Redo-surgery by transanal colonic pull-through for failed anastomosis associated with chronic pelvic sepsis or rectovaginal fistula

Repair of radiation-induced rectovaginal fistula with rectal stricture by a combined Tuttle, Turnbull-Cutait and Singapore flap approach

Radiation-induced rectovaginal fistula (RI-RVF) with associated rectal stricture represents a challenging problem in management. The aim of the present technical note is to describe a surgical technique aimed at minimizing disease recurrence by avoiding radiated tissue in the reconstruction: 1. Tuttle longitudinal incision of posterior vaginal wall with sharp excision of proximally located fistula; 2. Resection of strictured rectum via a combined transvaginal/laparotomy access, reconstruction with Turnbull-Cutait colon pull-through, and delayed handsewn coloanal anastomosis with loop ileostomy; 3. Bridge closure of the posterior vaginal wall by the interposition of a Singapore flap. This approach resulted in a favorable outcome at the 1-year follow-up in one patient with a medical history of gynecological carcinoma status after hystero-salpingo-oophorectomy followed by adjuvant radiation.

Management of acute and chronic pelvic sepsis after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer-a 10-year experience of a national referral centre

AIM

Uncontrolled pelvic sepsis following rectal cancer surgery may lead to dramatic consequences with significant impact on patients' quality of life. The aim of this retrospective observational study is to evaluate management of pelvic sepsis after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer at a national referral centre.

METHOD

Referred patients with acute or chronic pelvic sepsis after sphincter preserving rectal cancer resection, with the year of referral between 2010 and 2014 (A) or between 2015 and 2020 (B), were included. The main outcome was control of pelvic sepsis at the end of follow-up, with healed anastomosis with restored faecal stream (RFS) as co-primary outcome.

RESULTS

In total 136 patients were included: 49 in group A and 87 in group B. After a median follow-up of 82 months (interquartile range 35-100) in group A and 42 months (interquartile range 22-60) in group B, control of pelvic sepsis was achieved in all patients who received endoscopic vacuum assisted surgical closure (7/7 and 2/2), in 91% (19/21) and 89% (31/35) of patients who received redo anastomosis (P = 1.000) and in 100% (18/18) and 95% (41/43) of patients who received intersphincteric resection (P = 1.000), respectively. Restorative procedures resulted in a healed anastomosis with RFS in 61% (17/28) of patients in group A and 68% (25/37) of patients in group B (P = 0.567).

CONCLUSION

High rates of success can be achieved with surgical salvage of pelvic sepsis in a dedicated tertiary referral centre, without significant differences over time. In well selected and motivated patients a healed anastomosis with RFS can be achieved in the majority.

Turnbull-Cutait Pull-Through Procedure Is an Alternative to Permanent Ostomy in Patients With Complex Pelvic Fistulas

BACKGROUND

A permanent stoma is frequently recommended in the setting of complex or recurrent rectovaginal fistulas because of the high failure rate of reconstructive procedures. The Turnbull-Cutait pull-through procedure is a salvage operation for motivated patients desiring to avoid permanent fecal diversion.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the cure rates of complex rectovaginal fistulas after the Turnbull-Cutait pull-through procedure based on cause.

DESIGN

After the institutional review approval board, a retrospective review of women who underwent the procedure (1993-2018) for a rectovaginal fistula was conducted. Patients' demographics, cause, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.

SETTING

Colorectal surgery department at a tertiary center in the United States.

PATIENTS

Adult women with a rectovaginal fistula who underwent a colonic pull-through procedure were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Recurrence after the colonic pull-through procedure.

RESULTS

There were 81 patients who underwent colonic pull-through; of those, 26 patients had a rectovaginal fistula, had a median age of 51 (43-57) years, and had a mean BMI of 28 ± 3.2 kg/m 2 . A total of 4 patients (15%) had a recurrence and 85% of the patients healed. Ninety-three percent of the patients healed after the prior anastomotic leak. Patients with a Crohn's disease-related fistula had a 75% cure rate. The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a cumulative incidence of recurrence of 8% (95% CI, 0%-8%) within 6 months after surgery and 12% at 12 months.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective design.

CONCLUSIONS

The Turnbull-Cutait pull-through procedure may be the last option to preserve intestinal continuity and successfully treat rectovaginal fistulas in 85% of cases.

EL PROCEDIMIENTO PULLTHROUGH DE TURNBULLCUTAIT ES UNA ALTERNATIVA A LA OSTOMA PERMANENTE EN PACIENTES CON FSTULAS PLVICAS COMPLEJAS

ANTECEDENTES:Con frecuencia se recomienda un estoma permanente en el contexto de una fístula rectovaginal compleja o recurrente debido a la alta tasa de fracaso de los procedimientos reconstructivos. El procedimiento de extracción de Turnbull-Cutait es una operación de rescate para pacientes motivados que desean evitar la desviación fecal permanente.OBJETIVO:Analizar las tasas de curación de la fístula rectovaginal compleja después del procedimiento de extracción de Turnbull-Cutait según la etiología.DISEÑO:Después de la junta de aprobación de revisión institucional, se realizó una revisión retrospectiva de mujeres que se sometieron a un procedimiento (1993-2018) por fístula rectovaginal. Se analizaron los datos demográficos, la etiología y los resultados posoperatorios de los pacientes.AJUSTE:Departamento de cirugía colorrectal en un centro terciario en los Estados Unidos.PACIENTES:Mujeres adultas con fístula rectovaginal que se sometieron a extracción del colon.RESULTADO PRINCIPAL:recurrencia después de la extracción del colon.RESULTADOS:Hubo 81 pacientes que tenían extracción colónica, de esas 26 fístulas rectovaginales con una mediana de edad de 51 (43 - 57) años, y un índice de masa corporal promedio de 28 ± 3,2 kg/m2. Un total de 4 (15%) pacientes tuvieron una recurrencia y el 85% de los pacientes se curaron. El noventa y tres por ciento de los pacientes se curaron después de la fuga anastomótica previa. Los pacientes con fístula relacionada con EC tuvieron una tasa de curación del 75%. El análisis de Kaplan Meier mostró una incidencia acumulada de recurrencia del 8% [95% intervalo de confianza 0%-18%] dentro de los 6 meses posteriores a la cirugía y del 12% a los 12 meses.LIMITACIONES:Diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:El procedimiento de extracción de Turnbull-Cutait puede ser la última opción que se puede ofrecer para preservar la continuidad intestinal y tratar la fístula rectovaginal con éxito en el 85% de los casos. (Traducción-Yesenia.Rojas-Khalil).

Is Delaying a Coloanal Anastomosis the Ideal Solution for Rectal Surgery?: Analysis of a Multicentric Cohort of 564 Patients From the GRECCAR

OBJECTIVES

To assess the specific results of delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCAA) in light of its 2 main indications.

BACKGROUND

DCAA can be proposed either immediately after a low anterior resection (primary DCAA) or after the failure of a primary pelvic surgery as a salvage procedure (salvage DCAA).

METHODS

All patients who underwent DCAA intervention at 30 GRECCAR-affiliated hospitals between 2010 and 2021 were retrospectively included.

