Water-Soluble Enema Prior to Ileostomy Closure in Patients Undergoing Low Anterior Resection: Is It Necessary?

Pictorial review: radiological diagnosis of anastomotic leakage with water-soluble contrast enema after anterior resection of the rectum

For patients who have undergone colorectal surgery, anastomotic leakage is a serious and challenging complication with a variable rate ranging between 1.8% and 19.2%. Postoperative anastomotic leaks after colorectal surgery can have severe consequences for patients, particularly ones who present with few or no symptoms. Computed tomography and/or water-soluble contrast enema (WSE) are the most frequently utilized imaging methods to identify and diagnose anastomotic leaks early. WSE is a safe and complication-free procedure that allows to identify the presence of otherwise unrecognized anastomotic leaks, both in asymptomatic and symptomatic patients. Fluoroscopic rectal examination using a water-soluble contrast agent for postoperative patients is never an easy examination to perform since it requires careful preparation, skill, and knowledge. Four morphological types of anastomotic dispersion have been described: "saccular type", "horny type", "serpentine type" and "dendritic type". Among 4 types of leakage, dendritic and serpentine types are more frequently followed by clinical symptoms and none of the dendritic type resolves spontaneously. On the other hand, the saccular and horny types have a better prognosis after healing of the loss and subsequent restoration of the ostomy as they consist of a cavity that provides a sort of physical barrier to the spread of inflammation. The aim of this pictorial essay was to illustrate the spectrum of imaging findings of morphological types of radiologic leakages on WCE in patients with colorectal surgical anastomosis. We have also tried to provide tips and tools to enable identification of radiological leakages on retrograde WCE, particularly of the smallest leaks which can be more easily missed.

Chronic rectal anastomosis complications prior to ileostomy reversal: development of a pilot classification system and associated outcomes

BACKGROUNDS

A loop ileostomy may reduce the severity of acute anastomotic complications after low rectal resection, but some patients have persistent rectal anastomotic problems. No consensus exists for the management of patients with a chronic low rectal anastomosis complication and a loop ileostomy. There is need for a standard description of these anastomotic complications and to determine whether it is safe to reverse the ileostomy. This study proposes a classification of chronic rectal anastomotic complications and to report the correlation with successful restoration of rectal continuity.

METHODS

This was a retrospective project from a prospectively maintained database at a single colorectal unit in a large tertiary hospital in Metropolitan Melbourne. Patients with rectal anastomotic complications following rectal cancer resections between March 2012 and October 2019 were included. A classification of chronic rectal anastomotic complication was developed by reviewing the interval assessments of the rectal anastomosis. The classification categories were correlated with outcomes after stoma closure.

RESULTS

Of the 149 patients, 20 patients had an anastomotic complication identified during work up prior to loop ileostomy reversal. Eleven patients had an anastomotic stenosis and nine had an anastomotic defect. Eighteen patients were eligible for stomal closure. The majority (11/12) of patients with a Type 1 stenosis or defect had no rectal complications after stoma closure.

CONCLUSION

The classification system helps to describe chronic rectal anastomotic abnormalities and guide management. Although these patients may be a challenge, many can undergo successful ileostomy reversal.

Trajectory of change of low anterior resection syndrome over time after restorative proctectomy for rectal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Restorative proctectomy for rectal cancer is associated with a high incidence of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), but few studies report longitudinal results for bowel function. The aim of our study was to examine the trajectory of change of LARS over the first 18 months after restorative proctectomy for rectal cancer.

METHODS

A prospective database measuring functional outcomes in rectal cancer patients from a single university-affiliated specialist colorectal referral center from 10/2018 to 03/2020 was queried. Patients were included in this study if they underwent restorative proctectomy for rectal cancer and had at least three assessments in the first 18 months after primary surgery or after closure of proximal diversion. Bowel function was assessed using the LARS score, administered at every surveillance follow-up after restoration of bowel continuity. Latent-class growth curve (trajectory) analysis was used to identify different trajectories of LARS changes over the first 18 months and group patients into these trajectory groups. These groups were then compared to identify predictors for each trajectory.

RESULTS

A total of 95 patients were included (63 males, mean age. 61.3 ± 12.5 years). Trajectory analysis identified three distinct trajectory groups. Group 1 had stable minimal LARS over time (26%). Group 2 had early LARS scores consistent with the minor LARS category and improved with time (28%). Group 3 had persistently high LARS scores (45%). Neoadjuvant therapy, intersphincteric resection, and proximal diversion were more common in group 3.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified three main trajectories of change of LARS in the 18 months after restorative proctectomy. These data may be used to better inform patients of their expected postoperative bowel function.

Less is more-the best test for anastomotic leaks in rectal cancer patients prior to ileostomy reversal

PURPOSE

No clear consensus exists on how to routinely assess the integrity of the colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal. The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of contrast enema, endoscopic procedures, and digital rectal examination in rectal cancer patients in this setting.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed. Studies assessing at least one index test for which a 2 × 2 table was calculable were included. Hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated and used for test comparison. Paired data were used where parameters could not be calculated. Methodological quality was assessed with the QUADAS-2 tool.

