Functional outcome after low anterior resection with low anastomosis for rectal cancer using the colonic J-pouch. Prospective randomized study for determination of optimum pouch size

Reconstructive techniques following low anterior resection for carcinoma of the rectum

INTRODUCTION

Multiple reconstructive techniques have been described for reconstruction after a low anterior resection for carcinoma rectum. Colonic J pouch (CJP), Side to end anastomosis (SEA), transverse coloplasty pouch (TCP) and Straight Colo-rectal/anal anastomosis were the most widely studied.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

PubMed, Embase and Cochrane data base were searched for randomized, non-randomized studies and systematic reviews from inception of the databases till July 31st, 2023.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Considerable heterogeneity existed among different study findings. Reservoir techniques, including CJP, SEA, and TCP, exhibited reduced stool frequency, decreased urgency, and improved continence status compared to SCA, particularly in the short term. CJP maintained this advantage into the intermediate term. Other functional outcomes were similar among the techniques. However, these functional improvements did not translate into enhanced Quality of Life (QoL). TCP was associated with an elevated risk of anastomotic leaks. Other surgical outcomes remained comparable across all four techniques. Sexual outcomes also exhibited no significant variation. Some studies suggested that the size of the side limb in CJP or SEA may not significantly impact functional outcomes, implying that neorectum capacity may not be the primary determinant of improved function. The precise physiological mechanism underlying these findings remains unknown.

CONCLUSIONS

In the short and intermediate terms, reservoir techniques demonstrated superior functional outcomes, but long-term performance was comparable among all techniques. Notably, enhanced functional outcomes did not translate to improved Quality of Life. TCP, while effective, is linked to an increased risk of anastomotic complications, necessitating cautious utilization.

Comparison of complications and bowel function among different reconstruction techniques after low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Anastomosis for gastrointestinal reconstruction has been contentious after low anterior resection of rectal cancer for the past 30 years. Despite the abundance of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on colon J-pouch (CJP), straight colorectal anastomosis (SCA), transverse coloplast (TCP), and side-to-end anastomosis (SEA), most studies are small and lack reliable clinical evidence. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of the four anastomoses on postoperative complications, bowel function, and quality of life in rectal cancer.

METHODS

We assessed the safety and efficacy of CJP, SCA, TCP, and SEA in adult patients with rectal cancer after surgery by searching the Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed databases to collect RCTs from the date of establishment to May 20, 2022. Anastomotic leakage and defecation frequency were the main outcome indicators. We pooled data through a random effects model in a Bayesian framework and assessed model inconsistency using the deviance information criterion (DIC) and node-splitting method and inter-study heterogeneity using the I-squared statistics (I²). The interventions were ranked according to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to compare each outcome indicator.

RESULTS

Of the 474 studies initially evaluated, 29 were eligible RCTs comprising 2631 patients. Among the four anastomoses, the SEA group had the lowest incidence of anastomotic leakage, ranking first (SUCRA_SEA = 0.982), followed by the CJP group (SUCRA_CJP = 0.628). The defecation frequency in the SEA group was comparable to those in the CJP and TCP groups at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. In comparison, the defecation frequency in the SCA group 12 months after surgery all ranked fourth. No statistically significant differences were found among the four anastomoses in terms of anastomotic stricture, reoperation, postoperative mortality within 30 days, fecal urgency, incomplete defecation, use of antidiarrheal medication, or quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that SEA had the lowest risk of complications, comparable bowel function, and quality of life compared to the CJP and TCP, but further research is required to determine its long-term consequences. Furthermore, we should be aware that SCA is associated with a high defecation frequency.

[Colonic pouch reconstruction after low anterior rectal resection]

For many decades the coloanal anastomosis was traditionally created as an end-to-end anastomosis. Despite successful surgical restoration of the intestinal passage after low rectal resection and total mesorectal excision (TME), physiological continence and evacuation function cannot be achieved in many cases using end-to-end anastomosis. Subsequent complaints, such as fecal incontinence and urge problems, evacuation difficulties and high stool frequency (so-called low anterior resection syndrome, LARS) are the result. The combination of symptoms after TME known as LARS is described in the literature in up to 60% of cases. The increased occurrence of the imperative urge to defecate, frequent bowel movements and problems with fecal incontinence motivated surgeons to look for alternative anastomosis techniques. Side-to-end anastomosis, coloplasty pouch and colonic J‑pouch have been shown in various studies to be superior to end-to-end anastomosis in terms of functional results. Current studies could show that the side-to-end anastomosis (even if this is not a pouch in the actual sense) and the two pouch techniques show comparable results in terms of functional outcome and the rate of anastomotic leakage. The alternative to coloanal anastomosis after TME is the abdominoperineal resection. Most, especially younger patients, prefer to try to maintain continence with the risk of the described functional problems. If the patients are well selected, TME can be carried out with the current techniques in such a way that continuity is maintained and a good defecation function is achieved for a large proportion of patients using the pouch-anal anastomosis or the side-to-end techniques.

Comparison of the colonic J-pouch versus straight (end-to-end) anastomosis following low anterior resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

To evaluate comparative outcomes of straight (end-to-end) anastomosis versus colonic J-pouch anastomosis following anterior resection.

METHODS

A systematic search of multiple electronic data sources was conducted, and all studies comparing straight (end-to-end) anastomosis versus J-pouch anastomosis were included. Anastomotic complications, post-operative complications, re-operation, mortality, and functional outcomes were the evaluated outcome parameters. Revman 5.3 was used for data analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies reporting a total number of 3293 patients who underwent straight anastomosis (n = 1581) or J-pouch (n = 1712) were included. Anastomotic leak and re-operation rates were significantly higher in the straight group compared to the J-pouch group [RD 0.03, P = 0.03] and [OR 1.87, P = 0.003], respectively. Stool frequency per 24 h at 6 months and 12 months was lower in the J-pouch group than the straight group [MD 2.13, P = 0.003] and [MD 1.44, P = 0.00001], respectively. In addition, the use of anti-diarrheal medication is lower at 12 months in the J-pouch group [MD 3.85, P = 0.03]. Moreover, the two groups showed comparable results regarding SSI, sepsis, paralytic ileus, anastomotic stricture formation, anastomotic bleeding, and mortality.

CONCLUSION

J-pouch anastomosis showed lower risk for anastomotic leak and re-operation. Furthermore, better functional outcomes such as stool frequency were achieved using the colonic J-pouch reconstruction over the conventional straight end-to-end anastomosis.

Colonic J-pouch versus side-to-end anastomosis for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

This study aims to compare colonic J-pouch and side-to-end anastomosis for rectal cancer in terms of surgical and bowel functional outcomes and quality of life (QoL).

