Protective Ileostomy in Colorectal Resection for Endometriosis: Is It Truly Protective?

Factors Affecting the Postoperative Bowel Function and Recurrence of Surgery for Intestinal Deep Endometriosis

Objective

This study aims to evaluate the factors associated with complications and long-term results in the surgical treatment of intestinal deep endometriosis and to figure out the optimized treatment measures for bowel endometriosis.

Methods

A retrospective study was performed in a single center in China. Medical charts were reviewed from 61 women undergoing surgical treatment for bowel endometriosis between January 2013 and August 2019 in the Department of General Gynecology, Women’s Hospital School of Medicine Zhejiang University. Multivariate regression analysis was utilized to investigate the impact of the stages of endometriosis and surgical steps (independent risk factors) on complications (and postoperative bowel dysfunction). The clinical characters, surgical procedures, postoperative treatment, complications, and recurrence rate were summarized and analyzed by using Lasso regression.

Results

Surgery type was the most important independent risk factor related to postoperative abnormal defecation in intestinal deep endometriosis patients (P < 0.05, OR = 34.133). Infection is the most important independent risk factor related to both postoperative complications (OR = 96.931) and recurrences after conservative surgery (OR = 4.667). Surgery type and age were significantly related to recurrences after conservative surgery.

Conclusions

We recommended conservative operation especially full-thickness disc excision to improve the quality of life of intestinal deep endometriosis patients. In addition, prevention of infection is very important to reduce the postoperative complications rate and the recurrence rate.

Short-term outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery for deep infiltrative endometriosis with rectal involvement: a single-center experience of 168 cases

Purpose

The surgical management of deep infiltrative endometriosis (DE) involving the rectum remains a challenge. The objective of this study was to assess the outcomes from a single tertiary center over a decade with an emphasis on the role of a protective loop ileostomy (PI).

Methods

A retrospective review of outcomes for 168 patients managed between 2008 and 2018 is presented including 57 rectal shaves, 23 discoid excisions, and 88 segmental rectal resections.

Results

The nodule size (mean±standard deviation) in the segmental resection group was 32.7±11.2 mm, 23.4±10.5 mm for discoid excision, and 18.8±6.0 mm for rectal shaves. A PI was performed in 19 elective cases (11.3%) usually for an ultra-low anastomosis <5 cm from the anal verge. All Clavien-Dindo grade III/IV complications occurred after segmental resections and included 5 anastomotic leaks, 6 rectovaginal fistulas, 2 ureteric fistulas, and 1 ureteric stenosis. Of 26 stomas (15.5%), there were 19 PIs, 3 secondary ileostomies (after complications), and 4 end colostomies. The median time to PI closure was 5.8 months (range, 0.4-16.7 months) in uncomplicated disease compared with 9.2 months (range, 4.7-18.4 months) when initial postoperative complications were recorded (P=0.019). Only 1 patient with a recurrent rectovaginal fistula had a permanent colostomy.

Conclusion

In patients with DE and rectal involvement a PI is selectively used for low anastomoses and complex pelvic reconstructions. Protective stomas and those used in the definitive management of a major postoperative complication can usually be reversed.

Feasibility and safety of transvaginal specimen extraction in deep endometriosis colorectal resectional surgery and analysis of risk factors for postoperative complications

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to demonstrate that transvaginal specimen extraction is a feasible and safe approach in colorectal resection for deep endometriosis (DE) and to assess the risk factors for postoperative complications.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included all the consecutive patients undergoing segmental bowel resection for symptomatic endometriosis at "La Paz" University Hospital (Madrid, Spain) and at "Hospital General Universitario de Valencia" (Valencia, Spain) from January 2014 to December to 2017. Patients were grouped according to specimen extraction approach into those who had transvaginal extraction (Group I) and those who had suprapubic extraction (Group II). Clinic-demographical, surgical and post-surgical data were recorded. Intra- and postoperative complications were classified according to Clavien-Dindo criteria. Postoperative data were compared between groups. Risk factors associated with surgery were investigated.

RESULTS

Out of 99 female patients included (average age 36.91 ± 5.36 years), 23 patients (23.2%) had transvaginal and 76 (76.8%) had suprapubic specimen extraction. The groups were comparable regarding operative time, nodule size, level of anastomosis, hospital stay and intraoperative complications. We observed no statistically significant differences in postoperative complications and rectovaginal fistula rate between the groups. Binary logistic regression analyses determined that vaginal endometriosis is an independent risk factor for postoperative complications (OR: 2.63, 95% CI [1.10-6.48], p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Transvaginal specimen extraction is a safe and feasible technique in DE colorectal surgery and should be taken into consideration whenever vaginal endometriosis exists. Nevertheless, vaginal endometriosis can be an independent risk factor for postoperative complications in DE surgery.

Recommendations for the surgical treatment of endometriosis. Part 2: deep endometriosis

STUDY QUESTION

How should surgery for endometriosis be performed?

SUMMARY ANSWER

This document provides recommendations covering technical aspects of different methods of surgery for deep endometriosis in women of reproductive age.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Endometriosis is highly prevalent and often associated with severe symptoms. Yet compared to equally prevalent conditions, it is poorly understood and a challenge to manage. Previously published guidelines have provided recommendations for (surgical) treatment of deep endometriosis, based on the best available evidence, but without technical information and details on how to best perform such treatment in order to be effective and safe.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION

A working group of the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), ESHRE and the World Endometriosis Society (WES) collaborated on writing recommendations on the practical aspects of surgery for treatment of deep endometriosis.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS

This document focused on surgery for deep endometriosis and is complementary to a previous document in this series focusing on endometrioma surgery.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The document presents general recommendations for surgery for deep endometriosis, starting from preoperative assessments and first steps of surgery. Different approaches for surgical treatment are discussed and are respective of location and extent of disease; uterosacral ligaments and rectovaginal septum with or without involvement of the rectum, urinary tract or extrapelvic endometriosis. In addition, recommendations are provided on the treatment of frozen pelvis and on hysterectomy as a treatment for deep endometriosis.

LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION

Owing to the limited evidence available, recommendations are mostly based on clinical expertise. Where available, references of relevant studies were added.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

These recommendations complement previous guidelines on management of endometriosis and the recommendations for surgical treatment of ovarian endometrioma.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

The meetings of the working group were funded by ESGE, ESHRE and WES. Dr Roman reports personal fees from ETHICON, PLASMASURGICAL, OLYMPUS and NORDIC PHARMA, outside the submitted work; Dr Becker reports grants from Bayer AG, Volition Rx, MDNA Life Sciences and Roche Diagnostics Inc. and other relationships or activities from AbbVie Inc., and Myriad Inc, during the conduct of the study; Dr Tomassetti reports non-financial support from ESHRE, during the conduct of the study; and non-financial support and other were from Lumenis, Gedeon-Richter, Ferring Pharmaceuticals and Merck SA, outside the submitted work. The other authors had nothing to disclose.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

na.