When Is a Diverting Stoma Indicated after Low Anterior Resection? A Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials and Meta-Regression of the Risk Factors of Leakage and Complications in Non-Diverted Patients

A novel technique for the construction of an end ileostomy to prevent stoma outlet obstruction after rectal resection and total colectomy: a single-center retrospective study

PURPOSE

Stoma outlet obstruction (SOO) is an early postoperative complication of rectal cancer. We devised a novel surgical technique: end-ileostomy, to reduce SOO. Here, we describe the surgical technique used for constructing an end ileostomy and assess its impact on SOO.

METHODS

The subjects of this retrospective study were 78 patients who underwent low anterior resection or total colectomy with a defunctioning ileostomy (DI) between 2018 and 2022. The surgical procedure for end ileostomy can be summarized as follows: First, the ileum was separated using a linear stapler, approximately 30 cm from the Bauhin valve; then the opposite sides of the mesentery of the oral and anal ilea were sutured; and finally, end ileostomy was performed using standard techniques. End and loop ileostomies were performed in 34 and 44 patients, respectively. We assessed the independent risk factors for SOO.

RESULTS

SOO occurred in 12 patients (15.3%): 1 (2.9%) with an end ileostomy and 11 (25%) with a loop ileostomy. Multivariate analysis identified loop ileostomy as an independent risk factor for SOO (p = 0.037).

CONCLUSIONS

End ileostomy construction is a useful and safe technique for reducing the incidence of SOO in defunctioning ileostomies following rectal resection.

Socioeconomic and Racial Disparities in the Use of Robotic-Assisted Proctectomy in Rectal Cancer

BackgroundRectal cancer surgery is technically demanding, especially in males. Robotic assistance may help overcome these challenges. This study aimed to identify factors associated with robotic-assisted proctectomy in rectal cancer.MethodsRetrospective case-control analysis of patients with clinical stage I-III rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent proctectomy from the National Cancer Database (2010-2019) was conducted. Univariable and multivariable binary logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine predictive factors of robotic-assisted proctectomy in rectal cancer.Results67 145 patients (60.9% male; mean age: 61.15 ± 12.49 years) were included. 44.7% had stage III disease and 66.2% received neoadjuvant radiation. The surgical approach was laparotomy (n = 29 725), laparoscopy (n = 21 657), and robotic-assisted proctectomy (n = 15 763). Independent predictors for the use of robotic-assisted proctectomy were age <50 years (OR: 1.06; P = .032), male sex (OR: 1.07, P < .001), Asian race (OR: 1.25; P < .001), private insurance (OR: 1.25; P < .001), rectal cancer treatment between 2015 and 2019 (OR: 3.52; P < .001), stage III disease (OR: 1.06; P = .048), neoadjuvant radiation (OR: 1.26; P < .001), and pull-through coloanal anastomosis (OR: 1.15; P < .001). Robotic-assisted surgery was less often used in Black (OR: .857, P < .001) and American Indian patients (OR: .62, P = .002) and those with a Charlson score = 3 (OR: .818, P = .002), living in rural areas (OR: .865, P = .033), who were uninsured (OR: .611, P < .001), and undergoing pelvic exenteration (OR: .461, P < .001).ConclusionsDemographic and insurance disparities of robotic-assisted proctectomy are Black and American Indian patients and those with higher Charlson comorbidity index scores and uninsured patients were less likely to undergo robotic-assisted proctectomy. While patients with advanced disease and/or received neoadjuvant radiation were more likely to undergo robotic-assisted proctectomy, robotic-assisted surgery was less often performed in pelvic exenteration.

Patient selection and operative strategies for laparoscopic intersphincteric resection without diverting stoma

BACKGROUND

Diverting stoma (DS) is routinely proposed in intersphincteric resection for ultralow rectal cancer, but it is associated with increased stoma-related complications and economic burden. Appropriate patient selection and operative strategies to avoid stoma formation need further elucidation.

AIM

To select patients who may not require DS.

METHODS

This study enrolled 505 consecutive patients, including 84 who underwent stoma-free (SF) intersphincteric resection. After matching, patients were divided into SF (n = 78) and DS (n = 78) groups. The primary endpoint was the anastomotic leakage (AL) rate within 6 months and its protective factors for both the total and SF cohorts. The secondary endpoints included overall survival and disease-free survival.

RESULTS

The AL rate was greater in the SF group than in the DS group (12.8% vs 2.6%, P = 0.035). Male sex [(odds ratio (OR) = 2.644, P = 0.021], neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) (OR = 6.024, P < 0.001), and tumor height from the anal verge ≤ 4 cm (OR = 4.160, P = 0.007) were identified as independent risk factors. Preservation of the left colic artery (LCA) was protective in both the total cohort (OR = 0.417, P = 0.013) and the SF cohort (OR = 0.312, P = 0.027). The female patients who did not undergo nCRT and had preservation of the LCA experienced a significantly lower incidence of AL (2/97, 2.1%). The 3-year overall survival or disease-free survival did not significantly differ between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Female patients who do not receive nCRT may avoid the need for DS by preserving the LCA without increasing the risk of AL or compromising oncological outcomes.