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane. The last search was performed on March 28, 2021. All randomized controlled trials comparing colonic J-pouch with side-to-end anastomosis for rectal cancer were enrolled. The main outcomes were bowel functional outcomes and QoL. The secondary outcomes were surgical outcomes including operative time, postoperative hospital stay, complications, and mortality.

Results

Nine articles incorporating 7 trials with a total of 696 patients (330 by J-pouch and 366 by side-to-end) were enrolled in this meta-analysis. The bowel functional outcomes were comparable between J-pouch and side-to-end groups in terms of stool frequency, urgency, and incomplete defecation at the short term (< 8 months), medium term (8–18 months), and long term (> 18 months) follow up evaluations. No difference was observed between groups with regards to QoL (SF-36: physical function, social function, and general health perception). Besides, surgical outcomes were also similar in two groups.

Conclusion

The currently limited evidence suggests that colonic J-pouch and side-to-end anastomosis are comparable in terms of bowel functional outcomes, QoL, and surgical outcomes. Surgeons may choose either of the two techniques for anastomosis. A large sample randomized controlled study comparing colonic J-pouch and side-to-end anastomosis for rectal cancer is warranted.

[Surgical treatment of low anterior resection syndrome]

OBJECTIVE

To compare functional outcomes of various rectal reconstruction after total mesorectal excision.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective randomized trial included 90 patients with mid-to-low rectal carcinoma who underwent total mesorectal excision.

RESULTS

There were 22 patients after J-pouch surgery, 30 patients with side-to-end anastomoses and 38 patients with end-to-end anastomoses. Eight patients (26.6%) required conversion of J-P to E-E (7 patients) and S-E (1) anastomosis for technical reasons. Postoperative morbidity was similar (13.6, 16.7 and 34.2% in J-P, S-E and E-E groups, respectively, p=0.705). Sensory threshold, earliest and constant defecation urge and maximal tolerable volume were higher for J-P surgery within 3-6-12 months after surgery. Stool frequency was significantly lower after J-P surgery compared to S-E and E-E anastomoses within 3-6-12 months. Wexner scores were 3, 5, 6 after 6 months (p<0.05) and 0, 1, 1 after 12 months for J-P, S-E and E-E, respectively (p>0.05). Evacuation dysfunction was observed in 59.1% with J-P, 33.3% with S-E and 21.1% with E-E anastomoses in 6 months after stoma closure.

CONCLUSION

J-pouch reconstruction demonstrates higher neorectal volume that ensures reduced stool frequency up to 12 months after stoma closure. However, technical challenges of J-pouch surgery and evacuation dysfunction restrain application of this procedure in clinical practice.

Changes in surgical therapies for rectal cancer over the past 100 years: A review

Advances in surgical and adjuvant therapies have resulted in a dramatic improvement in outcomes of rectal cancer in terms of both oncology and functional preservation. Surgery plays a central role in therapy as it is the only means of achieving a complete cure. These surgical advancements result from extensive pioneering research in the fields of anatomy and physiology. Much history lies behind the recent surgical breakthroughs of total mesorectal excision (TME) and intersphincteric resection (ISR). This article outlines the changes that have taken place in surgical therapies for rectal cancer over more than a century based on clinical trials performed to provide scientific evidence for these therapies.

Better Function With a Colonic J-Pouch or a Side-to-end Anastomosis?: A Randomized Controlled Trial to Compare the Complications, Functional Outcome, and Quality of Life in Patients With Low Rectal Cancer After a J-Pouch or a Side-to-end Anastomosis

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

We aimed to compare prospectively the complications and functional outcome of patients undergoing a J-Pouch (JP) or a side-to-end anastomosis (SE) for treatment of low rectal cancer at a 2-year time point after resection for rectal cancer.

METHODS

A multicenter study was conducted on patients with low rectal cancer who were randomized to receive either a JP or SE and were followed for 24 months utilizing SF-12 and FACT-C surveys to evaluate the quality of life (QOL). Fecal incontinence was evaluated using the Fecal Incontinence Severity Index (FISI). Bowel function, complications, and their treatments were recorded.

RESULTS

Two hundred thirty-eight patients (165 males) were randomized with 167 final eligible patients, 80 in the JP group and 87 in the SE group for evaluation. The mean age at surgery was 61 (range 29 to 82) years. The overall mean recurrence rate was 12 of 238, 5% and similar in both groups.

COMPLICATIONS

Overall, 37 of 190 (19%) patients reported complications, 14 of these were Clavien Dindo Grade 3b and 2 were 3a: leak 3 (2 JP,1 SE), fistula 4 (1 JP, 3 SE), small bowel obstruction 4 (3JP, 1 SE), stricture 4 (3 SE, 1 SA), pouch necrosis 2 (JP), and wound infection 5 (2 JP, 3 SE). QOL scores using either instrument between the 2 groups at 12 and 24 months were similar (P > 0.05). Bowel movements, clustering, and FISI scores were similar.

CONCLUSION

At time points of 1 and 2 years after a JP or a SE for low rectal cancer, QOL, functional outcome, and complications are comparable between the groups. Although choosing a particular procedure may depend on surgeon/patient choice or anatomical considerations at the time of surgery, SE functions similar to JP and may be chosen due to the ease of construction.

Delayed Colo-anal Anastomosis for Rectal Cancer: Pelvic Morbidity, Functional Results and Oncological Outcomes: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Delayed colo-anal anastomosis (DCAA) has received renewed interest thanks to its reduction in anastomotic leakage rate without the use of stoma to protect a low rectal anastomosis. The aim of this review was to summarize the available literature on DCAA following rectal cancer resection and to report clinical, oncological and functional results.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review was conducted including MEDLINE/Pubmed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, clinicaltrials.gov and the Cochrane database of systematic reviews through July 2018. The review was conducted according to MOOSE guidelines. Quality was appraised with the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) tool.

RESULTS

Eight observational studies (409 patients) were included. Average MINORS score was 9.6/14 in seven non-comparative studies and 17/22 in one comparative study. Six studies reported no anastomotic leak. Pelvic sepsis/abscess ranged from 0 to 25%. Mortality rate was <3% in seven studies and 12.5% in one. Poor fecal continence was reported in <30% of patients. Need for permanent stoma was ≤2% in six studies. A five-year survival rate ranged from 63.8 to 81% (four studies). Loco-regional recurrence rate ranged from 4.8 to 14.3% at 3 years (four studies) and from 6 to 38.8% at 5 years (three studies).

CONCLUSION

DCAA offers an alternative to primary straight colo-anal anastomosis for low rectal cancer. The benefits include reduced risk of anastomotic leakage and pelvic sepsis, and no need for protective ileostomy, with good functional and oncological outcomes. Results of ongoing randomized controlled trials comparing DCAA with straight colo-anal anastomosis and protective stoma are awaited to draw definitive conclusions.

