Long-term efficacy of endoscopic vacuum therapy for the treatment of colorectal anastomotic leaks

Tube-in-tube endoscopic vacuum therapy for treatment of colorectal anastomotic leaks: A low-cost, patient-friendly, feasible and efficient technical modification of sponge-based endoscopic vacuum therapy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Colorectal endoscopic vacuum therapy (CR EVT) is usually performed using sponges passed through the anus. It may be associated with patient discomfort and displacement of the aspiration tube.

METHODS

With the tube-in-tube endoscopic vacuum therapy modification (CR TT-EVT), it is possible to position the aspiration tube in the pelvic cavity through the abdominal wall. In addition, it allows frequent cleaning of the fistula, eliminates the need for programmed device changes, and enables a standardized approach to such a wide variety of fistulas, leaks, and perforations.

RESULTS

Here is a technical note on how to perform CR TT-EVT, while we are at the early phase of our case series we have reached 100% of technical success.

Endoscopic fully covered self-expandable metal stent and vacuum-assisted drainage to treat postoperative colorectal cancer anastomotic stenosis with fistula

BACKGROUND

Digestive tract reconstruction is required after the surgical resection of a colorectal malignant tumor. Some patients may have concomitant anastomotic complications, such as anastomotic stenosis with fistula (ASF), postoperatively. Therefore, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of endoscopic fully covered self-expandable metal stent and homemade vacuum sponge-assisted drainage (FSEM-HVSD) for the treatment of ASF following the radical resection of colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients treated with FESM-HVSD were prospectively analyzed and followed up for ASF following colorectal cancer treatment in our medical center from 2017 to 2021 for the observation and evaluation of its safety and efficacy.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients with a mean age of 55.80 ± 11.08 years were included. Nine patients (60%) underwent protective ileostomy. All 15 patients were treated with endoscopic FSEM-HVSD. The median time from the index operation to the initiation of FSEM-HVSD was 80 ± 20.34 days in patients who underwent protective ileostomy versus 11.4 ± 4.4 days in those who did not. The average number of endoscopic treatments per patient was 5.70 ± 1.25 times. The mean length of hospital stay was 27.60 ± 4.43 days. FSEM-HVSD treatment was successful in 13 patients, and no patients had any complications. The follow-up time was 1 year. Twelve of 15 (80%) patients achieved prolonged clinical success after FSEM-HVSD treatment, 1 experienced anastomotic tumor recurrence and underwent surgery again, and 1 patient required balloon dilation for anastomotic stenosis recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

FSEM-HVSD is an effective, safe, and minimally invasive treatment for ASF following colorectal cancer treatment. This technique could be the preferred treatment strategy for patients with ASF.

Use of sponge-assisted endoluminal vacuum therapy for the treatment of colorectal anastomotic leaks: expert panel consensus

Background

Anastomotic leaks represent one of the most significant complications of colorectal surgery and are the primary cause of postoperative mortality and morbidity. Sponge-assisted endoluminal vacuum therapy (EVT) has emerged as a minimally invasive technique for the management of anastomotic leaks; however, there are questions regarding patient selection due to the heterogeneous nature of anastomotic leaks and the application of sponge-assisted EVT by surgeons.

Method

Seven colorectal surgical experts participated in a modified nominal group technique to establish consensus regarding key questions that arose from existing gaps in scientific evidence and the variability in clinical practice. After a bibliographic search to identify the available evidence and sequential meetings with participants, a series of recommendations and statements were formulated and agreed upon.

Results

Thirty-seven recommendations and statements on the optimal use of sponge-assisted EVT were elaborated on and unanimously agreed upon by the group of experts. The statements and recommendations answer 10 key questions about the indications, benefits, and definition of the success rate of sponge-assisted EVT for the management of anastomotic leaks.

Conclusion

Although further research is needed to resolve clinical and technical issues associated with sponge-assisted EVT, the recommendations and statements produced from this project summarize critical aspects to consider when using sponge-assisted EVT and to assist those involved in the management of patients with colorectal anastomotic leaks.

Endoscopic vacuum therapy and early surgical closure after pelvic anastomotic leak: meta-analysis of bowel continuity rates

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) with or without early surgical closure (ESC) is considered an effective option in the management of pelvic anastomotic leakage. This meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of EVT in terms of stoma reversal rate and the added value of ESC.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library was conducted in November 2021 to identify articles on EVT in adult patients with pelvic anastomotic leakage. The primary outcome was restored continuity rate. Following PRISMA guidelines, a meta-analysis was undertaken using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies were included, accounting for 827 patients with leakage who underwent EVT. There was large heterogeneity between studies in design and reported outcomes, and a high risk of bias. The overall weighted mean restored continuity rate was 66.8 (95 per cent c.i. 58.8 to 73.9) per cent. In patients undergoing EVT with ESC, the calculated restored continuity rate was 82 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 50.1 to 95.4) as compared to 64.7 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 55.7 to 72.7) after EVT without ESC. The mean number of sponge exchanges was 4 (95 per cent c.i. 2.7 to 4.6) and 9.8 (95 per cent c.i. 7.3 to 12.3), respectively. Sensitivity analysis showed a restored continuity rate of 81 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 55.8 to 99.5) for benign disease, 69.0 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 57.3 to 78.7) for colorectal cancer, and 65 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 48.8 to 79.1) if neoadjuvant radiotherapy was given.