Development of a Clinical Framework-Anastomotic Leakage Prediction Score (CF-ALPS) After Colorectal Surgery

Background: Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a severe complication of colorectal surgery and is associated with high morbidity, mortality, and prolonged hospital stay. Current predictive models vary in complexity and utility, highlighting the need for clinically accessible and accurate tools. This study aimed to develop and validate the clinical framework-anastomotic leakage prediction score (CF-ALPS) score, a practical and accessible risk prediction model for AL that integrates patient-, tumor-, and surgery-related factors. Methods: A retrospective cohort of 294 patients who underwent colorectal surgery between 2019 and 2024 was analyzed. Patients were categorized into the AL (n = 84) and non-AL groups (n = 210). The factors included age, sex, hypoalbuminemia, and comorbidities. Tumor-related factors included lymph node stage and neoadjuvant therapy, while surgical variables included urgency, duration, and type of procedure. The outcomes evaluated were the incidence of AL, duration of hospital stay, and in-hospital mortality. Independent predictors were identified using multivariate logistic regression analysis. The CF-ALPS score, which was developed from significant predictors, was validated using ROC curve analysis and 10-fold cross-validation. Results: A total of 294 patients who underwent colorectal surgery were included, of whom 84 (28.57%) developed AL. A male predominance was observed in the AL group (73.81% vs. 36.19%; p = 0.001). Nutritional status played a critical role, with significantly lower albumin levels in AL patients (2.8 ± 0.5 g/dL vs. 3.5 ± 0.4 g/dL; p < 0.001). Independent predictors of AL included hypoalbuminemia (<3.0 g/dL, OR: 0.52, p < 0.001), ASA score (OR, 1.85; p = 0.004), advanced lymph node stage (N2/N3, OR: 1.94, p = 0.037), neoadjuvant therapy (OR, 2.89; p = 0.002), and emergent surgery (OR, 1.67; p = 0.042). These variables formed the basis of the CF-ALPS score, which assigns weighted points based on the magnitude of their ORs. The CF-ALPS model achieved a ROC AUC of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.75-0.89) with a sensitivity of 85.0% and specificity of 78.0%. A cutoff score ≥7 demonstrated optimal risk stratification, classifying patients into high- and low-risk groups with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 72.0% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 88.0%. Cross-validation yielded a moderate AUC of 0.44 (SD = 0.062). Conclusions: The CF-ALPS score offers a simple and effective tool for AL risk prediction in colorectal surgery, emphasizing its practicality and clinical integration. Although its predictive accuracy was moderate, further prospective multicenter validation is warranted.

Risk Factors for Anastomotic Leak in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Rectal Cancer Resection: A Retrospective Analysis

Introduction Anastomotic leakage (AL) is one of the most severe complications following rectal cancer (RC) surgery, with significant implications for morbidity, mortality, and oncological outcomes. Identifying risk factors associated with AL may enhance surgical decision-making and improve patient prognosis. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted, including 42 adult patients who underwent RC resection at a hospital in Mexico City between January 2015 and December 2022. Demographic, clinical, pathological, and surgical variables were analyzed to assess their association with AL. Univariate and multivariate statistical analyses were performed to identify independent risk factors. Results The overall incidence of AL was 11.9%, consistent with previous literature. Univariate analysis revealed no significant differences in patient-related factors such as age, BMI, ASA classification, diabetes mellitus, smoking, or biochemical markers (p>0.05). Treatment-related factors such as neoadjuvant therapy and diverting stoma (DS) placement did not show a significant association with AL. However, surgical factors played a crucial role: operative time was significantly longer in patients with AL (349.0 vs. 232.9 minutes, p=0.024), intraoperative blood loss was markedly higher (800.0 vs. 198.6 mL, p<0.001), and transfusion rates were elevated (60.0% vs. 13.5%, p=0.040). Tumor location in the middle rectum was more frequent among AL cases (60.0% vs. 18.9%, p=0.090). Postoperative complications were significantly more severe in patients with AL, with prolonged hospital stays (20.0 vs. 10.2 days, p=0.043) and increased reintervention rates (80.0% vs. 5.6%, p<0.001). In the logistic regression model, none of the analyzed variables reached statistical significance (p>0.99). However, operative time showed an odds ratio (OR) of 1.736 (p=0.997), suggesting that for each additional minute of surgery, the risk of AL could increase by 73.6%. Despite this trend, the wide confidence interval limits its precision and clinical applicability. Age showed an OR of 0.023 (p=0.998), potentially suggesting a 97.7% reduction in leakage risk for each additional year, although this result was not statistically significant and should be interpreted with caution. Conclusion Although no statistically significant risk factors were identified in the multivariate analysis, intraoperative variables such as prolonged surgical time, high blood loss, and transfusion requirement emerged as clinically relevant trends. These findings emphasize the need for optimizing surgical techniques and perioperative management to mitigate AL risk. Further studies with larger sample sizes are necessary to validate these associations and improve risk stratification models.

