Does neoadjuvant therapy increase the incidence of anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for mid and low rectal cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Protective ileostomy creation after anterior resection of the rectum (PICARR): a decision-making exploring international survey

In our previous survey of experts, surgeon's decision-making process (DMP) about protective ileostomy (PI) creation after anterior resection was investigated. Based on our previous data, a multiple choice questionnaire has been developed. The aim is to perform a quantitative analysis of the results obtained from an international survey and to describe the clinical practice worldwide. Ten questions were related to participants' demographics and, 20 questions (of which 17 Likert scale questions) investigated the DMP regarding PI creation. To evaluate the tendency of the answers in the Likert-type questions, the mean of the answers obtained was compared with the mean point of the Likert scale. The survey was completed by 1019 physicians. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge ≤ 10 cm were each considered alone sufficient to justify creation of a PI, with statistically significant differences in comparison to the mean point of the scales in (p =  < 0.0001 in both cases). Total Mesorectal Excision alone was not considered a factor sufficient to create a PI (p = 0.416). Most of the participants agree to define their approach to create a PI "tailored" to patients' risk factors (p =  < 0.0001) and "influenced by my experience" in case of patients with low/moderate risk of anastomotic leakage (p =  < 0.0001). This study provides useful insights on the worldwide clinical practice regarding creation of PI following anterior resection. Given the lack of standardization and evidence-based guidelines, this analysis may be helpful to assist surgeons' practice.

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.

Three-row versus two-row circular staplers for left-sided colorectal anastomosis: a propensity score-matched analysis of the iCral 2 and 3 prospective cohorts

BACKGROUND

Since most anastomoses after left-sided colorectal resections are performed with a circular stapler, any technological change in stapling devices may influence the incidence of anastomotic adverse events. The aim of the present study was to analyze the effect of a three-row circular stapler on anastomotic leakage and related morbidity after left-sided colorectal resections.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A circular stapled anastomosis was performed in 4255 (50.9%) out of 8359 patients enrolled in two prospective multicenter studies in Italy, and, after exclusion criteria to reduce heterogeneity, 2799 (65.8%) cases were retrospectively analyzed through a 1:1 propensity score-matching model including 20 covariates relative to patient characteristics, to surgery and to perioperative management. Two well-balanced groups of 425 patients each were obtained: group (A) - true population of interest, anastomosis performed with a three-row circular stapler; group (B) - control population, anastomosis performed with a two-row circular stapler. The target of inferences was the average treatment effect in the treated (ATT). The primary endpoints were overall and major anastomotic leakage and overall anastomotic bleeding; the secondary endpoints were overall and major morbidity and mortality rates. The results of multiple logistic regression analyses for the outcomes, including the 20 covariates selected for matching, were presented as odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).

RESULTS

Group A versus group B showed a significantly lower risk of overall anastomotic leakage (2.1 vs. 6.1%; OR 0.33; 95% CI 0.15-0.73; P =0.006), major anastomotic leakage (2.1 vs. 5.2%; OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.17-0.87; P =0.022), and major morbidity (3.5 vs. 6.6% events; OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.24-0.91; P =0.026).

CONCLUSION

The use of three-row circular staplers independently reduced the risk of anastomotic leakage and related morbidity after left-sided colorectal resection. Twenty-five patients were required to avoid one leakage.

Prediction model of anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer-based on nomogram and multivariate analysis with 1995 patients

BACKGROUND

Postoperative anastomotic leakage for rectal cancer shows higher morbidity with grievous concomitant symptoms. Accurate assessment of the incidence of anastomotic leakage, multivariate analysis, and establishment of a scientific prediction model can be useful to dispose of its possible severe clinical consequences.

METHODS

This retrospective study collected 1995 consecutive patients who underwent anterior resection of rectal cancer with primary anastomosis at Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital between January 2016 and June 2022. Independent risk factors associated with anastomotic leakage were analyzed by univariate and multivariate logistic regression. The chosen independent risk factors were used to construct a nomogram risk prediction model whose availability was evaluated by using a bootstrapped-concordance index and calibration plots with R software.

RESULTS

A total of 1995 patients who underwent anterior resection for rectal cancer were included while 120 patients were diagnosed with anastomotic leakage, an incidence of 6.0%. Univariate analysis and its concomitant multivariate cox regression analysis indicated that independent risk factors associated with anastomotic leakage included male gender (odds ratio (OR) = 2.873), diabetes (OR = 2.480), neoadjuvant therapy (OR = 5.283), tumor's distance from the anus verge < 5 cm (OR = 5.824), tumor size ≥ 5 cm (OR = 4.888), and the blood lose > 50 mL (OR = 9.606).We established a nomogram prediction model with proper applicability (concordance index, 0.83) and the calibration curve to justify its predictive ability that the predicted occurrence probability keeps a high degree of consistency with the actual occurrence probability. Meanwhile, the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was 0.83.

CONCLUSIONS

The characteristics of patients and tumor surgery-related conditions can affect the incidence of anastomotic leakage. However, whether the surgical method will affect morbidity is still controversial. Our nomogram can be seen as an effective instrument to predict anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer precisely.

Predictive Factors for Anastomotic Leakage Following Colorectal Cancer Surgery: Where Are We and Where Are We Going?

Anastomotic leakage (AL) remains one of the most severe complications following colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery. Indeed, leaks that may occur after any type of intestinal anastomosis are commonly associated with a higher reoperation rate and an increased risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality. At first, our review aims to identify specific preoperative, intraoperative and perioperative factors that eventually lead to the development of anastomotic dehiscence based on the current literature. We will also investigate the role of several biomarkers in predicting the presence of ALs following colorectal surgery. Despite significant improvements in perioperative care, advances in surgical techniques, and a high index of suspicion of this complication, the incidence of AL remained stable during the last decades. Thus, gaining a better knowledge of the risk factors that influence the AL rates may help identify high-risk surgical patients requiring more intensive perioperative surveillance. Furthermore, prompt diagnosis of this severe complication may help improve patient survival. To date, several studies have identified predictive biomarkers of ALs, which are most commonly associated with the inflammatory response to colorectal surgery. Interestingly, early diagnosis and evaluation of the severity of this complication may offer a significant opportunity to guide clinical judgement and decision-making.

Anastomotic leakage in rectal cancer surgery: Retrospective analysis of risk factors

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage (AL) after restorative surgery for rectal cancer (RC) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality.

AIM

To ascertain the risk factors by examining cases of AL in rectal surgery in this retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

To identify risk factors for AL, a review of 583 patients who underwent rectal resection with a double-stapling colorectal anastomosis between January 2007 and January 2022 was performed. Clinical, demographic and operative features, intraoperative outcomes and oncological characteristics were evaluated.

RESULTS

The incidence of AL was 10.4%, with a mean time interval of 6.2 ± 2.1 d. Overall mortality was 0.8%. Mortality was higher in patients with AL (4.9%) than in patients without leak (0.4%, P = 0.009). Poor bowel preparation, blood transfusion, median age, prognostic nutritional index < 40 points, tumor diameter and intraoperative blood loss were identified as risk factors for AL. Location of anastomosis, number of stapler cartridges used to divide the rectum, diameter of circular stapler, level of vascular section, T and N status and stage of disease were also correlated to AL in our patients. The diverting ileostomy did not reduce the leak rate, while the use of the transanastomic tube significantly did.

CONCLUSION

Clinical, surgical and pathological factors are associated with an increased risk of AL. It adversely affects the morbidity and mortality of RC patients.

Protective ileostomy creation after anterior resection of the rectum: Shared decision-making or still subjective?

AIM

The choice of whether to perform protective ileostomy (PI) after anterior resection (AR) is mainly guided by risk factors (RFs) responsible for the development of anastomotic leakage (AL). However, clear guidelines about PI creation are still lacking in the literature and this is often decided according to the surgeon's preferences, experiences or feelings. This qualitative study aims to investigate, by an open-ended question survey, the individual surgeon's decision-making process regarding PI creation after elective AR.

