First, Do No Harm: Rethinking Routine Diversion in Sphincter-Preserving Rectal Cancer Resection

Modified delayed coloanal anastomosis following TME for mid and low rectal cancer: 19 consecutive patients from a single center

Surgery and management of rectal cancer have made significant progress in recent decades. However, there is still no coloanal anastomosis technique that offers a good compromise between functionality and low morbidity. The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficiency of the modified delayed coloanal anastomosis (mDCA). In this retrospective study, we analyzed the morbi-mortality as well as functional outcomes of 19 patients treated with mDCA, out of 73 colorectal cancer patients treated at our institution from September 2021 to June 2023. The inclusion criteria were cancer of the mid and low rectum (tumor less than 10 cm from the anal verge). Morbidity represented by complications of Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher was estimated at 5.2%. Only one patient experienced an asymptomatic anastomotic leak (AL) grade A. Ischemia of the colonic stump occurred in one patient, taken back to the OR on the 5th postoperative day. No stump retraction was noted. Anastomotic stenosis appeared in one patient (5.2%) during the 90-day postoperative period, and was treated by instrumental dilation. Perioperative mortality was nil. The mean St Marks incontinence score at 90 days was 13.2 points. At the 3-month follow-up, 15 patients (78.9%) had major low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), three (15.7%) had minor LARS, and one patient (5.2%) had no LARS. None of the patients had a diversion loop ileostomy. The mDCA, by decreasing the rate of AL, without the need for diversion ileostomy, might be an interesting alternative to the conventional immediate coloanal anastomosis (ICA), for restoring the GI tract after proctectomy for cancer.

Ghost Stoma Solving the Dilemma of Diversion After Anterior Resection: Surgical Technique Description and Experience from a Single Centre

Anastomotic leak is the most dreaded complication after anterior resection (AR). To do prophylactic diversion stoma or not is a matter of constant dilemma that most surgeons face. In such a situation, ghost stoma (GS) technique offers a middle path, wherein unnecessary prophylactic stomas can be avoided and at the same time ensuring that a diversion stoma can be created if need arises without the need of any major surgery or anaesthesia. Retrospective data of patients who underwent anterior resection with ghost stoma at our institute from January 2015 to December 2019 was analysed for clinical characteristics, operative outcomes and postoperative complications. Ghost stoma is fashioned by pulling up a loop of intestine up to parietal peritoneum layer of anterior abdominal wall with the help of silicone or plastic tube after anterior resection. During the study period, this technique was used in 68 patients of which 7 patients required creation of stoma under local anaesthesia for suspected or confirmed post-operative leak. One of these patients developed congestion of stoma for which the stoma was refashioned under regional anaesthesia. There were no major complications like bowel obstruction, strangulation or tube migration. However, two patients had prolonged ileus and were managed conservatively. Thus, unnecessary stoma was avoided in 89% patients of anterior resection. This is a simple, easy to learn, less time-consuming and oncologically safe procedure which can prevent patients from morbidity as well as psychological and financial burden associated with unnecessary stoma.

Can the Heald anal stent help to reduce anastomotic or rectal stump leak in elective and emergency colorectal surgery? A single-center experience

Anastomotic and rectal stump leaks are feared complications of colorectal surgery. Diverting stomas are commonly used to protect low rectal anastomoses but can have adverse effects. Studies have reported favorable outcomes for transanal drainage devices instead of diverting stomas. We describe our use of the Heald anal stent and its potential impact in reducing anastomotic or rectal stump leak after elective or emergency colorectal surgery. We performed a single-center retrospective analysis of patients in whom a Heald anal stent had been used to "protect" a colorectal anastomosis or a rectal stump, in an elective or emergency context, for benign and malignant pathology. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were reviewed using clinical and radiological records. The Heald anal stent was used in 93 patients over 4 years. Forty-six cases (49%) had a colorectal anastomosis, and 47 (51%) had an end stoma with a rectal stump. No anastomotic or rectal stump leaks were recorded. We recommend the Heald anal stent as a simple and affordable adjunct that may decrease anastomotic and rectal stump leak by reducing intraluminal pressure through drainage of fluid and gas.

Prediction of symptomatic anastomotic leak after rectal cancer surgery: A machine learning approach

INTRODUCTION

Anastomotic leakage (AL) remains the most dreaded and unpredictable major complication after low anterior resection for mid-low rectal cancer. The aim of this study is to identify patients with high risk for AL based on the machine learning method.