RESULTS

Five hundred sixty-four patients (male: 63%; median age: 62 years; interquartile range: 53-69) underwent a DCAA: 66% for primary DCAA and 34% for salvage DCAA. Overall morbidity, major morbidity, and mortality were 57%, 30%, and 1.1%, respectively, without any significant differences between primary DCAA and salvage DCAA ( P = 0.933; P = 0.238, and P = 0.410, respectively). Anastomotic leakage was more frequent after salvage DCAA (23%) than after primary DCAA (15%), ( P = 0.016).Fifty-five patients (10%) developed necrosis of the intra-abdominal colon. In multivariate analysis, intra-abdominal colon necrosis was significantly associated with male sex [odds ratio (OR) = 2.67 95% CI: 1.22-6.49; P = 0.020], body mass index >25 (OR = 2.78 95% CI: 1.37-6.00; P = 0.006), and peripheral artery disease (OR = 4.68 95% CI: 1.12-19.1; P = 0.030). The occurrence of this complication was similar between primary DCAA (11%) and salvage DCAA (8%), ( P = 0.289).Preservation of bowel continuity was reached 3 years after DCAA in 74% of the cohort (primary DCAA: 77% vs salvage DCAA: 68%, P = 0.031). Among patients with a DCAA mannered without diverting stoma, 75% (301/403) have never required a stoma at the last follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

DCAA makes it possible to definitively avoid a stoma in 75% of patients when mannered initially without a stoma and to save bowel continuity in 68% of the patients in the setting of failure of primary pelvic surgery.

Outcomes of redo for failed colorectal or coloanal anastomoses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to review the outcomes of redo procedures for failed colorectal or coloanal anastomoses.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and LILACS databases. The inclusion criteria were adult patients undergoing colectomy with primary colorectal or coloanal anastomosis and studies that assessed the postoperative results. The protocol is registered in PROSPERO (No. CRD42021267715).

RESULTS

Eleven articles met the eligibility criteria and were selected. The studied population size ranged from 7 to 78 patients. The overall mortality rate was 0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0%-0.01%). The postoperative complication rate was 40% (95% CI, 40%-50%). The length of hospital stay was 13.68 days (95% CI, 11.3-16.06 days). After redo surgery, 82% of the patients were free of stoma (95% CI, 75%-90%), and 24% of patients (95% CI, 0%-39%) had fecal incontinence. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (P=0.002) was associated with a lower probability of being free of stoma in meta-regression.

CONCLUSION

Redo colorectal and coloanal anastomoses are strategies to restore colonic continuity. The decision to perform a redo operation should be based on a proper evaluation of the morbidity and mortality risks, the probability of remaining free of stoma, the quality of life, and a functional assessment.

What is the best surgical option after failure of graciloplasty in patients with recurrent rectovaginal fistula? A study of 19 consecutive patients

BACKGROUND

Management of recurrent rectovaginal fistula (rRVF) remains challenging despite the good results of graciloplasty reported in the literature. However, little is known about how to avoid a permanent stoma if graciloplasty fails. The aim of our study was to report the management of rRVF after failure of graciloplasty.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed on consecutive patients with rRVF after failure of graciloplasty treated at our institution in January 2005-December 2021.

RESULTS

There were 19 patients, with a median age at graciloplasty of 39 years (range 25-64 years). Etiologies of RVF were Crohn's disease (CD) (n = 10), postoperative (n = 5), post-obstetrical (n = 3), and unknown (n = 1). After failure of graciloplasty, 45 new procedures were performed, all of them with a covering stoma: trans-anal repairs (n = 31), delayed colo-anal anastomosis (DCAA) (n = 4), biological mesh interposition (n = 3), second graciloplasty (n = 3), stoma only (n = 2) and redo ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) (n = 2). One patient was not re-operated on and instead treated medically for CD. After a mean follow-up of 63 ± 49 months, success (i.e., absence of stoma or RVF) was obtained in 11 patients (58%): 4/4 DCAA (100%), 5/31 after local repair (16%), 1 after stoma creation alone (50%) and 1 after redo IPAA (50%). Second graciloplasty and biologic mesh interposition all failed. All 8 patients with failed intervention had CD.

CONCLUSIONS

In cases of rRVF after failed graciloplasty, reoperation is possible, although the chance of success is relatively low. The best results were obtained with DCAA. CD is a predictor of poor outcome.

Redo laparoscopic colorectal resection: a retrospective analysis with propensity score matching

PURPOSE

Reports of redo laparoscopic colorectal resection (Re-LCRR) are scarce. In order to evaluate the safety and short-term outcomes of Re-LCRR, we performed a matched case-control analysis of patients who underwent this procedure for colorectal cancer.

METHOD

This was a retrospective, monocentric study that included patients who underwent Re-LCRR for colorectal cancer between January 2011 and December 2019 at our institution. The patients were compared to a 2:1 matched sample. Matching was conducted based on age, sex, BMI, surgical procedure, and clinical stage.

RESULT

Twenty-nine patients underwent Re-LCRR (RCRR group) and were compared to 58 patients selected by matching who underwent LCRR as primary resection (PCRR group). The median of age of the 29 patients of RCRR group was 75 (IQR 56-81) years and the RCRR group included 14 males. The median operative time of the RCRR group was 167 (IQR 126-232) minutes, and the median intraoperative blood loss was 5 (IQR 2-35) ml. In the RCRR group, there were no cases that required conversion to laparotomy. The short-term outcomes of the two groups did not differ to a statistical extent with respect to operative time (p = 0.415), intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.971), rate of conversion to laparotomy (p = 0.477), comorbidity (p = 0.215), and postoperative hospital stay (p = 0.809). No patients in either group experienced postoperative anastomotic leakage or required re-operation due to postoperative complications, and there was no procedure-related death. However, in terms of oncological factors, although there was no difference in the number of cases with a positive radical margin between the two groups (p = 1.000), the number of harvested lymph nodes in the RCRR group was significantly lower than that in the PCRR group (p = 0.015) and the RCRR group included 10 cases with less than 12 harvested lymph nodes.

CONCLUSION

Re-LCRR is associated with good short-term results and can be safely performed; however, the number of harvested lymph nodes is significantly reduced in comparison to primary resection cases, and further studies are needed to evaluate its long-term prognosis.

Turnbull-Cutait abdominoperineal pull-through operation: The Cleveland Clinic experience in the 21st century

AIM

The Turnbull-Cutait pull-through procedure (TCO) restores intestinal continuity in the setting of chronic pelvic sepsis, colorectal anastomotic leak, complex pelvic fistulas and technical challenges related to complicated rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of the TCO for salvaging complex pelvic conditions and to compare it to hand-sewn immediate coloanal anastomosis (CAA).

METHODS

This is a retrospective single-institution study where we searched a prospectively maintained database to identify patients who underwent the TCO. Patient demographics, operative indications and outcomes were analysed. TCO success was defined as maintenance of intestinal continuity and being stoma-free. Kaplan-Meier analysis was employed for stoma-free survival analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 81 patients with TCO and 129 patients with CAA were included. The TCO success rate was 69% at a median of 1.4 years' follow-up with 25 (31%) patients ending up with a permanent stoma compared to 22 (17%) in the CAA group with a median follow-up of 4 years (P = 0.03). The Kaplan-Meier cumulative incidence of TCO success at 1, 3 and 5 years was 79%, 60% and 51%, respectively, compared to 91%, 81% and 73% after CAA.

CONCLUSION

The TCO has a high success rate for patients with complex pelvic conditions who may be facing a permanent stoma as their only option.

