Transanal stent in anterior resection does not prevent anastomotic leakage

Does transanal drainage tubes placement have an impact on the incidence of anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery? a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether Transanal drainage tubes (TDTs) placement reduces the occurrence of anastomotic leakage (AL) after rectal cancer (RC) surgery remains controversial. Most existing meta-analyses rely on retrospective studies, while the prospective studies present an inadequate level of evidence.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies on TDTs placement in RC patients after surgery was conducted. The main analysis index was the incidence of AL, Grade B AL, and Grade C AL, while secondary analysis index was the incidence of anastomotic bleeding, incision infection, and anastomotic stenosis. A comprehensive literature search was performed utilizing the databases Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science. We recorded Risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each included study, and a fixed-effect model or random-effect model was used to investigate the correlation between TDTs placement and four outcomes after RC surgery.

RESULTS

Seven studies (1774 participants, TDT 890 vs non-TDT 884) were considered eligible for quantitative synthesis and meta-analysis. The meta-analysis revealed that the incidence of AL was 9.3% (83/890) in the TDT group and 10.2% (90/884) in the non-TDT group. These disparities were found to lack statistical significance (P = 0.58). A comprehensive meta-analysis, comprising four studies involving a cumulative sample size of 1259 participants, revealed no discernible disparity in the occurrence of Grade B AL or Grade C AL between the TDT group and the non-TDT group (Grade B AL: TDT 34/631 vs non-TDT 26/628, P = 0.30; Grade C AL: TDT 11/631 vs non-TDT 27/628, P = 0.30). Similarly, the incidences of anastomotic bleeding (4 studies, 876 participants), incision infection (3studies, 713 participants), and anastomotic stenosis (2studies, 561 participants) were 5.5% (24/440), 8.1% (29/360), and 2.9% (8/280), respectively, in the TDT group, and 3.0% (13/436), 6.5% (23/353), and 3.9% (11/281), respectively, in the non-TDT group. These differences were also determined to lack statistical significance (P = 0.08, P = 0.43, P = 0.48, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The placement of TDTs does not significantly affect the occurrence of AL, Grade B AL, and Grade C AL following surgery for rectal cancer. Additionally, TDTs placement does not be associated with increased complications such as anastomotic bleeding, incision infection, or anastomotic stenosis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: CRD42023427914.

Clinical Impact of Transanal Drainage Tube on Anastomosis Leakage Following Minimally Invasive Resection Without Diverting Stoma in Patients With Rectal Cancer: A Propensity Score-matched Analysis

OBJECTIVES

As one of the most serious complications of rectal cancer (RC) surgery, preventing anastomotic leakage (AL) is crucial. Several studies have suggested a positive role of the transanal drainage tube (TaDT) in AL prevention. However, whether TaDT is beneficial for AL in patients with RC remains controversial. The present study aimed to evaluate the clinical impact of TaDT on AL following minimally invasive resection without diverting stoma (DS) in patients with RC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 392 consecutive patients with RC who had undergone minimally invasive resection without DS between 2010 and 2021. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to reduce selection bias. AL was classified as grade A, B, or C.

RESULTS

A TaDT was used in 214 patients overall. After PSM, we enrolled 316 patients (n=158 in each group). Before PSM, significant group-dependent differences were observed in terms of age, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status, and the use of antiplatelet/anticoagulant agents. The frequency of AL was 7.3% in the overall cohort and was significantly lower in the TaDT group (3.7%) than in the non-TaDT group (11.8%). The rate of grade B AL was significantly lower in the TaDT group than in the non-TaDT group (before PSM, P <0.01; after PSM, P =0.02). However, no significant differences between groups were found for grade C AL. Moreover, multivariate analysis identified the lack of a TaDT as an independent risk factor for AL in the overall and matched cohorts [before PSM, odds ratio, 3.64, P <0.01; after PSM, odds ratio, 2.91, P =0.02].

CONCLUSION

These results indicated that TaDT may play a beneficial role in preventing AL, particularly of grade B, for patients with RC undergoing minimally invasive resection without DS. However, further randomized controlled trials, including patient-reported outcomes, are still needed to understand better the role of TaDT in preventing ALs in patients with RC undergoing minimally invasive resection without DS.

Efficacy of transanal drainage tube in preventing anastomotic leakage after surgery for rectal cancer: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage (AL) following rectal cancer surgery is an important cause of mortality and recurrence. Although transanal drainage tubes (TDTs) are expected to reduce the rate of AL, their preventive effects are controversial.

