Acceptability and benefit of rectal irrigation in patients with Low Anterior Resection Syndrome: a qualitative study

Systematic review of the management options available for low anterior resection syndrome (LARS)

BACKGROUND

Rectal cancer incidence is increasing. Low anterior resection is currently the gold standard surgical management. Postoperatively, patients may present with symptoms indicative of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). LARS can be debilitating and is difficult to treat with low efficacy of treatment modalities. This systematic review aims to highlight the current evidence regarding LARS management.

METHODS

Systematic review of Medline, Cochrane and Embase used the following terms: "low anterior resection syndrome" AND "management", "low anterior resection syndrome" AND "treatment". Articles that focus solely of low anterior resection syndrome management in patients > 18 years were included. Bias risk was assessed via the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for cohort studies and the JBI critical appraisal tool for randomized controlled trials. Due to heterogeneity of methodology, no statistical analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight articles with a total of 1914 patients were included in this review. Ninety-five per cent underwent surgery for malignancy. Treatment options included pharmacology, pelvic floor rehabilitation (PFR), transanal irrigation (TAI), sacral nerve modulation (SNM), percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) and "treatment programs" starting from the least invasive procedures escalating to more invasive treatments upon failure. The most common published medical therapies report Ramoestron use; however, studies are low impact. PFR showed significant improvement in LARS mostly in those with symptoms of faecal incontinence. However, long-term outcomes are inconsistent. TAI supplies pseudo-continence with its greatest benefit reported in those with incomplete evacuation. TAI has significant short-term effects on LARS but little long-term effect. TAI is also associated with a significant drop-out rate. SNM's hypothesised benefit is extrapolated from non-LARS associated FI. Results show improvements in FI but a high rate of explantation. PTNS evidence suggests little if any significant LARS improvement. A single "stepwise programme" study reported that 77 per cent did not progress further than diet and medication. Little evidence suggests benefit regarding diet or acupuncture.

DISCUSSION

There is no consensus as to the optimal treatment strategy for LARS. LARS is multifactorial and requires sensitive discussion between patient and surgeon to address the most prominent symptom. It requires physical and psychological input. No single treatment option provides superior results. Treatment is based on symptom control and patient acceptance.

A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial of Transanal Irrigation Versus Conservative Treatment in Patients With Low Anterior Resection Syndrome After Rectal Cancer Surgery

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to evaluate transanal irrigation (TAI) as a treatment for low anterior resection syndrome (LARS).

BACKGROUND

LARS is a bowel disorder that is common after sphincter preserving rectal cancer surgery. Despite symptomatic medical treatment of LARS many patients still experience bowel symptoms that may have a negative impact on quality of life (QoL). TAI is a treatment strategy, of which the clinical experience is promising but scientific evidence is limited.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multicenter randomized trial comparing TAI (intervention) with conservative treatment (control) was performed. Inclusion criteria were major LARS, age above 18 years, low anterior resection with anastomosis and a defunctioning stoma as primary surgery, >6 months since stoma reversal, anastomosis without signs of leakage or stricture, and no signs of recurrence at 1-year follow-up. The primary endpoint was differences in bowel function at 12-month follow-up measured by LARS score, Cleveland Clinic Florida Fecal Incontinence Score, and 4 study-specific questions. The secondary outcome was QoL.

RESULTS

A total of 45 patients were included, 22 in the TAI group and 23 in the control group. Follow-up was available for 16 and 22 patients, respectively. At 12 months, patients in the TAI group reported significantly lower LARS scores (22.9 vs 32.4; P =0.002) and Cleveland Clinic Florida Fecal Incontinence Score (6.4 vs 9.2; P =0.050). In addition, patients in the TAI group also scored significantly higher QoL [8 of 16 European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) QoL aspects] compared with the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

The results confirm our clinical experience that TAI reduces symptoms included in LARS and improves QoL.

The Longitudinal Course of Low-anterior Resection Syndrome: An individual Patient Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to better understand the longitudinal course of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) to guide patient expectations and identify those at risk of persisting dysfunction.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

LARS describes disordered bowel function after rectal resection that significantly impacts quality of life.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and CINAHL databases were systematically searched for studies that enrolled adults undergoing anterior resection for rectal cancer and used the LARS score to assess bowel function at ≥2 postoperative time points. Regression analyses were performed on deidentified patient-level data to identify predictors of change in LARS score from baseline (3-6months) to 12-months and 18-24 months.

RESULTS

Eight studies with a total of 701 eligible patients were included. The mean LARS score improved over time, from 29.4 (95% confidence interval 28.6-30.1) at baseline to 16.6 at 36 months (95% confidence interval 14.2%-18.9%). On multivariable analysis, a greater improvement in mean LARS score between baseline and 12 months was associated with no ileostomy formation [mean difference (MD) -1.7 vs 1.7, P < 0.001], and presence of LARS (major vs minor vs no LARS) at baseline (MD -3.8 vs -1.7 vs 5.4, P < 0.001). Greater improvement in mean LARS score between baseline and 18-24 months was associated with partial mesorectal excision vs total mesorectal excision (MD-8.6 vs 1.5, P < 0.001) and presence of LARS (major vs minor vs no LARS) at baseline (MD -8.8 vs -5.3 vs 3.4, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

LARS improves by 18 months postoperatively then remains stable for up to 3 years. Total mesorectal excision, neoadjuvant radiotherapy, and ileostomy formation negatively impact upon bowel function recovery.