Single center experience with salvage surgery for chronic pelvic sepsis

Chronic pelvic sepsis eventually requires salvage surgery in half of all patients. The goal of surgery is to resolve pelvic inflammation while restoring intestinal continuity. Our salvage procedure achieves this by bringing a healthy conduit into the pelvis and creating an anastomosis beyond the source of sepsis. We aimed to review our single center experience with this procedure for the treatment of chronic pelvic sepsis. All patients requiring the procedure from 2010 to 2018 were retrospectively reviewed using a prospective database. Morbidity and mortality were evaluated, and restoration of bowel continuity at 1-year rate was the endpoint. Twenty patients were included. The main indication was pelvic sepsis after anastomotic leak (AL). The median age was 60 (42-86) years and the median BMI was 26 (18-37) kg/m². The median time carrying a stoma before the intervention was 15 months, and median time to intervention was 32 months. All patients had a diverting stoma. There were no death and overall morbidity reached 60%, and AL rate was 10%. At 1 year, 70% of the patients had their intestinal continuity restored. In expert hands, salvage surgery for chronic pelvic sepsis has acceptable morbidity rates, an acceptable rate of AL, and a bowel restoration success rate 70% at 1 year, and is a valuable option for patients failing conservative treatment.

Postoperative rectovaginal fistula: Can colonic pull-through delayed coloanal anastomosis avoid the need for definitive stoma? An experience of 28 consecutives cases

AIM

Management of rectovaginal fistula (RVF) remains a challenge, especially in cases of postoperative RVF as they are often large and surrounded by inflammatory and fibrotic tissue, making local repair difficult or even impossible. In this situation, colonic pull-through delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCAA) could be an interesting option. The aim of this study was to assess the results of DCAA for RVF observed after rectal surgery.

METHODS

All patients who underwent DCAA for RVF were reviewed. Success was defined as a patient without stoma and without any symptoms of recurrent RVF at the end of follow-up.

RESULTS

From January 2010 to December 2020, 28 DCAA were performed for RVF after rectal surgery for rectal cancer (n = 21) or endometriosis (n = 7). Ten patients (36%) had at least one previous local procedure before DCAA. DCAA was associated with temporary ileostomy in 22/28 cases (79%). After a mean follow-up of 23 ± 23 (2-82) months, the success rate was 86% (24/28): three patients (11%) required a definitive stoma because of poor functional results (n = 1), chronic pelvic sepsis with anastomotic leakage (n = 1) or stoma reversal refused (n = 1). Another patient (3%) presented with recurrence of RVF, 26 months after DCAA. Although not significant, the success rate was higher in cases of DCAA with diverting stoma (20/22, 91%) than without (4/6, 67%) (p = 0.191).

CONCLUSION

In cases of postoperative RVF, DCAA is a safe option which can avoid definitive stoma in the great majority of the patients. Concomitant use of a temporary stoma appears to slightly increase the success rate.

Delayed pull-through coloanal anastomosis without temporary stoma: an alternative to the standard manual side-to-end coloanal anastomosis with temporary stoma? A comparative study in 223 patients with low rectal cancer

AIM

After total mesorectal excision (TME) for low rectal cancer, current guideline recommendations for sphincter-saving surgery are to perform a side-to-end manual coloanal anastomosis (CAA) (or with J-pouch) with a temporary stoma. Our study aimed to evaluate if delayed pull-through coloanal anastomosis (DCAA) without a temporary stoma could represent a safe alternative in low rectal cancer.

METHOD

From 2003 to 2020, 223 consecutive patients with low rectal cancer undergoing TME were compared: CAA and diverting stoma (n = 190) versus DCAA without stoma (n = 33).

RESULTS

Overall 3-month and severe (Dindo ≥ IIIb) morbidity rates were similar in CAA versus DCAA groups: 34% (65/190) vs. 36% (12/33) and 2.6% (5/190) vs. 3% (1/33), respectively. In the DCAA group, only one patient (3%) underwent reoperation (Hartmann's procedure) at day 3 due to colon necrosis. The anastomotic leakage rate (both clinical and radiological) was significantly higher after CAA than DCAA: 28% (53/190) vs. 3% (1/33; p = 0.00138). Failure of the procedure (with return to stoma) was observed in 8% (15/190) vs. 6% (2/33) of patients after CAA and DCAA respectively (not significant).

CONCLUSION

Our comparative study suggested that in patients with low rectal cancer, DCAA without a temporary stoma could represent an interesting alternative to the actual recommended CAA with a temporary ileostomy. DCAA could offer two major advantages over CAA: a significantly lower rate of anastomotic leakage and absence of a temporary stoma and its potential complications (rehospitalization, dehydration, wound hernia after stoma closure).

Laparoscopic Proximally Extended Colorectal Resection With Two-Stage Turnbull-Cutait Pull-Through Coloanal Anastomosis for Late Complications of Chronic Radiation Proctopathy

Background

Chronic radiation proctopathy (CRP) is a common complication after radiation therapy for pelvic malignancies. Compared with diversion surgery, resection surgery removes the damaged tissue completely to avoid the risks of recurrence and improve patients' outcome. Hence, resection surgery could be an optimal surgical approach when CRP is complicated by late complications. This study aimed to describe a modified surgical procedure of resection surgery and report its preliminary efficacy and safety in treating patients with CRP with late complications.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the patients who were diagnosed with CRP with late complications and underwent the modified surgical procedure of laparoscopic proximally extended colorectal resection with two-Stage Turnbull-Cutait pull-through coloanal anastomosis (PE-Bacon) between November 2019 and October 2020 in the Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University.

Results

A total of 15 patients were performed the modified laparoscopic procedure of PE-Bacon, of which 1 patient underwent conversion from laparoscopic to open operation for intraoperative massive hemorrhage. Overall, the major (Clavien-Dindo III-V) postoperative complications occurred in 1 patient, anastomotic leakage was observed in 2 (13.3%) patients, and anastomotic stricture was observed in 4 (26.7%) patients. No patient had to be reoperated and died. Up to now, at the average follow-up of (524.40 ± 108.39) days, the preoperative symptoms of 93.3% (14/15) patients were relieved, with nine patients achieved complete remission, five patients only suffered minor symptoms. Because of the progression of radiation uropathy, one patient still had a vesicovaginal fistula as pre-operative complication. Colostomy reversal has been performed on 8 (53.3%) patients at an average postoperative duration of 299.5 ± 92.68 days, among whom only 2 patients suffered from major Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) until now.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic PE-Bacon surgery is a safe and feasible surgical procedure for late complications of CRP with low morbidity and high symptom remission rate.

Redo-surgery after failed colorectal or coloanal anastomosis: Morbidity, mortality and factors predictive of success. A retrospective study of 200 patients

AIM

In cases of anastomotic failure after colorectal (CRA) or coloanal anastomosis (CAA), revision of the anastomosis is an ambitious surgical option that can be proposed in order to maintain bowel continuity. Our aim was to assess postoperative morbidity, risk of failure and risk factor for failure in patients after CRA or CAA.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent redo-CRA/CAA in our institution between 2007-2018 were retrospectively included. The success of redo-CRA/CAA was defined by the restoration of bowel continuity 12 months after the surgery.

RESULTS

Two hundred patients (114 male: 57%) were analyzed. The indication for redo-CRA/CAA was chronic pelvic infection in 74 patients (37%), recto-vaginal or urinary fistula in 59 patients (30%), anastomotic stenosis in 36 patients (18%) and redo anastomosis after previous anastomosis takedown in 31 patients (15%). Twenty-three percent of the patients developed a severe postoperative complication. Anastomotic leakage was diagnosed in 39 patients (20%). One-year-success of the redo-CRA/CAA was obtained in 80% of patients. In multivariate analysis, only obesity was associated with redo-CRA/CAA failure (p = 0.042). We elaborated a pre-operative predictive score of success using the four variables: male sex, age > 60 years, obesity and history of pelvic radiotherapy. The success of redo-CRA/CAA was 92%, 86%, 80% and 62% for a preoperative predictive score value of 0, 1, 2 and ≥3, respectively (p = 0.010).