Construction of a nomogram prediction model for early postoperative stoma complications of colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Postoperative enterostomy is increasing in patients with colorectal cancer, but there is a lack of a model that can predict the probability of early complications.

AIM

To explore the factors influencing early postoperative stoma complications in colorectal cancer patients and to construct a nomogram prediction model for predicting the probability of these complications.

METHODS

A retrospective study of 462 patients who underwent postoperative ostomy for colorectal cancer in the Gastrointestinal Department of the Anhui Provincial Cancer Hospital. The patients' basic information, surgical details, pathological results, and preoperative inflammatory and nutritional indicators were reviewed. We used univariate and multivariate logistic regression to analyze the risk factors for early postoperative stoma complications in colorectal cancer patients and constructed a nomogram prediction model to predict the probability of these complications.

RESULTS

Binary logistic regression analysis revealed that diabetes [odds ratio (OR) = 3.088, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.419-6.719], preoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy (OR = 6.822, 95%CI: 2.171-21.433), stoma type (OR = 2.118, 95%CI: 1.151-3.898), Nutritional risk screening 2002 score (OR = 2.034, 95%CI: 1.082-3.822) and prognostic nutritional index (OR = 0.486, 95%CI: 0.254-0.927) were risk factors for early stoma complications after colorectal cancer surgery (P < 0.05). On the basis of these results, a prediction model was constructed and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.740 (95%CI: 0.669-0.811). After internal validation, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the validation group was 0.725 (95%CI: 0.631-0.820). The calibration curves for the modeling group and validation group are displayed. The predicted results have a good degree of overlap with the actual results.

CONCLUSION

A previous history of diabetes, preoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy, stoma type, Nutritional risk screening 2002 score and prognostic nutritional index are risk factors for early stoma complications after colorectal cancer surgery. The nomogram prediction model constructed on the basis of the results of logistic regression analysis in this study can effectively predict the probability of early stomal complications after colorectal cancer surgery.

Low rectal resection for low rectal endometriosis and rectal adenocarcinoma: Are we discussing the same risks?

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the rate and risk factors for anastomosis leakage in patients undergoing colorectal resection with low anastomosis for rectal endometriosis and rectal adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study evaluating prospectively collected data was conducted. Patients undergoing colorectal resection for rectal endometriosis and rectal adenocarcinoma with low anastomosis (<7 cm from the anal verge [AV]) from September 2018 to January 2023 were included in the analysis. The main outcome was the rate of anastomosis leakage. A multivariate logistic regression was conducted to evaluate risk factors for anastomosis leakage in both groups.

RESULTS

A total of 159 patients underwent colorectal resection with low anastomosis due to rectal endometriosis (n = 99) and rectal adenocarcinoma (n = 60). Patients with endometriosis were significantly younger than those with adenocarcinoma (35.7 ± 5.1 vs 63.7 ± 12.6; P = 0.001). The leakage rate was similar between the endometriosis (n = 12, 12.1%) and adenocarcinoma (n = 9, 15.0%) patients (P = 0.621). The anastomosis height less than 5 cm from the AV (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 12.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.24-23.54) was significantly associated with the anastomosis leakage. Protective stoma was associated with the decrease of the leakage risk (aOR 0.12, 95% CI 0.01-0.72). The type of disease (rectal endometriosis or adenocarcinoma) was not associated with the anastomosis leakage (aOR 2.87, 95% CI 0.34-21.23).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the different pathogenesis, the risk of anastomotic leakage was found to be similar between patients with low rectal endometriosis and those with rectal adenocarcinoma. These results must be considered by the gynecologist and colorectal surgeon to deliver proper information before rectal surgery for endometriosis.

Chemoradiation, Consolidation Chemotherapy, and Watch and Wait for Early Rectal Cancer

As watch and wait has become an attractive management alternative among patients with rectal cancer who achieve a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation, the focus of organ preservation has now shifted toward the use of this approach in patients with early rectal cancer. These patients would otherwise be treated without the use of neoadjuvant therapy for oncological reasons. The sole purpose of any neoadjuvant treatment here would be the achievement of a complete clinical response in an attempt to avoid total mesorectal excision. This has become particularly interesting after the incorporation of total neoadjuvant therapy regimens. These regimens have resulted in significantly higher rates of complete tumor regression and therefore become an interesting alternative among early rectal cancer patients where organ preservation is desired. The present review provides an overview of the currently available evidence and the preliminary experience with this rather controversial approach.

