Role of transanal irrigation in the treatment of anterior resection syndrome

Treatment of anterior resection syndrome: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

There has been a lack of research comparing the efficacy of various treatments for low anterior resection syndrome (LARS).

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search across six electronic databases and a paired meta-analysis was undertaken to assess the effectiveness of the interventions. Furthermore, a network meta-analysis was utilized to compare the efficacy of different treatments for LARS.

RESULTS

This study encompassed nine randomized controlled trials, involving a total of 450 patients. Compared to routine care, 5-HT3 receptor antagonists (follow-up<3 months) and percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (3 months ≤ follow-up <6 months) were effective in reducing the LARS score. Pelvic floor rehabilitation (follow-up≤3 months) was effective in decreasing daily number of bowel movements when compared to routine care. The network meta-analysis indicated that 5-HT3 receptor antagonists (follow-up<3 months) were the most effective in reducing both the LARS score and the daily number of bowel movements. Transanal irrigation (3 months ≤ follow-up ≤ 12 months) was most effective in reducing the LARS score. Additionally, 5-HT3 receptor antagonists demonstrated relative efficacy in improving patients' quality of life (follow-up ≤ 1 month).

CONCLUSIONS

This review indicates that 5-HT3 receptor antagonists and anal irrigation show significant promise in the treatment of LARS. Nevertheless, the contributions of percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation and pelvic floor rehabilitation to LARS treatment should not be overlooked. Given the clinical heterogeneity observed among the studies, the results should be interpreted with caution.

"You're just on your own": Exploring bowel symptom management needs after rectal cancer surgery through patient and clinician focus groups

PURPOSE

Currently cancer survivorship often leaves the needs of patients unidentified and unmet. The study aims to establish the views of experts on managing bowel symptoms following rectal cancer surgery.

METHOD

People living with bowel symptoms as well as clinicians with expertise in rectal cancer and subsequent bowel changes were invited to participate in online focus groups. Focus groups were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a modified framework analysis. Results were presented narratively with interpretations and quotations.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients following rectal cancer treatment attended one of two focus groups. Sixteen clinicians attended one of four groups. Participants described their opinions about bowel symptom management. Three themes were described by both patients and clinicians: expectations of bodily changes, supported self-repair and knowledgeable self-repair. Data from participants frequently concurred; all recognised clinicians needed to support and empower patients to independently manage their cancer consequences.

CONCLUSION

Well-managed expectations enable patients to set realistic goals and make plans. Clinicians need to support patients to understand potential bowel changes that might occur after rectal cancer surgery, providing support, information and signposting to other relevant information and colleagues. Effective communication through avoidance of jargon and rapport building as well as providing a point of contact help prevent patients feeling alone with their symptoms. Education is needed by both clinicians and patients to ensure consistent and useful advice is provided and understood. A recommendation from the focus groups is to create opportunities for patients to access information with clinician support and signposting.

Clinical Management of Low Anterior Resection Syndrome: Review of the Current Diagnosis and Treatment

BACKGROUND

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is a series of bowel dysfunction symptoms, including altered bowel frequency, irregular bowel rhythms, fecal incontinence, and constipation. LARS occurs in 80% of patients undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery, affecting patients' quality of life along with social avoidance. Different measurements and treatments have been raised to deal with LARS, but no systematic standard has been developed.

OBJECTIVE AND METHODS

To promote the standardization of clinical trials and clinical management of LARS, this review summarizes the latest findings up until 2023 regarding the diagnostic criteria, assessment protocols, and treatment modalities for postoperative LARS in rectal cancer.

RESULTS

The diagnostic criteria for LARS need to be updated to the definition proposed by the LARS International Collaborative Group, replacing the current application of the LARS score. In both clinical trials and clinical treatment, the severity of LARS should be assessed using at least one symptom assessment questionnaire, the LARS score or MSKCC BFI, and at least one scale related to quality of life. Anorectal manometry, fecoflowmetry, endoscopic ultrasonography, and pelvic floor muscle strength testing are recommended to be adopted only in clinical trials. After analysis of the latest literature on LARS treatment, a stepwise classification model is established for the standardized clinical management of LARS. Patients with minor LARS can start with first-line treatment, including management of self-behavior with an emphasis on diet modification and medication. Lamosetron, colesevelam hydrochloride, and loperamide are common antidiarrheal agents. Second-line management indicates multi-mode pelvic floor rehabilitation and transanal irrigation. Patients with major LARS should select single or several treatments in second-line management. Refractory LARS can choose antegrade enema, neuromodulation, or colostomy.

CONCLUSIONS

In clinical trials of LARS treatment between 2020 and 2022, the eligibility criteria and evaluation system have been variable. Therefore, it is urgent to create a standard for the diagnosis, assessment, and treatment of LARS. Failure to set placebos and differentiate subgroups are limitations of many current LARS studies. Randomized controlled trials comparing diverse therapies and long-term outcomes are absent, as well. Moreover, a new scale needs to be developed to incorporate the patient's perspective and facilitate outpatient follow-up. Though the establishment of a stepwise classification model for LARS treatment here is indispensable, the refinement of the guidelines may be improved by more standardized studies.

Long-Term Outcomes of Transanal Irrigation for Bowel Dysfunction

INTRODUCTION

Transanal irrigation (TAI) improves bowel function and quality of life in patients with neurogenic bowel disease compared to conservative bowel care. Its use has been extended to a range of defecatory disorders. However, data on long-term benefits and compliance are lacking. We aim to evaluate the long-term efficacy of TAI by examining compliance and patient outcomes over a five-year period.

METHODS

This study is a five-year retrospective review of patients practising TAI in a district general hospital. Patient demographics, indications, long-term compliance, adverse events, and patient-reported Qufora bowel symptom bother scores were analysed.

RESULTS

A cohort of 18 patients had a median age of 61 (range 23-91) and were predominantly female (83.5%). The reasons for bowel dysfunction were diverse: low anterior resection syndrome, neurogenic bowel, congenital anorectal malformations, obstructed defecation, and functional disorders. Predominant symptoms were constipation (9), faecal incontinence (7), and mixed (2). Both high-volume (catheter and cone) and low-volume (mini cone) irrigation devices were used. Fourteen patients continued regular irrigation at a median follow-up of 27.7 months (range 5.1-72.3), while four had discontinued at a median follow-up of 4.8 months. The reasons for discontinuation were inadequate rectal evacuation and spontaneous improvement of symptoms. In the compliant group, there was a significant improvement in bowel symptom scores (p=0.003). No major adverse events, such as significant rectal bleeding or perforation, were noted.

