients who underwent stapled anastomosis received additional handsewn sutures on all rounds of the stapled line. Patients who underwent intersphincteric resection were excluded.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The anastomosis-related complications were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

Early anastomotic leakage was found in one (1.8%) and eight (8.4%) patients in the stapled group and handsewn group. Overall anastomosis-related complications, pelvic abscess, and anastomotic stenosis were significantly less frequent in the stapled group (p < 0.001, p < 0.048, and p < 0.032). Incomplete donuts after the stapled anastomosis were observed in 9 patients (16.4%); however, we reinforced all around the stapled line in these patients, and this reduced the subsequent occurrence of anastomotic leakage.

LIMITATIONS

First, this was a retrospective single-center study that was not randomized or controlled. Second, there were chronological differences regarding the anastomotic method between the two groups. Third, our study included a relatively small number of patients who received preoperative chemoradiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Stapled anastomosis with reinforced handsewn sutures resulted in fewer anastomosis-related complications than did coloanal handsewn anastomosis after transanal total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer; thus, the former may be superior and should be the preferred method, when technically possible. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B749.COMPLICACIONES RELACIONADAS CON LAS ANASTOMOSIS ENGRAMPADAS Y REFORZADAS CON SUTURAS EN LA EXCISIÓN TOTAL DEL MESORRECTO POR VÍA TRANSANAL EN CASOS DE CÁNCER DE RECTO BAJO: ESTUDIO RETROSPECTIVO UNICÉNTRICO.

ANTECEDENTES

El grupo del Registro Internacional de Excisión Total del Mesorrecto por vía Transanal mostró que la excisión total mesorrectal transanal incluía problemas clínicos relacionados a las complicaciones involucradas con la anastomosis.

OBJETIVO

Se evaluaron las complicaciones anastomóticas en pacientes cuyas anastomosis se realizaron con engrampadora reforzada de suturas después de la excisión total de l mesorrecto por vía transanal en casos de cáncer de recto bajo.

DISEO

Estudio retrospectivo unicéntrico.

AJUSTE

El Hospital del Centro Nacional del Cáncer del Este, Japón.

PACIENTES

Entre junio de 2016 y diciembre de 2019, 150 pacientes se sometieron a excisión total del mesorrecto por vía transanal en casos de cáncer de recto bajo. Se realizó anastomosis con engrampadora en 55 y anastomosis coloanal suturada a mano en 95 pacientes. La perfusión tisular sanguínea del colon operado se evaluó de forma rutinaria con angiografía de fluorescencia con verde de indocianina intraoperatoria. Todos los pacientes que se sometieron a anastomosis con grapas recibieron suturas realizadas a mano adicionales sobre la totalidad de la línea de grapas. Se excluyeron los pacientes sometidos a resección interesfintérica.

PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO

Las complicaciones relacionadas con la anastomosis se compararon entre los grupos.

RESULTADOS

Se encontró fuga anastomótica temprana en 1 (1.8%) y 8 (8.4%) pacientes en el grupo de engrampado y en el grupo suturado a mano, respectivamente. En general, las complicaciones relacionadas con la anastomosis, el absceso pélvico y la estenosis anastomótica fueron significativamente menos frecuentes en el grupo con grapas (p < 0.001, p < 0.048, p < 0.032, respectivamente). Se observaron donas incompletas después de la anastomosis grapada en 9 pacientes (16,4%); sin embargo, reforzamos todo alrededor de la línea de grapas en estos pacientes, y esto redujo la aparición posterior de fugas anastomóticas.

LIMITACIONES

Inicialmente, este fue un estudio retrospectivo de un solo centro que no fue aleatorizado ni controlado. En segundo lugar, hubo diferencias cronológicas con respecto al método anastomótico entre los dos grupos. En tercer lugar, nuestro estudio incluyó un número relativamente pequeño de pacientes que recibieron quimiorradioterapia preoperatoria.

CONCLUSIONES

La anastomosis engrapada reforzada con suturas realizadas a mano dio como resultado menos complicaciones relacionadas con la anastomosis que la anastomosis coloanal suturada a mano después de la excisión total del mesorrecto por vía transanal en casos de cáncer de recto bajo; por tanto, el primero puede ser superior y debería ser el método preferido, cuando sea técnicamente posible. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B749. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo).

The use of single-stapling techniques reduces anastomotic complications in minimal-invasive rectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Leakage of rectal anastomoses is one of the most important and feared complications in colorectal surgery. Apart from patient-specific risk factors, technical aspects may influence the occurrence of anastomotic complications. This study investigated whether using single-stapling techniques (SST) instead of the double-stapling technique (DST) for minimal-invasive rectal anastomosis is associated with a lower rate of anastomotic complications.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 272 patients who received a minimally invasive stapled rectal anastomosis (3-16 cm from the anal verge) at our institution from 2015 to 2020 was performed. In 131 patients, rectal anastomosis was created by SST (SST group), while 141 patients received a rectal anastomosis with crossing stapler lines (DST group). The impact of the anastomotic technique on patient outcomes was determined by uni- and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Overall anastomotic leakage rate was 6%. Patients with SST anastomoses had a lower leakage rate than patients with DST anastomoses (3% vs. 9% in the DST group, p = 0.045). The rate of anastomotic stenosis was lower in the SST group than in the DST group (1% vs. 6%, p = 0.037). Overall morbidity and mortality did not differ between the two groups. Multivariate analysis showed that single-stapling techniques significantly reduce the risk of anastomotic leakage (OR 3.5 [1.0-11.5], p = 0.043).