METHOD

Fifty four colorectal surgeons took part in an electronic survey to answer the questions and describe what usually led their decision to perform PI. A content analysis was used to code the answers. To classify answers, five dichotomous categories (In favour/Against PI, Listed/Unlisted RFs, Typical/Atypical, Emotions/Non-emotions, Personal experience/No personal experience) have been developed.

RESULTS

Overall, 76% of surgeons were in favour of PI creation and 88% considered listed RFs in the question of whether to perform PI. Atypical answers were reported in 10% of cases. Emotions and personal experience influenced surgeons' decision-making process in 22% and 49% of cases, respectively. The most frequently considered RFs were the distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge (96%), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (88%), a positive intraoperative leak test (65%), blood loss (37%) and immunosuppression therapy (35%).

CONCLUSION

The indications to perform PI following rectal cancer surgery lack standardization and evidence-based guidelines are required to inform practice. Until then, expert opinion can be helpful to assist the decision-making process in patients who have undergone AR for adenocarcinoma.

Effect of the transanal drainage tube on preventing anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a common postoperative complication of rectal cancer, and transanal drainage tube (TDT) efficacy is still contentious. This study aimed to evaluate the TDT effect on AL prevention.

METHODS

All relevant papers were searched by using a predefined search strategy (two randomized controlled trials (RCTs), one prospective study, and four retrospective studies). Meta-analysis was conducted to estimate AL and re-operation pooled rates.

RESULTS

A total of 7 studies (1556 patients) were included: No significant statistic difference was found between two groups on AL rate (odds ratio (OR) 0.61, P = 0.11) and re-operation rate (OR 0.52, P = 0.10). For subgroup analysis, significant statistic difference was found between two groups on AL rate (OR 0.29, P = 0.002) and re-operation rate (OR 0.15, P = 0.04) in patients without neoadjuvant therapy. As for patients without diverting stoma, the AL rate (OR 0.35, P = 0.002) was significantly lower than that in patients without TDT.

CONCLUSIONS

TDT may reduce AL morbidity and re-operation rate for patients without high risk of AL, but may be useless for those in high-risk situations.

Comprehensive literature review of the outcome, modifications, and alternatives to double-stapled low pelvic colorectal anastomosis

BACKGROUND

The double-stapled technique is widely used for creation of colorectal anastomosis after anterior resection of the rectum. Anastomotic leak has been recognized as one of the serious complications of low pelvic colorectal anastomosis. The present review aimed to illustrate the collective outcome of double-stapled technique, risk factors for anastomotic leak, and the modifications and alternatives of double-stapled technique.

METHODS

A comprehensive review of PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted to search articles that entailed patients who underwent low anterior resection with double-stapled low pelvic anastomosis. The main outcome measures were anastomotic leak and complication rates of double-stapled technique and its technical modifications.

RESULTS

Overall, the median anastomotic leak rate across 25 studies was 7.3% (range: 0.7%-24.5%). The most commonly reported predictors of anastomotic leak after double-stapled technique were low tumor location, multiple stapler firings, male sex, longer operation time, and perioperative blood transfusion. Several modifications of the double-stapled technique were described and include hand-sewn colonic J-pouch, vertical division of the rectum, transanal reinforcement of anastomosis, transanal pull-through with single stapling technique, elimination of dog-ears using sutures, the natural orifice intracorporeal anastomosis with extraction of specimen procedure, and transanal transection and single-stapled.

CONCLUSION

The median rate of anastomotic leak after double-stapled technique was less than 8%; however, it showed a wide range from less than 1% to approximately 25%. This wide variation might be related to additional risk factors of anastomotic leak, namely low tumor location and multiple stapler firings. Several techniques were described to modify the double-stapled technique to try to reduce the incidence of anastomotic leak.

Are risk factors for anastomotic leakage influencing long-term oncological outcomes after low anterior resection of locally advanced rectal cancer with neoadjuvant therapy? A single-centre cohort study

PURPOSE

Anastomotic leakage (AL) poses the most serious problem following low anterior resection in patients with rectal cancer independent of surgical approach or technique. The aim of this study was to evaluate risk factors for the occurrence of AL and how they affect the oncological long-term outcome of patients who received neoadjuvant therapy.

METHODS

A single centre cohort study of 163 consecutive locally advanced rectal cancer patients (cT3, cT4, N +) that received neoadjuvant therapy followed by resection with primary anastomosis between January 1998 and December 2020 were included in this study. Short- and long-term findings were compared between patients with AL (Leakage +) and without AL (Leakage -).

RESULTS

A complete follow-up was obtained from 163 patients; thereby, 33 patients (20%) developed an AL. We observed more patients with comorbidities (38% vs. 61%, p = 0.049) which developed a leakage in the course. Permanent stoma rate (36% vs. 18%, p = 0.03) was higher, and time between primary operation and stoma reversal was longer (219 days [172-309] vs. 93 days [50-182], p < 0.001) in this leakage group as well. Tumour distance lower than 6 cm from the anal verge (OR: 2.81 [95%CI: 1.08-7.29], p = 0.04) and comorbidities (OR: 2.22 [95%CI: 1.01-4.90], p = 0.049) was evaluated to be independent risk factors for developing an AL after rectal cancer surgery. Oncological outcome was not influenced by AL nor by other associated risk factors.

CONCLUSION

We could clearly detect the distance of tumour from the anal verge and comorbidities independent risk factors for the occurrence of AL. Oncological findings and long-term outcome were not influenced by these particular risk factors.

Risk factors and economic burden of postoperative anastomotic leakage related events in patients who underwent surgeries for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Nationwide research about the clinical and economic burden caused by anastomotic leakage (AL) has not been published yet in Korea. This study assessed the AL rate and quantified the economic burden using the nationwide database.

METHODS

This real world evidence study used health claims data provided by the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA, which showed that 156,545 patients underwent anterior resection (AR), low anterior resection (LAR), or ultra-low anterior resection (uLAR) for colorectal cancer (CRC) between January 1, 2007 and January 31, 2020. The incidence of AL was identified using a composite operational definition, a composite of imaging study, antibacterial drug use, reoperation, or image-guided percutaneous drainage. Total hospital costs and length of stay (LOS) were evaluated in patients with AL versus those without AL during index hospitalization and within 30 days after the surgery.

RESULTS

Among 120,245 patients who met the eligibility criteria, 7,194 (5.98%) patients had AL within 30 days after surgery. Male gender, comorbidities (diabetes, metastatic disease, ischemic heart disease, ischemic stroke), protective ostomy, and multiple linear stapler use, blood transfusion, and urinary tract injury were associated with the higher odds of AL. Older age, rectosigmoid junction cancer, AR, LAR, and laparoscopic approach were related with the reduced odds of AL. Patients with AL incurred higher costs for index hospitalization compared to those without AL (8,991 vs. 7,153 USD; p<0.0001). Patients with AL also required longer LOS (16.78 vs. 14.22 days; p<0.0001) and readmissions (20.83 vs. 13.93 days; p<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Among patients requiring resection for CRC, the occurrence of AL was associated with significantly increased costs and LOS. Preventing AL could not only produce superior clinical outcomes, but also reduce the economic burden for patients and payers.