CONCLUSION

In this small cohort, TAI was safe and effective for long-term use; however, a fifth of patients discontinued treatment. Further work needs to be done to identify those patients who will benefit from TAI.

Transanal irrigation in functional bowel disorders and LARS: short-term results from an Italian national study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the potential benefits associated with the short-term (6 months) treatment with transanal irrigation (TAI) in patients suffering from functional constipation (FC), functional fecal incontinence (FI), and low anterior resection syndrome (LARS).

METHODS

A multicenter observational study (12 centers; 369 patients) was conducted to assess the following primary and secondary objectives: to evaluate the level of satisfaction regarding bowel control and quality of life (QoL); to evaluate bowel symptoms severity and dropout frequency and reason. To this aim, validated questionnaires were provided to the patients at baseline (T0) and after 6 months of TAI treatment (T6) performed with the medical device Peristeen® Plus (Coloplast A/S, Denmark). Statistical analyses were conducted to compare the outcomes obtained at T0 and T6.

RESULTS

A 6-month treatment with TAI enabled a statistically significant (p < 0.05) improvement of QoL scores, satisfaction scores regarding bowel control, and severity indexes of disorder-related symptoms in patients suffering from FC, FI, and LARS. Globally, 8.0% of patients discontinued the treatment after 6 months as a result of occurrence of symptoms (2.4%) or other justifications (3.8%) such as personal reasons. None of the dropouts were due to treatment inefficacy.

CONCLUSION

Results of the present study suggest that short-term TAI treatment is beneficial for patients suffering from functional bowel disorders and LARS. Future analysis of prospective data will focus on the clinical outcomes associated with the long-term use (up to 24 months) of TAI when dealing with these types of medical conditions.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials on the treatment of low anterior resection syndrome

BACKGROUND

We conducted a systematic review of randomized clinical trials on treating low anterior resection syndrome to help inform current practice.

METHODS

This Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-compliant systematic review of randomized clinical trials involved different treatments for low anterior resection syndrome. The risk of bias 2 tool was used to assess the risk of bias. The main outcomes were improvement in low anterior resection syndrome after treatment assessed by change in low anterior resection syndrome, fecal incontinence scores, and adverse treatment effects.

RESULTS

After an initial screening of 1,286 studies, 7 randomized clinical trials were included. Sample sizes ranged between 12 to 104 patients. Posterior tibial nerve stimulation was the most frequently assessed treatment in 3 randomized clinical trials. The weighted mean difference between posterior tibial nerve stimulation and medical treatment or sham therapy in follow-up low anterior resection syndrome score (-3.31, P = .157) was insignificant. Transanal irrigation reduced major low anterior resection syndrome symptoms by 61.5% compared with 28.6% after posterior tibial nerve stimulation with a significantly lower 6-month follow-up low anterior resection syndrome score. Pelvic floor training achieved better improvement in low anterior resection syndrome than standard care (47.8% vs 21.3%) at 6 months, but this was not maintained at 12 months (40.0% vs 34.9%). Ramosetron was associated with a greater short-term improvement in major low anterior resection syndrome (23% vs 8%) and a lower low anterior resection syndrome score (29.5 vs 34.6) at 4-weeks follow-up than Kegels or Sitz baths. No significant improvement in bowel function was noted after probiotics use as probiotics and placebo had similar follow-up low anterior resection syndrome scores (33.3 vs 36).

CONCLUSION

Transanal irrigation was associated with improvement in low anterior resection syndrome according to 2 trials, and ramosetron showed promising short-term results in one trial. Posterior tibial nerve stimulation had a marginal benefit compared with standard care. In contrast, pelvic floor training was associated with short-term symptomatic improvement, and probiotics showed no tangible improvement in low anterior resection syndrome symptoms. Firm conclusions cannot be drawn due to the small number of trials published.

Advances in diagnosis and treatment of low anterior resection syndrome

Rectal cancer is one of the most common cancers. As much as 90% of patients with low rectal cancer complain of increased frequency of defecation, fecal incontinence, and evacuation problems after surgery, which is termed as low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). LARS detrimentally affects the quality of life for patients with rectal cancer. In this paper, we review the pathogenesis, risk factors, assessment tools, and treatment strategies for LARS.

Management of treatment-related sequelae following colorectal cancer

AIM

Colorectal cancer survivors are one of the most rapidly growing groups of patients living with and beyond cancer. In a national multidisciplinary setting, we have examined the extent of late treatment-related sequelae in colorectal cancer survivors and present the scientific evidence for management of these conditions in this patient category with the aim of facilitating identification and treatment.

METHOD

A systematic search for existing guidelines and relevant studies was performed across 16 and 4 databases, respectively, from inception to 2021. This yielded 13 guidelines and 886 abstracts, of which 188 were included in the finalized guideline (231 included for full text review). Secondarily, bibliographies were cross-referenced and 53 additional articles were included.

RESULTS

Symptoms have been divided into overall categories including psychosocial, bowel-related, urinary, sexual (male and female), pain/neuropathy and fatigue symptoms or complaints that are examined individually. Merging and grading of data resulted in 22 recommendations and 42 management strategies across categories. Recommendations are of a more general character, whereas management strategies provide more practical advice suited for initiation on site before referral to specialized units.

CONCLUSION

Treatment-related sequelae in colorectal cancer survivors are common and attention needs to be focused on identifying patients with unmet treatment needs and the development of evidence-based treatment algorithms.

Management of Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) Following Resection for Rectal Cancer

INTRODUCTION

A total of 60-80% of patients undergoing rectal resection (mostly as a treatment for rectal cancer) suffer from a variety of partly severe functional problems despite preservation of the anal sphincter. These patients are summarized under the term low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). Preoperative radiotherapy, vascular dissection and surgical excision of the low rectum and mesorectum lead, alone or all together, to a significant impairment of colonic and (neo-) rectal motility. This results in a variety of symptoms (multiple defecation episodes, recurrent episodes of urge, clustering, incontinence, etc.) which are associated with severe impairment of quality of life (QOL).

METHODS

This narrative review summarizes the present state of knowledge regarding the pathophysiology of LARS as well as the evidence for the available treatment options to control the symptoms resulting from this condition.