CONCLUSION

The use of SST for rectal anastomosis may help to reduce anastomotic complications. This finding should be confirmed by a randomized controlled trial.

Triple-Staple Technique Effectively Reduces Operating Time for Rectal Anastomosis

Purpose

Stapled anastomotic techniques to the distal rectum have gained widespread acceptance due to their procedural advantages. Various modifications in the stapling techniques have evolved since their inception. The triple-staple technique utilizing stapled closure of both the proximal colon and distal rectal stump provides a rapid and secure colorectal anastomosis. The aims of this study were to determine the safety and efficacy of the triple-staple technique and to compare the clinical outcomes with a historical control group for which the conventional double-staple technique had been performed.

Methods

One hundred consecutive patients operated on by a single surgeon were included in the study; 50 patients who underwent a double-staple (DSA) procedure and 50 patients undergoing triple-staple anastomosis (TSA).

Results

The most common indication for surgery in both groups was rectal cancer followed by diverticular disease and distal sigmoid cancer. There was no significant difference in number of patients requiring loop ileostomy formation in the groups (TSA, 56.0% vs. DSA, 68.0%; P = 0.621). The mean operating time for the TSA group was significantly shorter compared to that of the DSA group (TSA, 242.8 minutes vs. DSA, 306.1 minutes; P = 0.001). There was no significant difference in complication rate (TSA, 40% vs. DSA, 50%; P = 0.315) or length of hospital stay between the two groups (TSA, 11.3 days vs. DSA, 13.0 days; P = 0.246). Postoperative complications included anastomotic leak, prolonged ileus, bleeding, wound infection, and pelvic collection.

Conclusion

The triple-staple technique is a safe alternative to double-staple anastomosis after anterior resection and effectively shortens operating time.

Predicting the level of difficulty of the double-stapling technique in laparoscopic total mesorectal excision

BACKGROUND

The transection of rectum and fashioning of anastomosis is a crucial step in laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) and the double-stapling technique (DST) is often employed. This study aimed to evaluate the factors that were associated with difficult DST.

METHOD

Cases of laparoscopic TME were retrospectively reviewed. The clinico-anatomical parameters were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database. In addition, pelvic dimensions were taken by reviewing the magnetic resonance imaging scan. The number of stapler cartridges used for intracorporeal transection of rectum was used as a surrogate for the level of difficulty of DST and its relationship with various parameters were evaluated.

RESULTS

There were a total of 121 consecutive cases analyzed. The mean number of stapler cartridges used was 2.1 ± 0.7. Pelvic inlet (p = 0.002) and tumor height (p = 0.015) were predictors of the number of cartridges used, R² = 0.366. A model was developed to predict the likelihood of transecting the rectum with two or less stapler cartridges, which included the following parameters: gender, pelvic inlet, interspinous distance, intertuberous distance, and tumor height. The predicted probability also correlated with overall operation time (p = 0.009) and anastomotic leakage (p = 0.023).

CONCLUSION

The difficulty of DST was associated with patient's clinico-anatomical factors. Surgeons can consider other feasible alternatives, like transanal anastomosis, when a technically challenging DST is anticipated.

Transanal Pull-Through Procedure with Delayed versus Immediate Coloanal Anastomosis for Anus-Preserving Curative Resection of Lower Rectal Cancer: A Case-Control Study

This case-control study compared the effectiveness and safety of transanal pull-through procedure (TPP) with delayed or immediate coloanal anastomosis (CAA) for anus-preserving curative resection of lower rectal cancer. Lower rectal cancer patients (n = 128) were hospitalized between January 2003 and December 2013 for elective anus-preserving curative resection through a TPP with delayed (n = 72) or immediate (n = 56) CAA. Main outcome measures including surgical safety, resection radicality, and defecation function were assessed. The two groups were comparable in age, sex, gross pathology, histology, and tumor-node-metastasis staging. Both the delayed and immediate CAA TPPs had similar resection radicality and safety profiles. The immediate CAA was associated with a significantly higher risk of anastomotic leakage and defecation impairment. None of patients in the delayed CAA group experienced anastomotic leakage. In conclusion, TPP with delayed CAA may be superior to immediate CAA in minimizing the risk of anastomotic leakage and relevant surgical morbidities, and does not require a temporary ileostomy and second-look restoration of ostomy.