CONCLUSION

EVT is associated with satisfactory stoma reversal rates that may be improved if it is combined with ESC.

Endoluminal vacuum-assisted therapy to treat rectal anastomotic leakage: A critical analysis

Endoluminal vacuum-assisted therapy (EVT) has been introduced recently to treat colorectal anastomotic leaks in clinically stable non-peritonitic patients. Its application has been mainly reserved to low colorectal and colo-anal anastomoses. The main advantage of this new procedure is to ensure continuous drainage of the abscess cavity, to promote and to accelerate the formation of granulation tissue resulting in a reduction of the abscess cavity. The reported results are promising allowing a higher preservation of the anastomosis when compared to conventional treatments that include trans-anastomotic tube placement, percutaneous drainage, endoscopic clipping of the anastomotic defect or stent placement. Nevertheless, despite this procedure is gaining acceptance among the surgical community, indications, inclusion criteria and definitions of success are not yet standardized and extremely heterogeneous, making it difficult to reach definitive conclusions and to ascertain which are the real benefits of this new procedure. Moreover, long-term and functional results are poorly reported. The present review is focused on critically analyzing the theoretical benefits and risks of the procedure, short- and long-term functional results and future direction in the application of EVT.

Endoscopic vacuum therapy for the treatment of colorectal leaks - a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

During the last two decades, vacuum-assisted wound therapy has been successfully transferred to an endoscopic treatment approach of various upper and lower gastrointestinal leaks called endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT). As mostly small case series are published in this field, the aim of our systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EVT in the treatment of colorectal leaks.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE/PubMed and Cochrane databases was performed using search terms related to EVT and colorectal defects (anastomotic leakage, rectal stump insufficiency) according to the PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational studies, and case series published by December 2020 were eligible for inclusion. A meta-analysis was conducted on the success of EVT, stoma reversal rate after EVT as well as procedure-related complications. Statistical interferences were based on pooled estimates from random effects models using DerSimonian-Laird estimator.

RESULTS

Only data from observational studies and case series were available. Twenty-four studies reporting on 690 patients with colorectal defects undergoing EVT were included. The mean rate of success was 81.4% (95% CI: 74.0%-87.1%). The proportion of diverted patients was 76.4% (95% CI: 64.9%-85.0%). The mean rate of ostomy reversal across the studies was 66.7% (95% CI: 58.0%-74.4%). Sixty-four patients were reported with EVT-associated complications, the weighted mean complication rate across the studies was 12.1% (95% CI: 9.7%-15.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Current medical evidence on EVT in patients with colorectal leaks lacks high quality data from RCTs. Based on the data available, EVT can be seen as a feasible treatment option with manageable risks for selected patients with colorectal leaks.

Current status in endoscopic management of upper gastrointestinal perforations, leaks and fistulas

Recent advancement in endoscopic closure techniques have revolutionized the treatment of gastrointestinal perforations, leaks and fistulas. Traditionally, these have been managed surgically. The treatment strategy depends on the size and location of the defect, degree of contamination, presence of healthy surrounding tissues, patients' condition and the availability of expertise. One of the basic principles of management includes providing a barricade to the flow of luminal contents across the defect. This can be achieved with a wide range of endoscopic techniques. These include endoclips, stenting, suturing, tissue adhesives and glue, and endoscopic vacuum therapy. Each method has their distinct indications and shortcomings. Often, a combination of these techniques is required. Apart from endoscopic closure, drainage procedures by the interventional radiologist and surgical management also play an important role. In this review article, the outcomes of each of these endoscopic closure techniques in the literature is provided in tables, and practical management algorithms are being proposed.

Management of Acute Anastomotic Leaks

Management of the acute anastomotic leak is complex and patient-specific. Clinically stable patients often benefit from a nonoperative approach utilizing antibiotics with or without percutaneous drainage. Clinically unstable patients or nonresponders to conservative management require operative intervention. Surgical management is dictated by the degree of contamination and inflammation but includes drainage with proximal diversion, anastomotic resection with end-stoma creation, or reanastomosis with proximal diversion. Newer therapies, including colorectal stenting, vacuum-assisted rectal drainage, and endoscopic clipping, have also been described.

