Comparative study of three different managements after colorectal anastomosis in ovarian cancer: conservative management, diverting ileostomy, and ghost ileostomy

A restrictive stoma policy after colorectal anastomosis in ovarian cancer based on ghost ileostomy use

BACKGROUND

The incidence of anastomotic leak after colorectal anastomosis in ovarian cancer has been reported to be much lower than that in colorectal cancer patients. Regarding the use of protective manoeuvres (diverting ileostomy) as suggested by clinical guidelines, the goal should be the implementation of a restrictive stoma policy for ovarian cancer patients, given the low rate of anastomotic leakage in this population.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients who underwent cytoreduction surgery in a single centre (University Hospital La Fe, Valencia Spain) due to ovarian cancer between January 2010 and June 2023 were classified according to two groups: a non-restrictive stoma policy group (Group A) and a restrictive stoma policy group (Group B).

RESULTS

A total of 256 patients were included in the analysis (group A 52 % vs group B 48 %). The use of protective diverting ileostomy was lower in the restrictive stoma policy group (14 % vs 6.6 %), and the use of ghost ileostomy was 32 % vs 87 % in groups A and B, respectively (p < 0.00001). No differences were found in the anastomotic leak rate, which was 5.2 % in the non-restrictive group and 3.2 % in the restrictive stoma policy group (p = 0.54).

CONCLUSION

The use of a restrictive stoma policy based on the use of ghost ileostomy reduces the rate of diverting ileostomy in patients with ovarian cancer after colorectal resection and anastomosis. Furthermore, this policy is not associated with an increased rate of anastomotic leakage nor with an increased rate of morbi-mortality related to the leak.

The art of bowel surgery in gynecologic cancer

The field of gynecologic oncology has witnessed a profound transformation in the practice of bowel resection over the years. This evolution, driven by innovative techniques and expanded surgical skills, has redefined the role of the surgeon. This review article delves into the historical journey of bowel surgery, its contemporary importance in cytoreductive procedures for gynecologic cancers, and the general principles of digestive surgery. From pioneering surgeons such as Lane, Broca, and Billroth to the introduction of mechanical staplers, this narrative unfolds the remarkable advances in the field. It highlights the critical need for meticulous training, anatomic mastery, aseptic measures, vascular support, tension-free anastomoses, and precise surgical techniques. These principles underpin the success of bowel resection and anastomosis in the complex landscape of gynecologic oncology.

Short-Term Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Virtual/Ghost Ileostomy or Defunctioning Ileostomy after Anterior Resection of the Rectum: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Anterior rectal resection (ARR) represents one of the most frequently performed methods in colorectal surgery, mainly carried out for rectal cancer (RC) treatment. Defunctioning ileostomy (DI) has long been chosen as a method to "protect" colorectal or coloanal anastomosis after ARR. However, DI does not rule out risks of more or less serious complications. A proximal intra-abdominal closed-loop ileostomy, the so-called virtual/ghost ileostomy (VI/GI), could limit the number of DIs and the associated morbidity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes (PRISMA) guidelines. Meta-analysis was performed by use of RevMan [Computer program] Version 5.4.

RESULTS

The five included comparative studies (VI/GI or DI) covering an approximately 20-year study period (2008-2021). All included studies were observational ones and originated from European countries. Meta-analysis indicated VI/GI as significantly associated with lower short-term morbidity rates related to VI/GI or DI after primary surgery (RR: 0.21, 95% CI: 0.07-0.64, p = 0.006), fewer dehydration (RR: 0.17, 95% CI: 0.04-0.75, p = 0.02) and ileus episodes after primary surgery (RR: 0.20, 95% CI: 0.05-0.77, p = 0.02), fewer readmissions after primary surgery (RR: 0.17, 95% CI: 0.07-0.43, p = 0.0002) and readmissions after primary surgery plus stoma closure surgery (RR: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.06-0.30, p < 0.00001) than the DI group. On the contrary, no differences were identified in terms of AL after primary surgery, short-term morbidity after primary surgery, major complications (CD ≥ III) after primary surgery and length of hospital stay after primary surgery. Conclusions: Given the significant biases among meta-analyzed studies (small overall sample size and the small number of events analyzed, in particular), our results require careful interpretation. Further randomized, possibly multi-center trials may be of paramount importance in confirming our results.