METHODS

Patients with mid-low rectal cancer undergoing low anterior resection were enrolled from West China Hospital between January 2008 and October 2019 and were split by time into training cohort and validation cohort. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) method and stepwise method were applied for variable selection and predictive model building in the training cohort. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and calibration curves were used to evaluate the performance of the models.

RESULTS

The rate of AL was 5.8% (38/652) and 7.2% (15/208) in the training cohort and validation cohort, respectively. The LASSO-logistic model selected almost the same variables (hypertension, operating time, cT4, tumor location, intraoperative blood loss) compared to the stepwise logistic model except for tumor size (the LASSO-logistic model) and American Society of Anesthesiologists score (the stepwise logistic model). The predictive performance of the LASSO-logistics model was better than the stepwise-logistics model (AUC: 0.790 vs. 0.759). Calibration curves showed mean absolute error of 0.006 and 0.013 for the LASSO-logistics model and stepwise-logistics model, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our study developed a feasible predictive model with a machine-learning algorithm to classify patients with a high risk of AL, which would assist surgical decision-making and reduce unnecessary stoma diversion. The involved machine learning algorithms provide clinicians with an innovative alternative to enhance clinical management.

Short-course radiation with consolidation chemotherapy does not increase operative morbidity compared to long-course chemoradiation: A retrospective study of the US rectal cancer consortium

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Neoadjuvant short-course radiation and consolidation chemotherapy (SC TNT) remains less widely used for rectal cancer in the United States than long-course chemoradiation (LCRT). SC TNT may improve compliance and downstaging; however, a longer radiation-to-surgery interval may worsen pelvic fibrosis and morbidity with total mesorectal excision (TME). A single, US-center retrospective analysis has shown comparable risk of morbidity after neoadjuvant short-course radiation with consolidation chemotherapy (SC TNT) and long-course chemoradiation (LCRT). Validation by a multi-institutional study is needed.

METHODS

The US Rectal Cancer Consortium database (2010-2018) was retrospectively reviewed for patients with nonmetastatic, rectal adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant LCRT or SC TNT before TME. The primary endpoint was severe postoperative morbidity. Cohorts were compared by univariate analysis. Multivariable logistic regression modeled the odds of severe complication.

RESULTS

Of 788 included patients, 151 (19%) received SC TNT and 637 (81%) LCRT. The SC TNT group had fewer distal tumors (33.8% vs. 50.2%, p < 0.0001) and more clinical node-positive disease (74.2% vs. 47.6%, p < 0.0001). The intraoperative complication rate was similar (SC TNT 5.3% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.65). There was no difference in overall postoperative morbidity (38.4% vs. 46.3%, p = 0.08). Severe morbidity was similar with low anterior resection (9.1% vs. 15.3%, p = 0.10) and abdominoperineal resection (24.4% vs. 29.7%, p = 0.49). SC TNT did not increase the odds of severe morbidity relative to LCRT on multivariable analysis (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.37-1.10).

CONCLUSIONS

SC TNT does not increase morbidity after TME for rectal cancer relative to LCRT. Concern for surgical complications should not discourage the use of SC TNT when aiming to increase the likelihood of complete clinical response.

Overuse of Proximal Fecal Diversion in Colorectal Surgery

Many surgeons tend to overuse proximal fecal diversion in the setting of colonic surgery. The decision to proximally divert an anastomosis should be made with careful consideration of the risks and benefits of proximal diversion. Proximal diversion does not decrease the rate of anastomotic leak, but it does decrease the severity of leaks. Anastomotic height for low pelvic anastomoses, hemodynamic instability, steroid use, male sex, obesity, malnutrition, smoking, and alcohol abuse increase the rate of anastomotic leak. Biologics, most immunosuppressive agents, unprepped colons, and radiation for rectal cancer do not contribute to increased rates of anastomotic leak. Proximal fecal diversion creates additional potential morbidity, higher rates of readmission, and need for a subsequent hospitalization and operation for reversal. Additionally, diverted patients have higher rates of anastomotic stricture and delayed recognition of chronic leaks. These downsides to diversion must be weighed with a patient's perceived ability to handle the physiologic stress and consequences of a severe leak if reoperation is required. When trying to determine which patients can handle a leak, the modified frailty index can help to objectively determine a patient's risk for increased rate of morbidity and failure to rescue in the event of a leak. While proximal diversion is still warranted in many cases, we find that certain clinical scenarios often lead to overuse of proximal diversion. The old surgical adage "If you are considering diverting, you should probably do it" should be tempered by an understanding of the risk and benefits of diversion.