Modified transverse coloplasty pouch: new reconstruction techniques after total mesorectal excision. Our experience

AIM

The incidence of rectal cancer continues to rise. The functional results after complete Total Mesorectal Excision (TME) depend on the segment of colon used for reconstruction of colonic continuity and the form, the volume and the functional proprieties of the "neorectum". The aim of our study is evaluate the efficacy of our Modified Transverse Coloplasty Pouch (MTCP) after the treatment of low rectal cancer in terms of functional outcomes and quality of life.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The study included 136 patients, underwent TME from January 2007 to December 2016 with diagnosis of extraperitoneal carcinoma of the rectum. The average distance of the tumor from the dentate line was 5.6 cm. Our follow-up protocol included functional outcome evaluation at 7th post-operative day (POD), 2nd month, and 6th month after the surgery.

RESULTS

All patients (M/F 84/52) underwent anterior rectal resection (TME) with MTCP. Frequency of bowel movements per 24 hours in the studied patients compared at 7th POD, 2 months, and 6 months. Since the first post-operative weeks there is an encouraging reduction of the frequency of bowel movements.

CONCLUSION

Modified Transverse Coloplasty Pouch (MTCP) had better functional results and quality of life compared to patients with a Colonic J Pouch (CJP) and traditional Transverse Coloplasty Pouch (TCP).

Morbidity Following Coloanal Anastomosis: A Comparison of Colonic J-Pouch vs Straight Anastomosis

BACKGROUND

Low rectal tumors are often treated with sphincter-preserving resection followed by coloanal anastomosis.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the short-term complications following straight coloanal anastomosis vs colonic J-pouch anal anastomosis.

DESIGN

Patients were identified who underwent proctectomy for rectal neoplasia followed by coloanal anastomosis in the 2008 to 2013 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Demographic characteristics and 30-day postoperative complications were compared between groups.

SETTINGS

A national sample was extracted from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project database.

PATIENTS

Inpatients following proctectomy and coloanal anastomosis for rectal cancer were selected.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Demographic characteristics and 30-day postoperative complications were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

One thousand three hundred seventy patients were included, 624 in the straight anastomosis group and 746 in the colonic J-pouch group. Preoperative characteristics were similar between groups, with the exception of preoperative radiation therapy (straight anastomosis 35% vs colonic J-pouch 48%, p = 0.0004). Univariate analysis demonstrated that deep surgical site infection (3.7% vs 1.4%, p = 0.01), septic shock (2.25% vs 0.8%, p = 0.04), and return to the operating room (8.8% vs 5.0%, p = 0.0006) were more frequent in the straight anastomosis group vs the colonic J-pouch group. Major complications were also higher (23% vs 14%, p = 0.0001) and length of stay was longer in the straight anastomosis group vs the colonic J-pouch group (8.9 days vs 8.1 days, p = 0.02). After adjusting for covariates, major complications were less following colonic J-pouch vs straight anastomosis (OR, 0.57; CI, 0.38-0.84; p = 0.005). Subgroup analysis of patients who received preoperative radiation therapy demonstrated no difference in major complications between groups.

LIMITATIONS

This study had those limitations inherent to a retrospective study using an inpatient database.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative complications were less following colonic J-pouch anastomosis vs straight anastomosis. Patients who received preoperative radiation had similar rates of complications, regardless of the reconstructive technique used following low anterior resection. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A468.

A Cross-Sectional Review of Reporting Variation in Postoperative Bowel Dysfunction After Rectal Cancer Surgery

BACKGROUND

Postoperative bowel dysfunction affects quality of life after sphincter-preserving rectal cancer surgery, but the extent of the problem is not clearly defined because of inconsistent outcome measures used to characterize the condition.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess variation in the reporting of postoperative bowel dysfunction and to make recommendations for standardization in future studies. If possible, a quantitative synthesis of bowel dysfunction symptoms was planned.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, as well as the Cochrane Library, were queried systematically between 2004 and 2015.

STUDY SELECTION

The studies selected reported at least 1 component of bowel dysfunction after resection of rectal cancer.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measures were reporting, measurement, and definition of postoperative bowel dysfunction.

RESULTS

Of 5428 studies identified, 234 met inclusion criteria. Widely reported components of bowel dysfunction were incontinence to stool (227/234 (97.0%)), frequency (168/234 (71.8%)), and incontinence to flatus (158/234 (67.5%)). Urgency and stool clustering were reported less commonly, with rates of 106 (45.3%) of 234 and 61 (26.1%) of 234. Bowel dysfunction measured as a primary outcome was associated with better reporting (OR = 3.49 (95% CI, 1.99-6.23); p < 0.001). Less than half of the outcomes were assessed using a dedicated research tool (337/720 (46.8%)), and the remaining descriptive measures were infrequently defined (56/383 (14.6%)).

LIMITATIONS

Heterogeneity in the reporting, measurement, and definition of postoperative bowel dysfunction precluded pooling of results and limited interpretation.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable variation exists in the reporting, measurement, and definition of postoperative bowel dysfunction. These inconsistencies preclude reliable estimates of incidence and meta-analysis. A broadly accepted outcome measure may address this deficit in future studies.

Randomized clinical trial of defaecatory function after anterior resection for rectal cancer with high versus low ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery

Background

Defaecatory function is often poor after anterior resection. Denervation of the neorectum following high ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) is a possible cause of impaired defaecatory function. The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to clarify whether the level of ligation of the IMA in patients with rectal cancer affects defaecatory function.

Methods

Between 2008 and 2011, patients who underwent anterior resection for rectal cancer were randomized to receive either high or low ligation of the IMA. The primary endpoint was to demonstrate the superiority of low ligation in terms of defaecatory function.

Results

One hundred patients were enrolled in the study; 51 were randomized to high ligation of the IMA and 49 to low ligation. There were no differences between the groups in terms of clinical data, except tumour stage, which was more advanced in the high-ligation group (P = 0·046). Nor were there any differences in defaecatory function, self-assessment of defaecation, Faecal Incontinence Quality of Life scale or continence score between groups at 3 months and 1 year. The number of harvested lymph nodes was similar. The rate of symptomatic anastomotic leakage was 16 per cent in the high-ligation group and 10 per cent in the low-ligation group (P = 0·415).

Conclusion

The level of ligation of the IMA in patients with rectal cancer did not affect defaecatory function or the incidence of postoperative complications. Registration number: NCT00701012 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Risk Factors for Anastomotic Leakage After Intersphincteric Resection Without a Protective Defunctioning Stoma for Lower Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is performed as an alternative to abdominoperineal resection for super-low rectal cancer. The purpose of this study was to evaluate risk factors for anastomotic leakage (AL) after ISR without a defunctioning stoma for lower rectal cancer.

METHODS

Between 1995 and 2012, 135 consecutive patients with lower rectal cancer underwent curative ISR without a protective defunctioning stoma. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the risk factors for AL.