AIM

To reveal the effect of TDT in patients with symptomatic AL after rectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies (PCSs) in which patients were assigned to two groups depending on the use or non-use of TDT and in which AL was evaluated. The results of the studies were synthesized using the Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model, and a two-tailed P value > 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Three RCTs and two PCSs were included in this study. Symptomatic AL was examined in all 1417 patients (712 with TDT), and TDTs did not reduce the symptomatic AL rate. In a subgroup analysis of 955 patients without a diverting stoma, TDT reduced the symptomatic AL rate (odds ratio = 0.50, 95% confidence interval: 0.29–0.86, P = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

TDT may not reduce AL overall among patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery. However, patients without a diverting stoma may benefit from TDT placement.

Transanal drainage tube for the prevention of anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a serious complication of anterior resection for rectal cancer. The use of transanal drainage tubes (TDT) during surgery to prevent AL remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the efficacy of TDT in reducing AL.

Methods

Relevant data and studies published from inception until November 1, 2022, were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to compare the incidence of AL after anterior resection for rectal cancer with and without TDT.

Results

This meta-analysis included 5 RCTs comprising 1385 patients. The results showed that the intraoperative use of TDT could not reduce the incidence of AL after rectal cancer surgery (risk ratio [RR], 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52-1.59; p = 0.75). A subgroup analysis of different degrees of AL revealed that TDT did not reduce the incidence of postoperative grade B AL (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.67-2.09; p = 0.56) but decreased the incidence of grade C AL (RR, 0.28; 95% CI: 0.12-0.64; p = 0.003). Further, TDT did not reduce the incidence of AL in patients with rectal cancer and a stoma (RR, 2.40; 95% CI, 1.01-5.71; p = 0.05).

Conclusion

TDT were ineffective in reducing the overall incidence of AL, but they might be beneficial in reducing the incidence of grade C AL in patients who underwent anterior resection. However, additional multicenter RCTs with larger sample sizes based on unified control standards and TDT indications are warranted to validate these findings.

Transanal drainage tube for the prevention of anastomotic leakage in anterior resection for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the ability of the transanal drainage tube (TDT) to prevent anastomotic leakage (AL) and provide clinicians with the latest evidence in this area.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We search for relevant studies according to a search strategy. Data extracted from the study were analyzed using RevMan 5.4 software.

RESULTS

Fourteen eligible studies were included in our meta-analysis. The results of this meta-analysis suggest that patients with TDT placement have a lower incidence of AL than those without TDT placement (6% vs. 9.1%) (RR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.46, 0.73, P < 0.00001). However, pooled results from RCTs suggest that TDT does not appear to reduce the incidence of AL in patients (6.4% vs. 8%) (RR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.52, 1.18, P = 0.24). In addition, the results of the meta-analysis suggest that TDT appears to reduce patient reoperation rates (2.6% vs. 5.8%) (RR = 0.38, 95% CI 0.27, 0.54, P < 0.00001).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the RCTs suggest that TDT placement does not reduce the AL rate in patients, however, it is undeniable that the placement of TDT does provide patients with some clinical benefits (such as reduced reoperation rates).

Efficacy of a transanal drainage tube versus diverting stoma in protecting colorectal anastomosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is the most fearsome complication in low rectal resection. The temporary diverting stoma (DS) is recommended to prevent AL, but it may cause relevant morbidity and needs a second surgical procedure to be closed. Therefore, the use of a transanal drainage tube (TDT) has been proposed as an alternative. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis concerning the peri-operative outcomes in patients undergoing elective anterior rectal resection (ARR) with TDT alone or DS alone. Six studies were meta-analyzed, including a total of 735 patients. The meta-analysis showed that the incidences of AL, surgery-related complications, infective complications, and 30-day reoperation after ARR with low colorectal or coloanal anastomosis did not differ significantly between patients undergoing positioning of TDT and those undergoing DS. Furthermore, overall complications were significantly rarer in patients undergoing TDT. A meta-analysis of the randomized control trial (RCT) and no-RCT subgroups did not detect any statistically significant differences in any outcomes. These results suggest that it might be reasonable to employ a TDT in place of a DS to protect low colorectal and coloanal anastomosis, with consequent considerable advantages in terms of the short- and long-term post-operative outcomes. However, more well-designed RCTs are needed to definitively assess this issue.

Anastomotic Leak Rate and Prolonged Postoperative Paralytic Ileus in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgery for Colo-Rectal Cancer After Placement of No-Coil Endoanal Tube

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common gastrointestinal tumor in men and the third in women. Left-hemicolectomy (LC) and low anterior resection (LAR) are considered the gold standard curative treatment. In this retrospective study, we evaluated the presence or absence of post-operative complications, in all patients who underwent Video-laparoscopic (VLS) LAR/LC with No Coil trans-anal tube positioning, and compared the data with the current literature on the topic.