Prognostic value of increased postoperative carcinoembryonic antigen in patients with early intestinal anastomosis leakage who underwent right hemicolectomy surgery

&lt;b&gt; Introduction:&lt;/b&gt; Anastomotic leak after colorectal surgery is a serious complication that causes significant postoperative morbidity and mortality. &lt;/br&gt;&lt;/br&gt; &lt;b&gt;Aim:&lt;/b&gt; This study aimed to investigate the predictive value of increased postoperative carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in early intestinal anastomosis leakage in patients who underwent right hemicolectomy surgery.&lt;/br&gt;&lt;/br&gt; &lt;b&gt;Material and methods:&lt;/b&gt; In this prospective study, 535 patients who underwent right colon cancer surgery with stapled anastomosis were enrolled. A subset of 315 patients was included in the study after meeting the inclusion criteria. Preoperatively, their serum CEA levels were measured, and on postoperative days 3 and 6, the levels were measured again.&lt;/br&gt;&lt;/br&gt; &lt;b&gt;Results:&lt;/b&gt; Early AL occurred in 18 patients (5.71%). The mean SD age of patients was 65.06 11.69 years. Increased CEA level was associated with increased odds of intestinal AL among the patients after three and six days of surgery (OR after three days = 1.3; 95%CI = 1.11.5, OR after six days = 1.7 95%CI = 1.142.5). The mean CEA level significantly increased among patients with anastomose leakage (P-value &lt; 0.001). &lt;/br&gt;&lt;/br&gt; &lt;b&gt;Conclusion:&lt;/b&gt; The results showed that increasing CEA levels can be used as one of the non-invasive markers in detecting early AL in patients with right colon cancer surgery.

Severe complications from anastomotic leakage after total mesorectal excision with the protective loop ileostomy in three patients

Introduction and importance

A protective loop ileostomy is recommended in ultra-low rectal cancer to reduce the complications associated with anastomotic leakage (AL), but there are few studies on the complications after AL. The purpose of this study was to outline our experience in the successful treatment of severe abdominal infection after AL in rectal cancer patients with the protective loop ileostomy.

Case presentation

In this report, we describe three cases of AL after standard total mesorectal excision with the protective loop ileostomy. Severe abdominal infection occurred postoperatively. The patients were successfully treated by surgical reintervention and had an uneventful recovery. No recurrence was observed after 2 years.

Clinical discussion

We consider that pelvic floor reconstruction and extending the extubation time should be performed in patients with a high risk of AL. Moreover, when severe abdominal infection and early infectious shock occur after AL, immediate reoperation should be performed to minimize the complication.

Conclusion

Protective loop ileostomy can't decrease the re-operation rate for patients with AL. We should take preventive measures during and after the operation, as well as early detection and early treatment.

•

The protective loop ileostomy sometimes can’t prevent severe complications for patients with anastomotic leakage after TME operation

•

Severe abdominal infection needs operation immediately.

•

Pelvic floor reconstruction and extending the extubation time can reduce reoperation rate

Two-year follow-up results of the use of a fecal diverting device as a substitute for a defunctioning stoma

PURPOSE

Our previously published clinical studies described the short-term outcomes of a newly developed intraluminal fecal diverting device (FDD). FDD was a safe and effective substitute for a defunctioning stoma. However, the long-term efficacy and safety of this device remain unknown. We investigated the long-term outcomes of the use of the FDD as a substitute for a defunctioning stoma.

METHODS

We examined the medical records of patients who participated in our two previous FDD clinical studies. The main outcome was the number of patients with bowel continuity for 2 years after undergoing the FDD procedure or defunctioning stoma creation.

RESULTS

Between May 2015 and July 2018, 85 patients were screened for inclusion in this study. Of those, 27 patients underwent a defunctioning ileostomy after proctectomy. The remaining 58 underwent the FDD procedure after proctectomy. Seventy-two patients (ileostomy group, n = 22; FDD group, n = 50) with a follow-up duration > 24 months were included in this analysis. The mean duration of fecal diversion was significantly shorter (p < 0.001) in the FDD group (3.1 [1.6-6.1] weeks) than in the ileostomy group (16.7 [10.0-31.6] weeks). However, the rate of permanent stoma creation was not statistically different between the two groups (ileostomy and FDD groups, 13.6% [3/22] and 10.0% [5/50], respectively; p = 0.693).

CONCLUSIONS

The FDD procedure is a feasible substitute for a defunctioning stoma after proctectomy. Multicenter large-scaled clinical studies are required to validate our results.

Does a long interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery benefit the clinical outcomes of locally advanced rectal cancer? A systematic review and meta analyses

PURPOSE

The study aims to systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy after 8 weeks (long interval, LI) between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer.

METHODS

The PubMed database, EMBASE database, and the Cochrane Library (deadline: September 25, 2021) were searched to select clinical studies that compared two intervals between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer: after 8 weeks (long interval, LI) and within 8 weeks (short interval, SI). The included studies were screened and evaluated according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies were included, with 9070 cases in the LI group and 14,207 cases in the SI group. The analysis results showed that the pathologic complete response (PCR) rate in the LI group was higher than that in the SI group (P < 0.00001). There was no significant difference in the R0 resection rate (P = 0.85), anal preservation rate (P = 0.89), morbidity rate (P = 0.60), anastomotic leakage rate (P = 0.06), operation time (P = 0.58), local recurrence rate (P = 0.56), distant metastasis rate (P = 0.32), or overall survival (OS) rate (P = 0.17) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

A longer interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery can improve the PCR rate; however, it has no significant impact on the clinical efficacy or long-term prognosis. Due to some limitations in the number and quality of the studies, these findings still need to be further verified by multicenter, large-sample high-quality RCTs in the future.

Clinical impact of the triple-layered circular stapler for reducing the anastomotic leakage in rectal cancer surgery: Porcine model and multicenter retrospective cohort analysis

Aim

To investigate the impact of the triple-layered circular stapler compared with the double-layered circular stapler on anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery.

Methods

The bursting pressure was compared between porcine ileocolic anastomoses created using a double- or triple-layered stapler. We also retrospectively analyzed the incidence of severe anastomotic leakage in 194 patients who underwent colorectal anastomosis using a double- or triple-layered circular stapler during rectal cancer resection performed in two cancer centers between January 2015 and April 2021.

Results

In the porcine model, the bursting pressure was higher in anastomoses created using the triple-layered stapler than the double-layered stapler (end-to-end anastomosis: 26.4 ± 6.2 mm Hg vs 14.5 ± 4.3 mm Hg, P = .0031; side-to-side anastomosis: 27.7 ± 5.0 mm Hg vs 18.0 ± 2.9 mm Hg, P = .0275). Intersectional leakage occurred in 41% and 83% of anastomoses created using the triple- or double-layered stapler, respectively (P = .0821). In the clinical cohort, the double- and triple-layered stapler was used in 153 and 41 patients, respectively. The incidence of anastomotic leakage was lower for anastomoses created using the triple-layered stapler vs the double-layered stapler (0.0% vs 5.8%, P = .0362). In multivariate analysis, the factors independently associated with a lower incidence of anastomotic leakage were female sex (odds ratio: 0.16, 95% confidence interval: 0.01-0.90, P = .0354) and triple-layered stapler usage (odds ratio: 0.00, 95% confidence interval: 0.00-0.96, P = .0465).

Conclusion

Anastomoses created using a triple-layered circular stapler had high bursting pressure, which might contribute to a lower incidence of anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery.

