Risk factors for perineal wound infection after abdominoperineal resection of advanced lower rectal cancer

Minimally Invasive Lower Anterior Resections - Better than Open But Not All the Same

Background/Objective: Optimal approach for lower anterior resection has been closely debated. The relatively new addition of the robotic approach adds a layer of complexity to this topic. The majority of the literature has compared the possible approaches between two techniques; however, only a few studies have comprehensively compared all 3 approaches at the same time, especially in a non-academic center.Study Design: This is a retrospective cohort study of a prospectively maintained database of data from a large group of private-practice colorectal surgeons in a large metropolitan area. Specifically, rectal resections using open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches were queried. A total of 130 patients underwent open, laparoscopic, or robotic oncological lower anterior resection from 2016 to January 2020.Results: Statistical significance of length of stay was noted between the three approaches with the mean length of stay for open being 8.08 days, laparoscopic being 7.04 days, and robotic being 4.96 days (P < .005). No statistical significance was noted for estimated blood loss, operating time, or postoperative complications including anastomotic leak, ileus, pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, surgical site infection, and urinary tract infection. When directly comparing any minimally invasive surgery approach to open, estimated blood loss was decreased in addition to the shortened length of stay (P < .05).Conclusions: This study demonstrates that MIS LAR has significant benefit over the open approach. However, finding that robotic surgery had was superior to laparoscopic LAR which was surprising and important. This experience in the private world raises the question as to whether robotic LAR should be considered the standard of care.

A history of bariatric surgery before surgery for colorectal cancer may improve short-term postoperative outcomes: Analysis of the national inpatient sample 2015-2019

BACKGROUND

Bariatric surgery is the most effective and sustainable form of weight loss. Bariatric surgery before elective operations for colorectal pathology may improve postoperative outcomes. To compare patients with and without prior bariatric surgery undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer in terms of postoperative morbidity and health care use.

METHODS

Adult patients undergoing resection for colorectal cancer from 2015 to 2019 were identified from the National Inpatient Sample. Patients were stratified according to their history of bariatric surgery. Propensity score matching with 4:1 nearest-neighbor matching was performed according to demographic, operative, and hospital characteristics. The primary outcome was postoperative morbidity. Secondary outcomes included system-specific postoperative complications, postoperative mortality, postoperative length of stay, total admission health care cost, and post-discharge disposition. McNemar's test and Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test were performed.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 1,197 patients without prior bariatric surgery and 376 patients with prior bariatric surgery were included. Patients with prior bariatric surgery had an absolute reduction of 6.5% in overall in-hospital postoperative morbidity (19.1% vs 25.6%, P < .0001), a $5,256 decrease in hospitalization cost ($70,344 vs $75,600, P = .034), and were more likely to be discharged home after their index operation (72.9% vs 63.9%, P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Bariatric surgery before surgery for colorectal cancer may be associated with decreased postoperative morbidity and health care use. Bariatric surgery and other forms of rapid and effective weight loss, such as very low-energy diets, should be evaluated further for the optimization of obese patients before nonbariatric abdominal surgery.

Effects of wound infection on prognosis after laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection of rectal cancer

Background

In two facilities in Chongqing, this research sought to retrospectively evaluate the effects of perineal wound infection on survival after laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (LAPR) of rectal cancer.

Methods

To obtain clinical information on patients who underwent LAPR between January 2013 and December 2021, we performed a multicenter cohort study. A total of 473 patients were enrolled: 314 in the non-infection group and 159 in the group with perineal infection. The general data, perioperative conditions, and tumor outcomes between groups were analyzed. The infection rates, recurrence rates, and survival rates of the two centers were compared.

Results

The age, height, weight, body mass index (BMI), preoperative complications, preoperative treatment, and intraoperative conditions of patients in the LAPR infection group were not statistically different from those in the non-infection group. The percentage of men, typical postoperative hospital stay, length of initial postoperative therapy, and recurrence and metastasis rates were all considerably higher in the infection group than those in the non-infection group. Wound infection was an independent factor affecting tumor recurrence and metastasis after LAPR as well as an independent factor shortening patient survival time according to multivariate analysis. The incidence of wound infection, the rate of recurrence, and the rate of mortality did not vary significantly across sites.

Conclusion

Wound infection after LAPR increases the mean postoperative hospital stay, prolongs the time to first postoperative treatment, and decreases the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Therefore, decreasing the rate of LAPR wound infection is expected to shorten the postoperative hospital stay and prolong the patient DFS and OS. Patients with postoperative infection may require intensive adjuvant therapy.

Management of Perineal Wounds Following Pelvic Surgery

Despite advancements in understanding and technique, there remain significant challenges in the management of a complex perineal wound following pelvic surgery. Complications including wound sepsis, fistulation, persistent sinus, and herniation produce additional morbidity and health care costs. This article details the methods of optimizing patient and operative factors to mitigate this risk, alongside strategies to deal with sequelae of wound failure.

Effect of pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy on postoperative complications of rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Standard total mesorectal resection has become an important treatment option for locally advanced or high-risk rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy. 15-27% of patients can achieve pathological complete response (PCR) after neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (nCRT). However, the relationship between PCR and postoperative complications remains an important unsolved problem. The objective of this study was to determine whether PCR was associated with the rate of postoperative complications.