RESULTS

The radiological and symptomatic AL rate was 17.0 % (23/135). Univariate analysis demonstrated that male sex (P = 0.030), preoperative chemotherapy (P = 0.016), partial ISR (P < 0.001), lateral lymph-node dissection (P = 0.042), distal tumor distance from the dentate line (P = 0.007), and straight reconstruction (P < 0.001) were significantly associated with AL. Severe AL requiring re-laparotomy developed in 13 (9.6 %) patients. Univariate analysis demonstrated that male sex (P = 0.006), partial ISR (P < 0.001), distal tumor distance from the dentate line (P = 0.002), and straight reconstruction (P < 0.001) were significantly associated with AL requiring relaparotomy. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that partial ISR [odds ratio (OR) 6.701; P = 0.001] and straight reconstruction (OR 5.552; P = 0.002) were independently predictive of AL.

CONCLUSIONS

Partial ISR and straight reconstruction increased the risk of AL after ISR without a protective defunctioning stoma. A defunctioning stoma might be mandatory in patients with the risk factors identified in this analysis.

The Functional Outcomes of Coloanal and Low Colorectal Anastomoses with Reservoirs after Low Rectal Cancer Resections

Nearly half of patients undergoing low anterior rectal cancer resection have a functional sequelae after straight coloanal or low colorectal anastomoses (SA), including low anterior rectal resection syndrome, which combines stool fragmentation, urge incontinence, and incontinence. SA are responsible for anastomotic leakage rates of 0 to 29.2 per cent. Adding a colonic reservoir improves the functional results while reducing anastomotic complications. These colonic reservoir techniques include the colonic J pouch (CJP), transverse coloplasty (TC), and side-to-end anastomosis (STEA) procedures. The aim of this literature review was to compare the functional outcomes of these three techniques from a high level of evidence. CJP with a 4- to 6-cm reservoir is a good surgical option because it reduces functional impairments during the first year, and probably up to 5 years, but is not always feasible. TC appears to perform as well as CJP, is achievable in over 95 per cent of patients, but still with some doubts about a higher anastomotic leakage rate and worse functional outcomes. STEA appears equivalent to CJP in terms of morbidity and even better functional outcomes. STEA, with a terminal side segment size of 3 cm, is feasible in the majority of nonobese patients, combines good functional results, has low anastomotic leakage rates, and is easy to complete.

Long-term clinical and functional results of intersphincteric resection for lower rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is an alternative to abdominoperineal resection (APR) for super-low rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term curability after ISR over an average 6-year observational period, to compare the postoperative functional outcomes for ISR with those for low anterior resection (LAR), and to determine whether ISR is a function-preserving surgery.

METHODS

Between 2000 and 2007, a total of 77 consecutive patients with low rectal cancer underwent curative ISR. The curability outcomes for ISR, LAR, and APR were compared. We evaluated the postoperative defecation functions, Wexner incontinence score (WIS), and defecation quality of life (QOL) for a between-groups comparison (ISR/LAR).

RESULTS

The 5-year survival rate after ISR was 76.4 %, and the outcome was better than for APR (APR 51.2 %, LAR 80.7 %). Local recurrence after ISR occurred in 7.8 % of patients (APR 12.1 %, LAR 11.7 %). The average daily frequency of defecation was 3.7 times for the ISR patients and 3.2 times for the LAR patients, indicating no significant difference between the groups. Moreover, there were no significant differences between the groups for defecation functions. The WIS was 8.1 for ISR and 4.9 for LAR, and the defecation QOL for ISR and LAR was not significantly different (modified fecal incontinence QOL score: ISR 34.3, LAR 26.5).

CONCLUSIONS

The long-term clinical and functional results suggest that ISR may be the optimal sphincter-preserving surgery for patients with lower rectal cancers who cannot be treated with a double-stapling technique.

Coloplasty Neorectum versus Straight Anastomosis in Low Rectal Cancers

Introduction. Patients with the diagnosis of carcinoma rectum after random allocation were assigned to 2 groups. One group was subjected to total mesorectal excision with coloplasty neorectum reconstruction and another group to total mesorectal excision with straight anastomosis. This randomization was done by odds and even method by the sister in charge of the ward to avoid bias in randomization. The study included 42 patients with diagnosis of carcinoma rectum from 4 to 12 centimeters from anal verge. Composite incontinence score, bladder function, and sexual function were considered as the main outcome measures. Results. All patients of transverse coloplasty group had mild or moderate composite incontinence score while 7 (36.8%) patients of straight anastomosis group had a severe score at 7th POD (P < 0.05). At 6 months, 100% patients in transverse coloplasty group had a nil score which was not achieved by any of the patients in the other group. An intragroup comparison showed an improvement in score with time in both groups more marked in transverse coloplasty group. Conclusion. Transverse coloplasty group showed a better QOL so far as anal incontinence is considered. However, no statistically significant difference was achieved when comparing bladder and sexual dysfunction between the two groups.

Review of bowel dysfunction of rectal cancer patients during the first five years after sphincter-preserving surgery: a population in need of nursing attention

PURPOSE

The aim of the review was to summarize the longitudinal changes in bowel dysfunction among patients with rectal cancer within the first five years following sphincter-preserving resection.

METHODS

A series of literature searches were conducted on six English-language electronic databases. Articles published after 1990 were searched. A total of 29 articles (reporting 27 studies) was found.

RESULTS

Bowel dysfunction, including an alteration in the frequency of bowel movements, incontinence, abnormal sensations, and difficulties with evacuation, is reported among patients with rectal cancer within the first five years after sphincter-preserving resection. These problems are most frequent and severe within the first year, especially within the first six months, and stabilize after one year. Some of the problems may last for years.

CONCLUSION

Supportive care for bowel dysfunction is needed, and should include the provision of information and psychological support delivered in multiple steps. Oncology nurses can play an important role in providing supportive care for rectal cancer patients with bowel dysfunction.

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS): cause and effect and reconstructive considerations

Between 25 and 80% of patients undergoing a low or very low anterior resection will suffer postoperatively, from a constellation of symptoms including fecal urgency, frequent bowel movements, bowel fragmentation and incontinence, collectively referred to as the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). The etiology of LARS is multifactorial with the potential of sphincter injury during anastomosis construction, alterations in anorectal physiology, the development of a pudendal neuropathy, and a lumbar plexopathy with exacerbation of symptoms if there is associated anastomotic sepsis or the use of adjuvant and neoadjuavnt therapies. The symptoms of LARS may be obviated in part by the construction of a neorectal reservoir which may take the form of a colonic J-pouch, a transverse coloplasty, or a side-to-end anastomosis. This review outlines the factors contributing to LARS symptomatology along with the short- and medium-term functional results of comparative trials with the different types of neorectal reconstructions.