Defining Anastomotic Leak and the Clinical Relevance of Leaks

Surgeons universally dread gastrointestinal anastomotic leaks, yet the precise definition is not widely agreed on despite international consensus guidelines. Likewise, leaks are not uniformly reported which makes comparisons across studies flawed. Leak rates range from 1 to 3% for ileocolonic, 0.5 to 18% for colorectal, and 5 to 19% for coloanal anastomoses. The sequelae of an anastomotic leak vary but generally correlate with the need for a change in clinical management, from minimal changes to the need for reoperation. Short- and long-term outcomes can be life-altering or life-threatening. Temporary or permanent stomas may be necessary and low pelvic anastomotic leaks may affect bowel function. For cancer patients, leaks can delay treatment and negatively affect oncologic outcomes. In Crohn's patients, leaks are associated with higher recurrence rates. In essence, the lack of agreement on the definition of an anastomotic leak inhibits meaningful understand of its epidemiology, prevention, and treatment.

Time interval between rectal cancer resection and reintervention for anastomotic leakage and the impact of a defunctioning stoma: A Dutch population-based study

AIM

In the Netherlands, a selective policy of faecal diversion after rectal cancer surgery is generally applied. This study aimed to evaluate the timing, type, and short-term outcomes of reoperation for anastomotic leakage after primary rectal cancer resection stratified for a defunctioning stoma.

METHOD

Data of all patients who underwent primary rectal cancer surgery with primary anastomosis from 2013-2019 were extracted from the Dutch ColoRectal Audit. Primary outcomes were new stoma construction, mortality, ICU admission, prolonged hospital stay, and readmission.

RESULTS

In total, 10,772 rectal cancer patients who underwent surgery with primary anastomosis were included, of whom 46.6% received a primary defunctioning stoma. The reintervention rate for anastomotic leakage was 8.2% and 11.6% for patients with and without a defunctioning stoma (p < 0.001). Reintervention consisted of reoperation in 44.0% and 85.3% (p < 0.001), with a median time interval from primary resection to reoperation of seven days (IQR 4-14) vs. five days (IQR 3-13), respectively. In the presence of a defunctioning stoma, early reoperation (<5 days; n = 47) was associated with significantly more end-colostomy construction (51% vs. 33%) and ICU admission (66% vs. 38%) than late reoperation (≥5 days; n = 127). Without defunctioning stoma, early reoperation (n = 252) was associated with significantly higher mortality (4% vs. 1%), and more ICU admissions (52% vs.34%) than late reoperation (n = 302).

CONCLUSIONS

Early reoperations after rectal cancer resection are associated with worse outcomes reflected by a more frequent ICU admission in general, more colostomy construction, and higher mortality in patients with primary defunctioned and nondefunctioned anastomosis.

Transanal Drainage Tube Use for Preventing Anastomotic Leakage After Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection in Patients With Rectal Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Preventing anastomotic leakage (AL) is crucial for colorectal surgery. Some studies have suggested a positive role of transanal drainage tubes (TDTs) in AL prevention after low anterior resection, but this finding is controversial.

Objective

To assess the effect of TDTs in AL prevention after laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This multicenter randomized clinical trial with parallel groups (TDT vs non-TDT) was performed from February 26, 2016, to September 30, 2020. Participants included patients from 7 different hospitals in China who were undergoing laparoscopic low anterior resection with the double-stapling technique for mid-low rectal cancer; 576 patients were initially enrolled in this study, and 16 were later excluded. Ultimately, 560 patients were randomly divided between the TDT and non-TDT groups.

Interventions

A silicone tube was inserted through the anus, and the tip of the tube was placed approximately 5 cm above the anastomosis under laparoscopy at the conclusion of surgery. The tube was fixed with a skin suture and connected to a drainage bag. The TDT was scheduled for removal 3 to 7 days after surgery.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was the postoperative AL rate within 30 days.