CONCLUSIONS

In case of failure of primary CRA/CAA, bowel continuity can be saved in 4 out of 5 patients by redo-CRA/CAA despite 23% suffering severe postoperative morbidity.

Redo surgery after low anterior resection for chronic pelvic sinus and anastomotic disruption. Could pull-through procedure with delayed anastomosis be a feasible alternative? Case reports and narrative review

Introduction

Case presentation

Discussion

Conclusion

•

Complications after colorectal anastomosis, such as septic leakage or anastomotic disruption, remain a problem to deal with for colorectal surgeons.

•

Conversion to terminal colostomy is the most frequent option chosen, but the most of time restoration of bowel continuity is not performed.

•

Delayed coloanal anastomosis with pull-through procedure described by Turnbull-Cutait might be an option to consider in difficult situations, to maintain or to restore intestinal continuity and could be also chosen as a first option for coloanal anastomosis.

Second redo surgery after two consecutive failures of a colorectal or coloanal anastomosis: is it reasonable?

PURPOSE

Colorectal redo surgery is well known to be a difficult procedure, associated with a high risk of failure. The aim of this study was to look into patients presenting two consecutive failed colorectal (CRA) or coloanal (CAA) anastomosis who underwent a second redo surgery (i.e., third anastomosis).

METHODS

A retrospective study based on a prospective database of second redo surgeries of CRA or CAA, in an expert center. Sixteen patients between 2005 and 2020 were analyzed.

RESULTS

After a mean follow-up of 28 ± 26 months, success of surgery (defined as no stoma at the end of follow-up) was reported in 10/16 patients (63%). One patient with chronic anastomotic leakage and another with early colonic ischemia had no defunctioning stoma reversal. In the remaining four patients with a failed second redo surgery, a definitive stoma was ultimately created for fistula recurrence (n = 1), poor functional results (n = 2), or local cancer recurrence (n = 1). Two risk factors for failure of this second redo surgery were significantly found in a univariate analysis: (1) nature of the primary anastomosis: 3/13 s redo surgeries failed (23%) if a CRA was first made and 3/3 (100%) if it was a CAA (p = 0.036); (2) age: patients with a failed second redo surgery were older (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

A 63% rate of success of second redo surgery was observed after two failed CRA or CAA. Although a demanding procedure, it can be proposed to carefully selected and motivated patients.

Rectovaginal fistula after low anterior resection: Prevention and management

Rectovaginal fistula after low anterior resection for rectal malignancy is one of the most challenging postoperative complications because it is difficult to treat and may complicate plans of adjuvant therapy. This problematic complication could lead to multiple operations, stoma formation, sexual dysfunction, fecal incontinence and psychosocial ramifications. This review comprehensively covers an overview of its incidence, risk factors, presentation and evaluation, management (ranging from conservative measures, endoscopic treatment and local tissue repair to radical resection and redo anastomosis) and treatment outcomes of rectovaginal fistula after low anterior resection. Notably, these therapeutic options and outcomes are influenced by several factors, including the size and location of the fistula, tumor clearance, cancer staging, quality of colorectal anastomosis and surrounding tissue, presence of diverting stoma, previous attempted repair, and the surgeon’s experience. Also, strategies to prevent rectovaginal fistula after low anterior resection are presented with illustrations. Finally, a decision-making algorithm for managing this complication is proposed.

Can end-to-end anastomosis reduce the risks of anastomotic leak compared to side-to-end anastomosis? A comparative study of 518 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for low- or mid-rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

After laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) for low or mid-rectal cancer, we observed several cases of anastomotic leakage (AL) in patients with side-to-end anastomosis (STE). Thus, from December 2018, we routinely performed end-to-end anastomosis (ETE). The aim of this study was to assess if this new strategy changed AL and chronic pelvic sepsis rates in our department.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on all the patients who underwent a laparoscopic rectal resection with TME and sphincter-saving surgery for mid- and low-rectal adenocarcinoma from January 2006 to December 2019. A comparative study between STE and routine ETE was performed. The primary outcome was the assessment of postoperative AL rate. The secondary outcomes were: (a) overall morbidity rate; (c) severe morbidity rate defined by a Clavien-Dindo score > 3; (c) chronic leak rate.

RESULTS

Five hundred eighteen patients underwent TME: STE was performed in 394 cases (76%) and ETE in 124 but for the first 66 cases only if STE was impossible (i.e., too short colon, obese patients). AL rates for STE were 57/204 (23%) after stapled colorectal anastomosis (CRA) and 34/190 (18%) after manual coloanal anastomosis (CAA). Since December 2018, routine ETE was performed in 58 cases. The AL rate for routine ETE was 3/24 (12%) for CRA, and 2/34 (6%) for CAA: thus, The AL rate dropped from 23% (91/394) after STE to 9% (5/58) after routine ETE (p = 0.0005). After a mean follow-up of 43 months (6-156), incidence of chronic AL was 68/394 (17%) after STE and 15/117 (13%) after ETE (p = 0.32). In the group of ETE with chronic AL, 11 patients (73%) spontaneously healed and stoma reversal was possible, whereas this happened in only 20 patients (29%) after STE (p = 0.0025).

CONCLUSIONS

ETE seems to be associated with a significantly lower rate of AL and higher rate of spontaneous healing after chronic AL than STE.

Two-step pull-through colo-anal anastomosis aiming to avoid stoma in rectal cancer surgery: A "real life" study in a developing country

BACKGROUND

Delayed colo-anal anastomosis (DCA) is an underused technique rarely performed after resection of primary low rectal adenocarcinoma. The objective of this study was to compare the short-term outcomes of DCA and classical colo-anal anastomosis (CAA).

METHODS

This is a retrospective comparative study carried out at two tertiary centres in Morocco and France. It included all patients who underwent colo-anal anastomosis after complete mesorectal excision for primary rectal adenocarcinoma between January 2018 and December 2019. The main outcomes were 90-day morbidity and rates completing the surgical steps of DCA and CAA.

RESULTS

Among 215 rectal resections, 45 patients received colo-anal anastomosis, including 19 DCA and 26 CAA. Seventeen patients in the DCA group completed the two steps compared to 16 in the CAA group (89.5% vs. 61.5%, P=0.04). The rates of severe complications (26.9% vs. 26.3%, P=0.96) and anastomotic leakage (42.3% vs. 31.6%, P=0.46) were not different between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that DCA was associated with a higher rate of completing the two surgical steps, with no difference in overall and severe morbidity. DCA may be a strong alternative to classical colo-anal anastomosis.

Delayed coloanal anastomosis as a stoma-sparing alternative to immediate coloanal anastomosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recent clinical trials have demonstrated favorable outcomes associated with trans-anal colonic pull-through for rectal resection followed by delayed coloanal anastomoses (DCA), resulting in a resurgence in popularity of the technique. This meta-analysis aims to review existing literature to evaluate the postoperative complications associated with DCA, and to make comparisons with immediate coloanal anastomoses (ICA) after colorectal resection to assess the suitability of DCA as an alternative form of surgical treatment.