Endo-sponge in management of anastomotic colorectal leaks: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims  Following colorectal surgery, anastomotic dehiscence and leak formation has an incidence of 2 % to 7 %. Endo-SPONGE has been applied in the management of anastomatic leaks (ALs) after colorectal surgery. This is the first systematic review and meta analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Endo-SPONGE in the management of colorectal ALs. Patients and methods  The primary outcomes assessed were the technical and clinical success of Endo-SPONGE placement in colorectal ALs. The secondary outcomes assessed were the overall adverse events (AEs) and the AE subtypes. Pooled estimates were calculated using random-effects models with 95 % confidence interval (C. I.). The statistical analysis was done using STATA v16.1 software (StataCorp, LLC College Station, Texas, United States). Results  The analysis included 17 independent cohort studies with a total of 384 patients. The rate of technical success was 99.86 % (95 % CI: 99.2 %, 100 %; P  = 0.00; I ²  = 70.69 %) and the calculated pooled rate of clinical success was 84.99 % (95 % CI: 77.4 %, 91.41 %; P  = 0.00; I ²  = 68.02 %). The calculated pooled rate of adverse events was 7.6 % (95 % CI: 3.99 %, 12.21 %; P  = 0.03; I ²  = 42.5 %) with recurrent abscess formation and bleeding being the most common AEs. Moderate to substantial heterogeneity was noted in our meta-analysis. Conclusions  Endoscopic vacuum therapy appears to be a minimally invasive, safe, and effective treatment modality for patients with a significant colorectal leak without any generalized peritonitis with high clinical and technical success rates and a low rate of adverse events. Further prospective or randomized controlled trials are needed to validate our findings.

Evidence of negative pressure therapy for anastomotic leak: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leak (AL) is a devastating complication. Several new treatment options are available, endoluminal negative pressure therapy is one. The aims of this systematic review are; to report success rates and stoma closure rates following endoluminal negative pressure therapy in colorectal AL patients.

METHODS

A systematic review of MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane and Embase databases from inception to June 2018. Search limits were; English language, humans, sample >5 and >18 years. Search terms were Endospong* OR Endo-spong* OR Endo spong* OR Endoluminal negative pressure OR Endoluninal vac* OR Vacuum assisted OR negative pressure. Combined with colon OR rectum OR colorect* AND anastomotic leak OR leak*.

RESULTS

Twenty articles met inclusion criteria. There were 334 patients. Reported success rates ranged from 60% to 100%. However, success definition varied considerably. The most widely used definition was endoscopic assessment of residual cavity size, but this also varied from 0.5 cm to 3 cm. Stoma closure rates were only reported in 11 studies and ranged from 31% to 100%. Complication rates were reported in 13 studies (65%). The most common was on-going sepsis.

CONCLUSIONS

Included studies suggest that 60-100% of ALs heal with endoluminal negative pressure therapy. However, results from this review need to be interpreted with caution because of the variable definition of success. A more objective assessment of success may be stoma closure but this is only reported in 60% of studies. Further studies are needed to assess the benefit of negative pressure therapy in anastomotic leaks.

Management of colorectal anastomotic leakage using endoscopic negative pressure therapy with or without protective ostomy: a retrospective study

PURPOSE

Management of colorectal anastomotic leakage (AL) is patient-oriented and requires an interdisciplinary approach. We analyzed the management of AL according to its severity and presence of ostomy and proposed a therapy algorithm.

METHODS

We identified all patients who underwent colorectal surgery and developed an AL in our clinic between 2012 and 2017. The management of AL was retrospectively analyzed according to the severity grade: asymptomatic (A), requesting interventional or antibiotic therapy (B), undergoing re-operation (C). The groups were compared according to the leakage characteristics, presence of ostomy, and patient clinical conditions.

RESULTS

We identified 784 consecutive patients meeting the inclusion criteria. Of these, 10.8% experienced an AL (A = 18%, B = 48%, and C = 34%). The rate of successful ostomy closure was 100% (A), 68% (B), and 62% (C), respectively. Within group B, 91% of the patients were treated solely by endoscopic negative pressure therapy (ENPT), whereas 37% of the patients within group C required ENPT in addition to surgery. Seven cases within group B (17%) required no protective ostomy (nOB) during ENPT which was itself shorter and required less cycles in comparison to group B with ostomy (OB) (p = 0.017 and 0.111, respectively). Moreover, the leakage distance to anal verge was higher in the OB subgroup (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

ENPT for the treatment of colorectal AL is efficient in combination with operative revision or protective ostomy. In selected patients, it is feasible also in the absence of a protective ostomy.

The "impossible" rectal anastomosis: a novel use for endoluminal vacuum-assisted therapy

Purpose

Low rectal anastomoses can safely be performed, usually secured by a diverting ostomy. However, in cases of inflammation, extensive scarring, after extensive radiation, or after severe stapler dysfunction the risk for an anastomotic leak may become prohibitively high. We present a novel use for endoluminal vacuum-assisted therapy (EVAT) for otherwise “impossible” low rectal anastomoses.