Application and evaluation of transitory protective stoma in ovarian cancer surgery

Ovarian cancer is the most fatal of all female reproductive cancers. The fatality rate of OC is the highest among gynecological malignant tumors, and cytoreductive surgery is a common surgical procedure for patients with advanced ovarian cancer. To achieve satisfactory tumor reduction, intraoperative bowel surgery is often involved. Intestinal anastomosis is the traditional way to restore intestinal continuity, but the higher rate of postoperative complications still cannot be ignored. Transitory protective stoma can reduce the severity of postoperative complications and traumatic stress reaction and provide the opportunity for conservative treatment. But there are also many problems, such as stoma-related complications and the impact on social psychology. Therefore, it is essential to select appropriate patients according to the indications for the transitory protective stoma, and a customized postoperative care plan is needed specifically for the stoma population.

Anastomotic Leakage after Colorectal Surgery in Ovarian Cancer: Drainage, Stoma Utility and Risk Factors

Objective: to evaluate the incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL), risk factors and utility of drainage and stoma in patients undergoing intestinal surgery for ovarian cancer in a single institution and in a review of the literature. Methods: retrospective study that includes consecutive patients undergoing debulking surgery with en bloc pelvic resection with rectosigmoid colectomy for ovarian cancer between 1 November 2011 and 31 December 2021. Data regarding patient and tumour characteristics, surgical procedure, hospitalisation, complications and follow-up were recorded and analysed. The PubMed database was explored for recent publications on this topic. Results: Seventy-five patients were enrolled in the study. All anastomoses were performed at a distance of >6 cm from the anal margin, with negative leak tests and tension-free anastomosis. Diverting stoma were performed in just three patients (4%). At least one perianastomotic pelvic drain was positioned in 71 patients (94.7%) and was removed on average on postoperative day 7. Four patients (5.3%) experienced AL. In all cases, the drain content was not the only sign of complication, as the clinical signs were also highly suggestive. Just one patient received conservative treatment. Average postoperative hospitalisation was 14.6 days (SD: ±9.7). There were no deaths at 30 and 60 days after surgery. Between the AL and non-AL groups, statistically significant differences were observed for age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, length of the intestinal resection and fitness for chemotherapy at 30 days. In ovarian cancer, rectosigmoid resection is a standardised procedure with comparable results for AL, and risk factors for AL are discretely homogeneous. What is neither homogeneous nor standardised according to the literature is the use of stomas and/or drains. Conclusion: use in the future of protective stoma and/or intra-abdominal drains is to be explored in selected and standardised situations to verify their preventive role.

Anastomotic Leak in Ovarian Cancer Cytoreduction Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Simple Summary

Bowel resection is often required to obtain complete removal of ovarian cancer. A major complication of this operation is anastomotic leakage, which has been shown to increase morbidity and mortality in this population. Numerous original research studies have assessed the risk factors for anastomotic leaks. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify statistically significant risk factors. This meta-analysis identified multiple bowel resections as the only significant risk factor. With further research to identify additional risk factors, new management guidelines could be implemented to minimize the risk of anastomotic leaks and improve patient outcomes.

Abstract

Introduction: Anastomotic leaks (AL) following ovarian cytoreduction surgery could be detrimental, leading to significant delays in commencing adjuvant chemotherapy, prolonged hospital stays and increased morbidity. The aim of this study was to investigate risk factors associated with anastomotic leaks after ovarian cytoreduction surgery. Material and methods: The MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane Library, EMBASE and Scopus bibliographical databases were searched. Original clinical studies investigating risk factors for AL in ovarian cytoreduction surgery were included. Results: Eighteen studies with non-overlapping populations reporting on patients undergoing cytoreduction surgery for ovarian cancer (n = 4622, including 344 cases complicated by AL) were included in our analysis. Patients undergoing ovarian cytoreduction surgery complicated by AL had a significantly higher rate of 30-day mortality but no difference in 60-day mortality. Multiple bowel resections were associated with an increased risk of postoperative AL, while no association was observed with body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, age, smoking, operative approach (primary versus interval cytoreductive, stapled versus hand-sewn anastomoses and formation of diverting stoma), neoadjuvant chemotherapy and use of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Discussion: Multiple bowel resections were the only clinical risk factor associated with increased risk for AL after bowel surgery in the ovarian cancer population. The increased 30-day mortality rate in patients undergoing ovarian cytoreduction complicated by AL highlights the need to minimize the number of bowel resections in this population. Further studies are required to clarify any association between neoadjuvant chemotherapy and decreased AL rates.

