Long-term functional evaluation of straight coloanal anastomosis and colonic J-pouch: is the functional superiority of colonic J-pouch sustained?

Bowel function after anterior rectal resection for cancer: short and long-term prospective evaluation with low anterior rectal syndrome (LARS) score in a cohort of Cameroonian patients

Introduction

bowel dysfunction is the most common and disabling complication after anterior rectal resection (ARR) for cancer. We aimed to evaluate these complications in a cohort of Cameroonian patients, using the low anterior rectal syndrome (LARS) score.

Methods

we conducted a descriptive and analytical cross-sectional study, in two university hospitals of Yaoundé (Cameroon). Prospectively, we collected the records of all patients aged at least 18 years who had an ARR indicated for rectal cancer from January 2015 to March 2018. Alive patients among them were subsequently received in consultation at 1 and 3 years after surgery, for short and long-term assessment of their digestive function using the LARS score.

Results

during the study period, 28 patients underwent anterior rectal resection for rectal cancers. Short-term bowel function was evaluated in 23 patients. Their mean age was 48.42 ± 12.2 years and 14 were males. LARS was present in 10 of them (43.47%) and classified as "minor" in the majority of cases (n=6). The commonest bowel dysfunction at this term was splitting of stool (56.53%). Long-term digestive function was evaluated in 11 patients; LARS was found in 3 of them (27,27%) and classified as minor in all cases. Perfect continence was significantly improved (p=0.003) in the long term compared to the short-term status. Continence (p=0.049) and urgency (p=0.048) were better in patients who had a low colorectal anastomosis compared to those who had a colo supra-anal anastomosis.

Conclusion

after ARR for cancer, there is a high prevalence of LARS in the short term with an improvement in the long term.

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.

Latest Advances in Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer

Background

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) has been a preferable alternative to abdominoperineal resection (APR) for anal preservation in patients with low rectal cancer. Laparoscopic ISR and robotic ISR have been widely used with the proposal of 2 cm or even 1 cm rule of distal free margin and the development of minimally invasive technology. The aim of this review was to describe the newest advancements of ISR.

Methods

A comprehensive literature review was performed to identify studies on ISR techniques, preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT), complications, oncological outcomes, and functional outcomes and thereby to summarize relevant information and controversies involved in ISR.

Results

Although PCRT is employed to avoid positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) and decrease local recurrence, it tends to engender damage of anorectal function and patients' quality of life (QoL). Common complications after ISR include anastomotic leakage (AL), anastomotic stricture (AS), urinary retention, fistula, pelvic sepsis, and prolapse. CRM involvement is the most important predictor for local recurrence. Preoperative assessment and particularly rectal endosonography are essential for selecting suitable patients. Anal dysfunction is associated with age, PCRT, location and growth of anastomotic stoma, tumour stage, and resection of internal sphincter.

Conclusions

The ISR technique seems feasible for selected patients with low rectal cancer. However, the postoperative QoL as a result of functional disorder should be fully discussed with patients before surgery.

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.

Complete laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with an intersphincteric resection and coloplasty pouch anal anastomosis for lower rectal cancer

This pilot study aimed to develop a new technique, complete laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) with an intersphincteric resection (ISR) and coloplasty pouch anal anastomosis to avoid any further abdominal incision other than laparoscopic port sites, and to assess the impact on short-quality of life and oncological outcomes of this technique. After laparoscopic TME, large bowel was dissected at the level of the promontory. Then, laparoscopic construction of the coloplasty pouch was performed. Simultaneously, a rectal specimen with ISR was excised using the transanal approach. Coloplasty pouch was gently pulled from pelvic thorough anal and a hand-sewn coloplasty pouch anal anastomosis was created. We had performed 8 surgeries using the new technique. Though one patient developed pelvic infections, but intestinal continuity could be maintained and no local and distant recurrence was recognized in other patients. We foresee this novel approach to have significant clinical potential for lower rectal cancer patients with ISR.

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 multicentre randomised controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy, morbidity and functional outcome of endoscopic transanal proctectomy versus laparoscopic proctectomy for low-lying rectal cancer (ETAP-GRECCAR 11 TRIAL): rationale and design

BACKGROUND

Total mesorectal excision is the standard surgical treatment for mid- and low-rectal cancer. Laparoscopy represents a clear leap forward in the management of rectal cancer patients, offering significant improvements in post-operative measures such as pain, first bowel movement, and hospital length of stay. However, there are still some limits to its applications, especially in difficult cases. Such cases may entail either conversion to an open procedure or positive resection margins. Transanal endoscopic proctectomy (ETAP) was recently described and could address the difficulties of approaching the lower third of the rectum. Early series and case-control studies have shown favourable short-term results, such as a low conversion rate, reduced hospital length of stay and oncological outcomes comparable to laparoscopic surgery. The aim of the proposed study is to compare the rate of positive resection margins (R1 resection) with ETAP versus laparoscopic proctectomy (LAP), with patients randomly assigned to each arm.

METHODS/DESIGN

The proposed study is a multicentre randomised trial using two parallel groups to compare ETAP and LAP. Patients with T3 lower-third rectal adenocarcinomas for whom conservative surgery with manual coloanal anastomosis is planned will be recruited. Randomisation will be performed immediately prior to surgery after ensuring that the patient meets the inclusion criteria and completing the baseline functional and quality of life tests. The study is designed as a non-inferiority trial with a main criterion of R0/R1 resection. Secondary endpoints will include the conversion rate, the minimal invasiveness of the abdominal approach, postoperative morbidity, the length of hospital stay, mesorectal macroscopic assessment, functional urologic and sexual results, faecal continence, global quality of life, stoma-free survival, and disease-free survival at 3 years. The inclusion period will be 3 years, and every patient will be followed for 3 years. The number of patients needed is 226.

DISCUSSION

There is a strong need for optimal evaluation of the ETAP because of substancial changes in the operative technique. Assessment of oncological safety and septic risk, as well as digestive and urological functional results, is particularily mandatory. Moreover, benefits of the ETAP technique could be demonstrated  in post-operative outcome.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT02584985 . Date and version identifier: Version n°2 - 2015 July 6.

Transanal Pull-Through Procedure with Delayed versus Immediate Coloanal Anastomosis for Anus-Preserving Curative Resection of Lower Rectal Cancer: A Case-Control Study

This case-control study compared the effectiveness and safety of transanal pull-through procedure (TPP) with delayed or immediate coloanal anastomosis (CAA) for anus-preserving curative resection of lower rectal cancer. Lower rectal cancer patients (n = 128) were hospitalized between January 2003 and December 2013 for elective anus-preserving curative resection through a TPP with delayed (n = 72) or immediate (n = 56) CAA. Main outcome measures including surgical safety, resection radicality, and defecation function were assessed. The two groups were comparable in age, sex, gross pathology, histology, and tumor-node-metastasis staging. Both the delayed and immediate CAA TPPs had similar resection radicality and safety profiles. The immediate CAA was associated with a significantly higher risk of anastomotic leakage and defecation impairment. None of patients in the delayed CAA group experienced anastomotic leakage. In conclusion, TPP with delayed CAA may be superior to immediate CAA in minimizing the risk of anastomotic leakage and relevant surgical morbidities, and does not require a temporary ileostomy and second-look restoration of ostomy.

Long-term results of extended intersphincteric resection for very low rectal cancer: a retrospective study

Background

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) has become an increasingly popular optional surgical tool for the treatment of very low rectal cancer. The purpose of this study was to assess the long-term oncological and functional outcomes of intersphincteric resection for T2 and T3 rectal cancer situated below 4 cm from the anal verge.

Methods

A total of 62 consecutive patients with very low rectal cancer who underwent ISR from 2001 to 2010 were classified into standard ISR for T2 lesions (Group I, n = 24) and extended ISR for T3 lesions (Group II, n = 38).

Results

The 5-year overall survival rates were 95.8 % for group I and 94.7 % for group II. The 5-year recurrence-free survival rates were 87.5 % for group I and 86.8 % for group II. Bowel functions were evaluated at the 12^th and 24^th months after ileostomy closure in both groups. The frequency of bowel evacuation was higher in patients who underwent extended ISR than in those who underwent standard ISR at the 12^th month (p < 0.05). However, at the 24^th month, the frequencies decreased in both groups, exhibiting no significant difference. In the comparison based on the Kirwan classification, group I showed better continence status than group II but no significant difference. The Wexner scores of both groups revealed that the average score was 7.33 ± 2.8 in group I and 8.18 ± 2.9 in group II at the 12^th month, and at the 24^th month, the average score was 5.21 ± 1.7 in group I and 5.82 ± 1.9 in group II. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups.

Conclusions

Extended ISR with quadrant resection of the upper external sphincter achieved good post-operative continence status, OS and RFS. Extended ISR can thus be an alternative to abdominoperineal resection for very low rectal cancer without compromising the chance of cure and improving quality of life.

Anastomotic salvage after rectal cancer resection using the Turnbull-Cutait delayed anastomosis

BACKGROUND

Turnbull-Cutait abdominoperineal pull-through followed by delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCA) was first described in 1961. Studies have described its use for challenging colorectal conditions. We reviewed our experience with Turnbull-Cutait DCA as a salvage procedure for complex failure of colorectal anastomosis.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study from October 2010 to September 2011, with analysis of postoperative morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

Seven DCAs were performed for anastomotic complications (3 chronic leaks, 2 rectovaginal fistulas, 1 colovesical fistula, 1 colonic ischemia) following surgery for rectal cancer. Six patients had a diverting ileostomy constructed as part of previous treatment for anastomotic complications before the salvage procedure. No anastomotic leaks were observed. All procedures but 1 were completed successfully. One patient who underwent DCA subsequently required an abdominoperineal resection and a permanent colostomy for postoperative extensive colonic ischemia. No 30-day mortality occurred.

CONCLUSION

Salvage Turnbull-Cutait DCA appears to be a safe procedure and could be offered to patients with complex anastomotic complications. This procedure could be added to the surgeon's armamentarium as an alternative to the creation of a permanent stoma.

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.

The clinical results of the Turnbull-Cutait delayed coloanal anastomosis: a systematic review

Turnbull and Cutait described abdominoperineal pull-through followed by delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCA) in 1961. DCA could reduce anastomotic leaks, pelvic morbidity and use of stomas. Strong evidence about its clinical benefits is still lacking. This systematic review examined the clinical outcomes of DCA for the treatment of malignant or benign colorectal conditions. A systematic search of electronic medical databases was conducted. Two independent reviewers selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. The primary outcome was pelvic morbidity (anastomotic leak, pelvic abscess or sepsis, use of stoma). Fecal continence and survival data were also analyzed. From 1,251 citations, we included seven observational studies including 1,124 patients. All included studies were considered at high risk of bias. Two studies comparing DCA with immediate anastomosis reported a significant decrease in anastomotic leak, and pelvic abscess or sepsis. Low rates of pelvic morbidity were reported in the other five studies: anastomotic leak 0-7 %, pelvic abscess 0-11.8 % and pelvic sepsis 6.8-10 %. Rates of permanent stoma after DCA were low in six studies (1-6 %), with one study reporting an incidence of 25 %. Fecal continence was reported as satisfying in all studies. No differences were observed in a comparative setting. Survival data were reported in four studies. Clinical heterogeneity and methodological issues precluded meta-analysis. Based on retrospective evidence, DCA offers a low rate of anastomotic leak, pelvic morbidity and use of stoma, with reasonable fecal continence. Results are encouraging, but prospective studies are needed for comparison with standard of care.

Risk factors and predictive factors for anastomotic leakage after resection for colorectal cancer: reappraisal of the literature

Anastomotic leakage is a serious complication that can occur after colorectal surgery. Several risk factors for anastomotic leakage have been reported based on the findings of prospective and retrospective studies, including patient characteristics, the use of neoadjuvant therapy, the tumor location, intraoperative events, etc. However, as these risk factors affect each other, the statistical results have differed in each study. In addition, differences in surgical methods, including laparoscopy versus laparotomy or stapling anastomosis versus handsewn anastomosis, may influence the incidence of anastomotic leakage. This mini-review summarizes the results of reported papers to clarify the current evidence of risk factors for anastomotic leakage.

Coloanal anastomosis or abdominoperineal resection for very low rectal cancer: what will benefit, the surgeon's pride or the patient's quality of life?

PURPOSES

Sphincter-saving operation with coloanal anastomosis (CAA) has become an established option for very low rectal cancer, but few studies have compared its functional results and quality of life (QoL) with abdominoperineal resection (APR) showing controversial results.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients treated for low rectal cancer with APR or CAA, disease-free after a median follow-up period of 26.5 (8-84) and 52.5 (12-156) months, respectively, were retrospectively reviewed. General and disease-specific changes in QoL and severity of disease were evaluated by Karnofsky scale, EORTC-C30, EORTC-CR38, SF-36, PGWBI, FIQL, PAC-QoL, ICIQ-SF, Stoma-QoL, AMS, Wexner's score and obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) score.

RESULTS

Twenty-six APR patients and 34 CAA patients entered the study. Karnofsky score did not show significant differences. The median Stoma-QoL was 58.2 (45-76.6), indicating a good stoma function in 95% of patients. EORTC-C30, CR38, PGWBI and SF-36 questionnaires did not show significant differences between the two groups except for sexual function (better after CAA, p = 0.01). Eleven patients after APR and eight after CAA had urinary incontinence, and its severity did not differ significantly. Eighteen of 21 CAA patients complained of faecal incontinence [AMS, 80 (15-120); Wexner, 13 (2-19)] with an impact on their QoL [FIQL: lifestyle, 1.75 (0-4); coping/behaviour, 1.3 (0-3.5); depression, 2.1 (0-5.2); embarrassment, 2 (0-4.6)] and 11 complained of obstructed defecation [7.5 (3-16)] with significant consequences on QoL [PAC-QoL, 30.4 (19.2-80.3)].

CONCLUSIONS

QoL in patients with permanent stoma and in those after CAA did not differ significantly. APR patients had worse sexual function, while most CAA patients had faecal incontinence and sometime obstructed defecation, with important impact on their QoL.

A review of controversies in the management of colorectal cancers

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignancies worldwide. Due to a higher incidence of CRC in the western hemisphere a significant amount of research was carried out and majority of the controversies could be resolved as far as management of CRC is concerned. Recently a number of significant advances were made in the field of CRC related to surgery, systemic therapy and radiotherapy. During the last decade we have witnessed introduction of minimally invasive surgery, incorporation of more effective newer chemotherapeutic regimes and targeted therapies and refinements in radiotherapy protocols. The demographics and clinical picture of CRC seems to be different in developing countries and there is paucity of CRC related studies from developing countries. In-order to update the practicing surgeons a review of conventional controversies of CRC surgery was performed and an update on the recent developments in the field of CRC was also presented in this article.

Routine defunctioning stoma after chemoradiation and total mesorectal excision: A single-surgeon experience

AIM: To investigate the 10-year results of treating low rectal cancer by a single surgeon in one institution.

METHODS: From Oct 1998 to Feb 2009, we prospectively followed a total of 62 patients with cT2-4 low rectal cancer with lower tumor margins measuring at 3 to 6 cm above the anal verge. All patients received neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) for 6 wk. Among them, 85% of the patients received 225 mg/m²/d 5-fluorouracil using a portable infusion pump. The whole pelvis received a total dose of 45 Gy of irradiation in 25 fractions over 5 wk. The interval from CRT completion to surgical intervention was planned to be approximately 6-8 wk. Total mesorectal excision (TME) and routine defunctioning stoma construction were performed by one surgeon. The distal resection margin, circumferential resection margin, tumor regression grade (TRG) and other parameters were recorded. We used TRG to evaluate the tumor response after neoadjuvant CRT. We evaluated anal function outcomes using the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center anal function scores after closure of the defunctioning stoma.

RESULTS: The median distance from the lower margin of rectal cancer to the anal verge was 5 cm: 6 cm in 9 patients, 5 cm in 32 patients, 4 cm in 10 patients, and 3 cm in 11 patients. Before receiving neoadjuvant CRT, 45 patients (72.6%) had a cT3-4 tumor, and 21 (33.9%) patients had a cN1-2 lymph node status. After CRT, 30 patients (48.4%) had a greater than 50% clinical reduction in tumor size. The final pathology reports revealed that 33 patients (53.2%) had a ypT3-4 tumor and 12 (19.4%) patients had ypN1-2 lymph node involvement. All patients completed the entire course of neoadjuvant CRT. Most patients developed only Grade 1-2 toxicities during CRT. Thirteen patients (21%) achieved a pathologic complete response. Few post-operative complications occurred. Nearly 90% of the defunctioning stomas were closed within 6 mo. The local recurrence rate was 3.2%. Pathologic lymph node involvement was the only prognostic factor predicting disease recurrence (36.5% vs 76.5%, P = 0.006). Nearly 90% of patients recovered sphincter function within 2 year after closure of the defunctioning stoma.

CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant CRT followed by TME, combined with routine defunctioning stoma construction and high-volume surgeon experience, can provide excellent surgical quality and good local disease control.

Comparison of Colonic J-pouch and Straight Coloanal anastomosis after Low Anterior Resection

Background

The tendency towards sphincter preserving for low rectal cancers with low anterior resection, has led to the technique of straight coloanal anastomosis (SCAA) or colonic J-pouch anal anastomosis (CPAA).

Objectives

The aim of our study was to compare functional outcomes, complication rates and quality of life (QoL) after LAR with either a straight or colonic J pouch anastomosis.

Patients and Methods

In 88 patients with rectal tumors located in lower third, who were candidate for LAR with coloanal anastomosis. They were divided for reconstruction using either SCAA (n= 47) or CPAA (n= 41) from January 2007 to May 2009. Functional results were assessed after closure of temporary loop ileostomy, 6 months postoperatively. Quality of life (QoL) was measured using European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30.

Results

The two groups were matched for gender, age, and preoperative chemotherapy and radiotherapy. There were no significant differences between the SCAA and CPAA groups relative to anastomotic leakage. Among patients with CPAA, the mean of 24 hours bowel movements, daytime bowel movements, incontinence scores, and incidence of urgency were significantly lower than those in the SCAA group. Also, patients with a CPAA had a significantly better quality of life.

Conclusions

CPAA provided not only better functional results than SCAA, but also improved quality of life, thus may be the better choice.

Anterior resection syndrome

Up to 80% of patients with rectal cancer undergo sphincter-preserving surgery. It is widely accepted that up to 90% of such patients will subsequently have a change in bowel habit, ranging from increased bowel frequency to faecal incontinence or evacuatory dysfunction. This wide spectrum of symptoms after resection and reconstruction of the rectum has been termed anterior resection syndrome. Currently, no precise definition or causal mechanisms have been established. This disordered bowel function has a substantial negative effect on quality of life. Previous reviews have mainly focused on different colonic reconstructive configurations and their comparative effects on daily function and quality of life. The present Review explores the potential mechanisms underlying disturbed functions, as well as current, novel, and future treatment options.

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.

Management and results of complications after anterior resection with colonic pouch reconstruction for rectal cancer

AIM

Colonic J-pouch reconstruction is widely carried out during low anterior resection. The aim of this observational study was to describe the complications and evaluate the results of adverse event management.

METHOD

A total of 128 patients underwent an elective anterior resection with colorectal or coloanal J-pouch reconstruction for primary rectal cancer between January 1997 and December 2008.

RESULTS

The overall mortality was 1.6%. Three (2.3%) patients developed pouch necrosis, one of whom died. The rate of anastomotic leakage was 11.7%. Other major complications included intra-abdominal abscess (3.1%), haemorrhage (0.8%) and abdominal dihiscence (0.8%). In all cases of anastomotic leakage, the pouch was salvaged, with 80% of patients undergoing surgical revision with relaparotomy and transanal suture. Patients with pouch necrosis underwent relaparotomy with removal of the pouch and a terminal colostomy. In all cases of intra-abdominal abscess without anastomotic leakage, radiologically controlled percutaneous drainage was carried out.

CONCLUSION

Anal function can usually be saved after anastomotic leakage by salvage surgery without increase in mortality.

Quality-of-life and surgical treatments for rectal cancer--a longitudinal analysis using the California Cancer Registry

BACKGROUND

Heterogeneous results for research investigating health-related quality of life (HRQL) in patients undergoing sphincter-ablating procedures for rectal cancer are likely due to single institution experiences and measurement of HRQL. To address this heterogeneity, we evaluated HRQL in patients with rectal cancer by type of surgery, location of tumor, and receipt of adjuvant therapy using an HRQL instrument that has not been used to address rectal cancer patients in a population-based sample over time.

METHODS

The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal instrument was administered at 9 and 19 months after diagnosis to a consecutive sample of 160 patients in Northern California identified by the California Cancer Registry. A broad multidimensional interpretation of HRQL was used to examine the impact of tumor location and treatment status, stage of disease, age, and gender.

RESULTS

In general, men had lower social well-being scores, and younger patients had lower physical and emotional well-being scores and colorectal concerns scores. We found no differences in HRQL by either tumor location or type of surgery, at either 9 or 19 months after diagnosis. Lower physical well-being and greater adverse colorectal concerns were reported at 9 months among patients who received adjuvant therapy; however, only adverse colorectal concerns persisted over time.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides additional evidence that sphincter-ablating procedures do not necessarily reduce quality of life in patients with rectal cancer. Distinctive features of this study include a broad multidimensional interpretation of HRQL, the 19 months of longitudinal follow-up, and a prospective population-based study design.

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.

Differences in ano-neorectal physiology of ileoanal and coloanal reconstructions for restorative proctectomy

OBJECTIVE

Restorative proctectomy with straight coloanal anastomosis (CAA) and restorative proctocolectomy with ilealpouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) are options for maintaining bowel integrity after rectal resection. The aim of this study was to compare clinical function and anorectal physiology in patients treated with CAA and IPAA.

METHOD

Three-dimensional vector-manometry and neorectal volumetry were performed in straight CAA [53 patients (34 male)] and IPAA [61 patients (39 male)] for ulcerative colitis. Function was assessed using a 14 day incontinence diary.

RESULTS

Function was similar in both groups, but neorectal compliance and threshold volumes for sensation, urge and maximum tolerated volume (MTV) were significantly higher after IPAA than after CAA. Mean pressure, vector volume and sphincter symmetry at rest were significant determinants of continence in both groups but squeeze pressure did not correlate significantly with function in either group. Threshold volume, MTV, and compliance were significantly correlated with frequency of defecation in patients with IPAA but not with CAA.

CONCLUSION

A strong consistent resting anal sphincter pressure is one determinant of continence after both IPAA and CAA. Squeeze pressures do not influence the functional result. In IPAA but not CAA, the neorectum has a reservoir function which correlates with the postoperative frequency of defaecation.

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.

Reduced neorectal capacitance is a more important factor for impaired defecatory function after rectal resection than the anal sphincter pressure

OBJECTIVE

The role of the diverse anorectal diagnostic tools like manometry and determination of the preception threshold and the maximal tolerable volume is still a matter of debate. Currently, there is a scarcity of physiological data in the long-term follow-up of patients who underwent sphincter-preserving rectal resection. The aim of this study was therefore to perform these anorectal physiological measurements and to correlate the determined parameters with a faecal incontinence score.

METHOD

In 45 patients, anorectal manometry, electromyography (EMG) and neorectal volume measurements were performed 21.6 +/- 1.4 months after rectal resection. Additionally, patients answered questions to help in the determination of a modified faecal incontinence score.

RESULTS

More than half of the patients had more than four bowel movements per day and suffered from defecatory urgency, evacuation and discrimination problems. Manometric data were not related to any functional deficits. In contrast, perception threshold and maximal tolerable volume were correlated with the faecal incontinence score.

CONCLUSION

Defecatory problems especially after radiochemotherapy are still common after rectal resection and the satisfactory functionality post resection should not be oversimplified to just the number of bowel movements. A precondition of an adequate defecation is not only the integrity of the sphincter muscles, but also the recovery of the rectal reservoir function.

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.

[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.

Diverting stoma after low anterior resection: more arguments in favor

PURPOSE

The necessity of a protective stoma in patients undergoing low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision for primary rectal cancer is discussed controversially. We conducted a randomized, controlled, pilot-study to evaluate the need for diverting ileostomy in patients undergoing low anterior resection [NCT00457327].

METHODS

Forty patients after elective sphincter-saving low anterior resection were eligible for intraoperative randomization. The primary objective of this trial was to demonstrate similar risks after the resection with both techniques. A priori stopping rules were defined for early termination of the trial.

RESULTS

Between July 4, 2006 and March 12, 2007, a total of 41 patients were screened and 34 patients were randomized. Eighteen patients were randomized to the stoma group and 16 patients to the nonstoma group The symptomatic anastomotic leakage rate was significantly higher in the nonstoma group (37.5 percent) than in the stoma group (5.5 percent, P = 0.02). In all six cases in the nonstoma group, reoperations were necessary. The study was stopped after 34 patients were included. A meta-analysis of the available data confirmed the value of a protective ostomy for patients undergoing low anterior resection.

CONCLUSIONS

The data demonstrate a high risk for patients undergoing low anterior resection without diverting ileostomy.

Neorectal irritability after short-term preoperative radiotherapy and surgical resection for rectal cancer

OBJECTIVES

Preoperative radiotherapy followed by rectal resection with total mesorectal excision (TME) and colo-anal anastomosis severely compromises anorectal function, which has been attributed to a decrease in neorectal capacity and neorectal compliance. However, to what extent altered motility of the neorectum is involved, is still unknown. The aim of the study was to compare the motor response to (prolonged) filling of the (neo-)rectum in patients after preoperative radiotherapy and rectal resection with that in healthy volunteers (HV).

METHODS

Neorectal function (J-pouch or side-to-end anastomosis) was studied in 15 patients (median age 61 years, 10 males) 5 months after short-term preoperative radiotherapy (5 x 5 Gy) and rectal resection with TME for rectal cancer and compared with that of 10 volunteers (median age 41 years, 7 males). Furthermore, patients with a colonic J-pouch anastomosis (n=6) were compared with patients with a side-to-end anastomosis (n=9). (Neo-)rectal sensitivity was assessed using a stepwise isovolumetric and isobaric distension protocol. (Neo-)rectal motility was determined during prolonged distension at the threshold of the urge to defecate.

RESULTS

The neorectal volume of patients at the threshold of the urge to defecate (125 +/-45 ml) was significantly lower when compared with that of HV (272+/-87 ml, P<0.05). The pressure threshold, however, did not differ between patients (26+/-9 mm Hg) and HV (21+/-5 mm Hg) and neither did the pressure threshold differ between patients with a J-pouch and those with side-to-end anastomosis. In HV, no rectal contractions were observed during prolonged rectal distension. In contrast, in all 15 patients, prolonged isovolumetric and isobaric distension induced 3 (range 0-5) rectal contractions/10 min, which were associated with an increase in sensation in half of the patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who underwent preoperative radiotherapy and rectal resection with TME, but not HV, developed contractions of the neo-rectum in response to prolonged distension. We suggest that this neorectal "irritability" represents a new pathophysiological mechanism contributing to the urgency for defecation after this multimodality treatment.

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).

Colo-anal pouches: lessons from a prospective audit

OBJECTIVE

Colonic pouch formation with pouch-anal anastomosis is the treatment of choice following restorative anterior resection for low rectal cancers with a proximal loop ileostomy to defunction the anastomosis. Controversy exists as to whether anastomotic integrity needs to be checked prior to ileostomy reversal. The aim of this prospective study was to audit our current practice.

METHOD

Data on all patients undergoing resectional surgery for rectal cancer in our unit are entered prospectively onto a database. Patients who underwent an anterior resection with pouch formation and defunctioning ileostomy were identified and a review of notes and radiological records was carried out.

RESULTS

Forty-two patients with rectal adenocarcinoma underwent an anterior resection with colo-colonic pouch, colo-anal anastomosis and a covering loop ileostomy. Of these, 38(90.5%) had water-soluble contrast enemas (WSCE) 6-8 weeks postoperatively. Two studies (5.3%) confirmed the presence of normal colo-colonic pouch but 24(63.2%) normal reports made no mention of the presence of pouch. Three studies (7.9%) reported true leaks, one study (2.6%) an anastomotic stricture and eight studies (21.1%) anastomotic leaks. Review by radiologists and surgeons, and examination with flexible sigmoidoscopy of these final eight confirmed that these appearances were consistent with normal colo-colonic pouches and anastomosis with no leak. These patients went on to have uneventful stoma closure.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that Colon pouches are difficult to clearly delineate on WSCE and appearances may be mistaken for leaks leading to questioning of the suitability of WSCE in assessing anastomotic integrity. A true positive leak rate of 7.9% would suggest that postoperative assessment prior to closure is still necessary in some patients.

Reconstructive techniques after rectal resection for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Total mesorectal resection (TME) has led to improved survival and reduced local recurrence in patients with rectal cancer. Straight coloanal anastomosis after TME can lead to problems with frequent bowel movements, fecal urgency and incontinence. The colonic J pouch, side-to-end anastomosis and transverse coloplasty have been developed as alternative surgical strategies in order to improve bowel function.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study is to determine which rectal reconstructive technique results in the best postoperative bowel function.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A systematic search of the literature (MEDLINE, Cancerlit, Embase and Cochrane Databases) was conducted from inception to Feb 14, 2006 by two independent investigators.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials in which patients with rectal cancer undergoing low rectal resection and coloanal anastomosis were randomized to at least two different anastomotic techniques. Furthermore, a measure of postoperative bowel function was necessary for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies identified for potential inclusion were independently assessed for eligibility by at least two reviewers. Data from included trials was collected using a standardized data collection form. Data was collated and qualitatively summarized for bowel function outcomes and meta-analysis statistical techniques were used to pool data on postoperative complications.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 2609 relevant studies, 16 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met our inclusion criteria. Nine RCTs (n=473) compared straight coloanal anastomosis (SCA) to the colonic J pouch (CJP). Up to 18 months postoperatively, the CJP was superior to SCA in most studies in bowel frequency, urgency, fecal incontinence and use of antidiarrheal medication. There were too few patients with long-term bowel function outcomes to determine if this advantage continued after 18 months postop. Four RCTs (n=215) compared the side-to-end anastomosis (STE) to the CJP. These studies showed no difference in bowel function outcomes between these two techniques. Similarly, three RCTs (n=158) compared transverse coloplasty (TC) to CJP. Similarly, there were no differences in bowel function outcomes in these small studies. Overall, there were no significant differences in postoperative complications with any of the anastomotic strategies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In several randomized controlled trials, the CJP has been shown to be superior to the SCA in bowel function outcomes in patients with rectal cancer for at least 18 months after gastrointestinal continuity is re-established. The TC and STE anastomoses have been shown to have similar bowel function outcomes when compared to the CJP in small randomized controlled trials; further study is necessary to determine the role of these alternative coloanal anastomotic strategies.

Effect of anastomosis level on continence performance and quality of life after colonic J-pouch reconstruction

Total mesorectal excision (TME) has become the recommended method for treatment of cancer in the middle or lower third of the rectum. Thus very low anastomoses are necessary to preserve continence, and pouch reconstruction is favored. It is unclear whether the level of anastomosis is important for continence and quality of life in colonic J-pouch reconstruction. In this investigation all patients were included who underwent curative elective anterior continuity resection with colorectal or coloanal J-pouch reconstruction for primary rectal cancer between January 2001 and December 2004. Exclusion criteria were distant metastases and any signs of recurrence at the time of investigation. Evaluation of continence performance by Wexner and Holschneider questionnaire and quality of life using the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR38 (EORTC) questionnaires was done 220 +/- 38 days after closure of the protective Ileostomy, which was performed 106 +/- 48 days after primary intervention. Fifty-two patients (79%) were analyzed. Colopouch rectal anastomosis was performed in eighteen cases and colopouch anal anastomosis in thirty-four cases. Fifty percent of the patients in both groups were continent for solid stool. Patients with a colopouch anal anastomosis had a significantly higher rate of incontinence for liquid stool, however. They took stool-regulating medicine more frequently and complained of fecal soiling and a restricted quality of life. Patients with a colopouch anal anastomosis had a significantly lower score on the most important points of the QLQ-C30 (emotional functioning, social functioning, pain, and quality of life). The same applied to the QLQ-CR38 for body image and problems with defecation. The quality of life of patients with a colopouch anal anastomosis was still considered acceptable compared with reference data for the normal healthy population, however. Both continence and quality of life are substantially affected by the level of the anastomosis after colonic pouch reconstruction. This suggests preservation of a small part of the rectum when oncologically feasible and performing a colopouch rectal anastomosis.

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.

Comparison of functional and surgical outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted colonic J-pouch versus straight reconstruction after total mesorectal excision for lower rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

To compare the functional and surgical outcomes of colonic J-pouch and straight anastomosis in the context that both reconstruction procedures were performed laparoscopically.

METHODS

The present study was a randomized prospective clinical trial. Patients with lower rectal cancer requiring laparoscopic total mesorectal excision were equally randomized to either laparoscopic-assisted colonic J-pouch reconstruction or laparoscopic straight end-to-end anastomosis. The techniques of the laparoscopic-assisted colonic J-pouch reconstruction are shown in the attached video. The primary end point was the comparison of functional results in both reconstruction methods. The secondary end points included the safety (surgical morbidity and mortality), surgical efficiency, and postoperative recovery.

RESULTS

A total of 48 patients were recruited within 2-year periods, in consideration of statistical power of 90% for comparison. There was no marked difference between patient groups undergoing colonic J-pouch surgery (n = 24) and straight anastomosis (n = 24) in various demographic and clinicopathogic parameters. The anorectal function of patients by colonic J-pouch were better than those by straight anastomosis in 3 months after operation, as evaluated by stool frequency (mean +/- standard deviation: 4.0 +/- 2.0 vs. 7.0 +/- 2.4 times/day, P < .001); use of antidiarrheal agents (29.2% [n = 7] vs. 75.0% [n = 18], P = .004); and perineal irritation (45.8% [n = 11] vs. 79.2% [n = 19], P = .037). Because of the relatively better bowel function in immediate postoperative period, patients by colonic J-pouch reconstruction were less disabled after surgery and had quicker return to partial activity (P = .039), full activity (P < .001), and work (P < .001). Both reconstruction methods were performed with similar amounts of blood loss, complication rates, and postoperative recovery. However, the operation time was significantly longer in the colonic J-pouch group (274.4 +/- 34.0 vs. 202.0 +/- 28.0 minutes, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Because laparoscopic-assisted creation of a colonic J-pouch achieved better short-term functional results of the anorectum and did not increase surgical morbidity, as compared with laparoscopic straight anastomosis, this reconstruction procedure could be recommended to patients with lower rectal cancer requiring laparoscopic total mesorectal excision.