Methods

Our initial series consisted of 14 consecutive patients who underwent prophylactic EVAT treatment due to unsafe low colorectal anastomosis. The vacuum sponge was placed intraoperatively in cases otherwise calling for a Hartmann’s procedure. An open-pored polyurethane sponge was placed prophylactically transanally for a mean duration of 11 days. Patient characteristics, complications, and risk factors were prospectively collected from medical records and analyzed.

Results

Between March 2017 and September 2019, we performed this novel technique in 14 patients enabling us to perform an anastomosis. Our collective consisted of 4 female (29%) and 10 male (71%) patients with a medium age of 59 years. Underlying disease was colorectal cancer in 10 patients, ovarian cancer, perforated sigmoid diverticulitis, ischemic colitis and sarcoma in one patient each. Dominant factors putting the anastomosis at extremely high risk were acute inflammation (n = 2), frozen pelvis (n = 2), intraoperative local chemotherapy (n = 2), stapler dysfunction (n = 2), non-closable rectal stump (n = 2), empty pelvis (n = 1) and ultra-low anastomosis (n = 3). Prophylactic EVAT was successful in 92% and gastrointestinal continuity was preserved in all patients.

Conclusion

This is the first description of prophylactic EVAT treatment. It seems to be a simple and safe method to enforce the high-risk low rectal anastomosis.

Long-Term Results after Anastomotic Leakage following Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Comparison of Treatment with Endo-Sponge and Transanal Irrigation

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate long-term results in patients from regular health care treated with endoscopic transanal closure system, that is, endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure system (EVAC) compared to transanal irrigation.

METHODS

In this retrospective, medical chart-based, observational study, we included patients with anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection for rectal cancer from 3 Stockholm hospitals 2006-2016 and compared time to first stoma closure in a Kaplan-Meier model and the proportion of patients who were stoma-free at end of follow-up.

RESULTS

Anastomotic leakage was found in 81 patients who were followed up in median 5.9 years (min-max: 0.53-13). EVAC was used on 14 (17%) patients and transanal irrigation on 34 (42%) patients. The remaining 33 (41%) patients either got a permanent colostomy or were treated only with antibiotics and percutaneous drainage. Treatment with EVAC or transanal irrigation led to similar rates of stoma closure, both when comparing all patients, and when comparing patients with similar defects. At the end of follow-up, 43% of patients treated with EVAC and 50% of patients treated with repeated irrigation were stoma-free (p = 0.75).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence of better outcomes in patients treated with EVAC. The study was, however, limited by small sample size.

The use of Endo-SPONGE® in rectal anastomotic leaks: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of an endoluminal vacuum device (Endo-SPONGE^®) in the treatment of rectal anastomotic leaks.

METHODS

All studies looking at endoluminal vacuum therapy with Endo-SPONGE^® in the treatment of rectal anastomotic leaks were included. A comprehensive search was conducted as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Primary outcome was defined as the rate of total anastomotic salvage, with secondary outcomes including rate of ileostomy closure, additional transrectal closures and functional outcomes RESULTS: Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. There was a significant publication bias (z = 3.53, p = 0.0004). Two hundred sixty-six patients were identified. The median treatment failure rate was 11.8% (range 0-44%), with random effects model of 0.17 (95% CI 0.11-0.22). There was improvement with early therapy start (OR 3.48) and negative correlation with neoadjuvant radiotherapy (OR 0.56). Fifty-one percent of all diverting stomas were closed at the end of treatment period and 12.8% of patients required an additional trans-rectal closure of the abscess cavity.

CONCLUSIONS

Endo-SPONGE^® seems to be a useful method of rectal anastomotic leak treatment in selected group of patients; however, the quality of available data is poor and it is impossible to draw a final conclusion. There is unexpected high rate of permanent ileostomy. There is a need for further assessment of this therapy with well-designed randomised or cohort studies.

Endoscopic repair of anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection for rectal cancer: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Anastomotic leakage (AL) after low anterior resection for rectal cancer is a severe complication. Except for re-operation, several endoscopic options have been proposed for the minimal invasive treatment of AL, including the endoluminal vacuum devices, tissue sealants and Over-The-Scope-Clip (OTSC) technique. The aim of the present review is to evaluate the effect of alternative treatment options for AL repair, by means of endoscopy.

METHOD

A bibliographic search was performed in the international literature. Ten case reports and series were finally included, reporting 75 cases of endoscopic repair of AL. A descriptive statistical analysis and a systematic review were performed.

RESULTS

The patients' mean age was 65.84 ± 9.92 years (95% CI: 61.70-68.76), the male-to-female ratio being 1.5:1. The mean diameter of the cavity was 5.17 ± 3.32 cm (95% CI: 4.03-6.31). The mean time until the diagnosis was 44.15 ± 105.91 days (95% CI: 13.39-74.90). Vacuum-assisted closure therapy was the most common technique (52%), followed by fibrin glue (25.3%) and OTSC (22.7%). As supplementary therapy, OTSC was applied in 8.3%, vacuum-assisted closure in 25%, endoclips in 4.2%, while fibrin glue was the most frequently used (62.5%).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic management of AL after low anterior resection is considered as an alternative to surgical treatment with promising results.