METHODS

Medline and Embase databases were reviewed from inception until 31 July 2020 in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Single-arm studies that involved patients undergoing DCA for benign or malignant causes were selected, and meta-analysis of proportions was conducted to determine the prevalence of postoperative complications following DCA. Comparative studies comparing postoperative outcomes between DCA and ICA were also included for comparative meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing DCA were significantly less likely to require diverting stoma construction as compared to ICA (odds ratio [OR] = 0.04; confidence interval [CI]: 0.02-0.07; P < 0.001). Overall postoperative morbidity (OR = 0.50; 95% CI: 0.23-1.12; P = 0.09) and mortality (OR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.12-1.98; P = 0.32) was comparable between DCA and ICA groups. No significant differences in perioperative complications, such as anastomotic leakage (OR = 0.42; 95% CI: 0.11-1.64; P = 0.21), postoperative ileus, pelvic abscesses, or sepsis, were noted between DCA and ICA.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows no differences in complications or functional outcomes between DCA and ICA. Pooled analysis expectedly revealed a lower rate of diverting stoma in patients undergoing DCA. DCA is thus a safe alternative to current surgical practices where avoidance of a stoma is desired.

Transanal and transabdominal combined endoscopic resection of rectal stenosis and anal reconstruction based on transanal endoscopic technique

OBJECTIVE

To propose a method for the resection of the rectal anastomotic stenosis and anal reconstruction based on the transanal endoscopic technique through a transanal and transabdominal combined endoscopic resection, and to verify its clinical effectiveness.

METHODS

Thirty-eight patients with anastomotic stenosis were admitted to the Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, China, from January 2016 to September 2019. Patients were divided into an experimental group (17 patients) and a control group (21 patients) subjected to the removal of the intestinal stenosis followed by anal reconstruction, they underwent transanal and transabdominal endoscopic surgery and traditional transabdominal surgery, respectively. Data on intraoperative blood loss, operation time, postoperative recovery, and prognosis were collected.

RESULTS

(1) The median intraoperative blood loss was approximately 100 ml, without conversion to laparotomy during the surgery and intraoperative complications. The safety of the surgical operation was improved. (2) The operation time was shortened compared to previous reports, and the median operative time was 193 min. The average time of transanal endoscopic dissociation to the retroperitoneal fold was 76 min. (3) Laparoscopic assistance was carried out on 14 of the17 patients, and the incision was reduced. (4) The short-term curative effect was quite satisfactory, without permanent stoma. The average time to recover food intake after the surgery was 1.5 days. The average ambulation time was 3 days. Within 30 days after the surgery, one case suffered anastomotic leakage and then underwent refunctioning stoma through a second surgery. One patient suffered from intestinal obstruction, and the condition was improved through a conservative treatment. One case experienced delayed abdominal wound healing.

CONCLUSION

The transanal and transabdominal endoscopic resection of the rectal anastomotic stenosis and anal reconstruction reduced the difficulty of the surgery, improved its safety, shortened the operation time, decreased the operative complications, and enabled patients to recover well after surgery.

Functional outcomes of patients undergoing successful redo surgery after failed primary colorectal or coloanal anastomosis for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

After a failure of a colorectal or coloanal anastomosis, redo anastomotic surgery aims to avoid the risk of permanent stoma but, overall, to provide a satisfactory functional result and quality of life. Very limited data exist regarding the long-term results after a successful redo anastomosis. The present study aimed to report the long-term functional outcomes and quality of life in patients after a successful redo colorectal anastomosis or coloanal anastomosis.

METHODS

Between 2007 and 2018, all patients who had a successful restoration of bowel continuity after a failed primary anastomosis performed for a rectal cancer were included. Functional outcomes and quality of life were assessed using the low anterior rectal syndrome score and the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-seven patients were eligible for inclusion in this study, with long-term functional outcomes assessed in 73 patients (57%). After a median follow-up of 69 months, 31 patients presented no or minor low anterior rectal syndrome (42%), whereas 31 patients reported a major low anterior rectal syndrome (42%). A definitive stoma was confectioned in 11 patients (15%), despite the technical success of redo anastomosis due to poor functional results. Only operative interval <36 months was associated with a poor functional outcome (P = .001), whereas all other factors such as pelvic radiotherapy were not (P = .848). An absence of major low anterior rectal syndrome was the only factor associated with improved quality of life (P = .001).

CONCLUSION

After successful redo colorectal anastomosis or coloanal anastomosis, good functional outcomes can be achieved in almost half of patients with a well-preserved quality of life but requires a prolonged postoperative period of rehabilitation.

Delayed coloanal anastomosis: an alternative option for restorative rectal cancer surgery after high-dose pelvic radiotherapy for prostate cancer

AIM

Restorative total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer after high-dose pelvic radiotherapy for prostate cancer has been reported to provide an unacceptable rate of pelvic sepsis. In a previous publication we proposed that delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCAA) should be performed in this situation. The present study aimed to assess the feasibility and outcomes of this strategy.

METHOD

Between 2000 and 2018, 1094 men were operated on for rectal cancer in our institution. All men with T2/T3 mid and low rectal cancer with preoperative radiotherapy and restorative TME were considered for this study (n = 416). Patients with external-beam high-dose radiotherapy (EBHRT) for prostate cancer (70-78 Gy) were identified and compared with patients with conventional long-course chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by TME. We compared our already published historical cohort (2000-2012), including arm A (CRT + TME; n = 236) and arm B (EBHRT + TME; n = 12), with our early cohort (2013-2018), including arm C (CRT + TME; n = 158) and arm D (EBHRT + TME-DCAA; n = 10). The end-points were morbidity, pelvic sepsis, reoperation rate and quality of the specimen.

RESULTS

Overall morbidity was not significantly different between groups. Pelvic sepsis decreased from 50% (arm B) to 10% (arm D) with the use of DCAA (P = 0.074), and was similar between arms A, C and D. Quality of the specimen was not significantly different between the four groups.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that TME with DCAA in patients with previous EBHRT is feasible, with the same postoperative pelvic sepsis rate as conventional CRT.

Turnbull-Cutait technique without ileostomy after total mesorectal excision is associated with acceptably low early post-operative morbidity

Background

This study aimed to compare the standard one‐stage coloanal anastomosis (CAA) technique plus diverting ileostomy and the Turnbull–Cutait (T–C) technique with delayed CAA in terms of early post‐operative morbidity in patients with low rectal cancer.

Methods

A total of 33 patients with non‐metastatic distal rectal cancer who were operated with one of the two different reconstruction methods (one‐stage CAA plus diverting ileostomy or two‐stage T–C technique with delayed CAA) after total mesorectal excision were included in this retrospective study. The two groups were compared for early post‐operative morbidity within 30 post‐operative days using complication frequency, Clavien–Dindo classification and Comprehensive Complication Index scores.

Results

The two groups did not differ in terms of morbidity parameters, including frequency of any morbidity, presence of grade 3b morbidity requiring management under general anaesthesia, as well as Comprehensive Complication Index score (P > 0.05 for all).

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that the two techniques did not differ in terms of early post‐operative morbidity. Owing to its comparable morbidity and safety to CAA plus concomitant ileostomy performed at the same session, the T–C technique may be considered in distal rectal cancer patients refusing to have a temporary stoma and in patients in whom CAA poses technical difficulties during the initial operation.

Long-term functional results and quality of life after redo rectal surgery: delayed versus immediate colo-anal anastomosis

AIM

To compare the functional results and quality of life after delayed colo-anal anastomosis (DCAA) or immediate colo-anal anastomosis (ICAA) following redo rectal surgery.