METHODS

This meta-analysis was implemented following the recommendations from Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. We searched electronic literature by PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar. Major outcomes of interest included anastomotic leakage, surgical-site infection, reoperation, and any postoperative complications. Other outcomes comprised postoperative hemorrhage, ileus, and mortality.

RESULTS

Eleven thousand two hundred ninety patients in 9 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled analysis revealed that patients with PCR did not have a higher risk of anastomotic leakage (OR = 1.22, 95% CI 0.92-1.62, p = 0.17), reoperation (OR = 1.13, 95% CI 0.93-1.37, p = 0.22), and any postoperative complications (OR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.91-1.15, p = 0.72) than patients with non-PCR. However, the meta-analysis showed that the PCR group was superior to the non-PCR group in terms of surgical-site infection (9.38% vs. 12.44%OR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.47-0.98; p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

PCR might not be related to the occurrence of postoperative complications in rectal cancer patients following nCRT. In addition, PCR might be associated with a lower risk of surgical-site infection.

Surgical Site Infections in patients undergoing major oncological surgery during the COVID-19 paNdemic (SCION): A propensity-matched analysis

Background and Objectives

There are reports of outcomes of elective major cancer surgery during the COVID‐19 pandemic. We evaluated if reinforcement of hand hygiene, universal masking, and distancing as a part of pandemic precautions led to a decrease in the incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs) in major oncologic resections.

Methods

Propensity score matching using the nearest neighbor algorithm was performed on 3123 patients over seven covariates (age, comorbidities, surgery duration, prior treatment, disease stage, reconstruction, and surgical wound type) yielding 2614 matched (pre‐COVID 1612 and COVID 1002) patients. Conditional logistic regression was used to identify if SSI incidence was lower amongst patients operated during the pandemic.

Results

There was a 4.2% (p = 0.006) decrease in SSI in patients operated during the pandemic. On multivariate regression, surgery during the COVID‐19 period (odds ratio [OR] = 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.61–0.98; p = 0.03), prior chemoradiation (OR = 2.46; CI = 1.45–4.17; p < 0.001), duration of surgery >4 h (OR = 2.17; 95%CI = 1.55–3.05; p < 0.001) and clean contaminated wounds (OR = 2.50; 95% CI = 1.09–2.18; p = 0.012) were significantly associated with SSI.

Conclusion

Increased compliance with hand hygiene, near‐universal mask usage, and social distancing during the COVID‐19 pandemic possibly led to a 23% decreased odds of SSI in major oncologic resections. Extending these low‐cost interventions in the post‐pandemic era can decrease morbidity associated with SSI in cancer surgery.

Continuous Negative Pressure Drainage with Intermittent Irrigation Leaded to a Risk Reduction of Perineal Surgical Site Infection Following Laparoscopic Extralevator Abdominoperineal Excision for Low Rectal Cancer

Purpose

High rate of perineal surgical site infection (SSI) is the most common complication following abdominoperineal resection (APR), especially for extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE). The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of continuous negative pressure drainage combined with intermittent irrigation (CNPDCII) in the presacral space on the perineal SSI following laparoscopic ELAPE for low rectal cancer.

Patients and Methods

The clinical data of 99 patients with low rectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic ELAPE surgery were retrospectively analyzed. Among the 99 patients, 46 patients received CNPDCII and 53 patients received conventional drainage in the presacral space after ELAPE. Self-made irrigation drainage tube: took a silicone drainage tube, cut 3 side holes at every 2cm intervals at the front end, and fixed a flexible tube of an intravenous needle at the front end of the silicone drainage tube. The conventional drainage tube or self-made irrigation drainage tube was placed in the presacral space and poked out from the inside of the ischial tuberosity. The incidence of SSI and other perioperative indicators between the two groups was compared within 30 days after surgery.

Results

There was no statistical difference in clinicopathological features between the two groups of patients (p>0.05). A statistically lower rate of SSI was found in CNPDCII group (17.4%, 8/46) than the conventional drainage group (35.8%, 19/53). The drainage tube retention time (7.8±1.2 d VS 9.4±1.6 d) and the postoperative hospital stay (9.7±1.4 d VS 11.9±2.3 d) in CNPDCII group were significantly shortened than the conventional drainage group. There was no statistical difference in operating theatre time and intraoperative blood loss between the two groups. Multivariate analysis confirmed that CNPDCII was an independent protective factor for SSI after ELAPE.

Conclusion

CNPDCII can effectively reduce the incidence of SSI following laparoscopic ELAPE, which is simple, safe and effective.

Perioperative Allogeneic Red Blood Cell Transfusion and Wound Infections: An Observational Study

BACKGROUND

It remains unclear whether the benefits of performing perioperative allogeneic red blood cell (RBC) transfusion outweigh the risks of postoperative wound infection. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of perioperative RBC transfusion as well as dose-response relationship on wound infections in surgical patients in a large cohort.