METHODS

Thirty-nine patients diagnosed with CRC of the descending colon, splenic flexure, sigma, and rectum were recruited. LC was performed for sigmoid and descending colon cancers, while LAR was applied for tumors of the upper two-thirds of the rectum. The No Coil trans-anal tube (SapiMed Spa, Alessandria, Italy) was placed in all patients of the study at the end of surgical treatment.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients received a LAR-VLS (46%) and 21 patients received a LC-VLS (54%). The average length of hospital stay after surgery was 7 days. PPOI occurred in only one in 39 patients (2.6%) who had undergone LAR-VLS. As for complications, in no patient of the study did AL (0%) occur.

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing LAR-VLS and LC-VLS, we performed colorectal anastomosis and in the same surgical operation we introduced the No-Coil device. Although this is a preliminary study and subject to further investigation, we believe that the No Coil tube positioning may reduce the time of presence of first flatus and feces and the risk of AL.

Left hemicolectomy and low anterior resection in colorectal cancer patients: Knight-griffen vs. transanal purse-string suture anastomosis with no-coil placement

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is considered one of the most frequent neoplasms of the digestive tract with a high mortality rate. Left hemicolectomy (LC) and low anterior resection (LAR) with minimally invasive laparoscopic and robotic approaches or with the open technique are the gold standard curative treatment.

Materials and methods

Seventy-seven patients diagnosed with CRC were recruited between September 2017 and September 2021. All patients underwent a preoperative staging with a full-body CT scan. The goal of this study was to compare both types of surgeries, LC-LAR LS with Knight-Griffen colorectal anastomosis and LC-LAR open with Trans-Anal Purse-String Suture Anastomosis (the TAPSSA group), by positioning a No-Coil transanal tube (SapiMed Spa, Alessandria, Italy), in terms of postoperative complications such as prolonged postoperative ileus (PPOI), anastomotic leak (AL), postoperative ileus (POI), and hospital stay.

Results

The patients were divided into two groups: the first with 39 patients who underwent LC and LAR in LS with Knight-Griffen anastomosis (Knight-Griffen group) and the second with 38 patients who underwent LC and LAR by the open technique with the TAPSSA group. Only one patient who underwent the open technique suffered AL. POI was 3.76 ± 1.7 days in the TAPSSA group and 3.07 ± 1.3 days in the Knight-Griffen group. There were no statistically significant differences in terms of AL and POI between the two different groups.

Conclusion

The important point that preliminarily emerged from this retrospective study was that the two different techniques showed similarities in terms of AL and POI, and therefore, all the advantages reported in the previous studies pertaining to No-Coil also hold good in this study regardless of the surgical technique used. However, randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Could Stoma Be Avoided after Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer? Experience with Transanal Tube in 195 Cases

Anastomotic leakage is the most-feared complication of rectal surgery. Transanal devices have been suggested for anastomotic protection as an alternative to defunctioning stoma, although evidence is conflicting, and no single device is widely used in clinical practice. The aim of this paper is to investigate the safety and efficacy of a transanal tube for the prevention of leakage following laparoscopic rectal cancer resection. A transanal tube was used in the cases of total mesorectal excision with low colorectal or coloanal anastomosis, undamaged doughnuts, and negative intraoperative air-leak test. The transanal tube was kept in place until the seventh postoperative day. A total of 195 consecutive patients were retrieved from a prospective surgical database and included in the study. Of these, 71.8% received preoperative chemoradiotherapy. The perioperative mortality rate was 1.0%. Anastomotic leakage occurred in 19 patients, accounting for an incidence rate of 9.7%. Among these, 13 patients underwent re-laparoscopy and ileostomy, while 6 patients were managed conservatively. Overall, the stoma rate was 6.7%. The use of a transanal tube may be a suitable strategy for anastomotic protection following restorative rectal cancer resection. This approach could avoid the burden of a stoma in selected patients with low anastomoses.

Does rectal tube/transanal stent placement after an anterior resection for rectal cancer reduce anastomotic leak? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is increasing evidence that either a transanal stent (TAS) or rectal tube (RT) can decrease the risk of anastomotic leakage (AL) after anterior resection for rectal cancer, in which a diverting stoma may not be required.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to investigate the efficacy and safety of RT/TAS in preventing AL after anterior resections.

DATA SOURCES

An up-to-date systematic review was performed on the available literature between 2000 and 2020 on PubMed, EMBASE, Medline and Cochrane Library databases.