RESULTS

A review of the literature (Medline, Pubmed) reveals a variety of treatment options available to control symptoms of LARS. Medical therapy, with or without dietary modification, shows only a modest effect. Pelvic floor rehabilitation consisting of muscle exercise techniques as well as biofeedback training has been associated with improvement in LARS scores and incontinence, albeit with limited scientific evidence. Transanal irrigation (TAI) has gained interest as a treatment modality for patients with LARS due to an increasing number of promising data from recently published studies. Despite this promising observation, open questions about still-unclear issues of TAI remain under debate. Neuromodulation has been applied in LARS only in a few studies with small numbers of patients and partly conflicting results.

CONCLUSION

LARS is a frequent problem after sphincter-preserving rectal surgery and leads to a marked impairment of QOL. Due to the large number of patients suffering from this condition, mandatory identification, as well as treatment of affected patients, must be considered during surgical as well as oncological follow-up. The use of a standardized treatment algorithm will lead to sufficient control of symptoms and a high probability of a marked improvement in QOL.

Transanale Irrigation als Geheimtipp

Funktionelle Störungen nach Rektumresektion, die unter der Definition „low anterior resection syndrome“ (LARS) zusammengefasst werden, beeinträchtigen bei vielen operierten Patienten zum Teil massiv die Lebensqualität. Nachdem die transanale Irrigation (TAI) bei ähnlicher Problematik anderer Genese als erfolgreiche Option zum Einsatz gekommen ist, wurde sie auch bei Patienten mit bereits länger bestehendem LARS angewandt. Als Folge der deutlichen Verbesserung der Rektumfunktion durch diese Therapie wurde auch eine prophylaktische Anwendung unmittelbar nach Verschluss der protektiven Ileostomie diskutiert und im Rahmen einer kontrollierten, randomisierten Studie untersucht. Dabei zeigte sich eine signifikante Reduktion der Anzahl der Defäkationsepisoden (bei Tag und Nacht), des LARS-Scores sowie des Wexner-Inkontinenz-Scores in den ersten 3 Monaten. Obwohl der positive Effekt der TAI eine Empfehlung als Therapieoption bei LARS nahelegt, verbleiben noch offene Fragen (notwendiges Irrigationsvolumen, Intervalle zwischen den Irrigationen, Behandlungsdauer) als Basis für zukünftige Untersuchungen.

Pathway Of Low Anterior Resection syndrome relief after Surgery (POLARiS) feasibility trial protocol: a multicentre, feasibility cohort study with embedded randomised control trial to compare sacral neuromodulation and transanal irrigation to optimised conservative management in the management of major low anterior resection syndrome following rectal cancer treatment

INTRODUCTION

Rectal cancer is common with a 60% 5-year survival rate. Treatment usually involves surgery with or without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or adjuvant chemotherapy. Sphincter saving curative treatment can result in debilitating changes to bowel function known as low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). There are currently no clear guidelines on the management of LARS with only limited evidence for different treatment modalities.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Patients who have undergone an anterior resection for rectal cancer in the last 10 years will be approached for the study. The feasibility trial will take place in four centres with a 9-month recruitment window and 12 months follow-up period. The primary objective is to assess the feasibility of recruitment to the POLARiS trial which will be achieved through assessment of recruitment, retainment and follow-up rates as well as the prevalence of major LARS.Feasibility outcomes will be analysed descriptively through the estimation of proportions with confidence intervals. Longitudinal patient reported outcome measures will be analysed according to scoring manuals and presented descriptively with reporting graphically over time.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been granted by Wales REC1; Reference 22/WA/0025. The feasibility study is in the process of set up. The results of the feasibility trial will feed into the design of an expanded, international trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CT05319054.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

BACKGROUND

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Bowel dysfunction following pelvic organ cancer: a prospective study on the treatment effect in nurse-led late sequelae clinics

BACKGROUND

Bowel dysfunction following treatment of pelvic organ cancer is prevalent and impacts the quality of life (QoL). The present study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and effects of treating bowel dysfunction in two nurse-led late sequelae clinics.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Treatment effects were monitored prospectively by patient-reported outcome measures collected at baseline and discharge. Change in bowel function was evaluated by 15 bowel symptoms, the St. Mark's Incontinence Score, the Patients Assessment of Constipation-Symptoms (PAC-SYM) score and self-rated bowel function. QoL was evaluated by the EuroQol 5-dimension 5-level (EQ-5D-5L) utility score and by measuring the impact of bowel function on QoL.

RESULTS

From June 2018 to December 2021, 380 cancer survivors (46% rectal, 15% gynaecological, 13% anal, 12% colon, 12% prostate, and 2% other cancers) completed a baseline questionnaire and started treatment for bowel dysfunction. At referral, 96% of patients were multisymptomatic. The most frequent symptoms were faecal urgency (95%), fragmented defaecation (93%), emptying difficulties (92%), flatus/faecal incontinence (flatus 89%, liquid 59%, solid 33%), and obstructed defaecation (79%). In total, 169 patients were discharged from the clinics in the follow-up period. At discharge, 69% received conservative treatment only and 24% also received transanal irrigation; 4% were surgically treated; 3% discontinued treatment. Improvements were seen in all 15 bowel symptoms (p < 0.001), the mean St. Mark's Incontinence Score (12.0 to 9.9, p < 0.001), the mean PAC-SYM score (1.04 to 0.84, p < 0.001) and the mean EQ-5D-5L utility score (0.78 to 0.84, p < 0.001). Self-rated bowel function improved in 56% (p < 0.001) of cases and the impact of bowel function on QoL improved in 46% (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Treatment of bowel dysfunction in nurse-led late sequelae clinics is feasible and significantly improved bowel function and QoL.

Preliminary functional results after transanal irrigation in patients undergoing SHiP procedure for low rectal cancer

The short-stump and high-anastomosis pull-through procedure (SHiP) is a newly introduced technique in the treatment of rectal cancer. This procedure does not involve the creation of a diverting ostomy with great improvement of the patients’ quality of life in the post-operative period. However, functional post-operative alterations such as low anterior rectal resection syndrome (LARS) may occur. In this context, trans-anal irrigation (TAI) may represent a viable option in the treatment and management of LARS symptoms. The aim of the present study is to investigate the role of TAI in patients operated on SHiP procedure for low rectal cancer. A prospective database of 17 patients who underwent a SHiP procedure was maintained from April 2019 to December 2021. Anal continence and functional outcomes were assessed through LARS score and Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Score (CCIS), respectively. All patients with a LARS score > 21 underwent TAI in the post-operative period. LARS median value was 36 (IQR = 8) and drastically improved after TAI treatment to 3 (IQR = 3), as the CCIS at a mean follow-up of 9 months (SD ± 5.02). Good functional result was reached in 12 out of 13 patients (92%). Our study confirms that patients with severe post-operative dysfunction could benefit from the use of TAI.