OVA-LEAK: Prognostic score for colo-rectal anastomotic leakage in patients undergoing ovarian cancer surgery

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the present study was to define and validate an anastomotic leak prognostic score based on previously described and reported anastomotic leak risk factors (OVA-LEAK: https://n9.cl/ova-leakscore) and to establish if the use of OVA-LEAK score is better than clinical criteria (surgeon's choice) selecting anastomosis to be protected with a diverting ileostomy.

MATERIAL & METHODS

This is a retrospective, multicentre cohort study that included patients who underwent cytoreductive surgery for primary advanced or relapsed ovarian cancer with colorectal resection and anastomosis between January 2011 and June 2021. Data from patients already included in the previous predictive model were not considered in the present analysis. To validate the performance of our logistic regression model, we used the OVA-LEAK formula (Annex I: https://n9.cl/ova-leakscore) for estimating leakage probabilities in a new independent cohort. Then, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed and area under the curve (AUC) was used to measure the performance of the model. Additionally, the Brier score was also estimated. 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each of the estimated performance measures were also calculated.

RESULTS

848 out of 1159 recruited patients were finally included in the multivariable logistic regression model validation. The AUC of the new cohort was 0.63 for predicting anastomotic leak. Considering a cut-off point of 22.1% to be 'positive' (to get a leak) this would provide a sensitivity of 0.45, specificity of 0.80, positive predictive value of 0.09 and negative predictive value of 0.97 for anastomotic leak. If we consider this cut-off point to select patients at risk of leak for bowel diversion, up to 22.5% of the sampled patients would undergo a diverting ileostomy and 47% (18/40) of the anastomotic leaks would be 'protected' with the stoma. Nevertheless, if we consider only the 'clinical criteria' for performing or not a diverting ileostomy, only 12.5% (5/40) of the leaks would be 'protected' with a stoma, with a rate of diverting ileostomy of up to 24.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with subjective clinical criteria, the use of a predictive model for anastomotic leak improves the selection of patients who would benefit from a diverting ileostomy without increasing the rate of stoma use.

Ostomy Does Not Lead to Worse Outcomes After Bowel Resection With Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review

Background

Debulking cytoreduction surgery with bowel resection is a common intervention for ovarian cancer. It is controversial whether ostomy causes worse survival outcomes and how clinical physicians should choose which patients to undergo ostomy. During this study, we performed a systematic review to determine whether ostomy leads to worse outcomes after bowel resection compared to anastomosis. We also summarized the possible indications for ostomy.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for articles containing the phrase "ovarian cancer with bowel resection" that were published between 2016 and 2021. We included studies that compared primary anastomosis with ostomy. We mainly focused on differences in the anastomotic leakage rate, length of hospital stay, overall survival, and other survival outcomes associated with the two procedures.

Results and Conclusion

Of the 763 studies, three were ultimately included in the systematic review (N=1411). We found that ostomy did not contribute to worse survival outcomes, and that the stoma-related complications were acceptable. Indications for ostomy require further study. Bowel resection segment margins and the distance from the anastomosis to the anal verge require consideration.

Protective ostomies in ovarian cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

To assess the benefit of protective ostomies on anastomotic leak rate, urgent re-operations, and mortality due to anastomotic leak complications in ovarian cancer surgery.