How low is low? Evolving approaches to sphincter-sparing resection techniques

Although advances in rectal cancer staging may ultimately be accurate enough to reliably exclude disease outside the rectal wall (thereby allowing local approaches to be more widely and safely applied) and advances in the use of neoadjuvant chemo- and radiation therapy may ultimately produce more "complete responders" that can be accurately identified and spared surgery altogether, as it stands, radical resection forms the basis of curative treatment for rectal cancer. However, the concepts that guide the surgeon in choosing the optimal approach in radical resection are changing. In the past, the decision as to how to proceed surgically with radical resection was based primarily on the level of the tumor above the anal verge or anorectal ring. The issue was primarily "How low is the tumor?" and "Is the distal margin safe?" A more modern approach focuses attention on achieving a negative circumferential margin despite what historically may seem to be a very minimal distal margin, the current issue is not "How low is the tumor?" so much as it is "How deep does the tumor go?". This shift in focus has been a major impetus in the evolution of sphincter sparing resection techniques.

Sphincter preservation for distal rectal cancer - a goal worth achieving at all costs?

To assess the merits of currently available treatment options in the management of patients with low rectal cancer, a review of the medical literature pertaining to the operative and non-operative management of low rectal cancer was performed, with particular emphasis on sphincter preservation, oncological outcome, functional outcome, morbidity, quality of life, and patient preference. Low anterior resection (AR) is technically feasible in an increasing proportion of patients with low rectal cancer. The cost of sphincter preservation is the risk of morbidity and poor functional outcome in a significant proportion of patients. Transanal and endoscopic surgery are attractive options in selected patients that can provide satisfactory oncological outcomes while avoiding the morbidity and functional sequelae of open total mesorectal excision. In complete responders to neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, a non-operative approach may prove to be an option. Abdominoperineal excision (APE) imposes a permanent stoma and is associated with significant incidence of perineal morbidity but avoids the risk of poor functional outcome following AR. Quality of life following AR and APE is comparable. Given the choice, most patients will choose AR over APE, however patients following APE positively appraise this option. In striving toward sphincter preservation the challenge is not only to achieve the best possible oncological outcome, but also to ensure that patients with low rectal cancer have realistic and accurate expectations of their treatment choice so that the best possible overall outcome can be obtained by each individual.

Meta-analysis of the colon J-pouch vs transverse coloplasty pouch after anterior resection for rectal cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the outcome of colonic J-pouches (CJP) and transverse colonic pouches (TCPs) after anterior resection for rectal cancer.

METHOD

Trials were located through Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, VIP and CNKI. Main end-points included functional outcomes, postoperative complications and anorectal physiological outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 120 articles, 34 compared CJP and TCP. Of these only six were randomized controlled trials (RCT), which fulfilled the inclusion criteria. These six included 648 patients, including 326 in the CJP group and 322 in the TCP group. There were no differences in the incidences of anastomotic leak [odds ratio 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21-1.18], chest infection (0.43, 0.09-2.00), wound infection (0.87, 0.33-2.30), anastomotic stricture (1.30, 0.44-3.84), fistula (0.64, 0.18-2.31).There were no difference in functional outcomes such as stool frequency [weighted mean difference (WMD) of -0.01, -0.30-0.27 at 6 months].There was no difference for anorectal physiology but heterogeneity existed: resting pressure (0.39, -1.76 to 2.55; 3.09, -0.04 to 6.23; 4.15, 2.21-6.094, at preoperation, 6 and 12 months,); squeeze pressure (-15.02, -46.14 to 16.10; -15.04, -37.04 to 6.97;0.83, -7.70 to 9.37 at preoperation, 6 and 12 months);(Neo)rectal threshold volume(8.49, 5.18-11.81; 27.13, -5.08 to 59.35, at preoperation and 6 months); Maximal (neo) rectal volume (-14.05, -36.60 to 8.50; 23.37, 2.65-44.09; -0.54, -0.91 to -0.18, at preoperation, 6 and at 12 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Transverse colonic pouch has similar results as CJP. As it is a safe, feasible, simple, technically easy and time-saving surgical procedure, TCP is a good candidate for wider clinical application.

Reconstruction techniques after proctectomy: what's the best?

There are approximately 40,000 new rectal cancer cases diagnosed each year in the United States, representing the second most common gastrointestinal malignancy (behind colon cancer). With the advent of sphincter preserving techniques, patients with mid and low colorectal cancers enjoy the benefits of better postoperative functional outcomes and quality of life; however, controversy exists over which reconstructive technique is superior in restoring bowel continuity. Construction of a straight coloanal anastomosis is technically simpler, but functional outcomes are inferior compared with colonic reservoirs. The purpose of this review is to summarize the current data regarding reconstructive techniques following proctectomy.

Resection of rectal cancer: a historical review

Local control of rectal cancer and patient survival have improved remarkably with advances in surgical techniques and adjuvant therapy. By applying advanced surgical principles, surgeons can now excise most rectal cancers completely, often preserving the anal sphincter and leaving the patient with relatively normal bowel and pelvic function. Historically, the earliest surgical approaches to rectal cancer were via the perineum. As surgical techniques and general anesthesia improved, other approaches such as a posterior approach were undertaken to improve access to the whole rectum. Consequently, abdominoperineal resection became the standard treatment until anterior resection was introduced for proximal rectal cancers. The most important surgical breakthrough in recent years has been the advent of total mesorectal excision (TME). The emphasis in rectal cancer surgery is on preservation of function, with dissection being done in appropriate anatomical planes. Thus, mobilization of the rectum has a long history, and is seen in modern procedures including TME and intersphincter resection. This article reviews the progression of the surgical management of rectal cancer with reference to historical perspectives. We discuss the major surgical considerations for mobilization of the rectum in several surgical procedures, from conventional operations to modern standardized TME.

Is laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery equal to open surgery? An evidence based perspective

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery (LCS) is an evolving subject. Recent studies show that LCS can not only offer safe surgery but evidence is growing that this new technique can be superior to classical open procedures. Fewer perioperative complications and faster postoperative recovery are regularly mentioned when studies of LCS are presented. Even though the learning curve of LCS is frequently debated when limitations of laparoscopic surgeries are reviewed, studies show that in experienced hands LCS can be a safe procedure for colorectal cancer treatment. The learning curve however, is associated with high conversion rates and economical aspects such as higher costs and prolonged hospital stay. Nevertheless, laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery (LCCR) offers several advantages such as less co-morbidity and less postoperative pain in comparison with open procedures. Furthermore, the good exposure of the pelvic cavity by laparoscopy and the magnification of anatomical structures seem to facilitate pelvic dissection laparoscopically. Moreover, recent studies describe no difference in safety and oncological radicalness in LCCR compared to the open total mesorectal excision (TME). The oncological adequacy of LCCR still remains unproven today, because long-term results do not yet exist. To date, only a few studies have described the results of laparoscopic TME combined with preoperative adjuvant treatment for colorectal cancer. The aim of this review is to examine the various areas of development and

controversy of LCCR in comparison to the conventional open approach.