Endoluminal negative pressure therapy in colorectal anastomotic leaks

AIM

The aim of the present work was to perform an up-to-date review of the literature on endoluminal negative pressure therapy for colorectal anastomotic leak.

METHOD

An electronic search in PubMed and Google Scholar and a manual search without language restrictions were performed on 25 January 2019. Only original series reporting endoluminal negative pressure therapy in colorectal anastomotic leaks were included. The primary outcome was the success rate (complete closure of the abscess cavity). The secondary outcomes were the rates of complications and stoma closure.

RESULTS

Nineteen series with a total of 295 cases were analysed. The median distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge and the size of the abscess were 5.65 cm (4.9-10) and 6.0 cm (5-8.1) respectively. In 84.5% (78%-91%) the stoma was created at the first intervention. Neoadjuvant therapy was performed in 48.6% (3%-60%). Median 7 sponges (2-34) were used with median negative pressure 150 mmHg (125-700) for a median of 31 days (14-127). The success rate was 85.4% (80%-91%) with ileostomy closure in 72.6%. Complications were observed in 19% (13%-25%): abscesses 11.5% and anastomotic stenosis 4.4%. Laparotomy was required in 15% of the complications. The stoma was the only significant predictor for the success of the therapy (0.007, SE 0.004, P = 0.040).

CONCLUSIONS

The initial experience looks promising with an 85% success rate, which precludes risky re-resections with redo anastomosis or Hartmann's procedure. Despite the good initial results, definitive conclusions cannot be drawn because of the small sample size and the lack of high-quality comparative studies.

Can a Local Drainage Salvage a Failed Colorectal or Coloanal Anastomosis? A Prospective Cohort of 54 Patients

BACKGROUND

Local drainages can be used to manage leakage in select patients without peritonitis.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of drainage procedures in maintaining a primary low anastomosis after anastomotic leakage.

DESIGN

A retrospective observational study was performed on a prospectively maintained database.

SETTINGS

The study was performed between 2014 and 2017 in a tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing rectal resections with either a colorectal or coloanal anastomosis with diverting stoma were identified. Anastomotic leakages requiring a radiological or transanal drainage without peritonitis were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the maintenance of the primary anastomosis after local drainage of an anastomotic leakage and stoma reversal.

RESULTS

A low anastomosis for rectal cancer with diverting stoma was performed in 326 patients. A total of 77 anastomotic leakages (24%) occurred, of which, 6 (8%) required abdominal surgery, 17 (22%) were treated conservatively (medical management), and 54 (70%) were managed by drainage. Surgical transanal drainage was performed in 21 patients (39%), with radiologic drainage procedures performed in 33 patients (61%). The median interval between surgery and drainage was 13 days (range, 9-21 d). Five patients (9%) required emergency abdominal surgery. Twenty-seven patients (50%) did not require any additional intervention after drainage procedure, whereas 21 patients (39%) underwent redo anastomotic surgery. Forty-three patients (80%) had no stoma at the end of follow-up. Failure to maintain the primary anastomosis after local drainage was associated with increased age (p = 0.04), a pelvic per-operative drainage (p = 0.05), a drainage duration >10 days (p = 0.002), the time between surgery and drainage >15 days (p = 0.03), a side-to-end or J-pouch anastomosis (p = 0.04), and surgical transanal drainage (p = 0.03).

LIMITATIONS

The small sample size of the study was the main limitation.