Feasibility Study of Transanal Irrigation Using a Colostomy Irrigation System in Patients With Low Anterior Resection Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Low anterior resection syndrome has a negative impact on quality of life. Intestinal irrigation is a method of lavage consisting of a scheduled evacuation.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate functional and quality-of-life outcomes in patients with low anterior resection syndrome after transanal irrigation using a colostomy irrigation system.

DESIGN

This was a prospective case series.

SETTINGS

This study presents a single-center experience at a tertiary oncological center in an upper-middle-income country.

PATIENTS

Patients classified as having minor or major low anterior resection syndrome 12 months after their operation were selected.

INTERVENTIONS

Transanal irrigation was performed using an ostomy irrigation kit. Questionnaires assessing patients' bowel function (low anterior resection syndrome and Wexner score) and quality of life (Short Form-36 questionnaire) were applied before and after treatment.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes were low anterior resection syndrome score and quality-of-life improvement after a 12-month treatment.

RESULTS

Of the 22 patients included, 20 had major and 2 had minor low anterior resection syndrome, with a median score of 39, especially high rates of incontinence for liquid stool (21; 95.5%), clustering (21; 95.5%), and urgency (17; 77.3%). All patients successfully completed the 3-day training, and there were no complications during the treatment. After the 12-month period, the median score was 8, with 90% of the patients classified as having "no syndrome" and great improvement in all domains of this score. The most improved quality-of-life sections were patient vitality (p = 0.025) and physical (p = 0.002), social (p = 0.001), and emotional aspects (p = 0.001).

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by its small sample size and the limited follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents a safe implementation protocol of an ostomy irrigation device for transanal irrigation. It also adds to the literature that transanal irrigation is a safe, effective, and easily implemented procedure for patients with low anterior resection syndrome with a significant improvement in quality of life. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B563.ESTUDIO DE FACTIBILIDAD DE LA IRRIGACIÓN TRANSANAL UTILIZANDO EL SISTEMA DE IRRIGACIÓN PARA COLOSTOMÍA EN PACIENTES CON SÍNDROME DE RESECCIÓN ANTERIOR BAJAANTECEDENTES:El síndrome de resección anterior baja tiene un impacto negativo en la calidad de vida de los pacientes. La irrigación intestinal es un método de lavado que consiste en evacuaciones programadas.OBJETIVOS:Evaluar los resultados de la funcionalidad e impacto en la calidad de vida de los pacientes con síndrome de resección anterior y baja posterior a la irrigación transanal utilizando un sistema de irrigación de colostomía.DISEÑO:Es estudio prospectivo de una serie de casos.ESCENARIO:En este estudio se muestra la experiencia de un centro oncológico de tercer nivel en un país en vías de desarrollo.PACIENTES:Aquellos clasificados como síndrome con afección en menor o mayor grado doce meses después de la cirugía.METODO:Se efectuó irrigación transanal utilizando un equipo de irrigación de estomas. Se aplicaron cuestionarios para valorar la función intestinal de los pacientes (síndrome de resección anterior baja y la escala de Wexner) y para calidad de vida (Cuestionario Corto-36) antes y después del tratamiento.EVALUACION DE LOS RESULTADOS PRINCIPALES:Los principales resultados se obtuvieron de la escala del síndrome de resección baja y la mejoría en la calidad vida doce meses después de tratamiento.RESULTADOS:De los veintidós pacientes incluidos, veinte presentaron manifestaciones mayores del síndrome de resección baja y dos, manifestaciones menores. Con una media de treinta y nueve, se encontraron, especialmente, altos índices de incontinencia a líquidos (21; 95'5%) hiperdefecación "clustering" (21; 95'5%) y urgencia (17; 77'3%). Todos los pacientes completaron en forma satisfactoria el entrenamiento de tres días sin presentarse complicaciones durante el tratamiento. Al término del mes doce la media fue de ocho, con el 90% de los pacientes clasificados como "sin síndrome" y se observó una mejoría substancial en todos los puntos de la evaluación. Las secciones de calidad de vida que mostraron una mejoría significativa fueron: la vitalidad del paciente (p = 0'025), física (p = 0'002), social (p = 0'001) y emocional (p = 0'001).LIMITACIONES:El tamaño de la muestra es pequeño y el tiempo de seguimiento corto.CONCLUSIONES:Este estudio muestra la implementación de un protocolo seguro para la irrigación de estomas mediante un dispositivo transanal. Además contribuye con el concepto en la literatura de que la seguridad de la irrigación transanal es seguro, efectivo y facilmente reproducible para pacientes con síndrome de resección anterior baja con una mejoría significativa en la calidad de vida. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B563. (Traducción-Dr. Miguel Esquivel-Herrera).

Low anterior resection syndrome: can it be prevented?

Surgery remains the cardinal treatment in colorectal cancers but changes in bowel habits after rectal cancer surgery are common and disabling conditions that affect patients' quality of life. Low anterior resection syndrome is a disorder of bowel function after rectal resection resulting in a lowering of the QoL and recently has been defined by an international working group not only by specified symptoms but also by their consequences. This review aims to explore an extensive bibliographic research on preventive strategies for LARS. All "modifiable variables," quantified by the LARS Score, such as type of anastomosis, neoadjuvant therapy, surgical strategy, and diverting stoma, were evaluated, while "non-modifiable variables" such as age, sex, BMI, ASA, preoperative TMN, tumor height, and type of mesorectal excision were excluded from the comparative analysis. The role of defunctioning stoma, local excision, neoadjuvant radiotherapy, and non operative management seems to significantly affect risk of LARS, while type of anastomosis and surgical TME approach do not impact on LARS incidence or gravity in the long term period. Although it is established that some variables are associated with a greater onset of LARS, in clinical practice, technical difficulties and oncological limits often make difficult the application of some prevention plans. Transtomal irrigations, intraoperative neuromonitoring, pelvic floor rehabilitation before stoma closure, and early transanal irrigation represent new arguments of study in preventive strategies which could, if not eliminate the symptoms, at least mitigate them.