Pouch operation for rectal cancer

Many retrospective studies have found that the functional outcome after a low anterior resection for rectal cancer is better with colonic J-pouch reconstruction than with conventional straight anastomosis. This advantage was demonstrated in prospective, randomized trials and meta-analyses. However, despite its increasing popularity there are several areas of controversy about the use of the colonic J-pouch reconstruction. These issues include anastomotic leaks, the part of the colon used for the pouch, the pouch size, causes of difficulty in evacuation, indications (the optimum level of anastomosis), appropriateness for the elderly, and long-term (2 years or more after surgery) functional outcome. All relevant articles identified from MEDLINE databases were reviewed. The incidence of anastomotic leaks is apparently reduced by colonic J-pouch reconstruction. A 5-cm colonic J-pouch using the sigmoid colon increases the reservoir function without compromising evacuation, and provides better functional outcome than straight anastomosis, even 2 years or more after surgery, in patients whose anastomosis is less than 8 cm from the anal verge. Patients with ultralow anastomoses, less than 4 cm from the verge, appear to benefit the most. At a time when the indications for abdominoperineal excision appear to be reduced for low rectal cancer, the demand for colonic J-pouch reconstruction (the best technique in pouch operations) is therefore likely to increase.

Comparison of a colonic J-pouch and transverse coloplasty pouch in patients with rectal cancer after an ultralow anterior resection using fecoflowmetric profiles

PURPOSE

Because the standard straight coloanal anastomosis for low rectal cancer tends to result in unfavorable outcomes in terms of defecatory function, colonic pouch reconstruction has therefore recently been adopted in many institutions. The colonic J-pouch (CJP)- and transverse coloplasty pouch (TCP)-anal anastomoses have been adopted worldwide. However, the comparative benefits and drawbacks of the two procedures are uncertain. This study was designed to analyze the functional and clinical outcomes after an ultralow anterior resection (ULAR) using the fecoflowmetry (FFM).

METHODS

Between November 1996 and July 2005, 18 patients were studied retrospectively. They were evaluated by FFM, together with Kelly's clinical score (KCS), and anorectal manometric assessments were also performed.

RESULTS

The KCS directly correlated to the maximum fecal stream flow rate (Fmax). In this study, postoperative patients with good KCS as well as a high value of Fmax were seen more in the patients with CJP than in those with TCP.

CONCLUSION

From the viewpoint of FFM, the patients with CJP had a more favorable functional outcome than those with TCP. FFM provided quantitative and qualitative evaluations concerning the anorectal motor activity in patients who had undergone an ULAR for rectal cancer.

Functional outcome following restorative rectal cancer surgery

The trend towards preoperative adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapies in selected patients with rectal cancer has led to increases in sphincter preservation with a limited understanding of the factors governing unsatisfactory functional outcomes. Data would suggest the need for a more selective use of standard radiotherapeutic fields in low- to intermediate-risk cases where there appears to be limited survival or locoregional recurrence benefit and where there is under-reported toxicity. This article discusses the complex factors which impact on functional outcome following open rectal cancer surgery particularly when it is accompanied by adjuvant therapy.

Prospective randomized trial for determination of optimum size of side limb in low anterior resection with side-to-end anastomosis for rectal carcinoma

PURPOSE

Functional outcome after low anterior resection with side-to-end anastomosis is comparable with that after a colonic J-pouch construction. The optimum size of the side limb has yet to be determined. This prospective randomized trial compared a 3-cm (short) and 6-cm (long) side limb.

METHODS

Forty-four patients with a mid or low rectal cancer undergoing low anterior resection were randomly assigned to each group. Physiologic and clinical assessments were performed preoperatively and at 3, 6, and 12 months after ileostomy closure. Defecography was performed at six months after ileostomy closure.

RESULTS

Twenty patients in each group completed the study. Among them, one patient with a short limb and two others with a long limb developed leakage. Sphincter function and reservoir function were similar between the groups. Bowel function or incontinence scoring was similar between the groups. The incidence of incomplete evacuation assessed by defecography in the long limb group was significantly greater than in the short limb group (13/20 long and 5/20 short, P = 0.025). One patient in the long limb group experienced fecal impaction.

CONCLUSION

The study showed similar clinical results in patients with either a short limb or a long limb but seemed to be underpowered. A long limb may be associated with fecal impaction in patients undergoing low anterior resection with side-to-end anastomosis.

Pelvic exenteration: ten-year experience at the European Institute of Oncology in Milan

OBJECTIVES

Analyze morbidity and survival after pelvic exenteration (PE) of gynecological malignancies.

METHODS

We reviewed 106 consecutive patients with gynecologic malignancies who underwent PE from June 1996 to April 2007 at the Division of Gynecology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO), Milan.

RESULTS

PE was performed for cancer of the cervix (62 patients), vagina (21 patients), vulva (9 patients), endometrium (9 patients), ovary (4 patients) and 1 uterine sarcoma. Mean age was 53.6 (30-78) years. 97% of the patients received radiotherapy before PE and 3 patients had PE as primary treatment. We performed 53 anterior, 48 total and 5 posterior PE. Median operation time, estimated blood loss and hospital stay were respectively 490 (200-780) minutes, 1240 (300-6500) ml and 21.6 (11-55) days. No residual tumor was left in 93% of the patients. Median follow-up was 22.3 (1.6-117) months. There were no post-operative deaths (<30 days from surgery) nor intra-operative mortality. Total morbidity rate was 66%; 48% of patients had early complications (<30 days after PE) whereas 52 patients (48.5%) had late complications; 70% of these occurred to the urinary tract and 25% were due to bowel occlusions or fistulas. Overall survival was 52%, 35%, 19% and 16% respectively for cervical, endometrial, vaginal and vulvar cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

PE is a feasible technique with no post-operative mortality and high percentage of long-survivors, although the morbidity rate still remains significantly high. Careful patient selection, pre- and post-operative care and optimal surgical skills in a Gynecologic Oncologic Center are the cornerstones to further improve quality of life and survival for these patients.

[Functional outcome after hand-sewn versus stapled colonic J pouch anastomosis for rectal carcinoma]

STUDY AIM

The aim of this study was to compare the surgical and functional results of hand-sewn and stapled colonic J-pouch anastomoses after proctectomies for cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Over a 6-year period, 120 patients had a laparotomic conservative rectal excision with total mesorectal excision but without intersphincteric dissection, for cancer of the mid- and lower rectum: the colonic J-pouch anastomosis was hand-sewn for 49 and stapled for 71 patients. The functional results were assessed at 1 year, by a questionnaire completed by the patient.