CONCLUSIONS

Local drainage procedures maintained primary anastomosis in 50% of cases after an anastomotic leakage. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B57. ¿PUEDE UN DRENAJE LOCAL SALVAR UNA ANASTOMOSIS COLORRECTAL O COLOANAL FALLIDA? UNA COHORTE PROSPECTIVO DE 54 PACIENTES: Los drenajes locales se pueden utilizar para controlar las fugas en pacientes seleccionados sin peritonitis.El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar la eficacia de los procedimientos de drenaje, para mantener una anastomosis primaria baja, después de una fuga anastomótica.Se realizó un estudio observacional retrospectivo en una base de datos mantenida prospectivamente.El estudio se realizó entre 2014-2017, en un centro de referencia terciaria.Se identificaron pacientes sometidos a resecciones rectales con anastomosis colorrectal o coloanal y estoma de derivación. Se incluyeron fugas anastomóticas sin peritonitis, que requirieron drenaje radiológico o transanal.El resultado primario fue el mantenimiento de la anastomosis primaria, después del drenaje local de una fuga anastomótica y la reversión del estoma.Se realizó una anastomosis baja para cáncer rectal con estoma derivativo en 326 pacientes. Se produjeron 77 (24%) fugas anastomóticas, de las cuales 6 (8%) requirieron cirugía abdominal, 17 (22%) fueron tratadas de forma conservadora (tratamiento médico) y 54 (70%) fueron manejadas por drenaje. Se realizó drenaje transanal en 21 pacientes (39%) y procedimientos de drenaje radiológico en 33 pacientes (61%). La mediana del intervalo entre la cirugía y el drenaje fue de 13 días [9-21]. 5 (9%) pacientes requirieron cirugía abdominal de emergencia. Veintisiete (50%) pacientes no requirieron ninguna intervención adicional después del procedimiento de drenaje, mientras que 21 pacientes (39%) se sometieron a una reparación quirúrgica anastomótica. 43 pacientes (80%) no tuvieron estoma al final del seguimiento. El fracaso para mantener la anastomosis primaria después del drenaje local, se asoció con un aumento de la edad (p = 0.04), un drenaje pélvico preoperatorio (p = 0.05), una duración del drenaje >10 días (p = 0.002), el tiempo entre la cirugía y el drenaje >15 días (p = 0.03), anastomosis termino lateral o bolsa en J (p = 0.04) y drenaje quirúrgico transanal (p = 0.03).El pequeño tamaño de la muestra del estudio fue la principal limitación.Después de la fuga anastomótica, los procedimientos del drenaje local conservaron la anastomosis primaria en el 50% de los casos. Vea el Resumen del Video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B57.

Management of anastomotic leakage after rectal surgery: a review article

Anastomotic leaks (ALs) are associated with increased perioperative morbidity and mortality, prolonged length of stay, higher readmission rates, the potential need for further operative interventions, and unintended permanent stomas; resulting in increased hospital costs and resource use, and decreased quality of life. This review article is to present definition, diagnosis and management strategies for AL after rectal surgery.

Adipose tissue grafting for management of persistent anastomotic leak after low anterior resection

BACKGROUND

An anastomotic leak is the most dreaded complication after low anterior resection. Adipose tissue grafting may induce healing in a persistent anastomotic defect. The aim of the present study was to report retrospectively reviewed outcomes for a series of patients who were managed with heterotopic grafted adipose tissue to facilitate anastomotic healing.

METHODS

Patients with anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection sequentially treated with grafting of adipose tissue were included in the study. All patients had pelvic radiation during treatment and had a diverting ileostomy in situ. The cohort had a persistent defect despite being treated with available modalities such as suture repair, fibrin glue, Endo-Sponge and surgical debridement. The outcomes were reviewed and reported.

RESULTS

There were 11 patients (8 males and 3 females) with a median age of 54 years (range 33-72 years). Five patients experienced complete healing of the anastomotic defect with successful reversal of the diverting ileostomy. The anastomotic defect of one other patient in the series appeared to have healed and hence his diverting ileostomy was reversed. However, he presented with a recurrent leak, which ultimately necessitated an abdominoperineal resection. Another patient had a persistent defect after an attempt at adipose tissue grafting and opted to proceed with a takedown of the anastomosis. In the remaining four patients, the outcome after adipose tissue grafting remains unknown, as two patients succumbed to metastatic disease, one was lost to follow-up and the remaining patient developed a recurrence which required pelvic exenteration. Procedural associated morbidity occurred in one patient who developed fat embolism, which was treated expectantly.

CONCLUSIONS

Adipose tissue grafting is safe and feasible, though its effectiveness remains uncertain. It may be useful selectively in the management of persistent anastomotic leak after radiation and low anterior resection.

Systematic review of endoluminal vacuum-assisted therapy as salvage treatment for rectal anastomotic leakage

Background

Endoluminal vacuum-assisted therapy (EVT) has been introduced recently to treat colorectal anastomotic leakage. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of EVT in the treatment of anastomotic leakage and rectal stump insufficiency after Hartmann's procedure.

Methods

A systematic search of MEDLINE, Scopus and Cochrane databases was performed using search terms related to EVT and anastomotic leakage or rectal stump insufficiency in line with the PRISMA checklist. Observational studies, RCTs and case series studies published to July 2017 were included. Primary outcomes of the review were the success of EVT, defined as complete or partial healing of the anastomotic defect and associated cavity, and the rate of stoma reversal after EVT. Secondary outcomes included the duration of treatment to complete healing, complications of treatment and the need for further intervention. A meta-analysis was conducted. The potential effect of clinical confounders on the failure of EVT was investigated using the random-effects meta-regression model.

Results

Of 476 articles identified, 17 studies reporting on 276 patients were ultimately included. The weighted mean rate of success was 85·3 (95 per cent c.i. 80·1 to 90·5) per cent, with a median duration from inception of EVT to complete healing of 47 (range 40-105) days. The weighted mean rate of stoma reversal across the studies was 75·9 (64·6 to 87·2) per cent. Twenty-five patients (9·1 per cent) required additional interventions after EVT. Thirty-eight patients (13·8 per cent) developed complications. The weighted mean complication rate across the studies was 11·1 (6·0 to 16·2) per cent. Variables significantly associated with failure included preoperative radiotherapy, absence of diverting stoma, complications and male sex.