METHOD

Twenty-six patients with DCAA between 2014 and 2018 were studied retrospectively (group A). Two control groups were used: 26 ICAA after redo surgery (group B) and 52 colo-anal anastomosis (CAA) after anterior resection (group C). Control groups were matched for age, sex, pelvic radiotherapy and time to surgery. Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) and Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI) scores were used to assess function and quality of life.

RESULTS

The indications for surgery were comparable for groups A and B: anastomotic failure with chronic sepsis (38% vs 50%, P = 0.40), vaginal fistula (42% vs 42%, P = 1) and urinary fistula (20% vs 8%, P = 0.22) as well as the number of previous abdominal operations (1.3 ± 0.9 vs 1.1 ± 0.6, P = 0.19). The median LARS score in the first 2 years was 30 [interquartile range (IQR) 14-41] for group A, 23 (IQR 0-41) for group B and 22 (IQR 11-37) for group C. After 2 years, the median LARS score improved in each group [A, 21 (IQR 11-35); B, 18 (IQR 5-26); C, 13 (IQR 9-20)], but was still high in group A. There was a tendency toward more major LARS in group A than in group B (46% vs 27%; P = 0.149). There was no difference in the mean GIQLI score between groups A and B (120 ± 16 vs 117 ± 19; P = 0.53) at the end of the follow-up period. Time after stoma closure (< 2 years) and previous radiotherapy were risk factors for major LARS in all populations.

CONCLUSION

ICAA should be the procedure of choice where possible in redo surgery as it has better functional outcomes.

Post surgical rectovaginal fistula: who really benefits from stoma diversion?

To analyze the role of stoma diversion and timing of stoma maintenance in the healing of post-surgical Recto Vaginal Fistulae (psRVF). A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained registry. All patients with a psRVF diagnosed at IRCCS Sacro Cuore-Don Calabria Hospital of Negrar di Valpolicella from January 2002 to December 2016 were analyzed. The baseline treatment was a fecal diversion. Patients were divided into two groups according to healing time: < 6 months (Group 1) or > 6 months (Group 2). 2043 women underwent rectal resections in the study period. We recorded 37 patients with psRVF (1.8%). Nineteen women (51.3%) healed (Group 1) within 6 months. The median time of psRVF recovery in group 1 was 99.7 days. Concomitant local treatment of the fistula did not influence the healing rate (p 0.8). Colostomies were significantly higher in group 1 (p 0.003). The size of the psRVF influenced the success rate of fistula healing with loop stoma (p 0.07). A multivariate analysis the presence of fever and pelvic abscess (pelvis sepsis) were significantly associated with diversion failure (p 0.035). A step-up approach with the maintenance of loop stoma at least for six months for all patients with psRVF could be changed. Patients with larger fistula and pelvic sepsis at index procedure should be addressed earlier to a specific second-level treatment.

Reversal of Hartmann's procedure in patients following failed colorectal or coloanal anastomosis: an analysis of 45 consecutive cases

AIM

This study aimed to assess outcomes of Hartmann's reversal (HR) after failure of previous colorectal anastomosis (CRA) or coloanal anastomosis (CAA).

METHODS

All patients planned for HR from 1997 to 2018 following the failure of previous CRA or CAA were included.

RESULTS

From 1997 to 2018, 45 HRs were planned following failed CRA or CAA performed for rectal cancer (n = 19, 42%), diverticulitis (n = 16, 36%), colon cancer (n = 4, 9%), inflammatory bowel disease (n = 2, 4%) or other aetiologies (n = 4, 9%). In two (4%) patients, HR could not be performed. HR was performed in 43/45 (96%) patients with stapled CRA (n = 24, 53%), delayed handsewn CAA with colonic pull-through (n = 11, 24%), standard handsewn CAA (n = 6, 14%) or stapled ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (n = 2, 4%). One (2%) patient died postoperatively. Overall postoperative morbidity rate was 44%, including 27% of patients with severe postoperative complication (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3). After a mean follow-up of 38 ± 30 months (range 1-109), 35/45 (78%) patients presented without stoma. Multivariate analysis identified a remnant rectal stump < 7.5 cm in length as the only independent risk factor for long-term persistent stoma. Among stoma-free patients, low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score was ≤ 20 (normal) in 43%, between 21 and 29 (minor LARS) in 33% and ≥ 30 (major LARS) in 24% of the patients.

CONCLUSION

HR can be recommended in patients following a failed CRA or CAA. It permits 78% of patients to be free of stoma. A short length of the remnant rectal stump is the only predictive factor of persistent stoma in these patients.

Normative Data for the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Score (LARS Score)

OBJECTIVE

To provide normative data for the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) score.

BACKGROUND

The LARS score is a validated and frequently used tool measuring bowel dysfunction after sphincter sparing surgery for rectal cancer. The interpretation of LARS score results has previously been limited by the lack of normative data.

METHODS

An age and sex-stratified random sample of 3440 citizens from the general population was drawn from the Danish civil registration system (age range 20-89 years, 50% females). A brief questionnaire including the LARS score and health-related items were distributed electronically or by post.

RESULTS

A total of 1875 (54.5%) responded, 54.0% were females. In the age group 50 to 79 years, relevant for most rectal cancer studies, the response rate was 70.5% (n = 807). In this specific age group, 18.8% of the females and 9.6% of the males had a LARS score ≥30, corresponding to the LARS score category "major LARS" (P = 0.001), and the median (interquartile range) LARS score was 16 (7-26) and 11 (4-22), respectively (P < 0.001). Responders with physical disease had a statistically significant higher risk of a LARS score ≥30, compared with responders without any physical disease (odds ratio 2.2, 95% confidence interval 1.6-2.9, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A LARS score ≥30 (major LARS) is common in the general population, especially in the age group 50 to 79 years. Normative data for the LARS score are now available and can be taken into account when interpreting LARS score results in scientific studies of bowel function after rectal cancer treatment.

Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgical Management of Persisting Pelvic Sepsis or Chronic Sinus After Low Anterior Resection

BACKGROUND

Redo surgery of persisting pelvic sepsis or chronic presacral sinus after low anterior resection for rectal cancer is challenging. Transanal minimally invasive surgery improves visibility and accessibility of the deep pelvis.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the conventional approach with transanal minimally invasive surgery for redo pelvic surgery with or without anastomotic reconstruction.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted in a tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

All consecutive patients undergoing redo pelvic surgery after low anterior resection for rectal cancer between January 2005 and March 2018 were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Redo surgery was divided into redo anastomosis and intersphincteric completion proctectomy. Transanal minimally invasive surgery procedures since November 2014 were compared with the conventional approach.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary end points were procedural characteristics and 90-day major complications.

RESULTS

In total, 104 patients underwent redo surgery; 47 received a redo anastomosis (18 conventional and 29 transanal minimally invasive surgery) and 57 underwent intersphincteric completion proctectomy (35 conventional and 22 transanal minimally invasive surgery). The transabdominal part of the transanal minimally invasive surgery procedures was performed laparoscopically in 72% and 59% of redo anastomosis and intersphincteric completion proctectomy, compared with 6% and 34% in the conventional group (p < 0.001 and p = 0.100). The 90-day major complication rate was 33% and 45% after redo anastomosis (p=0.546) and 29% and 41% after intersphincteric completion proctectomy (p=0.349) in conventional surgery and transanal minimally invasive surgery.