Anastomotic leakage in colorectal cancer surgery

The safety of colorectal surgery for oncological disease is steadily improving, but anastomotic leakage is still the most feared and devastating complication from both a surgical and oncological point of view. Anastomotic leakage affects the outcome of the surgery, increases the times and costs of hospitalization, and worsens the prognosis in terms of short- and long-term outcomes. Anastomotic leakage has a wide range of clinical features ranging from radiological only finding to peritonitis and sepsis with multi-organ failure. C-reactive protein and procalcitonin have been identified as early predictors of anastomotic leakage starting from postoperative day 2-3, but abdominal-pelvic computed tomography scan is still the gold standard for the diagnosis. Several treatments can be adopted for anastomotic leakage. However, there is not a universally accepted flowchart for the management, which should be individualized based on patient's general condition, anastomotic defect size and location, indication for primary resection and presence of the proximal stoma. Non-operative management is usually preferred in patients who underwent proximal faecal diversion at the initial operation. Laparoscopy can be attempted after minimal invasive surgery and can reduce surgical stress in patients allowing a definitive treatment. Reoperation for sepsis control is rarely necessary in those patients who already have a diverting stoma at the time of the leak, especially in extraperitoneal anastomoses. In patients without a stoma who do not require abdominal reoperation for a contained pelvic leak, there are several treatment options, including laparoscopic diverting ileostomy combined with trans-anal anastomotic tube drainage, percutaneous drainage or recently developed endoscopic procedures, such as stent or clip placement or endoluminal vacuum-assisted therapy. We describe the current approaches to treat this complication, as well as the clinical tests necessary to diagnose and provide an effective therapy.

Risk Factors and Preventive Measures for Anastomotic Leak in Colorectal Cancer

Anastomotic leak (AL) represents one of the most detrimental complications after colorectal surgery. The patient-related factors and surgery-related factors leading to AL have been identified in previous studies. Through early identification and timely adjustment of risk factors, preventive measures can be taken to reduce potential AL. However, there are still many problems associated with AL. The debate about preventive measures such as preoperative mechanical bowel preparation (MBP), intraoperative drainage, and surgical scope also continues. Recently, the gut microbiota has received more attention due to its important role in various diseases. Although the underlying mechanisms of gut microbiota on AL have not been validated completely, new strategies that manipulate intrinsic mechanisms are expected to prevent and treat AL. Moreover, laboratory examinations for AL prediction and methods for blood perfusion assessment are likely to be promoted in clinical practice. This review outlines possible risk factors for AL and suggests some preventive measures in terms of patient, surgery, and gut microbiota.

OUP accepted manuscript

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Updates of Risk Factors for Anastomotic Leakage after Colorectal Surgery

Anastomotic leakage is a potentially severe complication occurring after colorectal surgery and can lead to increased morbidity and mortality, permanent stoma formation, and cancer recurrence. Multiple risk factors for anastomotic leak have been identified, and these can allow for better prevention and an earlier diagnosis of this significant complication. There are nonmodifiable factors such as male gender, comorbidities and distance of tumor from anal verge, and modifiable risk factors, including smoking and alcohol consumption, obesity, preoperative radiotherapy and preoperative use of steroids or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Perioperative blood transfusion was shown to be an important risk factor for anastomotic failure. Recent studies on the laparoscopic approach in colorectal surgery found no statistical difference in anastomotic leakage rate compared with open surgery. A diverting stoma at the time of primary surgery does not appear to reduce the leak rate but may reduce its clinical consequences and the need for additional surgery if anastomotic leakage does occur. It is still debatable if preoperative bowel preparation should be used, especially for left colon and rectal resections, but studies have shown similar incidence of postoperative leak rate.

Diagnosis of Anastomotic Leak

Anastomotic leaks after colorectal surgery is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Understanding the impact of anastomotic leaks and their risk factors can help the surgeon avoid any modifiable pitfalls. The diagnosis of an anastomotic leak can be elusive but can be discerned by the patient's global clinical assessment, adjunctive laboratory data and radiological assessment. The use of inflammatory markers such as C-Reactive Protein and Procalcitonin have recently gained traction as harbingers for a leak. A CT scan and/or a water soluble contrast study can further elucidate the location and severity of a leak. Further intervention is then individualized on the spectrum of simple observation with resolution or surgical intervention.

The efficacy of ileostomy after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a meta-analysis

Background

Protective ileostomy is always applied to avoid clinically significant anastomotic leakage and other postoperative complications for patients receiving laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. However, whether it is necessary to perform the ileostomy is still controversial. This meta-analysis aims to analyze the efficacy of ileostomy on laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery.

Methods

Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, and PubMed were applied for systematic search of all relevant literature, updated to May 07, 2021. Studies compared patients with and without ileostomy for laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. We applied Review Manager software to perform this meta-analysis. The quality of the non-randomized controlled trials was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS), and the randomized studies were assessed using the Jadad scale.

Results

We collected a total of 1203 references, and seven studies were included using the research methods. The clinically significant anastomotic leakage rate was significantly lower in ileostomy group (27/567, 4.76%) than that in non-ileostomy group (54/525, 10.29%) (RR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.30–0.73, P for overall effect = 0.0009, P for heterogeneity = 0.18, I² = 32%). However, the postoperative hospital stay, reoperation, wound infection, and operation time showed no significant difference between the ileostomy and non-ileostomy groups.

Conclusion

The results demonstrated that protective ileostomy could decrease the clinically significant anastomotic leakage rate for patients undergoing laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. However, ileostomy has no effect on postoperative hospital stay, reoperation, wound infection, and operation time. The efficacy of ileostomy after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a meta-analysis.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12957-021-02432-x.

Revisiting the Value of Drains After Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer: a Multi-institutional Analysis of 996 Patients

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative pelvic drains are often placed during low anterior resection (LAR) to evacuate postoperative fluid collections and identify/control potential anastomotic leaks. Our aim was to assess the validity of this practice.

METHODS

Patients from the US Rectal Cancer Consortium (2007-2017) who underwent curative-intent LAR for a primary rectal cancer were included. Patients were categorized as receiving a closed suction drain intraoperatively or not. Primary outcomes were superficial surgical site infection (SSI), deep SSI, intraabdominal abscess, anastomotic leak, and need for secondary drain placement. Three subgroup analyses were conducted in patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation, had a diverting loop ileostomy (DLI), and had low anastomoses < 6 cm from the anal verge.

RESULTS

Of 996 patients 67% (n = 551) received a drain. Drain patients were more likely to be male (64 vs 54%), have a smoking history (25 vs 19%), have received neoadjuvant chemoradiation (73 vs 61%), have low tumors (56 vs 36%), and have received a DLI (80 vs 71%) (all p < 0.05). Drains were associated with an increased anastomotic leak rate (14 vs 8%, p = 0.041), although there was no difference in the need for a secondary drainage procedure to control the leak (82 vs 88%, p = 0.924). These findings persisted in all subset analyses. Drains were not associated with increased superficial SSI, deep SSI, or intraabdominal abscess in the entire cohort or each subset analysis. Reoperation (12 vs 10%, p = 0.478) and readmission rates (28 vs 31%, p = 0.511) were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Although not associated with increased infectious complications, intraoperatively placed pelvic drains after low anterior resection for rectal cancer are associated with an increase in anastomotic leak rate and no reduction in the need for secondary drain placement or reoperation. Routine drainage appears to be unnecessary.

Predictive and Diagnostic Biomarkers of Anastomotic Leakage: A Precision Medicine Approach for Colorectal Cancer Patients

Development of an anastomotic leak (AL) following intestinal surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancers is a life-threatening complication. Failure of the anastomosis to heal correctly can lead to contamination of the abdomen with intestinal contents and the development of peritonitis. The additional care that these patients require is associated with longer hospitalisation stays and increased economic costs. Patients also have higher morbidity and mortality rates and poorer oncological prognosis. Unfortunately, current practices for AL diagnosis are non-specific, which may delay diagnosis and have a negative impact on patient outcome. To overcome these issues, research is continuing to identify AL diagnostic or predictive biomarkers. In this review, we highlight promising candidate biomarkers including ischaemic metabolites, inflammatory markers and bacteria. Although research has focused on the use of blood or peritoneal fluid samples, we describe the use of implantable medical devices that have been designed to measure biomarkers in peri-anastomotic tissue. Biomarkers that can be used in conjunction with clinical status, routine haematological and biochemical analysis and imaging have the potential to help to deliver a precision medicine package that could significantly enhance a patient's post-operative care and improve outcomes. Although no AL biomarker has yet been validated in large-scale clinical trials, there is confidence that personalised medicine, through biomarker analysis, could be realised for colorectal cancer intestinal resection and anastomosis patients in the years to come.