Conclusion

EVT is associated with a high rate of complete healing of anastomotic leakage and stoma reversal. It is an effective option in appropriately selected patients with anastomotic leakage.

Endoscopic Full-Thickness Defects and Closure Techniques

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Gastrointestinal transmural defects are defined as total rupture of the gastrointestinal wall and can be divided into three main categories: perforations, leaks, and fistulas. Due to an increase in the number of therapeutic endoscopic procedures including full-thickness resections and the increase incidence of complications related to bariatric surgeries, there has been an increase in the number of transmural defects seen in clinical practice and the number of non-invasive endoscopic treatment procedures used to treat these defects.

RECENT FINDINGS

The variety of endoscopic approaches and devices, including closure techniques using clips, endoloop, and endoscopic sutures; covering techniques such as the cardiac septal occluder device, luminal stents, and tissue sealants; and drainage techniques including endoscopic vacuum therapy, pigtail, and septotomy with balloon dilation are transforming endoscopy as the first-line approach for therapy of these conditions. In this review, we describe the various transmural defects and the endoscopic techniques and devices used in their closure.

[Meta-analysis of management of colorectal anastomotic leakage]

AIM

To identify the most effective management of colorectal anastomosis failure via analysis of available literature sources.

RESULTS

Systematic review included 20 original trials. Effectiveness of redo interventions for colorectal anastomosis failure including open, laparoscopic, minimally invasive techniques (transanal drainage, endoscopic vacuum therapy, endoscopic drainage) was described. Anastomotic failure rate was 6.5%. Medication was effective in 57% (95% CI 34-77%) of cases. Redo open surgery was applied in 43% (95% CI 23-66%) of patients. Postoperative mortality was 21-27%. Redo laparoscopic procedure was performed in 61% (95% CI 50-70%) of cases for anastomotic failure after previous laparoscopy, incidence of conversion was 12% (95% CI 4-28%). Transanal drainage was effective in 85% (95% CI 61-94%) of cases, endoscopic vacuum therapy - in 82% (95% CI 74-87%), healing of anastomosis without need for colostomy was achieved in 16% (95% CI 9-26%) of cases. Endoscopic clipping for colorectal anastomotic defect was effective in 73.3-77% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Redo surgery for anastomotic failure is associated with advanced mortality and need for permanent colostomy. Laparoscopic approach reduces incidence of complications after redo surgery and followed by better functional outcomes. Minimally invasive procedures are advisable for colorectal anastomosis failure without need for redo surgery. However, effectiveness of these methods is controversial due to few reports and no comparative trials.

Vacuum-assisted early transanal closure of leaking low colorectal anastomoses: the CLEAN study

Introduction

Non-healing of anastomotic leakage can be observed in up to 50% after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. This study investigates the efficacy of early transanal closure of anastomotic leakage after pre-treatment with the Endosponge^® therapy.

Methods

In this prospective, multicentre, feasibility study, transanal suturing of the anastomotic defect was performed after vacuum-assisted cleaning of the presacral cavity. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a healed anastomosis at 6 months after transanal closure. Secondary, healing at last follow-up, continuity, direct medical costs, functionality and quality of life were analysed.

Results

Between July 2013 and July 2015, 30 rectal cancer patients with a leaking low colorectal anastomosis were included, of whom 22 underwent neoadjuvant radiotherapy. Median follow-up was 14 (7–29) months. At 6 months, the anastomosis had healed in 16 (53%) patients. At last follow-up, anastomotic integrity was found in 21 (70%) and continuity was restored in 20 (67%) patients. Non-healing at 12 months was observed in 10/29 (34%) patients overall, and in 3/14 (21%) when therapy started within three weeks following the index operation. Major LARS was reported in 12/15 (80%) patients. The direct medical costs were €8933 (95% CI 7268–10,707) per patient.

Conclusion

Vacuum-assisted early transanal closure of a leaking anastomosis after total mesorectal excision with 73% preoperative radiotherapy showed that acceptable anastomotic healing rates and stoma reversal rates can be achieved. Early diagnosis and start of treatment seems crucial.

Emerging Trends in the Etiology, Prevention, and Treatment of Gastrointestinal Anastomotic Leakage

Anastomotic leaks represent one of the most alarming complications following any gastrointestinal anastomosis due to the substantial effects on post-operative morbidity and mortality of the patient with long-lasting effects on the functional and oncologic outcomes. There is a lack of consensus related to the definition of an anastomotic leak, with a variety of options for prevention and management. A number of patient-related and technical risk factors have been found to be associated with the development of an anastomotic leak and have inspired the development of various preventative measures and technologies. The International Multispecialty Anastomotic Leak Global Improvement Exchange group was convened to establish a consensus on the definition of an anastomotic leak as well as to discuss the various diagnostic, preventative, and management measures currently available.