RESULTS

Morbidity was 37% in the hand-sewn group and 38% in the stapled group (ns). Mean duration of surgery in the hand-sewn group was 288 minutes and in the stapled group, 246 minutes (p<0.001). At 1 year, the rate of perfect continence was 71% for the hand-sewn group and 76% for the stapled group (ns). Significantly, more patient from the hand-sewn groups used enemas (16% versus 3%, p<0.005). On the other hand, there was no significant difference between the two groups for wearing protection, urgency, number of stools a day or gas/stool discrimination.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no major difference in either the surgical or functional results between hand-sewn or stapled colonic J-pouch anastomosis by laparotomy for rectal cancer. Because it is simpler and faster to perform, a stapled pouch is preferable when the tumor site so permits.

Bowel problems, self-care practices, and information needs of colorectal cancer survivors at 6 to 24 months after sphincter-saving surgery

The aim of this study was to describe bowel problems, self-care practices, and information needs of patients who have recovered from the acute effects of sphincter-saving surgery for colorectal cancer. A retrospective, descriptive survey was conducted using a structured telephone interview and mailed questionnaires. The sample consisted of 101 patients who had undergone sphincter-saving surgery for colorectal cancer in the last 6 to 24 months. Most participants (71.3%) reported a change in bowel habits after surgery. The 6 most frequently reported gastrointestinal problems were incomplete evacuation (75.2%), excessive flatus (75.2%), urgency (73.3%), straining (61.4%), perianal soreness or itching (49.5%), and bloating (43.6%). Incontinence of feces (varying from smears to complete bowel action) was reported by 37.6% of participants. The most frequently reported information needs were related to diet (50.5%) and managing conditions such as diarrhea (31.7%), bloating/wind/gas (28.7%), pain (21.8%), and incomplete emptying of the bowel (18.8%). Patients who had recovered from the acute effects of sphincter-saving surgery for colorectal cancer reported a wide range of bowel problems and ongoing concerns about managing symptoms. Findings from this study provide valuable information to guide the development of educational resources to prevent or better manage bowel problems after surgery.

Early results from a randomized clinical trial of colon J pouch versus transverse coloplasty pouch after low anterior resection for rectal cancer

Background

Patients with primary rectal cancer undergoing low anterior resection are often reconstructed using a pouch procedure. The aim of this trial was to compare colon J pouch (CJP) with transverse coloplasty pouch (TCP) reconstruction with regard to functional results, perioperative mortality and morbidity. As there is considerable uncertainty over the true anastomotic leak rate in patients with a TCP, the study analysed short-term outcome data.

Methods

Elective patients suitable for either procedure after sphincter-saving low anterior resection were eligible. Randomization took place during surgery. The primary endpoint was the rate of late evacuation problems after 2 years; secondary endpoints were anastomotic leak rate, perioperative morbidity and mortality.

Results

Between 21 October 2002 and 5 December 2005, 149 patients were randomized. All 76 patients randomized to TCP had the procedure compared with 68 of the 73 patients (93 per cent) randomized to CJP. Both groups were comparable with regard to demographic and clinical characteristics. Surgical complications (CJP: 19 per cent; TCP: 18 per cent) and the overall anastomotic leak rate (8 per cent) were equally distributed in both groups.

Conclusion

This trial demonstrated a comparable early outcome for TCP and CJP. This contradicts previous reports suggesting a higher leak rate after TCP. Registration number: ISRCTN78983587 (http://www.controlled-trials.com).

Total mesorectal excision and management of rectal cancer

Treatment of rectal cancer over the last two decades has evolved with changes in techniques of surgery and radiation based on national and international trials. Preoperative adjuvant radiation is now preferred over postoperative adjuvant radiation, and total mesorectal excision with preservation of pelvic nerves is the gold standard for surgical treatment of rectal cancer. Preservation of the anal sphincter without compromising oncological outcome is an additional benefit for patients with carcinoma in the distal rectum. Further progress in imaging and a multidisciplinary team approach will facilitate individualization of treatment strategy with more focus on quality of life.

A randomized multicenter trial to compare long-term functional outcome, quality of life, and complications of surgical procedures for low rectal cancers

INTRODUCTION

Colonic pouches have been used for 20 years to provide reservoir function after reconstructive proctectomy for rectal cancer. More recently coloplasty has been advocated as an alternative to a colonic pouch. However there have been no long-term randomized, controlled trials to compare functional outcomes of coloplasty, colonic J-Pouch (JP), or a straight anastomosis (SA) after the treatment of low rectal cancer.

AIM

: To compare the complications, long-term functional outcome, and quality of life (QOL) of patients undergoing a coloplasty, JP, or an SA in reconstruction of the lower gastrointestinal tract after proctectomy for low rectal cancer.

METHODS

A multicenter study enrolled patients with low rectal cancer, who were randomized intraoperatively to coloplasty (CP-1) or SA if JP was not feasible, or JP or coloplasty (CP-2) if a JP was feasible. Patients were followed for 24 months with SF-36 surveys to evaluate the QOL. Bowel function was measured quantitatively and using Fecal Incontinence Severity Index (FISI). Urinary function and sexual function were also assessed.

RESULTS

Three hundred sixty-four patients were randomized. All patients were evaluated for complications and recurrence. Mean age was 60 +/-12 years, 71% were male. Twenty-three (7.4%) died within 24 months of surgery. No significant difference was observed in the complications among the 4 groups. Two hundred ninety-seven of 364 were evaluated for functional outcome at 24 months. There was no difference in bowel function between the CP-1 and SA groups. JP patients had fewer bowel movements, less clustering, used fewer pads and had a lower FISI than the CP-2 group. Other parameters were not statistically different. QOL scores at 24 months were similar for each of the 4 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing a restorative resection for low rectal cancer, a colonic JP offers significant advantages in function over an SA or a coloplasty. In patients who cannot have a pouch, coloplasty seems not to improve the bowel function of patients over that with an SA.

Saving the sphincter in rectal cancer: are we prepared to change practice?

Total mesorectal excision and preoperative radiation with or without chemotherapy has led to a reduction in local recurrence rates in patients with rectal cancer. This article examines the effect such treatment has on the rate of sphincter preservation in patients with rectal cancers close to the anal sphincter mechanism and looks at the evidence for changing clinical practice.