Low Anterior Resection Syndrome: Predisposing Factors and Treatment

Bowel dysfunction after restorative proctectomy, commonly referred to as Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS), is a common long-term sequela of rectal cancer treatment that has a significant impact on quality of life. While the pathophysiology of LARS is poorly understood, its underlying cause is likely multifactorial, and there are numerous patient, tumor, and treatment-level factors associated with its development. In accordance with these risk factors, several strategies have been proposed to mitigate LARS postoperatively, including modifications in the technical approach to restorative proctectomy and advancements in the multidisciplinary care of rectal cancer. Furthermore, a clinically applicable pre-operative nomogram has been developed to estimate the risk of LARS postoperatively, which may help in counseling patients before surgery. The management of LARS begins with identifying those who manifest symptoms, as postoperative bowel dysfunction often goes unrecognized. This goal is best achieved with the systematic screening of patients using validated Patient-Reported Outcome Measures. Once a patient with LARS is identified, conservative management strategies should be implemented. When available, a dedicated LARS nurse and/or multidisciplinary team can be an invaluable resource in engaging patients and educating them regarding LARS self-care. If symptoms of LARS persist or worsen over time despite conservative measures, second-line interventions, such as transanal irrigation or pelvic floor rehabilitation, can be initiated. A small proportion of patients will ultimately require an intervention such as sacral neuromodulation or permanent colostomy for refractory, major LARS symptoms.

Evolving Evidence Supporting Use of Rectal Irrigation in the Management of Bowel Dysfunction: An Integrative Literature Review

Disorders of bowel function are prevalent, particularly among patients with spinal cord injuries and other neurological disorders. An individual's bowel control significantly impacts quality of life, as predictable bowel function is necessary to actively and independently participate in everyday activities. For many patients with bowel dysfunction, initial lifestyle adjustments and other conservative therapeutic interventions (eg, digital stimulation, oral laxatives, suppositories) are insufficient to reestablish regular bowel function. In addition to these options, rectal irrigation (RI) is a safe and effective method of standard bowel care that has been used for several decades in adults and children suffering from bowel dysfunction associated with neurogenic or functional bowel etiologies. Rectal irrigation is an appropriate option when conservative bowel treatments are inadequate. Unlike surgical options, RI can be initiated or discontinued at any time. This report summarizes the clinical, humanistic, and economic evidence supporting the use of RI in clinical practice, noting features (eg, practical considerations, patient education) that can improve patients' success with RI treatment.

Financial and occupational impact of low anterior resection syndrome in rectal cancer survivors

AIM

The aim of this study was to assess bowel-related financial stress and strain and to evaluate its association with global quality of life.

METHOD

This was a retrospective cohort study with cross-sectional follow-up including consecutive patients who underwent restorative proctectomy for neoplastic disease of the rectum at a single university-affiliated hospital in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Bowel-related financial impact and occupational impact were compared between patients with major low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) and those with minor/no LARS. The association between LARS, bowel-related financial impact and global quality of life (QoL) was then assessed in a multiple logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Of 180 eligible rectal cancer survivors who were contacted, 154 completed the questionnaires (response rate 47.1%) at a median follow-up of 57.5 months (interquartile range 34.1-98.1) after proctectomy. Individuals with major LARS reported a higher prevalence of bowel-related financial stress (53.2% vs 5.6%, p < 0.001) and strain (42.2% vs 5.6%, p < 0.001) compared with those with minor/no LARS. Among those who were working preoperatively (n = 100), the majority of participants with major LARS reported an impact of their new bowel function on their ability to work (70.6%), including delayed return to work (44.1%), the need to change schedules (35.3%) or roles (20.6%), and complete long-term medical absence from work (14.7%). On multiple logistic regression, major LARS with financial impact (OR 4.50, 95% CI 1.57-13.77) was associated with low global QoL compared with minor/no LARS.

CONCLUSION

Major LARS was associated with considerable financial stress and strain and difficulties in returning to work.

Functional Outcomes and Quality of Life after Redo Anastomosis in Patients With Rectal Cancer: An International Multicenter Comparative Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Redo anastomosis can be considered in selected patients with persistent leakage, stenosis, or local recurrence. It is technically challenging, and little is known about the functional outcomes after this seldomly performed type of surgery.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare functional outcomes and the quality of life between redo anastomosis and primary successful anastomosis following total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.

DESIGN

This study was designed as an international multicenter comparative cohort study.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted in 3 tertiary referral centers in the Netherlands, Belgium, and France.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing redo anastomosis were compared with patients with a primary successful anastomosis after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Low anterior resection syndrome score, European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) C30, and EORTC QLQ-CR29 questionnaires were used to assess outcomes.

RESULTS

In total, 170 patients were included; 52 underwent redo anastomosis and 118 were controls. Major low anterior resection syndrome occurred in 73% after redo anastomosis compared with 68% following primary successful anastomosis (p = 0.52). The redo group had worse EORTC QLQ-CR29 mean scores for fecal incontinence (p = 0.03) and flatulence (p = 0.008). There were no differences in urinary (p = 0.48) or sexual dysfunction, either in men (p = 0.83) or in women (p = 0.76). Significantly worse scores in the redo group were found for global health (p = 0.002), role (p = 0.049) and social function (p = 0.006), body image (p = 0.03), and anxiety (p = 0.02).

LIMITATIONS

This study is limited by the possible response bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Redo anastomosis is associated with significantly worse quality of life compared with primary successful anastomosis. However, major low anterior resection syndrome was comparable between groups and should not be a reason to preclude restoration of bowel continuity in highly motivated patients. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B565.

RESULTADOS FUNCIONALES Y DE CALIDAD DE VIDA POSTERIOR A LA RECONSTRUCCIN DE LA ANASTOMOSIS EN PACIENTES CON CNCER DE RECTO ESTUDIO INTERNACIONAL MULTICNTRICO DE COHORTE COMPARATIVO