STUDY SELECTION

All studies reporting on anterior resections in adults, comparing transanal tube/stent versus non-tube/stent, were analysed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The primary outcome was rates of AL, whereas secondary outcomes compared associated unplanned re-operation for AL and hospital length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

Two randomized controlled trials and 13 observational studies were included, with 1714 patients receiving RT/TAS and 1741 patients without. There were 119 (7%) patients with AL in the RT/TAS group compared to 216 (12.3%) patients in the non-RT/TAS group (OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.38-0.62, p < 0.001). There were 47 (2.9%) patients with AL complications requiring surgery in the RT/TAS group compared to 132 (8%) patients in the non-RT/TAS group (OR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.20-0.42, p < 0.001) and no significant difference identified with the standardized mean difference (SMD) favouring the RT/TAS group for hospital LOS (SMD: -0.23, 95% CI: -0.51 to 0.06, p = 0.115).

CONCLUSION

The use of RT/TAS post restorative anterior resection for rectal cancer should be considered, given the benefits shown from this meta-analysis.

Laparoscopic anterior resection with or without transanal tube for rectal cancer patients - A multicenter randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In rectal cancer surgery, insertion of transanal tube has been shown to have efficacy to prevent anastomotic leakage. This randomized controlled study aims to clarify the incidence of anastomotic leakage with or without transanal tube in patients with rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients who underwent elective low anterior resection were randomly allocated to either have transanal tube insertion or not for five days after surgery. We examined the incidence of anastomotic leakage, postoperative 30-day morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

157 patients were randomized to the transanal tube group or the no-transanal tube group. Symptomatic anastomotic leakage occurred in six patients (7.6%) of the former group and eight patients (10.3%) in the latter group, without significant difference (p = 0.559). There was also no significant difference in morbidity between groups (p = 0.633) and no mortality was detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Transanal tube insertion had no significant benefit towards prevention of anastomotic leakage in rectal cancer surgery.

No Coil® placement in patients undergoing left hemicolectomy and low anterior resection for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the most common tumor of the gastrointestinal tract. Anastomotic leak (AL) and prolonged postoperative ileus (PPOI) are two important complications of colorectal surgery. In this observational retrospective study, we evaluated the positive effects of transanal tube No Coil® in patients with CRC undergoing low anterior resection (LAR) and left hemicolectomy (LC).

METHODS

Thirty-eight cases and forty controls resulted eligible for the final sample. No Coil® placement (SapiMed Spa, Alessandria, Italy) was considered an inclusion criteria for the case group. No Coil® was placed immediately after the end of surgical treatment.

RESULTS

PPOI was significantly more frequent in the control group. AL was evident in 1 patient (2.6%) of cases and 3 patients (7.5%) of controls. No statistical difference was found in AL occurrence between groups. POI days and AL resulted associated with hospital stay. POI days were negatively associated with No Coil placement and positively with AL.

CONCLUSION

With our preliminary data, we suggest that No Coil® placement can be considered as a valuable procedure assisting colorectal surgery, but further studies are required to confirm and enlarge actual evidence.

The possibility of a transanal tube as an alternative to diverting stoma in terms of preventing severe postoperative anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic low anterior resection

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to reveal whether a transanal tube (TAT) could act as an alternative to a diverting stoma (DS) after laparoscopic low anterior resection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 89 consecutive rectal cancer patients whose tumors were located within 15 cm from the anal verge who underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection without a DS at our institution between May 12, 2015 and August 31, 2019 were included. All patients received a postoperative Gastrografin enema study (GES) through a TAT between the 3rd and 10th postoperative day. We planned two study protocols. From May 12, 2015 to March 31, 2017, we conducted a second operation including a DS construction immediately when radiological anastomotic leakage (rAL) was detected (Group A, n=46). From April 1, 2017 to August 31, 2019, we continued TAT drainage even if rAL was detected and repeated the GES weekly until the rAL was healed (Group B, n=43).

RESULTS

In Group A (n=46), 14 cases of rAL were included, 11 of which underwent stoma construction. The remaining 3 patients who refused stoma construction were treated conservatively. In Group B (n=43) rAL was encountered in 10, and 7 of these patients were treated successfully by TAT continuous drainage. The rate of DS in Group B (7.0%) was significantly lower than that in Group A (23.9%) (p=0.028).

CONCLUSIONS

A TAT could act as a DS to mitigate the symptoms of anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic low anterior resection.