Managing Bowel Symptoms After Sphincter-Saving Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Scoping Review

CONTEXT

Rectal cancer is common and it is often treated by surgery with or without chemoradiation. Cancer treatment frequently results in bowel symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

The review aim was to chart the management options for bowel symptoms following rectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

A scoping review was undertaken searching nine healthcare databases, using relevant search terms and Boolean operators following PRISMA-ScR guidance. Data were extracted into an Excel spreadsheet using headings from the United Kingdom Department of Health guidance and are reported narratively.

RESULTS

30 heterogeneous studies met the inclusion criteria, including 853 patients. The most commonly reported bowel symptom was fecal incontinence; the most frequent management strategy was sacral nerve stimulation. Most studies reported on a single management option, often used to manage more than one bowel symptom. Often failure to satisfactorily improve symptoms using options such as medication was needed prior to progressing to other management options. In some studies more than one management option was used, such as rehabilitation programmes.

CONCLUSION

It is likely that to effectively manage the bowel symptoms experienced after rectal cancer treatment, more than one management option may be used-. Additionally, different management options may need to be tried concurrently.

Experiences and needs of patients with rectal cancer confronted with bowel problems after stoma reversal: A systematic review and thematic-synthesis

PURPOSE

After the reversal of the temporary stoma, rectal cancer survivors are often confronted with bowel complaints largely impacting on their quality of life. This systematic review aims to identify and synthesise the experiences and needs of patients with rectal cancer confronted with bowel problems after stoma reversal.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed through Pubmed, CINAHL and Web of Science. Only studies with a qualitative design were included in this review. Quality assessment was done by the critical appraisal skill programme (CASP) Qualitative Studies Checklist. A thematic-synthesis was performed.

RESULTS

Of 2713 identified papers, 10 were included in this systematic review. Two general themes were identified: 'experiences and needs about bowel function before surgery' and 'experiences and needs afterwards'. Before restoration of continuity patients had to cope with the temporary stoma, and they felt uncertain about what to expect. Patients indicated that the timing of providing information was crucial but varied. Bowel problems after surgery had a physical and emotional impact on patients' family life. They were also confronted with shame and stigma. Patients were happy to be alive and cancer free but were hopeful that the bowel problems would resolve. They used several strategies to manage and cope with these symptoms. Peers and healthcare professionals proved valuable resources of support.

CONCLUSION

Rectal cancer survivors experience ongoing bowel problems after treatment. Patients describe experiences and needs before rectal cancer surgery and afterwards when confronting with bowel problems. Follow-up care should be organised proactively and focus on management strategies and emotional support.

Management guidelines for low anterior resection syndrome - the MANUEL project

AIM

Little is known about the pathophysiology of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), and evidence concerning the management of patients diagnosed with this condition is scarce. The aim of the LARS Expert Advisory Panel was to develop practical guidance for healthcare professionals dealing with LARS.

METHOD

The 'Management guidelines for low anterior resection syndrome' (MANUEL) project was promoted by a team of eight experts in the assessment and management of patients with LARS. After a face-to-face meeting, a strategy was agreed to create a comprehensive, practical guide covering all aspects that were felt to be clinically relevant. Eight themes were decided upon and working groups established. Each working group generated a draft; these were collated by another collaborator into a manuscript, after a conference call. This was circulated among the collaborators, and it was revised following the comments received. A lay patient revised the manuscript, and contributed to a section containing a patient's perspective. The manuscript was again circulated and finalized. A final teleconference was held at the end of the project.

RESULTS

The guidance covers all aspects of LARS management, from pathophysiology, to assessment and management. Given the lack of sound evidence and the often poor quality of the studies, most of the recommendations and conclusions are based on the opinions of the experts.

CONCLUSIONS

The MANUEL project provides an up-to-date practical summary of the available evidence concerning LARS, with useful directions for healthcare professional and patients suffering from this debilitating condition.

Changes to gastrointestinal function after surgery for colorectal cancer

Bowel function is increasingly considered as an important outcome for patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. Increasing technical skills and technological advances have meant fewer patients require a long-term stoma but this comes at the cost, often, of poor function. With a larger range of treatment options available for a given cancer, both function and oncology should be considered in parallel when counselling patients before surgery. In the perioperative phase, bowel function can be improved with minimally invasive surgery and enhanced recovery after surgery protocols, with limited evidence for targeted medical therapies. Early detection and sound management of surgical complications such as anastomotic leak and stricture can mitigate their adverse effects on bowel function. Long-term gastrointestinal dysfunction manifests as diarrhoea and low anterior resection syndrome for colon and rectal cancer respectively. Multi-modal strategies for low anterior resection syndrome are emerging to improve significantly quality of life after restorative rectal cancer surgery.