Neoadjuvant radiotherapy for locoregional Siewert type II gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: A propensity scores matching analysis

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the effect of neoadjuvant radiotherapy (nRT) on prognosis in patients with locoregional Siewert type II gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (GEA).

METHOD

All patients pathologically diagnosed as Siewert type II GEA between 2004 and 2015 were retrieved from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and Final Results (SEER) database. We analyzed the impact of different treatment regimens on the prognosis in each stage. Survival analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier (K-M) method. Multivariate Cox model and propensity score matching was further used to verify the results.

RESULTS

4,160 patients were included in this study. The efficacy of nRT was superior to that of adjuvant radiotherapy (aRT) (p = 0.048), which was the same as that of surgery combined with chemotherapy (p = 0.836), but inferior to the overall survival (OS) of surgical treatment alone (p<0.001) in T1-2N0M0 patients. Patients receiving nRT had distinctly better survival than those receiving surgical treatment alone (p = 0.008), but had similar survival compared with patients treated with aRT (p = 0.989) or surgery combined with chemotherapy (p = 0.205) in the T3N0/T1-3N+M0 subgroup. The efficacy of nRT is clearly stronger than that of surgical therapy alone (p<0.001), surgery combined with chemotherapy (p<0.001), and aRT (p = 0.008) in patients with T4 stage. The survival analysis results were consistent before and after propensity score matching.

CONCLUSION

In these carefully selected patients, the present study made the following recommendations: nRT can improve the prognosis of patients with T3N0M0/T1-3N+M0 and T4 Siewert type II GEA, and it seems to be a better treatment for T4 patients. Surgery alone seems to be sufficient, and nRT is not conducive to prolonging the survival of Siewert II GEA patients with T1-2N0M0 stage. Of course, further prospective trials are needed to verify this conclusion.

Nomogram for Predicting Anastomotic Leakage after Rectal Cancer Surgery in Elderly Patients with Dysfunctional Stomata

Purpose

Anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery in elderly patients is a critical challenge. Many risk factors have been found and many interventions tried, but anastomotic leakage in elderly patients remains difficult to deal with. This study aimed to create a nomogram for predicting anastomotic leakage after rectal surgery in elderly rectal cancer patients with dysfunctional stomata.

Methods

We collected data from 326 consecutive elderly patients with dysfunctional stomata after rectal cancer surgery at the Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University from January 2014 to December 2019. Risk factors of anastomotic leakage were identified with multivariate logistic regression and used to create a nomogram. Predictive performance was evaluated by the area under the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

Results

American Society of Anesthesiologists score ≥3, male sex, and neoadjuvant radiotherapy were identified as significantly associated factors that could be combined for accurate prediction of anastomotic leakage on multivariate logistic regression and development of a nomogram.The area under the ROC curve for this model was 0.645. The C-index value for this model was 0.645, indicating moderate predictive ability of the risk of anastomotic leakage.

Conclusion

The nomogram showed good ability to predict anastomotic leakage in elderly patients with rectal cancer after surgery, and might be helpful in providing a reference point for selection of surgical procedures and perioperative treatment.

Risk Factors for Anastomotic Leakage in Patients with Rectal Tumors Undergoing Anterior Resection within an ERAS Protocol: Results from the Swedish ERAS Database

Background

Research on risk factors for anastomotic leakage (AL) alone within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol has not yet been conducted. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for AL and study short-term outcome after AL in patients operated with anterior resection (AR).

Methods

All prospectively and consecutively recorded patients operated with AR in the Swedish part of the international ERAS® Interactive Audit System (EIAS) between January 2010 and February 2020 were included. The cohort was evaluated regarding risk factors for AL and short-term outcomes, including uni- and multivariate analysis. Pre-, intra- and postoperative compliance to ERAS®Society guidelines was calculated and evaluated.

Results

Altogether 1900 patients were included, 155 (8.2%) with AL and 1745 without AL. Male gender, obesity, peritoneal contamination, year of surgery 2016–2020, duration of primary surgery and age remained significant predictors for AL in multivariate analysis. There was no significant difference in overall pre- and intraoperative compliance to ERAS®Society guidelines between groups. Only preadmission patient education remained as a significant ERAS variable associated with less AL. AL was associated with longer length of stay (LOS), higher morbidity rate and higher rate of reoperations.

Conclusion

Male gender, obesity, peritoneal contamination, duration of surgery, surgery later in study period, age and preadmission patient education were associated with AL in patients operated on with AR. Overall pre- and intraoperative compliance to the ERAS protocol was high in both groups and not associated with AL.

A meta-analysis of the role of diverting ileostomy after rectal cancer surgery

PURPOSE

Anastomotic leak is a feared complication of rectal cancer surgery. A diverting stoma is believed to act as a safety mechanism against this undesirable outcome. This meta-analysis aimed to examine the role of loop ileostomy in the prevention of this complication.

METHODS

The Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing anastomotic complications after rectal cancer surgery in the presence or absence of diverting ileostomy. The need for reoperation and postoperative complications were also analysed. The length of hospital stay, intraoperative blood loss and operating time were analysed as secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

A significantly higher number of anastomotic leaks was detected in patients with no diverting ileostomies than in those with diversion (odds ratio (OR) 0.292 and 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.177-0.481), and more patients required reoperations in this group (OR 0.219 and 95% CI 0.114-0.422). The rate of complications other than anastomotic leak was significantly higher in patients with diverting ileostomies than in those without (OR 3.337 and 95% CI of 1.570-7.093). The operating time was longer in the ileostomy group than in the no ileostomy group (P 0.001), but no significant differences in the intraoperative blood loss or postoperative hospital stay length were observed between the two groups(P 0.199 and 0.191 respectively).

CONCLUSION

A lower leak rate in the presence of diverting ileostomy is supported by relatively weak evidence. While mitigating the consequences of leakage, diverting ileostomies lead to numerous other complications. High-quality RCTs are needed before routine ileostomy diversions can be recommended after rectal cancer surgery.

Does intraoperative indocyanine green fluorescence angiography decrease the incidence of anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Colorectal anastomoses in patients with colorectal cancer carry a high risk of leakage. Indocyanine green fluorescence angiography (ICG-FA) is a new technique that allows surgeons to assess the blood perfusion of the anastomosis during operation. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate whether ICG-FA could prevent anastomotic leakage (AL) in colorectal surgery.

METHODS

Four databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) were searched to identify suitable literatures until March 2020 that compared AL rates between intraoperative use and non-use of ICG-FA in colorectal surgery for cancer. The Review Manager 5.3 software was used to perform the statistical analysis. Evaluation of articles quality and analysis for publication bias were also conducted.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies of 4037 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The study included 1806 patients in the ICG group and 2231 patients in the control group. The pooled incidence of AL in ICG group was 3.8% compared with 7.8% in control group. There was a significant difference in AL rate with or without use of ICG-FA (OR 0.44; 95% CI 0.33-0.59; P < 0.00001). Reoperation rates were 2.6% and 6.9% in ICG and control groups, respectively. Application of intraoperative ICG-FA was associated with a lower risk of reoperation (OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.16-0.94; P = 0.04). Overall complication rate was 15.6% in the ICG group compared with 21.2% in the control group. Overall complications were significantly reduced when using ICG-FA (OR 0.62; 95% CI 0.47-0.82; P = 0.0008). Mortality rate was not statistically different with or without the use of ICG-FA (OR 1.22; 95% CI 0.20-7.30; P = 0.83).

CONCLUSION

The results revealed that ICG-FA reduced risks of AL, reoperation, and overall complications for colorectal cancer patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Well-designed RCTs are needed to confirm the usefulness of intraoperative ICG-FA for preventing surgical complications like AL and reoperation.