The impact of transanal tube design for preventing anastomotic leak in anterior resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Placement of a transanal tube (TAT) into the rectum is a strategy used to attempt to prevent anastomotic leak (AL) in anterior resection surgery. There is a wide variation in materials and tube design in devices used as TATs and previous meta-analyses have not considered TAT design in their analyses. This study reviews the impact that design of TAT has on AL rates.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed with the aim of identifying studies evaluating the use of TATs for preventing AL and then defining the design of TATs. Studies were then compared in groups based on TAT design in a meta-analysis to evaluate whether design is an important variable in outcomes.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies were included. There was a wide variety of tubes used as TATs. On meta-analysis, catheter-type TATs were associated with a substantially lower rate of AL (OR: 0.46; 95% CI 0.30, 0.68). By contrast, stent-type TATs were not associated with any reduction in the incidence of AL (OR: 1.06, 95% CI 0.50, 2.22). Catheter-type TATs were also associated with substantial reductions in the rate of reoperation (OR: 0.32; 95% CI 0.20, 0.50), whereas stent-type TATs showed no benefit in the rate of reoperation (OR: 0.79; 95% CI 0.37, 1.65).

CONCLUSIONS

Off-the-shelf catheter-type transanal tubes appeared effective in preventing AL, whereas custom-designed stent-type TATs were not demonstrated to be effective; although high quality evidence is limited. TAT design should be an important consideration in further research of the use of TATs in anterior resection surgery.

Does a transanal drainage tube reduce anastomotic leakage? A matched cohort study in 144 patients undergoing laparoscopic sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of transanal drainage (TD) tube (a Foley catheter) on the anastomotic leak (AL) rate after laparoscopic sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer (SSS).

METHODS

A prospective study was conducted on, all consecutive patients undergoing SSS at our institution between June 2017 and October 2018. All patients had TD for at least 4 days after surgery and constituted the TD group. The patients from TD group were matched to patients who underwent SSS without TD between January 2015 and May 2017 (no-TD group) according to age, sex, body mass index, neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy, mesorectal excision (total vs partial), and type of anastomosis (stapled vs hand sewn and side-to-end versus end-to-end). The primary endpoint was the AL rate, including both clinical and radiological AL.

RESULTS

A total of 258 patients were included. Eighty-nine patients (34%) had a TD tube. After matching, 72 patients were included in each group. Mean TD duration was 3.9 [2.0-5.9] days. No significant differences between groups were observed in the rates of overall AL: 25/72 (35%) (TD) vs 17/72 (22%) (no-TD), (p = 0.14), clinical AL: 13/72 (18%) (TD) vs 7/72 (10%) (no-TD), (p = 0.23), and asymptomatic radiological AL: 12/72 (17%) (TD) vs 9/72 (13%) (no-TD), (p = 0.64). Multivariate analysis showed that male sex (OR 2.92, 95% CI [1.04-8.24]) and preoperative radiochemotherapy (OR 5.66, 95% CI [1.36-23.53]) were associated with AL.

CONCLUSIONS

Our case-matched study suggested that a TD tube does not reduce the AL rate after laparoscopic sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer.

Outcomes of transanal tube placement in anterior resection: A meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

In recent years, transanal tube placement was reported to be an effective procedure preventing anastomotic leakage after anterior resection of rectal cancer. However, this procedure is still controversial owing to inconsistent results found in previous studies.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed using Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane library from the databases inception up until June 21, 2018. The methodological quality of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies were evaluated by Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, respectively. Statistical analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

1 randomized controlled trial and 9 cohort studies were included in our meta-analysis. The randomized controlled trial was proven to be low risk according to the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. All of the cohort studies proved a high quality according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Patients in transanal tube group had more disadvantageous preoperative demographic characteristics than patients in non-transanal tube group. The anastomotic leak rate was lower in the transanal tube group. Patients in the transanal tube group tended to have lower reoperation rates and shorter hospital stays compared with patients in the non-transanal tube group.

CONCLUSION

Despite various unfavorable preoperative characteristics, anastomotic leakage after anterior resection was lower in patients who received transanal tube placement compared with the control group. Transanal tube placement may be an alternative procedure of defunctioning stoma. A large sample size, multicenter RCT was needed to prove our results.

Transanal Tube NO COIL® after Rectal Cancer Proctectomy. The “G. Paolo II” Cancer Centre Experience

Aims and background

Covering stoma is the main method used to protect low-lying anastomosis after cancer proctectomy. Intraluminal rectal pressure could be a potential risk factor for anastomotic leakage. We present our personal experience with an alternative and original device, the transanal tube NO COIL®, evaluating its feasibility and safety based on a preliminary manometric study.

Methods

From May 1998 to March 1999, an experimental manometric study on 35 subjects was performed to assess the pathophysiological basis of intraluminal rectal pressure with or without the transanal tube. Subsequently, from April 1999 to December 2009, 184 patients (107 males, 77 females, average age 68.2 ± 10 years) with primary adenocarcinoma of the rectum (≤12 cm from anal verge) were selected. Eighty-two underwent total proctectomy and 102 subtotal proctectomy. No stoma were fashioned. At the end of the operation, the silicone transanal tube NO COIL®, 60–80 mm long, 2 mm thick with a calibre of up to 2 cm, was applied and secured to the perineal skin by two stitches, then removed on the seventhpostoperative day if no signs of leakage occurred.