Low Anterior Resection Syndrome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Low anterior resection syndrome is a highly prevalent condition that can develop after anal sphincter-sparing surgery for rectal cancer and impair quality of life. In this review, we summarize the major features and pathophysiology of this syndrome and discuss treatment approaches.

RECENT FINDINGS

Quality of life correlates significantly with severity of low anterior resection syndrome. Prompt assessment and initiation of therapy are essential to rehabilitating damaged mechanical and neural structures. Anorectal manometry demonstrates a global decrease in sphincteric function postoperatively, though in many patients, function does recover. Transanal irrigation, pelvic floor rehabilitation, and biofeedback are the mainstays of the treatment of major LARS. Definitive stoma can be considered in therapy refractory LARS > 2 years. The development of low anterior resection syndrome likely involves an interplay between mechanical and neural pathways. Clinically, patients present at varying levels of severity, and scoring systems are available to help assess patient symptoms and guide therapy. Treatment approaches range from conservative therapies to biofeedback and sacral nerve stimulation. Future randomized controlled trials aimed at risk stratification of patients and development of severity-based treatment algorithms are warranted.

A randomized trial comparing transanal irrigation and percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation in the management of low anterior resection syndrome

AIM

To assess the effectiveness of transanal irrigation (TAI) compared with posterior tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) in severe and chronic low anterior resection syndrome (LARS).

METHOD

A two-group parallel, open-label randomized controlled trial carried out in a single university hospital. The study population included patients with a LARS scale score of more than 29 points who had undergone rectal surgery more than 1 year previously. These were randomly allocated, with a central randomization system, following a 1:1 sequence to TAI or PTNS. The main study outcome was to achieve a reduction of at least one LARS grade in at least 50% of the patients, for each intervention.

RESULTS

A total of 27 patients (TAI = 13, PTNS = 14) were randomized. Both groups were similar with regard to confounding factors. Four patients were excluded because of intercurrent disease or early dropout, leaving 23 (TAI, n = 10; PTNS, n = 13) for analysis. Eight out of 10 and 4 out of 13 patients were downgraded with TAI and PTNS, respectively. The median LARS score decreased from 35 [interquartile range (IQR) 32-39] to 12 (IQR 12-26) (P = 0.021) for the TAI group and from 35 (IQR 34-37) to 30 (IQR 25-33) (P = 0.045) for the PTNS group. The Vaizey score fell from 15 (IQR 11-18) to 6 (IQR 4-7) (P = 0.037) and from 14 (IQR 13-17) to 9 (IQR 7-10) (P = 0.007) with TAI and PTNS, respectively, with 80% and 38% of patients, respectively, showing decreases of more than 50%. Improvement in quality of life was observed in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Both treatments improved the LARS score in this study but this was only significant in the TAI group.

Overlooked Long-Term Complications of Colorectal Surgery

While colorectal surgery has been documented to have some of the highest complication rates in the surgical field, some of the more common, functional complications are often overlooked in the literature and in discussion with patients. Urinary, sexual, and defecatory dysfunction are common after colorectal surgery, especially after pelvic dissections, and may severely impact the postoperative quality of life for patients. These complications include urinary retention, erectile dysfunction, retrograde ejaculation, dyspareunia, infertility, and low anterior resection syndrome. The majority is rooted in autonomic nerve damage, both sympathetic and parasympathetic, that occurs during mobilization and resection of the sigmoid colon and rectum. While not all of these postoperative complications are preventable, treatment strategies have been developed to ameliorate the impact on quality of life. Given the high incidence and direct effect on patients, clinicians should be familiar with the etiology, prevention, and treatment strategies of these complications to provide the highest quality of care.

Etiology and management of low anterior resection syndrome based on the normal defecation mechanism

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) commonly develops after an anal sphincter-preserving operation (SPO). The etiology of LARS is not well understood, as the anatomical components and physiological function of normal defecation, which may be damaged during the SPO, are not well established. SPOs may damage components of the anal canal (such as the internal anal sphincter, longitudinal conjoint muscle, or hiatal ligament), either mechanically or via injury to the nerves that supply these organs. The function of the rectum is substantially impaired by resection of the rectum, division of the rectococcygeus muscle, and/or injury of the nervous supply. When the remnant rectum is small and does not function properly, an important functional role may be played by the neorectum, which is usually constructed from the left side of the colon. Hypermotility of the remnant colon may affect the manifestation of urge fecal incontinence. To develop an SPO that minimizes the risk of LARS, the anatomy and physiology of the structures involved in normal defecation need to be understood better. LARS is managed similarly to fecal incontinence. In particular, management should focus on reducing colonic motility when urge fecal incontinence is the dominant symptom.