Intraoperative fluorescence angiography with indocyanine green: retrospective evaluation and detailed analysis of our single-center 5-year experience focused on colorectal surgery

Objectives

Assessing bowel perfusion with indocyanine green fluorescence angiography (ICG-FA) shows positive effects on anastomotic healing in colorectal surgery.

Methods

A retrospective evaluation of 296 colorectal resections where we performed ICG-FA was undertaken from January 2014 until December 2018. Perfusion of the bowel ends measured with ICG-FA was compared to the visual assessment before and after performing the anastomosis. According to the observations, the operative strategy was confirmed or changed. Sixty-seven low anterior rectal resections (LARs) and 76 right hemicolectomies were evaluated statistically, as ICG-FA was logistically not available for every patient in our service and thus a control group for comparison resulted.

Results

The operative strategy based on the ICG-FA results was changed in 48 patients (16.2%), from which only one developed an anastomotic leakage (AL) (2.1%). The overall AL rate was calculated as 5.4%. Within the 67 patients with LAR, the strategy was changed in 11 patients (16.4%). No leakage was seen in those. In total three AL happened (4.5%), which was three times lower than the AL rate of 13.6% in the control group but statistically not significant. From the 76 right hemicolectomies a strategy change was undertaken in 10 patients (13.2%), from which only one developed an AL. This was the only AL reported in the whole group (1.3%), which was six times lower than the leakage rate of the control group (8.1%). This difference was statistically significant (p=0.032).

Conclusions

Based on the positive impact by ICG-FA on the AL rate, we established the ICG-FA into our clinical routine. Although randomized studies are still missing, ICG-FA can raise patient safety, with only about 10 min longer operating time and almost no additional risk for the patients.

Risk factors for anastomotic leakage and its impact on long-term survival in left-sided colorectal cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage (AL) significantly impairs short-term outcomes. The impact on the long-term outcomes remains unclear. This study aimed to identify the risk factors for AL and the impact on long-term survival in patients with left-sided colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Nine-hundred patients with left-sided colorectal carcinoma who underwent sigmoid or rectal resection were enrolled in the study. Risk factors for AL after sigmoid or rectal resection were identified, and long-term outcomes of patients with and without AL were compared.

RESULTS

AL rates following sigmoid and rectal resection were 5.1% and 10.7%, respectively. Higher ASA score (III-IV; OR = 10.54, p = 0.007) was associated with AL in patients undergoing sigmoid surgery on multivariable analysis. Male sex (OR = 2.40, p = 0.004), CCI score > 5 (OR = 1.72, p = 0.025), and T3/T4 stage tumors (OR = 2.25, p = 0.017) were risk factors for AL after rectal resection on multivariable analysis. AL impaired disease-free and overall survival in patients undergoing sigmoid (p = 0.009 and p = 0.001) and rectal (p = 0.003 and p = 0.014) surgery.

CONCLUSION

ASA score of III-IV is an independent risk factor for AL after sigmoid surgery, and male sex, higher CCI score, and advanced T stage are risk factors for AL after rectal surgery. AL impairs the long-term survival in patients undergoing left-sided colorectal surgery.

A nomogram for predicting rectovaginal fistula after low anterior resection for rectal cancer

PURPOSE

Rectovaginal fistula (RVF) is a complicated and troublesome complication of low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer. We aimed to investigate the risk factors for post-LAR RVF and develop a predictive nomogram.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 821 female patients with rectal cancer who underwent LAR between October 2010 and October 2018. Logistic regression was performed to identify risk factors. A nomogram was developed to predict RVF.

RESULTS

The incidence of post-LAR RVF was 3.4% (28/821). A multivariate analysis showed that the preoperative serum hemoglobin level (OR 2.449, 95% CI 1.144-5.239), the distance between the tumor and anal verge (OR 4.158, 95% CI 1.392-12.418), surgical procedure (OR 2.369, 95% CI 1.117-5.027), hysterectomy (OR 2.996, 95% CI 1.106-8.833), and bilateral oophorectomy (OR 5.823, 95% CI 1.639-20.689) were significantly associated with the development of RVF. A nomogram was developed, which showed a C-index of 0.824 (95% CI 0.730-0.918) and an adjusted C-index of 0.790.

CONCLUSION

This study identified the preoperative serum hemoglobin level, the distance between the tumor and the anal verge, the type of surgical procedure, hysterectomy, and bilateral oophorectomy as predictors of post-LAR RVF. A nomogram was successfully developed. It could aid in the prediction of RVF in patients undergoing LAR.

Early Metabolic and Inflammatory Intraperitoneal Changes After Rectum Perforation

Purpose

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is the most dreaded complication in rectal surgery. It has a great impact on postoperative morbidity and mortality. This animal model, in which we have studied postoperative metabolic and inflammatory changes, is designed to imitate an AL.

Methods

Twelve pigs were randomized into 2 groups. In the experimental group, an iatrogenic rectal perforation was performed, with the control group having a sham operation. The 2 groups were followed for 10 hours after operation with regard to vital parameters, arterial lactate, and cytokines interleukin (IL) 1, IL6, and IL10 in the blood and intraperitoneally. Intraperitoneal microdialysis analyses of glucose, lactate, glycerol, and pyruvate were performed and the lactate/pyruvate ratio was calculated.

Results

Glucose levels were lower in the experimental group after 4 hours. After 7 hours, lactate and lactate/pyruvate ratio was higher in the experimental group. At the same time intraperitoneal cytokines IL6 and IL10 were higher in the experimental group. Blood samples showed higher IL6 after 7 hours in the experimental group.

Conclusion

In this study, several significant differences between the groups in metabolic and inflammatory values were detected. Further clinical studies are recommended to evaluate the importance of intraperitoneal metabolic and inflammatory analyses as a diagnostic tool for early identification of an AL.

Can a Local Drainage Salvage a Failed Colorectal or Coloanal Anastomosis? A Prospective Cohort of 54 Patients

BACKGROUND

Local drainages can be used to manage leakage in select patients without peritonitis.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of drainage procedures in maintaining a primary low anastomosis after anastomotic leakage.

DESIGN

A retrospective observational study was performed on a prospectively maintained database.

SETTINGS

The study was performed between 2014 and 2017 in a tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing rectal resections with either a colorectal or coloanal anastomosis with diverting stoma were identified. Anastomotic leakages requiring a radiological or transanal drainage without peritonitis were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the maintenance of the primary anastomosis after local drainage of an anastomotic leakage and stoma reversal.

RESULTS

A low anastomosis for rectal cancer with diverting stoma was performed in 326 patients. A total of 77 anastomotic leakages (24%) occurred, of which, 6 (8%) required abdominal surgery, 17 (22%) were treated conservatively (medical management), and 54 (70%) were managed by drainage. Surgical transanal drainage was performed in 21 patients (39%), with radiologic drainage procedures performed in 33 patients (61%). The median interval between surgery and drainage was 13 days (range, 9-21 d). Five patients (9%) required emergency abdominal surgery. Twenty-seven patients (50%) did not require any additional intervention after drainage procedure, whereas 21 patients (39%) underwent redo anastomotic surgery. Forty-three patients (80%) had no stoma at the end of follow-up. Failure to maintain the primary anastomosis after local drainage was associated with increased age (p = 0.04), a pelvic per-operative drainage (p = 0.05), a drainage duration >10 days (p = 0.002), the time between surgery and drainage >15 days (p = 0.03), a side-to-end or J-pouch anastomosis (p = 0.04), and surgical transanal drainage (p = 0.03).

LIMITATIONS

The small sample size of the study was the main limitation.