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for all studies on anastomotic leak and ostomy formation related to ovarian cancer surgery. Non-controlled studies, case series, abstracts, case reports, study protocols, and letters to the editor were excluded. Meta-analysis was performed on the primary endpoint of anastomotic leak rate. Subgroup analysis was carried out based on type of bowel resection and bevacizumab use. Secondary endpoints were urgent re-operations and mortality associated with anastomotic leak, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, 30-day readmission rate, adjuvant chemotherapy, survival, and reversal surgery in ostomy and non-ostomy patients.

Results

A total of 17 studies (2,719 patients) were included: 16 retrospective cohort studies, and 1 case-control study. Meta-analysis of 17 studies did not show a decrease in anastomotic leak rate in ostomy patients (odds ratio [OR]=1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.60–1.70; p=0.980). Meta-analysis of ten studies (1,452 women) did not find a decrease in urgent re-operations in the ostomy group (OR=0.72; 95% CI=0.35–1.46; p=0.360). Other outcomes were not considered for meta-analysis due to the lack of data in included studies.

Conclusion

Protective ostomies did not decrease anastomotic leak rates, and urgent re-operations in ovarian cancer surgery. This evidence supports the use of ostomies in very select cases.

Risks factors for anastomotic leakage in advanced ovarian cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarise the available evidence on the pre- and intra-operative risk factors for anastomotic leakage (AL) after bowel resection and anastomosis for ovarian cancer (OC).

STUDY DESIGN

We searched online databases from Pubmed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane Library from inception to October 2020. Pre- and intra-operative risk factors for AL were considered as the primary outcomes. Research heterogeneity and bias were evaluated by I² and by the Newcastle Ottawa scale, respectively. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42018095225.

RESULTS

The overall AL rate after OC surgery (median ± SD) was 5.3 ± 12% (277 AL on 5178 anastomoses). Thirteen non-randomised studies were included in the meta-analysis enrolling a total of 3274 patients. Pre albumin level ≤ 3 gr/dl, multiple bowel resections and primary cytoreductive surgery were associated with a significantly high risk of AL with a pooled OR of 5.29 (95% CI: 1.51-18.59), OR = 4.4 (95% CI: 1.19-16.66) and OR = 1.71 (95% CI: 1.05-2.77), respectively. Optimal cytoreduction, ASA score, ascites, and protective stoma were not associated with an increased risk of AL.

CONCLUSION

Based on the best available evidence, preoperative albumin level <3 gr/dl, multiple bowel resections and primary cytoreductive surgery were associated with an increased risk for AL after bowel surgery for OC.

Indications and practice of diverting ileostomy after colorectal resection and anastomosis in ovarian cancer cytoreduction

OBJECTIVE

To determine the factors related with diverting ileostomy performance after colorectal resection and anastomosis, in advanced ovarian cancer cytoreductive surgery.

METHODS

We have previously demonstrated the risk factors associated with anastomotic leak after colorectal anastomosis: Advanced age at surgery, low serum albumin level, additional bowel resections, manual anastomosis and distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge. However, use of diverting ileostomy is strongly variable and depends on individual surgeon preferences and training. Eight hospitals participated in this retrospective study. Data of 695 patients operated for ovarian cancer with primary colorectal anastomosis were included (January 2010-June 2018). Fourteen pre-/intraoperatively defined variables were identified and analysed as justification factors for use of diverting ileostomy.

RESULTS

The rate of diverting ileostomy in the entire cohort was 19.13% (133/695; range within individual centers 4.6-24.32%). Previous treatment with bevacizumab [OR 2.8 (1.3-6.1); p=0.01]; additional bowel resections [OR 3.0 (1.8-5.1); p<0.001]; extended operating time [OR 1.005 (1.003-1.006); p<0.001] and intra-operative red blood transfusion [OR 2.7 (1.4-5.3); p<0.001] were found to be independently associated with diverting ileostomy performance. Assuming a 7% AL rate cut-off, up to 51.8% of DI presented an AL risk below 7% and might have been spared.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk factors that drive the gynecologic oncology surgeons to perform a diverting ileostomy, seem to differ from the actual risk factors that we have identified to be associated with postoperative anastomotic leak. Broader awareness of the risk factors that contribute to a higher perioperative risk profile, will facilitate a better risk stratification process and possibly avoid unnecessary stoma formation in ovarian cancer patients.