Management of Colorectal Anastomotic Leak

The aim of this article is to present strategies for preventing and managing the failure of the surgical restoration of intestinal continuity. Despite improvements in surgical technique and perioperative care, anastomotic leaks still occur, and with them occur increased morbidity, mortality, length of stay, and costs. Due to the devastating consequences for patients with failed anastomoses, there have been a myriad of materials and techniques used by surgeons to create better intestinal anastomoses. We will also discuss the management strategies for anastomotic leak when they do inevitably occur.

Endoscopic Vacuum Therapy in Colorectal Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) has been established in Germany for the treatment of anastomotic leakage after rectal resection. Continuous or intermittent suction and drainage decrease bacterial contamination, secretion, and local edema promoting perfusion and granulation at the same time. However, data for use and long-term results of EVT in colorectal surgery are still scarce and are often limited by short-term follow-up.

OBJECTIVES

Here, we aimed at analyzing the treatment spectrum and long-term outcome of EVT for defects of the lower gastrointestinal tract.

METHODS

This is a retrospective single-center analysis of EVT for defects of the lower gastrointestinal tract of different etiology in 41 patients over a time period of 8 years (2007-2015) with a mean follow-up of 36 (2-89) months.

RESULTS

In total, 426 polyurethane sponges were placed in lower GI defects of 41 patients (31 male, 10 female) with a median age of 70 years (range, 29-91). Most frequent indications for EVT were anastomotic leakage after rectal resection (n = 20), Hartmann's stump insufficiency (n = 12), and rectal perforation (n = 3). The median number of sponge insertions was six (range, 1-37) with a mean changing interval of 3 days (range, 1-5). Median time of therapy was 20 days. A successful vacuum therapy with local control of the septic focus was achieved in 18 of 20 patients (90 %) with anastomotic leakage after rectal resection and in nine of 12 patients with a Hartmann's stump insufficiency. In 15 of 19 (79 %) patients with a diverting stoma, take-down after successful treatment was possible. Median time to closure was 244 days (range, 152-488 days).

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this retrospective observation of EVT application for rectal lesions represents the largest patient series in literature. EVT has earned its indication in complication management after colorectal surgery and can achieve a successful control of a local septic focus in the majority of patients.

Management of low colorectal anastomotic leak: Preserving the anastomosis

Anastomotic leak continues to be a dreaded complication after colorectal surgery, especially in the low colorectal or coloanal anastomosis. However, there has been no consensus on the management of the low colorectal anastomotic leak. Currently operative procedures are reserved for patients with frank purulent or feculent peritonitis and unstable vital signs, and vary from simple fecal diversion with drainage to resection of the anastomosis and closure of the rectal stump with end colostomy (Hartmann’s procedure). However, if the patient is stable, and the leak is identified days or even weeks postoperatively, less aggressive therapeutic measures may result in healing of the leak and salvage of the anastomosis. Advances in diagnosis and treatment of pelvic collections with percutaneous treatments, and newer methods of endoscopic therapies for the acutely leaking anastomosis, such as use of the endosponge, stents or clips, have greatly reduced the need for surgical intervention in selected cases. Diverting ileostomy, if not already in place, may be considered to reduce fecal contamination. For subclinical leaks or those that persist after the initial surgery, endoluminal approaches such as injection of fibrin sealant, use of endoscopic clips, or transanal closure of the very low anastomosis may be utilized. These newer techniques have variable success rates and must be individualized to the patient, with the goal of treatment being restoration of gastrointestinal continuity and healing of the anastomosis. A review of the treatment of low colorectal anastomotic leaks is presented.

Endoscopic management of gastrointestinal perforations, leaks and fistulas

Gastrointestinal perforations, leaks and fistulas may be serious and life-threatening. The increasing number of endoscopic procedures with a high risk of perforation and the increasing incidence of leakage associated with bariatric operations call for a minimally invasive treatment for these complications. The therapeutic approach can vary greatly depending on the size, location, and timing of gastrointestinal wall defect recognition. Some asymptomatic patients can be treated conservatively, while patients with septic symptoms or cardio-pulmonary insufficiency may require intensive care and urgent surgical treatment. However, most gastrointestinal wall defects can be satisfactorily treated by endoscopy. Although the initial endoscopic closure rates of chronic fistulas is very high, the long-term results of these treatments remain a clinical problem. The efficacy of endoscopic therapy depends on several factors and the best mode of treatment will depend on a precise localization of the site, the extent of the leak and the endoscopic appearance of the lesion. Many endoscopic tools for effective closure of gastrointestinal wall defects are currently available. In this review, we summarized the basic principles of the management of acute iatrogenic perforations, as well as of postoperative leaks and chronic fistulas of the gastrointestinal tract. We also described the effectiveness of various endoscopic methods based on current research and our experience.