CONCLUSIONS

Local drainage procedures maintained primary anastomosis in 50% of cases after an anastomotic leakage. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B57. ¿PUEDE UN DRENAJE LOCAL SALVAR UNA ANASTOMOSIS COLORRECTAL O COLOANAL FALLIDA? UNA COHORTE PROSPECTIVO DE 54 PACIENTES: Los drenajes locales se pueden utilizar para controlar las fugas en pacientes seleccionados sin peritonitis.El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar la eficacia de los procedimientos de drenaje, para mantener una anastomosis primaria baja, después de una fuga anastomótica.Se realizó un estudio observacional retrospectivo en una base de datos mantenida prospectivamente.El estudio se realizó entre 2014-2017, en un centro de referencia terciaria.Se identificaron pacientes sometidos a resecciones rectales con anastomosis colorrectal o coloanal y estoma de derivación. Se incluyeron fugas anastomóticas sin peritonitis, que requirieron drenaje radiológico o transanal.El resultado primario fue el mantenimiento de la anastomosis primaria, después del drenaje local de una fuga anastomótica y la reversión del estoma.Se realizó una anastomosis baja para cáncer rectal con estoma derivativo en 326 pacientes. Se produjeron 77 (24%) fugas anastomóticas, de las cuales 6 (8%) requirieron cirugía abdominal, 17 (22%) fueron tratadas de forma conservadora (tratamiento médico) y 54 (70%) fueron manejadas por drenaje. Se realizó drenaje transanal en 21 pacientes (39%) y procedimientos de drenaje radiológico en 33 pacientes (61%). La mediana del intervalo entre la cirugía y el drenaje fue de 13 días [9-21]. 5 (9%) pacientes requirieron cirugía abdominal de emergencia. Veintisiete (50%) pacientes no requirieron ninguna intervención adicional después del procedimiento de drenaje, mientras que 21 pacientes (39%) se sometieron a una reparación quirúrgica anastomótica. 43 pacientes (80%) no tuvieron estoma al final del seguimiento. El fracaso para mantener la anastomosis primaria después del drenaje local, se asoció con un aumento de la edad (p = 0.04), un drenaje pélvico preoperatorio (p = 0.05), una duración del drenaje >10 días (p = 0.002), el tiempo entre la cirugía y el drenaje >15 días (p = 0.03), anastomosis termino lateral o bolsa en J (p = 0.04) y drenaje quirúrgico transanal (p = 0.03).El pequeño tamaño de la muestra del estudio fue la principal limitación.Después de la fuga anastomótica, los procedimientos del drenaje local conservaron la anastomosis primaria en el 50% de los casos. Vea el Resumen del Video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B57.

Multicentre randomized clinical trial of colonic J pouch or straight stapled colorectal reconstruction after low anterior resection for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Colonic J pouch reconstruction has been found to be associated with a lower incidence of anastomotic leakage than straight anastomosis. However, studies on this topic are underpowered and retrospective. This randomized trial evaluated whether the incidence of anastomotic leakage was reduced after colonic J pouch reconstruction compared with straight colorectal anastomosis following anterior resection for rectal cancer.

METHODS

This multicentre RCT included patients with rectal carcinoma who underwent low anterior resection followed by colorectal anastomosis. Patients were assigned randomly to receive a colonic J pouch or straight colorectal anastomosis. The main outcome measure was the occurrence of major anastomotic leakage. The incidence of global (major plus minor) anastomotic leakage and general complications were secondary outcomes. Risk factors for anastomotic leakage were identified by regression analysis.

RESULTS

Of 457 patients enrolled, 379 were evaluable (colonic J pouch arm 190, straight colorectal arm 189). The incidence of major and global anastomotic leakage, and general complications was 14·2, 19·5 and 34·2 per cent respectively in the colonic J pouch group, and 12·2, 19·0 and 27·0 per cent in the straight colorectal anastomosis group. No statistically significant differences were observed between the two arms. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, male sex (odds ratio 1·79, 95 per cent c.i. 1·02 to 3·15; P = 0·042) and high ASA fitness grade (odds ratio 2·06, 1·15 to 3·71; P = 0·015) were independently associated with the occurrence of anastomotic leakage.

CONCLUSION

Colonic J pouch reconstruction does not reduce the incidence of anastomotic leakage and postoperative complications compared with conventional straight colorectal anastomosis. Registration number NCT01110798 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Postoperative complications in relation to overall treatment time in patients with rectal cancer receiving neoadjuvant radiotherapy

Background

The optimal timing of surgery for rectal cancer after radiotherapy (RT) is disputed. The Stockholm III trial concluded that it was oncologically safe to delay surgery for 4–8 weeks after short-course RT (SRT), with fewer postoperative complications compared with SRT with surgery within a week. Other studies have indicated that an even shorter interval between RT and surgery (0–3 days) might be beneficial. The aim of this study was to identify the optimal interval to surgery after RT.

Methods

Patients were analysed as treated, in terms of overall treatment time (OTT), the interval from the start of RT until the day of surgery. Patients receiving SRT (5 × 5 Gy) were categorized according to OTT: 7 days (group A), 8–13 days (group B), 5–7 weeks (group C) and 8–13 weeks (group D). Patients receiving long-course RT (25 × 2 Gy) were grouped into those with an OTT of 9–11 weeks (group E) or 12–14 weeks (group F). Outcomes assessed were postoperative complications and early mortality.

Results

A total of 810 patients were analysed (group A, 100; group B, 247; group C, 192; group D, 160; group E, 52; group F, 59). Baseline patient characteristics were similar. There were significantly more overall complications in group B than in groups C and D. Adjusted odds ratios, with B as the reference group, were: 0·72 (95 per cent c.i. 0·40 to 1·32; P = 0·289), 0·50 (0·30 to 0·84; P = 0·009) and 0·39 (0·23 to 0·65; P &lt; 0·001) for groups A, C and D respectively. Early mortality was similar in all groups. There were no significant differences between long-course RT groups.

Conclusion

These results suggest that surgery should optimally be delayed for 4–12 weeks (OTT 5–13 weeks) after SRT.

Defunctioning Stomas Result in Significantly More Short-Term Complications Following Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Studies suggest that defunctioning stomas reduce the rate of anastomotic leakage and urgent reoperations after anterior resection. Although the magnitude of benefit appears to be limited, there has been a trend in recent years towards routinely creating defunctioning stomas. However, little is known about post-operative complication rates in patients with and without a defunctioning stoma. We compared overall short-term post-operative complications after low anterior resection in patients managed with a defunctioning stoma to those managed without a stoma.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing elective low anterior resection of the rectum for rectal cancer. The primary outcome was overall 90-day post-operative complications.

RESULTS

Two hundred and three patients met the inclusion criteria for low anterior resection. One hundred and forty (69%) had a primary defunctioning stoma created. 45% received neoadjuvant radiotherapy. Patients with a defunctioning stoma had significantly more complications (57.1 vs 34.9%, p = 0.003), were more likely to suffer multiple complications (17.9 vs 3.2%, p < 0.004) and had longer hospital stays (13.0 vs 6.9 days, p = 0.005) than those without a stoma. 19% experienced a stoma-related complication, 56% still had a stoma 1 year after their surgery, and 26% were left with a stoma at their last follow-up. Anastomotic leak rates were similar but there was a significantly higher reoperation rate among patients managed without a defunctioning stoma.

CONCLUSION

Patients selected to have a defunctioning stoma had an absolute increase of 22% in overall post-operative complications compared to those managed without a stoma. These findings support the more selective use of defunctioning stomas.

STUDY REGISTRATION

Registered at www.researchregistry.com (UIN: researchregistry3412).

Patterns of complications following urinary tract reconstruction after multivisceral surgery in colorectal and anal cancer

BACKGROUND

Multi-visceral resection, including parts of the urinary tract, is sometimes warranted to achieve cancer clear resection margins and optimize survival in patients with locally advanced colorectal and anal cancer. The aim of this study was to assess morbidity after urinary tract reconstruction dictated by colorectal and anal malignancy and to identify potential predictors of urological complications.