Results

In total, 576 patients were initially enrolled in this study; 16 of these patients were excluded. Ultimately, 560 patients were randomly divided between the TDT group (n = 280; median age, 61.5 years [IQR, 54.0-68.8 years]; 177 men [63.2%]) and the non-TDT group (n = 280; median age, 62.0 years [IQR, 52.0-69.0 years]; 169 men [60.4%]). Intention-to-treat analysis showed no significant difference between the TDT and non-TDT groups in AL rates (18 [6.4%] vs 19 [6.8%]; relative risk, 0.947; 95% CI, 0.508-1.766; P = .87) or AL grades (grade B, 14 [5.0%] and grade C, 4 [1.4%] vs grade B, 11 [3.9%] and grade C, 8 [2.9%]; P = .43). In the stratified analysis based on diverting stomas, there was no significant difference in the AL rate between the groups, regardless of whether a diverting stoma was present (without stoma, 12 [5.8%] vs 15 [7.9%], P = .41; and with stoma, 6 [8.3%] vs 4 [4.5%], P = .50). Anal pain was the most common complaint from patients in the TDT group (130 of 280, 46.4%). Accidental early TDT removal occurred in 20 patients (7.1%), and no bleeding or iatrogenic colonic perforations were detected.

Conclusions and Relevance

The results from this randomized clinical trial indicated that TDTs may not confer any benefit for AL prevention in patients who undergo laparoscopic low anterior resection for mid-low rectal cancer without preoperative radiotherapy.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02686567.

Morbidity and costs of diverting ileostomy in transanal total mesorectal excision with primary anastomosis for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The role of diverting ileostomy is debated in rectal cancer surgery with primary anastomosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the associated morbidity and hospital costs of diversion after sphincter saving TaTME surgery.

METHODS

All patients undergoing TaTME with primary anastomosis for rectal cancer between January 2012 and December 2019 in a single centre in the Netherlands were included. Patients with diverting ileostomy creation during primary surgery were compared with those without ileostomy. Outcomes included length of hospital stay, anastomotic leakage rates and total hospital costs at 1 year.

RESULTS

One hundred and one patients were included in the ileostomy group, and 46 patients were in the non-ileostomy group. The number of female patients was 31 (30.7%) in the ileostomy group and 21 (45.7%) in the non-ileostomy group Mean age was 64.5 ± 11.1 years in the ileostomy group and 62.6 ± 10.7 years in the non-ileostomy group The anastomotic leakage rate was 21.7% in the non-ileostomy group and 15.8% in the ileostomy group (p = 0.385). The grade of leakage and number of anastomotic takedowns did not differ between groups. Mean costs at 1 year after surgery was €26,500.13 in the ileostomy group and €16,852.61 in the non-ileostomy group. The main cost driver was longer total length of hospital stay at 1 year (mean 12.4 ± 13.3 days vs 20.6 ± 12.6 days, p = 0.000).

CONCLUSIONS

Morbidity and associated costs after diverting ileostomy are high. The incidence and morbidity of anastomotic leakage was not reduced by creation of an ileostomy. Omission of a diverting ileostomy after TaTME could possibly result in a reduction in treatment associated morbidity and costs.

Highly selective diversion with proactive leakage management after low anterior resection for rectal cancer

In this single center case series with nine percent primary diversion, 86 of 94 patients alive and with complete follow-up at one year had a functioning anastomosis. Seventy-five of the initial 99 patients never had a stoma. Meaning: Highly selective fecal diversion in combination with proactive leakage management, low anastomoses can be preserved safely, and the majority of patients will be spared all disadvantages of a diverting stoma.

Mechanotechnical faults and particular issues of anastomotic complications following robot-assisted anterior resection in 968 rectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

As most risk factors for anastomotic complications (AC) in rectal cancer patients appear to be noncorrectable, it is needed to find the correctable causes. Additionally, the outcomes of indocyanine-green fluorescence imaging (IFI) and robot-stapled anastomosis have yet been undetermined.

METHODS

This study retrospectively analyzed 968 consecutive patients with rectal cancer, who underwent curative robot-assisted anterior resections between 2010 and 2018. IFI parameters and stapling features in the surgical records were reviewed, and reconfirmed.

RESULTS

AC occurred in 54 patients (5.6%), 34 (3.5%) with anastomotic leakage (AL) and 24 (2.5%) with anastomotic stenosis (AS). Mechanotechnical faults including defective stapling configurations, including angles lesser than or equal to 150° and outer deviation (more than half from the center of the circle) of linear staples, between the two linear staples were independently associated with AL (P < .001 each). IFI significantly reduced AL rate (2.5% vs 5.3%, P = .029) and AS rate (2% vs 18.8%, P = .006), respectively. Robot linear stapling enabled to maintain the obtuse angle during consecutive staplings and reduced console time. AL and AS were independent risk factors for disease-free survival (P = .02) and local recurrence (P = .03), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

AC were associated with some correctable causes, namely, mechanotechnical errors and lack of use of IFI.