RESULTS

Two prospective and 11 retrospective studies comprising 1903 patients were eligible for inclusion. Paired data analysis showed equal or better results for sensitivity and specificity of both endoscopic procedures and digital rectal examination compared to contrast enema. Subgroup analysis of contrast enema according to methodological quality revealed that studies with higher methodological quality reported poorer sensitivity for equal specificity and vice versa. No case was described where a contrast enema revealed an anastomotic leak that was overseen in digital rectal examination or endoscopic procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopy and digital rectal examination appear to be the best diagnostic tests to assess the integrity of the colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal. Accuracy measures of contrast enema are overestimated by studies with lower methodological quality. Synopsis of existing evidence and risk-benefit considerations justifies omission of contrast enema in favor of endoscopic and clinical assessment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42019107771.

Flexible endoscopy is enough diagnostic prior to loop ileostomy reversal

PURPOSE

This study investigates whether contrast enema (CE) and flexible endoscopy (FE) should be performed routinely after low anterior resection (LAR) before ileostomy reversal. Additionally, the impact of previous anastomotic leakage (AL) on diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) was assessed.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected tertiary care data of two centers. Consecutive rectal cancer patients undergoing LAR with loop ileostomy formation were included. Before ileostomy reversal, all patients were assessed by CE and FE. DTA of FE and CE for asymptomatic AL in patients who had previously suffered from clinically relevant AL (group 1) compared with those without apparent AL after LAR (group 0) were assessed separately.

RESULTS

Two hundred ninety-three patients were included in the analysis, 86 in group 1 and 207 in group 0. Overall sensitivity for detection of asymptomatic AL was 76% (FE) and 60% (CE). Specificity was 100% for both tests. DTA of FE was equal or superior to CE in all subgroups. Prevalence of asymptomatic AL at the time of testing was 1.4% in group 0 and 25.6% in group 1.

CONCLUSION

Flexible endoscopy is the more accurate diagnostic test for the detection of asymptomatic anastomotic leaks prior to ileostomy reversal. Contrast enema showed no gain of information. In the group without complications after the initial rectal resection, 104 must be tested to find one leak prior to reversal. In those patients, routine diagnostic testing additional to digital rectal examination may be questioned.

Delayed Bowel Perforation after Routine Distal Loopogram Prior to Ileostomy Closure

Ultra-low anterior resection for low rectal cancer is usually done with a covering ileostomy as a safety measure to reduce the consequences of distal anastomotic failure. In many centres, distal loopogram is performed routinely, prior to the closure of the loop ileostomy, to assess the integrity of anastomosis. Distal loopogram is generally considered a safe procedure with very low complication rates, especially when water-soluble contrast is used. We report two cases of delayed bowel perforation which led to severe sepsis and generalized peritonitis after distal loopogram prior to ileostomy closure. Our cases highlight the potential dangers of distal loopogram. Therefore, the routine usage of this procedure should be scrutinized and the patient needs to be properly counselled prior to the procedure.

Is water-soluble contrast enema examination for integrity of rectal anastomosis necessary prior to ileostomy reversal?

Background and Aim

Routine use of water-soluble contrast enema (WSCE) to assess anastomotic integrity is debated. This study aimed to evaluate the role of WSCE to assess anastomotic integrity following anterior resections (AR) with defunctioning stoma prior to reversal and identify factors to limit its selective use.

Methods

This retrospective study evaluated all WSCE performed over a 7-year period at a high-volume colorectal unit. Risk factors for radiological abnormality/leak, including malignancy, chemoradiotherapy, and immediate postoperative complications, were recorded. A gastrointestinal specialist radiologist and surgeon validated all WSCEs reported as abnormal.

Results

Of the 486 WSCE studies identified, 92 were excluded (repeat studies (n = 51), pediatric cases [n = 2], no AR [n = 39]). A total of 394 WSCE studies were evaluated (260 cancer; 134 noncancer patients); 14% (37/260) of cancer patients and 8% (10/134) of noncancer patients had abnormal studies (P = 0.072). Of the 37 abnormal studies in cancer patients, 73% (27/37) radiological leaks were found, and 41% (n = 11/27) of these patients had postoperative complications. Of the 10 abnormal studies in noncancer patients, 20% (2/10) radiological leaks were found, but none of these patients had postoperative complications. Overall leak rates were 7% (29/394), and rates were significantly higher in cancer patients than noncancer patients (10 vs 2%, P = 0.005).

Conclusion

Routine use of WSCE may not be necessary prior to reversal. WSCE should be selectively used in event of postoperative leak or complications. Noncancer resections are less likely demonstrate a leak.

Before and after Anorectal Surgery: Which Information Is Needed from the Functional Laboratory?

Background

Anorectal surgery covers a wide spectrum of surgery. Diagnostic workup of anorectal disease is based on clinical examination with basic functional tests followed by more elaborate diagnostic tests. Since the incidence of anorectal disorders increases with age, more patients will present in outpatient clinics, thus underlining the relevance of this topic.

Methods

A PubMed literature search was performed using the terms 'anal incontinence', 'anal and rectal surgery', 'functional diagnostics', and combinations of these terms. No restriction regarding publication year or publication type was applied but randomized trials, 'metanalyses', or guidelines were ranked higher. Only articles in English or German were included.

Results

The diagnostic value of digital rectal examination, anal manometry and endosonography, the water holding procedure, contrast enema, and incontinence scores is summarized.

Conclusion

The article focusses on basic clinical and functional diagnostic tests which can be easily applied in the pre- and postoperative setting to evaluate the postoperative outcome.