Results

The intraluminal rectal pressure with transanal tube was strongly reduced from 13.8 + 8.5 mmHg to 4.8 + 3.7 mmHg (P <0.01). Nine patients (4.8%) developed an anastomotic leakage, 2 males and 7 females. In 10 patients, the transanal tube NO COIL® did not remain in situ for the planned seven days, and 18 patients suffered from ulcers in the perianal skin. Leakage subsided with conservative treatment in 4 patients, whereas 5 patients required loop colostomy. The stoma rate was 2.7%. No leakage-related deaths occurred, and overall mortality was 1.3%.

Conclusions

The transanal tube NO COIL® does not abolish the risk of anastomotic leakage but could be an alternative option to covering stoma after cancer proctectomy in selected patients. In our experience, this simple and cheap device could reduce the rate of stoma without leakage-related mortality. Further studies within a randomized controlled trial are required to better define our results.

Usefulness of transanal tube placement for prevention of anastomotic leakage following laparoscopic low anterior resection

INTRODUCTION

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a major complication of laparoscopic low anterior resection (LLAR) for rectal cancer. Although several recent reports have suggested that transanal tube placement can prevent AL, this practice is still controversial. Additionally, the mechanism by which a transanal tube prevents AL is unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of transanal tube placement for prevention of AL following LLAR.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study that included 69 patients who underwent LLAR between February 2012 and January 2016. After an anastomosis using a double stapling technique, a transanal tube was placed in 28 patients. A diverting stoma was created in 26 patients. Univariate and multivariate analyses of clinicopathological characteristics were performed.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of AL was 15.9% (11/69). Univariate analysis showed that transanal tube placement (P = 0.022) and early postoperative diarrhea (P < 0.001) were associated with AL. The duration of the postoperative hospital stay for patients with transanal tube placement (13.1 ± 4.1 days) was significantly shorter than for patients without a transanal tube (22.7 ± 12.3 days; P < 0.001). However, transanal tube placement did not reduce postoperative diarrhea. Creation of a diverting stoma did not affect the incidence of AL. Multivariate analysis revealed that the absence of a transanal tube (odds ratio = 33.5, P = 0.018) and the occurrence of postoperative diarrhea (odds ratio = 86.3, P = 0.001) were independent risk factors for AL.

CONCLUSION

Transanal tube placement prevents AL after LLAR. Furthermore, this protective effect may be due to a reduction in the unfavorable incidence of early postoperative diarrhea.

Rectal tube drainage reduces major anastomotic leakage after minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery

AIM

Anastomotic leakage is the most serious complication following low anterior resection for rectal cancer and is a major cause of postoperative morbidity and mortality. The object of the present study was to investigate whether rectal tube drainage can reduce anastomotic leakage after minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery.

METHOD

Three hundred and seventy-four patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic LAR for tumours located ≤ 15 cm above the anal verge between 1 April 2012 and 31 October 2014 were assessed retrospectively. Of these, 107 with intermediate risk of anastomotic leakage received transanal rectal tube drainage. The rectal tube group was matched by propensity score analysis with patients not having rectal tube drainage, giving 204 patients in the study. Covariates for propensity score analysis included age, sex, body mass index, tumour height from the anal verge and preoperative chemoradiation.

RESULTS

Patient demographics, tumour location, preoperative chemoradiation and operative results were similar between the two groups. The overall leakage rate was 10.8% (22/204), with no significant difference between the rectal tube group (9.8%) and the nonrectal tube group (11.8%, P = 0.652). Of the patients with anastomotic leakage, major leakage requiring reoperation developed in 11.8% of those without and 3.9% of those with a rectal tube. On multivariate analysis, age over 65 years and nonuse of a rectal tube were found to be independent risk factors for major anastomotic leakage.

CONCLUSION

Rectal tube placement may be a safe and effective method of reducing the rate of major anastomotic leakage, alleviating the clinical course of leakage following minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery.

Emerging Trends in the Etiology, Prevention, and Treatment of Gastrointestinal Anastomotic Leakage

Anastomotic leaks represent one of the most alarming complications following any gastrointestinal anastomosis due to the substantial effects on post-operative morbidity and mortality of the patient with long-lasting effects on the functional and oncologic outcomes. There is a lack of consensus related to the definition of an anastomotic leak, with a variety of options for prevention and management. A number of patient-related and technical risk factors have been found to be associated with the development of an anastomotic leak and have inspired the development of various preventative measures and technologies. The International Multispecialty Anastomotic Leak Global Improvement Exchange group was convened to establish a consensus on the definition of an anastomotic leak as well as to discuss the various diagnostic, preventative, and management measures currently available.

