Vertical division of the rectum by endostapler in very low colorectal anastomosis with a double-stapling technique

Impact of the Vertical Division of the Rectum on the Decrease in Reloading of the Endostapler for a Complete Division in Colorectal Cancer

Background Despite several improvements in surgical techniques, the intracorporeal division of the distal end of the rectum is still challenging, particularly when it is too deep in a narrow pelvis. Even though it helps avoid spillage, the double-stapling technique (DST) raises concerns regarding safety and anastomotic leakage if multiple stapler firings are essential to complete the rectal division.

Objective To assess the feasibility of vertically dividing the rectum and its impact in reducing the number of reloads essential for that division in non-low rectal cancer patients undergoing total mesorectal excision (TME).

Materials and Methods A retroprospective study.

Results From January 2017 to November 2021, a total of 123 patients with sigmoid and rectal cancers were enrolled in the present study; their data were collected and analyzed, and 21 patients were excluded. The remaining sample of 102 subjects was composed of 47 male (46%) and 55 female (54%) patients with a median age of 54 years (range: 30 to 78 years). Only 1 reload was enough to complete the rectal division in 82 (80.39%) cases, and 2 reloads were used in the remaining 20 (19.61%) patients. Anastomotic leakage was clinically evident in 4 cases (3.9%). No statically significant difference was observed when firing one or two staplers. No 30-day mortality was recorded in this series.

Conclusion Our early experience indicates that this type of division has a real advantage in terms of decreasing the number of reloads needed and, in turn, lowering the incidence of anastomotic leakage after partial mesorectal excision (PME) or TME when applied with proper patient selection.

Use of the modified double-stapling technique with vertical division of the rectum during a sphincter-preserving operation for the treatment of a rectal tumor

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

The modified double-stapling technique (DST) with vertical division of the rectum(IO-DST) has been reported as a feasible and safe procedure for performing low anastomosis during rectal cancer surgery. In this procedure, an endostapler was vertically used, instead of using a horizontally orientated linear stapler, when dividing the rectum. A previous study reported that this technique is useful for treating patients with a narrow pelvis and/or performing a very low anastomosis.

METHODS

The use of IO-DST anastomosis during anterior resection(AR) and low anterior resection was performed on 80 cases of rectal cancer between April 1998 and June 2004 at our institution. We reviewed those cases and evaluated the leakage rate.

RESULTS

We found that leakage occurred in six cases (7.5%); however, leakage was not found in cases of AR or cases with a preserved left colic artery (LCA).

CONCLUSIONS

The IO-DST technique is an adequate procedure for performing AR. The preservation of the LCA could be used to prevent leakage.

Colorectal anastomosis using a novel double-stapling technique for lower rectal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The conventional double-stapling technique (DST) using a standard linear stapler horizontally is sometimes difficult to apply to an anastomosis where the pelvis is narrow or the anastomosis is ultralow. In this report, we review our experiences of a novel DST (IO-DST) that employs vertical division of the rectum using an endostapler.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One-hundred and five consecutive patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal carcinoma below the peritoneal reflection were enrolled into this study. The clinical, oncological, and functional outcomes were studied retrospectively.

RESULTS

The median distance from the anal verge to the tumor was 5.0 cm in "high risk" T1 tumors and 6.5 cm in more-advanced tumors. More than 2 cm of distal surgical margin was obtained in 80.6% of the patients with tumors deeper than T1. The median distance from the anal verge to the anastomosis was 4.2 cm in T1 tumors and 4.0 cm in more-advanced tumors. The median blood loss was 315 ml, and the median operative time was 262 min. There was no mortality in the IO-DST. Recurrence presented in 12 (13.0%) of the patients who underwent curative surgery, with local recurrence in four patients (4.3%) during a median follow-up of 46.2 months. However, no patients experienced suture-line recurrence. The early bowel frequency was four times/day after stoma closure in patients with transient covering colostomy and 3.5 times/day in patients without colostomy. The late bowel frequency was three times/day in patients with transient covering colostomy, and two times/day in patients without colostomy.

CONCLUSIONS

The IO-DST is a feasible and safe procedure for facilitating lower anastomosis in rectal carcinoma below the peritoneal reflection.

Modified double-stapling technique in low anterior resection for lower rectal carcinoma

PURPOSE

The original double-stapling technique (DST) using a standard linear stapler horizontally can be difficult in patients with a narrow pelvis or an ultralow anastomosis. We review our experience of performing a modified DST (IO-DST) with vertical division of the rectum achieved using an endostapler.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied the clinical outcomes of 90 patients who underwent low anterior resection (LAR) for lower rectal carcinoma. Low anterior resection was performed with IO-DST in 34 patients (IO-DST group), with the single-stapling technique (SST) in 47 (SST group), and with per anal anastomosis (PAA) in 9 (PAA group).

RESULTS

The distances from the anal verge to the tumor and to the anastomosis were significantly shorter in the IO-DST group than in the SST group (5.8 cm, 4.0 cm vs 7.0 cm, 5.0 cm, respectively), whereas it was equivalent in the IO-DST and PAA groups (5.0 cm, 4.0 cm). Blood loss was less in the IO-DST group than in the SST and PAA groups (400 ml vs 578 ml and 950 ml, respectively). The operative time was shorter in the IO-DST group than in the PAA group (281 min vs 327 min, respectively). There were no significant differences in the length of the distal surgical margin among the three groups. The IO-DST group patients suffered less bowel frequency than the SST group patients 1 month after surgery (2.5 times/day vs 4.0 times/day, respectively) and less than the PAA group patients more than 1 year after surgery (2.0 times/day vs 3.5 times/day, respectively). There were no significant differences in the incidence of complications or local recurrence among the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

IO-DST is a feasible and safe procedure for performing low anastomosis, which results in less bowel frequency after LAR for lower rectal carcinoma.