ANTECEDENTES:Se puede considerar reconstruir la anastomosis en pacientes seleccionados con fuga persistente, estenosis o recidiva local. Esto es técnicamente desafiante y poco se sabe sobre los resultados funcionales después de este tipo de cirugía que rara vez se realiza.OBJETIVO:El objetivo de este estudio fue comparar resultados funcionales y la calidad de vida entre reconstrucción de la anastomosis y la anastomosis primaria exitosa posterior de la escisión total de mesorrecto (TME) por cáncer de recto.DISEÑO:Este estudio fue diseñado como un estudio internacional multicéntrico de cohorte comparativo.ENTORNO CLINICO:El estudio se llevó a cabo en tres centros de referencia terciarios en Holanda, Bélgica y Francia.PACIENTES:Los pacientes sometidos a reconstrucción de anastomosis fueron comparados con pacientes con anastomosis primaria exitosa después de TME por cáncer de recto.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACION:Los cuestionarios; Escala de Síndrome de Resección Anterior Baja (LARS), EORTC QLQ-C30, y QLQ-CR29, fueron utilizados para evaluar los resultados.RESULTADOS:En total, se incluyeron 170 pacientes; 52 reconstrucción de anastomosis y 118 controles. LARS ocurrió en el 73% posterior a la reconstrucción de la anastomosis en comparación con el 68% posterior a la anastomosis primaria exitosa (p = 0,52). El grupo de reconstrucción tuvo peores puntuaciones medias de EORTC QLQ-CR29 para incontinencia fecal (p = 0,03) y flatulencia (p = 0,008). No hubo diferencias en disfunción urinaria (p = 0,48) o sexual, ni en hombres (p = 0,83) ni en mujeres (p = 0,76). Se encontraron puntuaciones significativamente peores en el grupo de reconstrucción para salud global (p = 0,002), desempeño (p = 0,049) y función social (p = 0,006), imagen corporal (p = 0,03) y ansiedad (p = 0,02).LIMITACIONES:La limitación de este estudio es el posible sesgo de respuesta.CONCLUSIONES:La reconstrucción de la anastomosis se asocia con una calidad de vida significativamente peor en comparación con los pacientes con anastomosis primaria exitosa. Sin embargo, LARS fue comparable entre los grupos y no debería ser una razón para impedir la restauración de la continuidad intestinal en pacientes muy motivados. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B565.

A study on the clinical application of greater omental pedicle flap transplantation to correct anterior resection syndrome in patients with low rectal cancer

Introduction

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is the most common complication after total mesorectal excision (TME) in patients with low rectal cancer and has been a challenge in colorectal surgery that severely impacts the quality of life of patients. This study aimed to introduce a revised surgical procedure which could effectively maintain rectal compliance and significantly improve LARS after the operation.

Methods

We performed mesorectal reconstruction after routine Dixon TME using greater omental pedicle flap transplantation in 11 patients with low rectal cancer (5 cases of preoperative neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, 5 cases of preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and 1 case of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy), thereby simulating the initial anatomical structure of the mesorectum and significantly reducing the postoperative anterior resection syndrome. The lars precision syndrome assessment scale (LARSS) was used to access the LARS.

Results

At 12 weeks after the 11 patients recovered from the anal defecation function, the average score on the LARS questionnaire was 25.5 ± 1.5 (minor). The average time at which anal function began to recover was 6.2 ± 2.6 weeks after surgery. The recovery was rapid, as the rectal and anal function of all patients generally returned to normal levels within 12 weeks, and the quality of life was close to that before surgery.

Conclusion

Greater omental flap transplantation can significantly improve LARS after Dixon TME in patients with low rectal cancer.

•

Omental pedicle flap transplantation is a revised and promising surgical procedure.

•

The procedure reconstructing the mesorectum could maintain rectal compliance.

•

The procedure can significantly improve low anterior resection syndrome.

The Effect of Anastomotic Leakage on the Incidence and Severity of Low Anterior Resection Syndrome in Patients Undergoing Proctectomy: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Purpose

Proctectomy for the treatment of rectal cancer results in inevitable changes to bowel habits. Symptoms such as fecal incontinence, constipation, and tenesmus are collectively referred to as low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). Among the several risk factors that cause LARS, anastomotic leakage (AL) is a strong risk factor for permanent stoma formation. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between the severity of LARS and AL in patients with rectal cancer based on the LARS score and the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) defecation symptom questionnaires.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal cancer since January 2010. Patients who completed the questionnaire were classified into the AL group and control group based on medical and imaging records. Major LARS and MSKCC scores were analyzed as primary endpoints.

Results

Among the 179 patients included in this study, 37 were classified into the AL group. After propensity score matching, there were significant differences in the ratio of major LARS and MSKCC scores of the control group and AL group (ratio of major LARS: 11.1% and 37.8%, P < 0.001; MSKCC score: 67.29±10.4 and 56.49±7.2, respectively, P < 0.001). Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that AL was an independent factor for major LARS occurrence and MSKCC score.

Conclusion

This study showed that AL was a significant factor in the occurrence of major LARS and defecation symptoms after proctectomy.

Assessment and management of low anterior resection syndrome after sphincter preserving surgery for rectal cancer

Many patients develop a variety of bowel dysfunction after sphincter preserving surgeries (SPS) for rectal cancer. The bowel dysfunction usually manifests in the form of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), which has a negative impact on the patients’ quality of life. This study reviewed the LARS after SPS, its mechanism, risk factors, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment based on previously published studies. Adequate history taking, physical examination of the patients, using validated questionnaires and other diagnostic tools are important for assessment of LARS severity. Treatment of LARS should be tailored to each patient. Multimodal therapy is usually needed for patients with major LARS with acceptable results. The treatment includes conservative management in the form of medical, pelvic floor rehabilitation and transanal irrigation and invasive procedures including neuromodulation. If this treatment failed, fecal diversion may be needed. In conclusion, Initial meticulous dissection with preservation of nerves and creation of a neorectal reservoir during anastomosis and proper Kegel exercise of the anal sphincter can minimize the occurrence of LARS. Pre-treatment counseling is an essential step for patients who have risk factors for developing LARS.

Transanal Irrigation for Neurogenic Bowel Disease, Low Anterior Resection Syndrome, Faecal Incontinence and Chronic Constipation: A Systematic Review

Transanal irrigation (TAI) has received increasing attention as a treatment option in patients with bowel dysfunction. This systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines and evaluates the effect of TAI in neurogenic bowel dysfunction (NBD), low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), faecal incontinence (FI) and chronic constipation (CC). The primary outcome was the effect of TAI on bowel function. Secondary outcomes included details on TAI, quality of life (QoL), the discontinuation rate, adverse events, predictive factors for a successful outcome, and health economics. A systematic search for articles reporting original data on the effect of TAI on bowel function was performed, and 27 eligible studies including 1435 individuals were included. Three randomised controlled trials, one non-randomised trial, and 23 observational studies were included; 70% of the studies were assessed to be of excellent or good methodological quality. Results showed an improvement in bowel function among patients with NBD, LARS, FI, and CC with some studies showing improvement in QoL. However, discontinuation rates were high. Side effects were common, but equally prevalent among comparative treatments. No consistent predictive factors for a successful outcome were identified. Results from this review show that TAI improves bowel function and potentially QoL; however, evidence remains limited.

