Omental flaps in patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer

The effect of omentoplasty in various surgical operations: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Omentoplasty is commonly used in various surgeries. However, its effectiveness is unsure due to lack of convincing data and research. To clarify the impact of omentoplasty on postoperative complications of various procedures, this systematic review and meta-analysis was performed.

METHODS

A systematic review of published literatures from four databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase before 14 July 2022. The authors primarily included publications on five major surgical operations performed in conjunction with omentoplasty: thoracic surgery, esophageal surgery, gastrointestinal surgery, pelvi-perineal surgery, and liver surgery. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO.

RESULTS

This review included 25 273 patients from 91 studies ( n =9670 underwent omentoplasty). Omentoplasty was associated with a lower risk of overall complications particularly in gastrointestinal [relative risk (RR) 0.53; 95% CI: 0.39-0.72] and liver surgery (RR 0.54; 95% CI: 0.39-0.74). Omentoplasty reduced the risk of postoperative infection in thoracic (RR 0.38; 95% CI: 0.18-0.78) and liver surgery (RR 0.39; 95% CI: 0.29-0.52). In patients undergoing esophageal (RR 0.89; 95% CI: 0.80-0.99) and gastrointestinal (RR 0.28; 95% CI: 0.23-0.34) surgery with a BMI greater than 25, omentoplasty is significantly associated with a reduced risk of overall complications compared to patients with normal BMI. No significant differences were found in pelvi-perineal surgery, except infection in patients whose BMI ranged from 25 kg/m 2 to 29.9 kg/m 2 (RR 1.25; 95% CI: 1.04-1.50) and anastomotic leakage in patients aged over 60 (RR 0.59; 95% CI: 0.39-0.91).

CONCLUSION

Omentoplasty can effectively prevent postoperative infection. It is associated with a lower incidence of multiple postoperative complications in gastrointestinal and liver surgery.

Outcomes of perineal wound closure techniques after abdominoperineal resections in rectal cancer: an NSQIP propensity score matched study

Perineal defects following abdominoperineal resections (APRs) for rectal cancer may require myocutaneous or omental flaps depending upon anatomic, clinical and oncologic variables. However, studies comparing their efficacy have shown contradictory results. We aim to compare postoperative complication rates of APR closure techniques in rectal cancer using propensity score-matching. The American College of Surgeons Proctectomy Targeted Data File was queried from 2016 to 2019. The study population was defined using CPT and ICD-10 codes for patients with rectal cancer undergoing APR, stratified by repair technique. Perioperative demographic and oncologic variables were controlled for by propensity-score matching. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed for wound and major complications (MCs). Of the 3291 patients included in the study, 85% underwent primary closure (PC), 8.3% rectus abdominis myocutaneous (RAM) flap, 4.9% pedicled omental flap with PC, and 1.9% lower extremity (LE) flap repair. Primary closure rates were significantly higher for patients with stage T1 and T2 tumors (p < 0.001). RAM and LE flaps were most used with multi-organ resections, 24% and 25%, respectively (p < 0.001). Similarly, cases with T4 tumors used these flaps more frequently, 30% and 40%, respectively (p < 0.001). After propensity score matching for comorbidities and oncologic variables, there was no significant difference in 30-day postoperative wound or MC rates between perineal closure techniques. The complication rates of the different closure techniques are comparable when tumor stage is considered. Therefore, tumor staging and concurrent procedures should guide clinical decision making regarding the appropriate use of each technique.

Abdominal wall reconstruction using Omental Flap with Mesh repair following resection of Aggressive Abdominal Wall Neoplasms

BACKGROUND

Resection of large anterior abdominal wall tumors causes a large full-thickness abdominal wall defects, and the repair of these defects remains a challenging point.

METHODS

Between July 2016 and February 2021, we retrospectively reviewed the internal database registry of the Oncology Center, Mansoura University (OCMU) Egypt, for patients with large abdominal wall defects after abdominal wall tumors resection and repair with omental flaps and synthetic Polypropylene (PP) mesh. Thirty-two patients met the inclusion criteria. They were analyzed for demographics, operative data including defect size, mesh size, intrabdominal tumor extension and postoperative outcomes and complications.

RESULTS

Thirty-Two patients with abdominal wall neoplasm underwent local resection in our center and the defect was closed with omental flap and PP mesh. The mean operative time was 143.75 ± 30.77 mins. The mean size of the abdominal wall defect was 50.78 cm2 (range: 25 - 90 cm2). The meshes used in reconstruction had a mean size of 89.53 cm2 (range: 55 - 130 cm2). The median follow-up period of the patients was 13.5 months (range: 5-54 months). Post-operative complications included infection (n = 4 cases), seroma (n = 2 cases), hematoma (n =1 case) and abnormal sensation (n = 5 cases). Tumor recurrence was reported in two cases and no cases developed incisional hernia during the follow up period.

CONCLUSION

Immediate use of omental flap with synthetic (PP) mesh for reconstruction of abdominal wall defects is a feasible technique and has avoided the complications associated with the use of synthetic mesh alone.

Management of Perineal Wounds Following Pelvic Surgery

Despite advancements in understanding and technique, there remain significant challenges in the management of a complex perineal wound following pelvic surgery. Complications including wound sepsis, fistulation, persistent sinus, and herniation produce additional morbidity and health care costs. This article details the methods of optimizing patient and operative factors to mitigate this risk, alongside strategies to deal with sequelae of wound failure.

Transperineal minimally invasive abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer: standardized technique and clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Despite the increasing utilization of transanal total mesorectal excision as a promising approach for low rectal cancer, the feasibility and safety of transperineal minimally invasive abdominoperineal resection (tp-APR) remain unclear.

METHODS

In total, 25 patients who underwent tp-APR between April 2017 and May 2020 (tp-APR group) and 27 patients who underwent conventional laparoscopic APR between May 2009 and September 2016 (lap-APR group) for low rectal cancer were enrolled in this retrospective study. Clinical outcomes were compared between the groups before and after propensity score matching. The primary outcome was the incidence of the overall postoperative complications with Clavien-Dindo grade II or above. Standardized technique of tp-APR was also demonstrated.

RESULTS

On comparison, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and overall postoperative complications with Clavien-Dindo grade II or above were significantly less in the tp-APR group both before and after propensity score matching. The rates of urinary disturbance and perineal wound infection were significantly less in the tp-APR group after matching. Further, postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the tp-APR group both before and after matching. However, pathological outcomes did not differ between the groups before and after matching. There has been no local recurrence in the tp-APR group with a median follow-up period of 18 months.

CONCLUSION

Standardized tp-APR for low rectal cancer is feasible and seems superior to conventional laparoscopic APR in terms of short-term outcomes. Further larger-scale studies with a longer follow-up period are required to evaluate oncological outcomes.