METHODS

As a retrospective observational study, the national Hospital Quality Monitoring System database was used to retrieve information about in-hospital surgical patients without limitations on surgical types in the People's Republic of China between 2013 and 2018. Patients were divided into the perioperative RBC transfusion and non-RBC transfusion groups, and wound infection rates (the primary end point) were compared. Secondary end points included in-hospital mortality, nosocomial infections, and length of hospital stay. Furthermore, patients who underwent RBC transfusion were subdivided into 6 groups based on the volume of transfused RBCs to investigate the dose-response relationship between RBC transfusions and wound infections. The association between RBC transfusion and patient outcomes were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for potential confounders.

RESULTS

A total of 1,896,584 patients from 29 provinces were included, among whom 76,078 (4.0%) underwent RBC transfusions; the overall wound infection rate was 0.7%. After adjusting for confounding factors, perioperative RBC transfusion was associated with higher odds of wound infection (odds ratio [OR] = 2.24, 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.09-2.40; P < .001). As the volume of transfused RBCs increased, so did the odds of wound infection with a clear dose-response relationship (OR of >0 and ≤1 U, >1 and ≤2 U, >2 and ≤4 U, >4 and ≤8 U, >8 U transfusion compared with no RBC transfusion were 1.20, 95% CI, 0.76-1.91; 1.27, 95% CI, 1.10-1.47; 1.70, 95% CI, 1.49-1.93; 2.12, 95% CI, 1.83-2.45 and 3.65, 95% CI, 3.13-4.25, respectively). RBC transfusion was also found to be associated with higher odds of in-hospital mortality, nosocomial infection, and longer hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

RBC transfusion was associated with an increased odd of postoperative wound infection in surgical patients, and a significant dose-related relationship was also observed. While there are still essential confounders not adjusted for and the results do not necessarily indicate a causal relationship, we still recommend to lessen perioperative blood loss and optimize blood conservation strategies.

What is the advantage of rectal amputation with an initial perineal approach for primary anorectal carcinoma?

Background

Rectal amputation (RA) remains an important surgical procedure for salvage despite advances in sphincter-preserving resection, including intersphincteric resection. The aim of this study was to compare short- and long-term outcomes of RA with an initial perineal approach to those of RA with an initial abdominal approach (conventional abdominoperineal resection (APR)) for primary anorectal cancer.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the short- and long-term outcomes of 48 patients who underwent RA with an initial perineal approach (perineal group) and 21 patients who underwent RA with an initial abdominal approach (conventional group).

Results

For the perineal group, the operation time was shorter than that for the conventional group (313 vs. 388 min, p = 0.027). The postoperative complication rate was similar between the two groups (43.8 vs. 47.6%, p = 0.766). Perineal wound complications (PWCs) were significantly fewer in the perineal group than in the conventional group (22.9 vs. 57.1%, p = 0.006). All 69 patients underwent complete TME, but positive CRM was significantly higher in the conventional group than in the perineal group (0 vs. 19.0%, p = 0.011). There were no significant differences in the recurrence (43.8 vs. 47.6%, p = 0.689), 5-year disease-free survival (63.7% vs. 56.7%, p = 0.665) and 5-year overall survival rates (82.5% vs. 66.2%, p = 0.323) between the two groups.

Conclusion

These data suggest that RA with an initial perineal approach for selective primary anorectal carcinoma is advantageous in minimizing PWCs and positive CRMs. Further investigations on the advantages of this approach are necessary.

Excluding the ischiorectal fossa irradiation during neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with intensity-modulated radiotherapy followed by abdominoperineal resection decreases perineal complications in patients with lower rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to explore the impact of including or excluding the ischiorectal fossa (IRF) within the clinical target volume during neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) using intensity modulated radiotherapy, in locally advanced lower rectal cancer (LALRC).

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed the data of 220 LALRC patients who received NCRT followed by abdominoperineal resection between January 2009 and January 2015. Six patients were excluded because of loss to follow-up, 90 patients received IRF irradiation (IRF group) while 124 patients did not (NIRF group). Survival, patterns of recurrence, and treatment toxicities were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Overall, patient/treatment variables were well balanced except for surgical technique. Perineal wound complications in the IRF and NIRF groups, were 40.0 and 24.2%, respectively (p = 0.010); corresponding 3-year perineal recurrence rates, local recurrence free survival, overall survival, and distant relapse free survival were 4.4% vs. 2.4% (p = 0.670), 88.1% vs. 95.0% (p = 0.079), 82.6% vs. 88.4% (p = 0.087), and 61.9% vs. 81.0% (p = 0.026), respectively. Multivariate analyses demonstrated the following factors to be significantly related to perineal wound complications: irradiation of the IRF (odds ratio [OR] 2.892, p = 0.002), anaemia (OR 3.776, p = 0.010), operation duration > 180 min (OR 2.486, p = 0.007), and interval between radiotherapy and surgery > 8 weeks (OR 2.400, p = 0.010).

CONCLUSIONS

Exclusion of the IRF from the clinical target volume during NCRT using intensity-modulated radiotherapy in LALRC could lower the incidence of perineal wound complications after abdominoperineal resection, without compromising oncological outcomes.