Outcomes of Early Versus Standard Closure of Diverting Ileostomy After Proctectomy: Meta-analysis and Meta-regression Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare outcomes of early and standard closure of diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) after proctectomy and determine risk factors for anastomotic leak (AL) and complications.

BACKGROUND

Formation of DLI has been a routine practice after proctectomy to decrease the incidence and potential adverse sequela of AL.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared outcomes of early versus standard closure of DLI after proctectomy. Main outcome measures were postoperative complications, AL, ileus, surgical site infection, reoperation, readmission, and hospital stay following DLI closure.

RESULTS

Eleven RCTs (932 patients; 57% male) were included. Early closure group included 474 patients and standard closure 458 patients. Early closure was associated with higher odds of AL [odds ratio (OR): 2.315, P =0.013] and similar odds of complications (OR: 1.103, P =0.667), ileus (OR: 1.307, P =0.438), surgical site infection (OR: 1.668, P =0.079), reoperation (OR: 1.896, P =0.062), and readmission (OR: 3.431, P =0.206). Hospital stay was similar (weighted mean difference: 1.054, P =0.237). Early closure had higher odds of AL than standard closure when early closure was done ≤2 weeks (OR: 2.12, P =0.047) but not within 3 to 4 weeks (OR: 2.98, P =0.107). Factors significantly associated with complications after early closure were diabetes mellitus, smoking, and closure of DLI ≤2 weeks, whereas factors associated with AL were ≥ American Society of Anesthesiologists II classification and diabetes mellitus.

CONCLUSIONS

Early closure of DLI after proctectomy has a higher risk of AL, particularly within 2 weeks of DLI formation. On the basis of this study, routine early ileostomy closure cannot be recommended.

Robotic low anterior resection with complete splenic flexure mobilization and defunctioning left-sided loop colostomy: a case series

A defunctioning stoma is used to alleviate the consequences of anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection for rectal cancer. A loop ileostomy is often preferred but may lead to dehydration and kidney injury. Here, we present a case series for an alternative: the left-sided loop colostomy. A convenience sample of four patients underwent robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer. A complete splenic flexure mobilization and a total mesorectal excision were performed. To defunction the anastomosis, the redundant left colon was brought up to a stoma site in the left iliac fossa and matured as a loop colostomy. Two patients experienced minor stoma leaks and one also had a small prolapse, while all patients had their colostomies reversed on average 7 months after surgery without complications. There were no dehydration episodes and creatinine levels remained within baseline levels at end of follow-up (on average 18 months).

Short-Term Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Virtual/Ghost Ileostomy or Defunctioning Ileostomy after Anterior Resection of the Rectum: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Anterior rectal resection (ARR) represents one of the most frequently performed methods in colorectal surgery, mainly carried out for rectal cancer (RC) treatment. Defunctioning ileostomy (DI) has long been chosen as a method to "protect" colorectal or coloanal anastomosis after ARR. However, DI does not rule out risks of more or less serious complications. A proximal intra-abdominal closed-loop ileostomy, the so-called virtual/ghost ileostomy (VI/GI), could limit the number of DIs and the associated morbidity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes (PRISMA) guidelines. Meta-analysis was performed by use of RevMan [Computer program] Version 5.4.

RESULTS

The five included comparative studies (VI/GI or DI) covering an approximately 20-year study period (2008-2021). All included studies were observational ones and originated from European countries. Meta-analysis indicated VI/GI as significantly associated with lower short-term morbidity rates related to VI/GI or DI after primary surgery (RR: 0.21, 95% CI: 0.07-0.64, p = 0.006), fewer dehydration (RR: 0.17, 95% CI: 0.04-0.75, p = 0.02) and ileus episodes after primary surgery (RR: 0.20, 95% CI: 0.05-0.77, p = 0.02), fewer readmissions after primary surgery (RR: 0.17, 95% CI: 0.07-0.43, p = 0.0002) and readmissions after primary surgery plus stoma closure surgery (RR: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.06-0.30, p < 0.00001) than the DI group. On the contrary, no differences were identified in terms of AL after primary surgery, short-term morbidity after primary surgery, major complications (CD ≥ III) after primary surgery and length of hospital stay after primary surgery. Conclusions: Given the significant biases among meta-analyzed studies (small overall sample size and the small number of events analyzed, in particular), our results require careful interpretation. Further randomized, possibly multi-center trials may be of paramount importance in confirming our results.