Straight and colonic J-pouch reconstruction after low anterior resection

PURPOSE

A complication after restorative rectal surgery with a straight anastomosis is low-anterior resection syndrome with a postoperatively deteriorated anorectal function. The colonic J-reservoir is sometimes used with the purpose of reducing these symptoms. An alternative method is to use a simple side-to-end anastomosis or a coloplasty.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Three-hundred fiftyseven patients with rectal cancer undergoing total mesorectal excision (TME). Three-hundred (84.0%) received a low anterior resection with primary anastomosis and colo-rectal n = 194 (64.6%) or colo-anal anastomosis n = 106 (35.3%). A colonic pouch using the descending colon was created in 24 patients and in 75 patients respectively. Surgical results and complications were recorded. Patients were followed with a functional evaluation at 6 and 12 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics in both groups were very similar regarding gender, age, tumor level, and Dukes' stages. A large proportion of the patients received short-term preoperative radiotherapy (72%). There was no significant difference in surgical outcome between the 2 techniques with respect to anastomotic height, perioperative blood loss, postoperative complications, reoperations, hospital stay or pelvic sepsis rates except the anastomotic stricture rate in the colonic J-Pouch group after coloanal anastomosis (p < 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

These data show that either a colonic J-pouch or a straight anastomosis performed on the descending colon in low-anterior resection with TME are methods that can be used with similar expected surgical and functional results.

Defecation mechanisms after anterior resection with J-pouch-anal and side-to-end anastomosis in dogs

BACKGROUND

Colonic J-pouch-anal anastomosis or colonic side-to-end anastomosis is the reconstruction of choice after low anterior resection. However, the mechanisms of defecation after both reconstruction forms are still speculative.

METHODS

Low anterior rectal resections were performed in 12 dogs with six colonic J-pouch-anal (pouch) and six coloanal side-to-end (SE) reconstructions. Four months postoperative stool frequency, intestinal transit time, and neorectal compliance were determined by radiography and barostat. Defecation mechanisms were evaluated radiographically during expulsion of artificial stool.

RESULTS

One dog with pouch reconstruction could not be evaluated due to an anastomotic leak, while the others had uncomplicated course. Spontaneous stool frequency was significantly increased with both reconstruction methods (control 2.0+/-0.9, pouch 2.7+/-1.2, SE 3.3+/-0.9 day; p<0.05). Intestinal transit time was significantly higher with pouch reconstruction due to storage of stool in the pouch and the descending colon compared to SE (control 760+/-82, pouch 592+/-97, SE 550+/-87 min; p<0.05). Compliance and functional capacity were higher in pouch than in side-to-end reconstructions (pouch 5.0+/-0.7 ml/mmHg, 124+/-23 ml; SE 2.7+/-0.3 ml/mmHg, 92+/-24 ml; p<0.05). During defecation, there were no contractions of the pouch detectable.

CONCLUSIONS

The colonic J-pouch reconstruction results in better functional outcome than side-to-end coloanal anastomosis. Our results show that pouch evacuation is passive and independent from pouch motility. The functional principle of the colonic J-pouch is not its reservoir function but a delay of colonic motility.

Prospective randomised trial comparing ileocaecal interposition and colon-J-pouch as rectal replacement after total mesorectal excision

BACKGROUND

Ileocaecal interposition (ICI) is a technique of rectal replacement after total mesorectal excision (TME), but the method has never been evaluated in a randomised fashion. We performed a randomised, controlled trial to compare ICI and colon-J-pouch (CJP) for rectal replacements after TME for rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifteen patients were enrolled into each treatment group of the trial according to the protocol. Follow-up evaluations were performed 3 months and 1 year after ileostomy closure and at a mean of 5 years after initial surgery.

RESULTS

Similar results between the groups were found for incontinence, urgency, constipation and quality of life at all follow-ups. The frequency of defecation was slightly lower in the CJP group at 3 months [3 (2-6) vs 5 (2-11) (p=0.043)] and at 1 year [3 (2-5) vs 5 (2-8) (p=0.034)]. However, this difference lost significance if patients who had postoperative radiotherapy were excluded from the analysis. Four out of the 15 patients treated with ICI experienced bowel obstruction, which required open surgery in two, endoscopic dilatation in one or maintenance of the ileostomy in one patient. None of the patients treated with CJP had similar complications.

CONCLUSIONS

ICI and CJP reconstruction result in a similar functional outcome and quality of life. As ICI did not show any benefit over CJP and tended to result in a higher frequency of defecation, it should not be used as a first choice treatment. In addition, ICI was associated with significant complications after radiotherapy. Therefore, it must not be used if postoperative radiochemotheray is intended.

The effect of neo-rectal wall properties on functional outcome after colonic J-pouch-anal anastomosis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

It has been suggested that normal function of both anal sphincters is essential for a good functional outcome after colonic J-pouch-anal anastomosis (CPAA). However, CPAA patients may have impaired continence despite adequate sphincter function. The present study was designed to identify those factors, which contribute to the functional outcome after a handsewn CPAA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty patients were studied before and 1 year after pouch surgery. Faecal continence was evaluated using the Rockwood faecal incontinence severity index (RFISI). At both occasions, maximum anal resting pressure (MARP) and maximum anal squeeze pressure (MASP) were recorded. In addition, sensory perception threshold-volumes (SPT-V) and compliance were assessed using an 'infinitely' compliant polyethylene bag connected to an electronic barostat assembly.

RESULTS

The median RFISI score 1 year after surgery was higher than the median RFISI score before surgery (13 vs 7 (p < 0.01). The median MARP dropped significantly (p < 0.01) whereas the median MASP remained unaffected. The mean compliance, calculated at three different sensation levels, and the pouch sensory perception threshold-volumes (PSPT-V) were lower than those of the original rectum (p < 0.05). The reduction of MARP showed no correlation with the post-operative change in RFISI scores. Low PC and low PSPT-V were associated with higher RFISI scores.

CONCLUSION

Low pouch compliance and low SPT-V adversely affect functional outcome after a handsewn colonic J-pouch-anal anastomosis.

Long-Term Functional Outcome of Colonic J-pouch Reconstruction After Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the long-term functional outcome of colonic J-pouch reconstruction after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer in a prospective study.

METHODS

We compared the functional outcome of 46 patients who underwent J-pouch reconstruction (J-group) and 49 patients who underwent straight anastomosis (S-group) after LAR for rectal cancer. We evaluated clinical function using a 17-item questionnaire about different aspects of bowel function. Physiologic reservoir function was evaluated by manovolumetry.

RESULTS

Among the patients with an ultralow anastomosis (<or=4 cm from the anal verge), those in the J-group had fewer bowel movements during the day and at night, and less urgency, soiling, protective pad use, incontinence, and dissatisfaction with bowel function than those in the S-group. Among the patients with a low anastomosis (5-8 cm from the verge), those in the J-group had fewer bowel movements at night, and less urgency and soiling than those in the S-group. Moreover, reservoir function (reflected by the maximum tolerable volume, threshold volume, and compliance) was better in the J-group than in the S-group in both the ultralow and low anastomosis groups.

CONCLUSION

J-pouch reconstruction after low anterior resection creates a better stool reservoir than straight anastomosis, especially when the anastomosis is less than 4 cm from the anal verge, resulting in a better quality of life 3 years after rectal cancer resection.