LIMITATIONS

A limitation of this study is the relatively small sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that transanal minimally invasive surgery is a valid alternative to conventional top-down redo pelvic surgery for persisting pelvic sepsis or chronic sinus, with more often a laparoscopic approach for the abdominal part. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B87. MANEJO QUIRÚRGICO TRANSANAL MÍNIMAMENTE INVASIVO DE LA SEPSIS PÉLVICA PERSISTENTE O DE UN SENO CRÓNICO DESPUÉS DE RESECCIÓN ANTERIOR BAJA: La cirugía de reoperación por sepsis pélvica persistente o un seno presacro crónico después de una resección anterior baja por cáncer de recto es un desafío. La cirugía transanal mínimamente invasiva mejora la visibilidad y la accesibilidad a la región profunda de la pelvis.El objetivo de este estudio fue comparar el abordaje convencional con la cirugía transanal mínimamente invasiva para cirugía pélvica de reoperación con o sin reconstrucción anastomótica.Este es un estudio de cohorte retrospectiva.Este estudio se realizó en un centro de referencia terciario.Se incluyeron todos los pacientes consecutivos que se sometieron a una cirugía pélvica de reoperación después de una resección anterior baja por cáncer de recto entre enero de 2005 y marzo de 2018.La cirugía de reoperación se dividió en reconstrucción de anastomosis y proctectomía interesfintérica. Los procedimientos de cirugía transanal mínimamente invasiva desde noviembre de 2014 se compararon con el abordaje convencional.Los puntos primarios fueron las características del procedimiento y las complicaciones mayores a 90 días.En total, 104 pacientes fueron sometidos a cirugía de reoperación; 47 recibieron una reconstrucción de anastomosis (18 abordaje convencional y 29 cirugía transanal mínimamente invasiva) y 57 se sometieron a una proctectomía interesfintérica (35 abordaje convencional y 22 cirugía transanal mínimamente invasiva). La parte transabdominal de los procedimientos de cirugía transanal mínimamente invasiva se realizó por vía laparoscópica en el 72% y el 59% de las reconstrucciones de anastomosis y las proctectomías interesfintéricas, respectivamente, en comparación con el 6% y el 34%, respectivamente, en el grupo convencional (p <0.001 y p = 0.100). La tasa de complicaciones mayores a los 90 días fue del 33% y del 45% después de la anastomosis de reconstrucción (p = 0.546) y del 29% y 41% después de la proctectomía interesfintérica (p = 0.349) en cirugía convencional y cirugía transanal mínimamente invasiva, respectivamente.La limitación de este estudio es el tamaño relativamente pequeño de la muestra.Este estudio sugiere que la cirugía transanal mínimamente invasiva es una alternativa válida para la cirugía pélvica de reoperación convencional en sepsis pélvica persistente o seno crónico, con un abordaje laparoscópico utilizado más frecuentemente para la parte abdominal. Vea el Abstract del video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B87.

Safety and feasibility of repeat laparoscopic colorectal resection: a matched case-control study

BACKGROUND

Perioperative outcomes of repeat laparoscopic colorectal resection (LCRR) have not been extensively reported.

METHODS

Patients who underwent LCRR from 2010 to 2018 in an expert center were retrieved from a prospectively collected database and compared to 2:1 matched sample. Matching was based on demographics, surgical indication [colorectal cancer (CRC) or benign condition], and type of resection (right-sided resection or left-sided resection or proctectomy).

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients underwent repeat LCRR with a median time of 36 months between the primary and the repeat LCRR. They were 12 (52%) men with a mean age of 64.9 years (31-87) and a median BMI of 21.4 kg/m² (17.7-34). Indication for repeat LCRR was CRC, dysplasia, anastomotic stricture, and inflammatory bowel disease in 11 (48%), 5 (22%), 4 (17%), and 3 (13%) patients, respectively. A right-sided resection, a left-sided resection, and proctectomy were reported in 11 (48%), 8 (35%), and 4 (17%) patients, respectively. Median blood loss reached 211 mL (range 0-2000 mL). Thirteen (57%) patients required conversion to laparotomy including 12 for intense adhesions. The median length of hospital stay was 7.5 days (5-20). Two (9%) major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3) were reported: 1 (4%) anastomotic fistula and 1 (4%) postoperative hemorrhage, without mortality. Among patients who underwent repeat LCRR for CRC, histopathological examination showed R0 resection in all patients, with at least 12 lymph nodes harvested in ten (91%) patients. After matched case-control analysis that compared to primary LCRR, conversion rate (p = 0.03), operative time (p = 0.03), and intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.0016) were significantly increased in repeat LCRR, without impact on postoperative outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Repeat LCRR seems to be feasible and safe in expert hands without compromising the oncologic outcomes. Intense postoperative adhesions and misidentification of blood supply might lead to conversion to laparotomy. Real benefits of laparoscopic approach for repeat LCRR should be assessed in further studies.

Outcome After Redo Surgery for Complicated Colorectal and Coloanal Anastomosis: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

When a colorectal or coloanal anastomosis fails because of persistent leakage or stenosis, or the anastomosis has to be resected for recurrent cancer, constructing a new anastomosis might be an option in selected patients. This is a rare and complex type of redo surgery.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review was to evaluate the current literature on redo anastomosis for complicated colorectal or coloanal anastomosis.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the PROSPERO register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform database was performed.

STUDY SELECTION

Two reviewers independently screened the available literature. All studies reporting on redo surgery and aiming at reconstruction of a prior low colorectal or coloanal anastomosis for any indication were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome was successful restoration of continuity. Secondary outcomes were postoperative morbidity, pelvic sepsis, incontinence, and mortality.

RESULTS

Nine studies were included, comprising 291 patients, of whom 76% had index surgery for colorectal cancer. Pooled proportions showed an overall success rate of 79% (95% CI, 69-86), with a pooled incidence of major postoperative morbidity of 16% (95% CI, 10-24). The pooled pelvic sepsis rate was 16% (95% CI, 9-27), and the pooled surgical reintervention and readmission rates were 11% (95% CI, 8-17) and 7% (95% CI, 3-15). Five studies reported on incontinence, with a pooled proportion of 17% (95% CI, 10-26).

LIMITATIONS

The limitations of this review are the lack of randomized controlled trials and high-quality studies, and the small sample sizes and heterogeneous patient populations in the included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Redo surgery is a valuable treatment option for the complicated colorectal or coloanal anastomosis with 79% successful restoration of bowel continuity in the published literature from experienced tertiary centers.

Redo coloanal anastomosis for anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection for rectal cancer: an analysis of 59 cases

AIM

The construction of a new coloanal anastomosis (CAA) following anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection (LAR) is challenging. The available literature on this topic is scarce. The aim of this two-centre study was to determine the clinical success and morbidity after redo CAA.

METHOD

This retrospective cohort study included all patients with anastomotic leakage after LAR for rectal cancer who underwent a redo CAA between 2010 and 2014 in two tertiary referral centres. Short- and long-term morbidity were analysed, including both anastomotic leakage and permanent stoma rates on completion of follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 59 patients were included, of whom 45 (76%) were men, with a mean age of 59 years (SD ± 9.4). The median interval between index and redo surgery was 14 months [interquartile range (IQR) 8-27]. The median duration of follow-up was 27 months (IQR 17-36). The most frequent complication was anastomotic leakage of the redo CAA occurring in 24 patients (41%), resulting in a median of three reinterventions (IQR 2-4) per patient. At the end of follow-up, bowel continuity was restored in 39/59 (66%) patients. Fourteen (24%) patients received a definitive colostomy and six (10%) still had a diverting ileostomy. In a multivariable model, leakage of the redo CAA was the only risk factor for permanent stoma (OR 0.022; 95% CI 0.004-0.122).