Management guidelines for low anterior resection syndrome - the MANUEL project

AIM

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

METHOD

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Nurse-led standardized intervention for low anterior resection syndrome. A population-based pilot study

AIM

Our aim was to study the implementation of the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score in a clinical setting and to evaluate a nurse-led standardized intervention for bowel dysfunction following rectal cancer surgery.

METHOD

All patients who underwent curatively intended, restorative rectal cancer resection in a single centre between 2012 and 2016 were screened using the LARS score. At clinical follow-up, patients with major LARS were offered treatment in a nurse-led clinic. Data were retrospectively collected from patients' electronic medical records.

RESULTS

In total, 190 out of 286 (66%) patients were screened with the LARS score of whom 89 had major LARS. A total of 86 patients requested treatment for their bowel dysfunction and the majority obtained acceptable function after nurse-led optimized conservative treatment. Seventeen patients went on to transanal irrigation, and seven patients were treated with biofeedback. Five patients were referred for surgery, three for gastroenterological evaluation. After treatment in the clinic, patients achieved a statistically significant decrease in median LARS score from 37 (interquartile range 34-39) to 31 (interquartile range 23-34) (P < 0.001), and the prevalence of major LARS fell from 95% to 53% (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Screening for LARS was not optimal as one-third of patients were not screened. The majority of patients with major LARS requested treatment for their symptoms and could be successfully treated with standardized interventions managed in a nurse-led setting.

Systematic screening for late sequelae after colorectal cancer-a feasibility study

AIM

The aim of this study was to test the feasibility of a new method for systematic screening for late sequelae (LS) following colorectal cancer treatment.

METHOD

Patients with colorectal cancer from five Danish hospitals were invited to complete a survey about LS at 3, 12, 24 and 36 months after surgery as part of their follow-up. The survey consisted primarily of validated tools, supplemented by a few ad hoc items, measuring bowel, urinary and sexual dysfunction, pain and quality of life and an additional question regarding request for contact. Patients completed surveys electronically or on paper.

RESULTS

Of the 1721 invited patients, 1386 (80.5%) were included (1085 with colon cancer and 301 with rectal cancer) of whom 72.5% responded electronically. Patients responding electronically were 7.6 years younger than those responding on paper (P < 0.001). Since some patients answered more than once, the dataset consisted of 2361 surveys. Patients with colon cancer requested phone contact in 19.0% of the surveys, and 8.4% were referred to treatment for LS, primarily bowel dysfunction. Among patients with rectal cancer, 30.8% requested phone contact and 16.2% were referred for treatment of LS, mainly due to bowel and sexual dysfunction.

CONCLUSION

This is the first paper investigating a new method of systematic screening for LS following colorectal cancer using electronic patient-reported outcome measures. The study shows that in the Danish population a high response rate can be obtained with this method and that close to three-quarters of patients respond electronically. Patients with rectal cancer had a higher need for phone contact and treatment of LS than patients with colon cancer.

Comparison of Clinical Efficacy and Safety Between da Vinci Robotic and Laparoscopic Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Background and Aims: The intersphincteric resection (ISR) is beneficial for saving patients' anus to a large extent and restoring original bowel continuity. Laparoscopic ISR (L-ISR) has its drawbacks, such as two-dimensional images, low motion flexibility, and unstable lens. Recently, da Vinci robotic ISR (R-ISR) is increasingly used worldwide. The purpose of this article is to compare the feasibility, safety, oncological outcomes, and clinical efficacy of R-ISR vs. L-ISR for low rectal cancer. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched to identify comparative studies of R-ISR vs. L-ISR. Demographic, clinical, and outcome data were extracted. Mean difference (MD) and risk ratio (RR) with their corresponding confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Results: Five studies were included. In total, 510 patients were included, of whom 273 underwent R-ISR and 237 L-ISR. Compared with L-ISR, R-ISR has significantly lower estimated intraoperative blood loss (MD = -23.31, 95% CI [-41.98, -4.64], P = 0.01), longer operative time (MD = 51.77, 95% CI [25.68, 77.86], P = 0.0001), hospitalization days (MD = -1.52, 95% CI [-2.10, 0.94], P < 0.00001), and postoperative urinary complications (RR = 0.36, 95% CI [0.16, 0.82], P = 0.02). Conclusions: The potential benefits of R-ISR are considered as a safe and feasible alternative choice for the treatment of low rectal tumors.

Changes to gastrointestinal function after surgery for colorectal cancer

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

Optimising functional outcomes in rectal cancer surgery

Background

By improved surgical technique such as total mesorectal excision (TME), multimodal treatment and advances in imaging survival and an increased rate of sphincter preservation have been achieved in rectal cancer surgery. Minimal-invasive approaches such as laparoscopic, robotic and transanal-TME (ta-TME) enhance recovery after surgery. Nevertheless, disorders of bowel, anorectal and urogenital function are still common and need attention.

Purpose

This review aims at exploring the causes of dysfunction after anterior resection (AR) and the accordingly preventive strategies. Furthermore, the indication for low AR in the light of functional outcome is discussed. The last therapeutic strategies to deal with bowel, anorectal, and urogenital disorders are depicted.

Conclusion

Functional disorders after rectal cancer surgery are frequent and underestimated. More evidence is needed to define an indication for non-operative management or local excision as alternatives to AR. The decision for restorative resection should be made in consideration of the relevant risk factors for dysfunction. In the case of restoration, a side-to-end anastomosis should be the preferred anastomotic technique. Further high-evidence clinical studies are required to clarify the benefit of intraoperative neuromonitoring. While the function of ta-TME seems not to be superior to laparoscopy, case-control studies suggest the benefits of robotic TME mainly in terms of preservation of the urogenital function. Low AR syndrome is treated by stool regulation, pelvic floor therapy, and transanal irrigation. There is good evidence for sacral nerve modulation for incontinence after low AR.

"Prophylactic" transanal irrigation (TAI) to prevent symptoms of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) after rectal resection: results at 12-month follow-up of a controlled randomized multicenter trial

BACKGROUND

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is associated with a severe negative impact on patients' quality of life (QOL). In a recent prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) by our group, early ("prophylactic") use of transanal irrigation (TAI) following rectal resection for rectal cancer was shown to improve symptoms associated with LARS significantly compared with a group under supportive therapy (ST) within 1 and 3 months following closure of the protective ileostomy. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the outcome after 12 months when patients had the option to choose between the two therapeutic options and/or modify the regimen of TAI (volume and time).

METHODS

In the RCT, 18 patients had been allocated to start with TAI following ileostomy closure, while 19 patients remained on ST only. Once the 3-month follow-up had been completed patients could choose between TAI or ST, respectively, and were invited for follow-up after 12 months. The maximum number of bowel movements during the day and the Wexner and LARS score as well as physical (PC) and mental (MC) component of the SF-36 questionnaire were evaluated. Furthermore, in patients who had changed their treatment arm, reasons for this decision were reported.

RESULTS

Six patients were lost to follow-up (all in the ST group). One patient from the ST group started with TAI due to problems associated with LARS, bringing the total number of TAI patients to 19. Nine patients from the previous TAI arm changed to ST due to the long duration of the emptying process (n: 8) or pain during TAI (n: 1), respectively. After 12 months, the median volume of water used for irrigation was 600 ml (range 200-1000 ml). The ten patients who continued with TAI patients showed a lower number of defecation episodes per daytime (TAI median 3; 1-6, ST median 5; 2-10, p: 0.018) and per night (TAI median 0; 0-1, ST median 1; 0-5, p: 0.004) compared to the ST group. Although the LARS score was lower in patients who used TAI after 12 months (TAI median 18; 9-32, ST median 30; 3-39), this failed to reach the level of significance (p: 0.063). Evaluation of the Wexner score and the 36-item Short Form Health Survey as well as comparison of patients who remained on TAI (n: 9) versus those who had stopped TAI after 3 months (n: 9) failed to find any statistically significant difference between TAI and ST.

CONCLUSIONS

This follow-up study revealed that a considerable number of patients decided to stop TAI within 12 months. However, the number of bowel movements during the day were still lower when TAI was used than when patients had ST only.

CATEGORY

Randomized trial.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

DRKS00011752, https://apps.who.int/trialsearch/ .

The efficacy of sacral neuromodulation in the treatment of low anterior resection syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) has become one of the main treatment options in patients with fecal incontinence. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of sacral neuromodulation in the treatment of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS).

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The search was conducted using the Pubmed, Embase, Ovid, and Cochrane databases, restricted to the English language and to articles published from 2000 to November 2018.

RESULTS

A total of 434 articles on the efficacy of SNM in the treatment of LARS were retrieved, and 13 studies were included in the final analysis, with a total of 114 patients treated with SNM for LARS The overall success rate excluding study heterogeneity was 83.30% [95% CI (71.33-95.25%)]. Improvement in anal continence was seen in several clinical and functional parameters, including the Wexner Score [10.78 points, 95% CI (8.55-13.02), p < 0.0001], manometric maximum resting pressure [mean improvement of 6.37 mm/Hg, 95% CI (2.67-10.07), p = 0.0007], maximum squeeze pressure [mean improvement of 17.99 mm/Hg, 95% CI (17.42-18.56), p < 0.0001] and maximum tolerated volume [mean improvement of 22.74 ml, 95% CI (10.65-34.83), p = 0.0002]. Quality of life questionnaires also demonstrated significant improvement in patients' quality of life, but were reported only in a small group of included patients.

CONCLUSIONS

SNM significantly improves symptoms and quality of life in patients suffering from fecal incontinence following low anterior resection.

Use of a new transanal irrigation device for bowel disorder management by patients familiar with the irrigation technique: a prospective, interventional, multicenter pilot study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of transanal irrigation (TAI) with a new medical device incorporating an electric pump, the IryPump®R Set.

METHODS

An interventional, prospective, open-label, non-comparative, multicenter pilot study on TAI was conducted at three French university hospitals. Patients with experience of TAI were enrolled for a 1-month period during which 5 consecutive TAIs were performed using the IryPump®R Set (B.Braun Melsungen AG Melsungen, Germany). The study's primary efficacy criterion was successful TAI, defined as (i) use of the patient's usual irrigation volume of water, (ii) stool evacuation, and (iii) the absence of leakage between TAIs. The first two TAIs were not taken into account in the main analysis. The secondary outcome measures were device acceptability, bowel dysfunction scores, tolerability, and safety.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients were included between November 2016 and May 2017, and 14 were assessed in the main analysis. The TAI success rate was 72.4% (21 out of 29 procedures). The bowel dysfunction scores at the end of the study did not differ significantly from those recorded on inclusion. A high proportion of patients (> 70%) reported that TAI was feasible with the new medical device. There were no serious adverse events or device-related adverse events. At the end of the study, 50% of the participants were willing to consider further use of the new device.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients familiar with TAI, using a new medical device incorporating an electric pump was feasible. Levels of patient satisfaction were high, especially with regard to comfort of use and a feeling of security during TAI.

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

AIM

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

METHOD

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Etiology and management of low anterior resection syndrome based on the normal defecation mechanism. Surg Today. 2019;49:803-808. [PMID: 30937634 DOI: 10.1007/s00595-019-01795-9]

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

Randomized clinical trial of prophylactic transanal irrigation versus supportive therapy to prevent symptoms of low anterior resection syndrome after rectal resection

Background

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is a frequent problem after rectal resection. Transanal irrigation (TAI) has been suggested as an effective treatment in patients who have developed LARS. This prospective RCT was undertaken to evaluate the effect of TAI as a prophylactic treatment to prevent symptoms of LARS.

Methods

Patients who had undergone ultralow rectal resection were randomized to start TAI on a daily basis, or to serve as a control with supportive therapy only after ileostomy closure. All patients were seen after 1 week, 1 month and 3 months, and the maximum number of defaecation episodes per day and night documented during follow‐up. Wexner score, LARS score and Short Form 36 questionnaire responses were evaluated in both groups.

Results

Thirty‐seven patients could be evaluated according to protocol (TAI 18, control 19). The maximum number of stool episodes per day and per night was significantly lower among patients who underwent TAI at 1 month (median 3 versus 7 episodes/day in TAI versus control group, P = 0·003; 0 versus 3 episodes/night, P = 0·001) and 3 months (3 versus 5 episodes per day, P = 0·006; 0 versus 1 episodes/night, P = 0·002). LARS scores were significantly better in the TAI group after 1 month (median 16 versus 32 in control group; P = 0·044) and 3 months (9 versus 31; P = 0·001). A significantly better result in terms of Wexner score was seen in the TAI group after 3 months (median 2 versus 6 in controls; P = 0·046).

Conclusion

Prophylactic TAI led to a significantly better functional outcome compared with supportive therapy for up to 3 months. Registration number: DRKS00011752 ( http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/).