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.

Transanal tube placement for prevention of anastomotic leakage following low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

Anastomotic leakage following low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer is a serious complication that increases morbidity and mortality rates. Transanal tube placement may reduce postoperative anastomotic leakage rate by reducing intraluminal pressure and preventing fecal extrusion through the staple line. This meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of transanal tube placement to prevent anastomotic leakage after LAR for rectal cancer using a stapling technique.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature was consistent with the recommendations of the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) statement. Multiple comprehensive databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and KoreaMed, were searched. The main study outcomes were anastomotic leakage.

Results

Two randomized clinical trials and 4 nonrandomized studies involving 1,118 patients were included. Subgroup analyses of randomized clinical trials found that transanal tube placement had no effect on study outcomes. Meta-analysis of nonrandomized studies showed that transanal tube placement was associated with a lower incidence of anastomotic leakage (relative risk, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.15-0.67; I² = 0%).

Conclusion

Transanal tube placement may be effective in preventing or reducing the occurrence of anastomotic leakage after LAR for rectal cancer using a stapling technique. Randomized clinical trials with sufficient power are needed to confirm the benefit of transanal tube placement.

Transanal Tube as a Means of Prevention of Anastomotic Leakage after Rectal Cancer Surgery

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leaks after low anterior resection for rectal cancer remain the most feared complication. The aim of our study was to investigate whether the use of a transanal tube could reduce the leakage rate after this surgical procedure.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of a single-institution experience. The study includes 66 patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal cancer without stoma creation between January 2008 and June 2013. Patients were divided into two groups, i.e. those with a transanal drainage tube (TT; n = 9) and those without tube (NTT; n = 57), and evaluated for clinically evident anastomotic leakage and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

The postoperative anastomotic leakage appeared in 5 patients (9%) in the NTT group while no single case was observed within the TT group. Despite the disadvantageous background in the TT group (a transanal stent was used in the most high-risk patients), these patients had no postoperative complications. In the NTT group, 23% had some kind of postoperative complications, and 5% died. The difference between the two groups is not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that the use of a transanal tube in low anterior resection for rectal cancer could potentially be a simple and effective method of reducing anastomotic leakage. In order to prove our observations, larger prospective randomized studies should be performed.

Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic low anterior resection with DST anastomosis

Background

Laparoscopic rectal surgery involving rectal transection and anastomosis with stapling devices is technically difficult. The aim of this study was to evaluate the risk factors for anastomotic leakage (AL) after laparoscopic low anterior resection (LAR) with double-stapling technique (DST) anastomosis.

Methods

This was a retrospective single-institution study of 154 rectal cancer patients who underwent laparoscopic LAR with DST anastomosis between June 2005 and August 2013. Patient-, tumor-, and surgery-related variables were examined by univariate and multivariate analyses. The outcome of interest was clinical AL.

Results

The overall AL rate was 12.3 % (19/154). In univariate analysis, tumor size (P = 0.001), operative time (P = 0.049), intraoperative bleeding (P = 0.037), lateral lymph node dissection (P = 0.009), multiple firings of the linear stapler (P = 0.041), and precompression before stapler firings (P = 0.008) were significantly associated with AL. Multivariate analysis identified tumor size (odds ratio [OR] 4.01; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.25–12.89; P = 0.02) and precompression before stapler firings (OR 4.58; CI 1.22–17.20; P = 0.024) as independent risk factors for AL. In particular, precompression before stapler firing tended to reduce the AL occurring in early postoperative period.

Conclusions

Using appropriate techniques, laparoscopic LAR with DST anastomosis can be performed safely without increasing the risk of AL. Important risk factors for AL were tumor size and precompression before stapler firings.

Can intraluminal devices prevent or reduce colorectal anastomotic leakage: A review

Colorectal anastomotic leakage is a serious complication of colorectal surgery, leading to high morbidity and mortality rates. In recent decades, many strategies aimed at lowering the incidence of anastomotic leakage have been examined. The focus of this review will be on mechanical aids protecting the colonic anastomosis against leakage. A literature search was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Collaborative library for all papers related to prevention of anastomotic leakage by placement of a device in the colon. Devices were categorised as decompression devices, intracolonic devices, and biodegradable devices. A decompression device functions by keeping the anal sphincter open, thereby lowering the intraluminal pressure and lowering the pressure on the anastomosis. Intracolonic devices do not prevent the formation of dehiscence. However, they prevent the faecal load from contacting the anastomotic site, thereby preventing leakage of faeces into the peritoneal cavity. Many attempts have been made to find a device that decreases the incidence of AL; however, to date, none of the devices have been widely accepted.

Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic rectal resection

PURPOSE

The anastomotic leakage rate after rectal resection has been reported to be approximately 2.5-21 percent, but most results were associated with open surgery. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors and their relationship to the experience of the surgeon for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic rectal resection.

METHODS

Between March 2003 and December 2008, 156 patients underwent a laparoscopic rectal resection without a diverting ileostomy. The patients' characteristics, the details of treatment, the intraoperative results, and the postoperative results were recorded prospectively. Univariate and multivariate analyses were applied to identify risk factors for anastomotic leakage.

RESULTS

The majority of operations were performed for malignant disease (n = 150; 96.2%), and 96 patients (61.5%) were males. Conversion to open surgery occurred in 1 case (0.6%). The anastomotic leak rate was 10.3% (16/156), and there were no mortalities. In the univariate analysis, tumor location, anastomotic level, intraoperative events, and operation time were associated with increased anastomotic leakage rate. In the multivariate analysis, anastomotic level (odds ratio [OR], 6.855; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.271 to 36.964) and operation time (OR, 8.115; 95% CI, 1.982 to 33.222) were significantly associated with anastomotic leakage.

CONCLUSION

The important risk factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic rectal resection without a diverting ileostomy were low anastomosis and long operation time. An additional procedure, such as diverting stoma, may reduce the anastomotic leakage if it is selectively applied in cases with these risk factors.

Postoperative complications following surgery for rectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review was designed to determine postoperative complication rates of radical surgery for rectal cancer (abdominal perineal resection and anterior resection).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Lack of accepted complication rates for rectal cancer surgery may hinder quality improvement efforts and may impede the conception of future studies because of uncertainty regarding the expected event rates.

METHODS

All prospective studies of rectal cancer receiving radical surgery published between 1990 and August 2008 were obtained by searching Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, as well as ASCO GI, CAGS, and ASCRS meeting abstracts between 2004 and 2008. There was no language restriction. The outcomes extracted were anastomotic leak, pelvic sepsis, postoperative death, wound infection, and fecal incontinence. Summary complication rates were obtained using a random effects model; the Z-test was used to test for study heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Fifty-three prospective cohort studies and 45 randomized controlled studies with 36,315 patients (24,845 patients had an anastomosis) were eligible for inclusion. Most of the studies found were based in continental Europe (58%), followed by Asia (25%), United Kingdom (10%), North America (5%), and Australia/New Zealand. The anastomotic leak rate, reported in 84 studies, was 11% (95% CI: 10, 12); the pelvic sepsis rate, in 29 studies, was 12% (9, 16); the postoperative death rate, in 75 studies, was 2% (2, 3); and the wound infection rate, in 50 studies, was 7% (5, 8). Fecal incontinence rates were reported in too few studies and so heterogeneously that numerical summarization was inappropriate. Year of publication, use of preoperative radiation, use of laparoscopy, and use of protecting stoma were not significant variables, but average age, median tumor height, and method of detection (clinical vs. radiologic) showed significance to explain heterogeneity in anastomotic leak rates. Year of publication, study origin, average age, and use of laparoscopy were significant, but median tumor height and preoperative radiation use were not significant in explaining heterogeneity among observed postoperative death rates. With multivariable analysis, only average age for anastomotic leak and year of publication for postoperative death remained significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Benchmark complication rates for radical rectal cancer surgery were obtained for use in sample size calculations in future studies and for quality control purposes. Postoperative death rates showed improvement in recent years.

Serum obestatin/ghrelin ratio is altered in patients after distal gastrectomy

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Ghrelin is a peptide hormone produced mainly in the stomach, and obestatin is derived by proteolytic cleavage of the ghrelin prepro-hormone. The aim of this study was to determine the postoperative serial changes in these hormones and whether hyperplasia of ghrelin-expressing cells occurs in the remnant stomach.

METHODS

We prospectively analyzed serial serum samples of 45 early gastric cancer patients and remnant stomach samples of 24 patients.

RESULT

The serum obestatin level on day 2 was lower than that on day 0, and it subsequently returned to the level observed on day 0. In contrast, the serum ghrelin level was lower on days 120 and 210 than on day 0. Eventually, the obestatin/ghrelin ratio was significantly high on day 210 (p = 0.0003). Moreover, we did not observe an increase in the number of ghrelin-expressing cells. The number of ghrelin-expressing cells correlated with the serum ghrelin level.

CONCLUSION

The serum level of obestatin and ghrelin exhibits a different time course in patients who have undergone gastrectomy, and there was no ghrelin-expressing cell hyperplasia in the remnant stomach despite the decrease in serum ghrelin.