METHODS

All patients undergoing surgery for colorectal or anal malignancy, including urinary tract resection and synchronous reconstruction, performed at the Karolinska University Hospital during 2004-2015 were included in this retrospective cohort study. Data was collected from medical records with follow-up until at least one year after the index surgery. Complications were graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification system of surgical complications.

RESULTS

The study included 189 patients; 121 underwent cystectomy and 68 partial ureter resection. The rate of high grade urological complications was 22%. The risk of major urological complications was significantly higher in patients subjected to ureter resection compared to after cystectomy (OR 2.60, 95% CI 1.23-5.49). Also, preoperative radiotherapy and intestinal anastomotic dehiscence significantly increased the risk of high grade urological complications.

CONCLUSION

To achieve potentially curative resections with uninvolved margins in patients with locally advanced colorectal and anal cancer, multi-visceral resection including urinary tract reconstruction can be performed with reasonable morbidity.

Anastomotic Leakage and Chronic Presacral Sinus Formation After Low Anterior Resection: Results From a Large Cross-sectional Study

OBJECTIVES

Little is known about late detected anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection for rectal cancer, and the proportion of leakages that develops into a chronic presacral sinus.

METHODS

In this collaborative snapshot research project, data from registered rectal cancer resections in the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit in 2011 were extended with additional treatment and long-term outcome data. Independent predictors for anastomotic leakage were determined using a binary logistic model.

RESULTS

A total of 71 out of the potential 94 hospitals participated. From the 2095 registered patients, 998 underwent a low anterior resection, of whom 88.8% received any form of neoadjuvant therapy. Median follow-up was 43 months (interquartile range 35-47). Anastomotic leakage was diagnosed in 13.4% within 30 days, which increased to 20.0% (200/998) beyond 30 days. Nonhealing of the leakage at 12 months was 48%, resulting in an overall proportion of chronic presacral sinus of 9.5%. Independent predictors for anastomotic leakage at any time during follow-up were neoadjuvant therapy (odds ratio 2.85; 95% confidence interval 1.00-8.11) and a distal (≤3 cm from the anorectal junction on magnetic resonance imaging) tumor location (odds ratio 1.88; 95% confidence interval 1.02-3.46).

CONCLUSIONS

This cross-sectional study of low anterior resection for rectal cancer in the Netherlands in 2011, with almost routine use of neoadjuvant radiotherapy, shows that one third of anastomotic leakages is diagnosed beyond 30 days, and almost half of the leakages eventually do not heal. Chronic presacral sinus is a significant clinical problem that deserves more attention.

Multicenter analysis of risk factors for anastomotic leakage after middle and low rectal cancer resection without diverting stoma: a retrospective study of 319 consecutive patients

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the risk factors for anastomotic leakage (AL) after anterior resection for middle and low rectal cancer in order to help surgeons to decide which patients could benefit from a diverting stoma.

METHODS

Data on 319 patients having a middle and low rectal cancer resection with anastomosis between May 2011 and October 2015 from two hospitals were included in the study. The analysis included the following variables: patient-related variables (gender, age, diabetes mellitus, ASA score, preoperative radiochemotherapy, body mass index, blood hemoglobin, and serum albumin level), tumor-related variables (K-ras status, distance of tumor from the anal verge, histopathologic grade, pathological T stage, pathological N stage, pathological M stage, TNM stage, and tumor size), and surgery-related variables (laparoscopic or open surgery, blood loss, and operative time). Univariate and multivariate regression analysis were carried out to identify risk factors for AL.

RESULTS

The AL rate was 11.91% (38/319). Male (OR 2.898, 95% CI 1.265-6.637, p = 0.012), diabetes mellitus (OR 2.482, 95% CI 1.004-6.134, p = 0.049), K-ras mutation (OR 2.544, 95% CI 1.210-5.348, p = 0.014), distance of tumor from the anal verge (OR 3.445, 95% CI 1.631-7.279, p = 0.001), and preoperative radiochemotherapy (OR 2.790, 95% CI 1.056-7.372, p = 0.039) were independent risk factors of AL. One (2.63%) in 38 patients with AL presented with no risk factor of AL, 6 (15.8%) in 38 patients with 1 risk factor, 16 (42.1%) in 38 patients with 2 risk factors, 9 (23.7%) in 38 patients with 3 risk factors, and 6 (15.7%) in 38 patients with 4 risk factors. No patient with 5 risk factors in our study. AL rate increased with the elevated number of risk factors clustering in individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

K-ras mutation is first reported to be an independent risk factor for AL after sphincter-preserving surgery without diverting stoma. A diverting stoma should be performed in sphincter-preserving surgery for middle and low rectal cancer patients with 2 or more risk factors identified in this analysis.

Very Early Colorectal Anastomotic Leakage within 5 Post-operative Days: a More Severe Subtype Needs Relaparatomy

Early anastomotic leakage (AL), usually defined as leakage within 30 post-operative days, represents a severe entity. However, mounting evidence has indicated that majorities of leakage occur within one week after surgery, making late AL rarity. Here we analyzed 101 consecutive colorectal AL, all of which occurred within 30 post-operative days, during Jan 2013 and Dec 2015 in cancer hospital of Fudan University. AL occurring within 5 post-operative days was defined as very early AL (vE-AL). We evaluated risk factors of vE-AL compared with non-vEAL and correlated with post-leakage peritonitis and need of relaparatomy. We found that AL occurred at median time of 7 days after surgery. 23 cases were vE-AL. Reconstruction of post-peritoneum for mid-low rectal carcinoma significantly reduced incidence of vE-AL compared with non-vE-AL (p = 0.042). Patients with vE-AL was associated with presence of peritonitis (p = 0.031), the latter significantly correlated with increased re-operation rate (p = 6.8E-13). Besides, patients with vE-AL trended to correlate with increased re-operation rate after leakage (p = 0.088). In concludsion, vE-AL occurring within 5 post-operative days represents a severe subtype associated with general peritonitis and need of relaparatomy.

Prophylactic transanal decompression tube versus non-prophylactic transanal decompression tube for anastomotic leakage prevention in low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Transanal decompression tube (TDT), an alternative intervention believed to have potential equivalent efficacy in reducing anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery and lower complication rates compared to protective stoma, was sporadically applied in some medical centers during recent decade. The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of the TDT in preventing the anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection for rectal cancer.

METHODS

The studies comparing TDT and non-TDT in rectal cancer were researched up to March 22, 2016 without language preference, in databases of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane library, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and National Clinical Trials Registry. The rates of anastomotic leakage, bleeding, and re-operation were separately calculated and compared between TDT and non-TDT groups using RevMan 5.3. Funnel plots, and Egger's tests were used to evaluate the publication biases of the studies.

RESULTS

Two prospective randomized controlled trial studies and five observational cohort studies with 833 participants in TDT group and 939 participants in non-TDT group were finally included in this meta-analysis. The results indicated that the TDT group had lower anastomotic leakage rate than non-TDT group with significant RR (RR 0.44; 95 % CI 0.29-0.66; P < 0.0001) and heterogeneity (I ² = 33 %; P = 0.18). So did the re-operation rate, with RR (RR 0.16; 95 % CI 0.07-0.37; P < 0.0001) and heterogeneity among the studies (I ² = 0 %; P = 0.80). There was no significant difference in anastomotic bleeding rates (RR 1.48; 95 % CI 0.79-2.77; P = 0.22) (I ² = 58 %; P = 0.09). No publication bias was found by Egger's test (anastomotic leakage rate, Pr > |z| = 0.224; re-operation rate, Pr > |z| = 0.425).

CONCLUSIONS

TDT might be an efficient and economic intervention in preventing anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery.