Surgical treatment of lower rectal cancer with sphincter preservation using handsewn coloanal anastomosis

Intersphincteric resection for very low rectal cancer: A review of the updated literature

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) has rapidly increased worldwide including laparoscopic surgery. However, there are some concerns for the definition of ISR, surgical technique, oncological outcome, anal function, and quality of life (QoL). The aim of the present study is to evaluate those issues. A review of this surgical technique was carried out by searching English language literature of the PubMed online database and appropriate articles were identified. With regard to open‐ISR, the morbidity rate ranged from 7.5% to 38.3%, with lower mortality rates. Local recurrence rates varied widely from 0% to 22.7%, with a mean follow‐up duration of 40–94 months. Disease‐free and overall 5‐year survival rates were 68–86% and 76–97%, respectively. Those outcomes were equivalent to laparoscopic‐ISR. Surgical and oncological outcomes of ISR were generally acceptable. However, accurate evaluation of anal function and QoL was difficult because of a lack of standard assessment of various patient‐related factors. The surgical and oncological outcomes after ISR seem to be acceptable. The ISR technique seems to be valid as an alternative to abdominoperineal resection in selected patients with a very low rectal cancer. However, both necessity for ISR and expectations of QoL impairment as a result of functional disorder should be fully discussed with patients before surgery.

Intersphincteric resection for very low rectal cancer: a systematic review

Radical surgical treatment for very low rectal cancer near the anus has generally involved abdominoperineal resection. Various sphincter-saving operations have been developed for such tumors to optimize the patients' postoperative quality of life. Current protocols focus on intersphincteric resection (ISR), which differs from conventional hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis (CAA) after low anterior resection. However, the efficacy of ISR remains unclear. The surgical, oncologic, and functional outcomes after intersphincteric resection (ISR) were reviewed. This review of the current literature was conducted by searching the PubMed online database. Articles focusing specifically on conventional hand-sewn CAA were excluded from this study. The mean mortality rate is <2 %, and the mean morbidity rate ranges from 7.7 to 38.3 %. The mean local recurrence rate varies widely from 0 to 22.7 %, with a mean follow-up duration of 40-94 months. The mean disease-free and overall 5-year survival rates are 69-86 and 79-97 months, respectively. Functional outcomes are generally acceptable, but accurate evaluation is extremely difficult due to the absence of unified appraisal methods. ISR appears surgically, oncologically and functionally acceptable. However, more experience and better understanding of the oncology, anal physiology, and pelvic anatomy are necessary to achieve successful outcomes without complications, and to improve patient survival.

A diverting stoma is not necessary when performing a handsewn coloanal anastomosis for lower rectal cancer

PURPOSE

Although a temporary diverting stoma is a frequent surgical procedure for the protection of anastomosis in a sphincter-preserving operation for lower rectal cancer, its impact on anastomotic leakage is not conclusive. This study was designed to evaluate anastomotic complications after ultralow anterior resection and handsewn coloanal anastomosis without a diverting stoma for lower rectal cancer patients.

METHODS

Between January 1995 and December 2005, 96 patients were treated by ultralow anterior resection and handsewn coloanal anastomosis for lower rectal cancer. Fifty-one patients received preoperative concurrent chemoradiation, whereas 45 had no preoperative treatment. No diverting stoma was created in any of these cases. The anastomotic complications were evaluated between the groups.

RESULTS

Six of 96 patients (6.1 percent) developed anastomotic complications: three anastomotic stenoses, one partial anastomotic dehiscence, one retrorectal abscess, and one rectovaginal fistula. All of the complications occurred in the preoperative radiation group, whereas none from the nonradiation group had an anastomotic complication (P=0.017). The patients with stenosis and partial dehiscence were managed conservatively. The patient with retrorectal abscess was treated with debridement, irrigation and drainage, and seton procedure with a transanal approach. The patient with rectovaginal fistula underwent a second coloanal anastomosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The anastomotic complication rate was low even without a diverting stoma. This study suggests that a diverting stoma is not necessary when performing a handsewn coloanal anastomosis for lower rectal cancer however, an effort should be made for healthy anastomotic healing in patients with rectal cancer who are preoperatively radiated.

Digest

Professor Seiki Matsuno and Dr Michiaki Unno, Chief Editors of Surgery Today (The Japanese Journal of Surgery), have selected from the July–September 1998 issues of the journal for this quarter's digest. A digest of BJS for the same period written by Mr Colin Johnson, European Editor, appears in the Japanese journal.