CONCLUSION

Redo CAA is a viable option in selected patients with persisting leakage after LAR for rectal cancer who want their bowel continuity restored. However, patients should be fully informed about the relatively high morbidity and reintervention rates.

Anastomotic stenosis after coloanal, colorectal and ileoanal anastomosis: what is the best management?

AIM

To assess the results of treatment for colorectal (CRA), coloanal (CAA) or ileal pouch-anal (IPAA) anastomotic stenosis (AS).

METHOD

All patients operated on for AS from 1995 to 2014 were included. Success was defined as the absence of an additional surgical procedure for AS during 12 months after the last procedure and the absence of a stoma at the end of follow-up.

RESULTS

Fifty consecutive patients presenting with AS after CRA (n = 16, 32%), CAA (n = 18, 36%) or IPAA (n = 16, 32%), performed for colorectal cancer (n = 28, 56%), familial adenomatous polyposis (n = 5, 10%), inflammatory bowel disease (n = 8, 16%), diverticulitis (n = 4, 8%), benign colorectal neoplasia (n = 3, 6%) or other (n = 2, 4%) underwent a total of 99 procedures including digital (n = 14, 14%), instrumental (n = 38, 38%) or endoscopic dilatation (n = 5, 5%), transanal AS stricturoplasty (n = 9, 10%), transanal circular stapler resection (n = 11, 11%) or transabdominal redo-anastomosis (n = 22, 22%). Overall the per-procedure success rate was 53% (52/99). Success rates were 36% (5/14) for digital dilatation, 40% (15/38) for instrumental dilatation, 20% (1/5) for endoscopic dilatation, 64% (7/11) for circular stapler resection, 89% (8/9) for stricturoplasty and 73% (16/22) for transabdominal redo-anastomosis. After a mean follow-up of 46 months, 42/50 (84%) patients had treatment that was considered successful. Multivariate analysis identified redo-anastomosis [OR = 5.1 (95% CI: 1.4-18.7), P = 0.003] as the only independent prognostic factor for success.

CONCLUSION

AS should be managed according to a step-up strategy. Conservative procedures are associated with acceptable success rates. If these fail, transabdominal redo-anastomosis is associated with the highest probability of success.

Persistent Asymptomatic Anastomotic Leakage After Laparoscopic Sphincter-Saving Surgery for Rectal Cancer: Can Diverting Stoma Be Reversed Safely at 6 Months?

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery raises the problem of the timing of diverting stoma reversal.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess whether stoma reversal can be safely performed at 6 months after laparoscopic sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer with total mesorectal excision in patients with persistent asymptomatic anastomotic leakage.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective analysis of a prospective database.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a tertiary colorectal surgery referral center.

PATIENTS

All of the patients with anastomotic leakage were treated conservatively after sphincter-saving laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main study measure was postoperative morbidity.

RESULTS

A total of 110 (26%) of 429 patients who presented with anastomotic leakage and were treated conservatively were diagnosed only on CT scan (60 symptomatic (14%) and 50 asymptomatic (12%)). During follow up, 82 (75%) of 110 anastomotic leakages healed spontaneously after a mean delay of 16 ± 6 weeks (range, 4-30 weeks). Among these patients, 7 (9%) of 82 developed postoperative symptomatic pelvic sepsis after stoma reversal. Among the 28 patients remaining, 3 died during follow-up. The remaining 25 patients (23%) presented with persistent asymptomatic anastomotic leakage with chronic sinus >6 months after rectal surgery. Stoma reversal was performed in 19 asymptomatic patients, but 3 (16%) of 19 developed postoperative symptomatic pelvic sepsis after stoma reversal (3/19 vs 7/82 patients; p = 0.217), requiring a redo surgery with transanal colonic pull-through and delayed coloanal anastomosis (n = 2) or standard coloanal anastomosis (n = 1). Regarding the 6 final patients, abdominal redo surgery was performed because of either symptoms or anastomotic leakage with a large presacral cavity.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by its small sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

In the great majority of patients with persistent anastomotic leakage at 6 months after total mesorectal excision, stoma reversal can be safely performed.

Transanal endoscopic surgery for complications of prior rectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Long-term complications of previous rectal surgery (e.g., enterovisceral fistula, anastomotic stricture, rectal stenosis) can be challenging problems for which transabdominal or transperineal surgery with or without definitive fecal diversion is often required. Transanal endoscopic surgery (TES) might allow for local treatment of these complications, thereby saving patients from otherwise major surgery.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients undergoing TES in the IJsselland Hospital (NL) since 1996 were recorded in a prospective database, of which twenty patients were treated for complications after previous rectal surgery. Data on prior treatment, surgical techniques, outcomes, and need for additional surgery were collected.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were identified from the database (rectourinary fistula n = 3, rectovaginal fistula n = 5, anastomotic stricture n = 8, and rectal stenosis n = 4). One of the three (33 %) rectourinary fistulas and two of five (40 %) rectovaginal fistulas were successfully treated with TES. Anastomotic strictures were successfully treated in 5/8 (63 %) patients. Strictures after local excision of rectal tumors were successfully treated in 3/4 (75 %) patients. No minor complication and one major complication occurred (rectovaginal fistula after stenoplasty eventually requiring Hartmann's procedure).

CONCLUSIONS

Transanal treatment of anastomotic strictures, rectal stenosis, and fistula after prior rectal surgery is safe and effective in a large proportion of patients. TES should be considered as a first step in all patients presenting with these late complications after rectal surgery.

Rectovaginal Fistula: What Is the Optimal Strategy?: An Analysis of 79 Patients Undergoing 286 Procedures

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess results of surgery for rectovaginal fistula (RVF) and prognostic factors for success.

BACKGROUND DATA

Management of RVF remains challenging and numerous surgical options are available. Few large reports of RVF are available and success prognostic factors remain unknown.

METHODS

All patients operated for RVF from 1996 to 2014 were included.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine patients presented RVF due to Crohn disease in 34 (43%), postoperative in 25 (32%), obstetrical in 7 (9%), radiation proctitis in 4 (5%), and miscellaneous in 9 (11%). A total of 286 procedures (132 with associated stoma, 46%) were performed including 217 conservative (76%) [seton drainage (n = 59; 21%), vaginal (n = 49, 17%) or rectal advancement flap (n = 46; 16%), diverting stoma only (n = 27; 9%), plug (n = 15; 5%), glue (n = 13; 5%), or others (n = 8, 3%)]; and 69 major procedures (24%) [gracilis muscle interposition (n = 32; 11%), coloanal or colorectal anastomosis (n = 19; 7%) including 11 delayed anastomosis with colonic pull-through, biomesh interposition (n = 9, 3%), and abdominoperineal resection (n = 9; 3%)]. After a mean follow-up of 33 months, overall success rate was 57 of 79 (72%). Per-procedure-based multivariate analysis identified major procedure [odds ratio (OR): 6.4 (2.9-14.2); P < 0.001], diverting stoma [OR: 3.5 (1.4-8.7); P = 0.009], less than 9 months between diagnosis and first surgery [OR: 2.3 (1.1-5.3); P = 0.046], and first surgery in our institution [OR: 3.2 (1.5-6.9); P = 0.003], as independent factors for success.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggested that aggressive surgical treatment of RVF, including early use of temporary stoma and major procedure in case of failure of previous local treatment, leads to high success rates.