[Oncologic and functional results of resections with direct delayed coloanal anastomosis in previously irradiated cancers of the lower rectum]

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.

Risk factors for ischemia/necrosis of the colonic stump after proctectomy and delayed coloanal anastomosis

INTRODUCTION

Delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCAA) is a two-stage procedure. DCAA has been increasingly reused in recent years in the management of rectal cancer. Such increased use of DCAA has highlighted the complications associated with this procedure. We aimed to evaluate the risk and risk factors of ischemia/necrosis of the colonic stump between the two stages of DCAA.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients who underwent a proctectomy with a DCAA were included in this retrospective single-centre study from November 2012 to June 2022. Two groups of patients were defined: patients with a well vascularized colonic stump (well vascularized group) and those who experienced ischemia or necrosis of the colonic stump (ischemic group). The primary endpoint was the rate of ischemia or necrosis of the colonic stump and an evaluation of the associated risk factors.

RESULTS

During the study period, 43 patients underwent DCAA. Amongst them, 32 (75%) had a well-vascularized colonic stump (well-vascularized group) and 11 (25%) ischemia of the colonic stump (ischemic group). Relative to patients in the well-vascularized group, those in the ischemic group were more often men (81.8% vs 40.6%, p = 0.034), had a higher BMI (29.2 kg/m2 vs 25.7 kg/m2, p = 0.03), were more frequently diabetic (63.6% vs 21.9%, p = 0.01) and more frequently had had preoperative radiotherapy (100% vs 53.1%, p = 0.008). On the preoperative CT scan, the interspinous diameter was shorter in the ischemic group (9.4 ± 1.01 cm vs 10.6 ± 1.01 cm, p = 0.001), the intertuberosity diameter was shorter (9.2 ± 1.18 cm vs 11.9 ± 1.18 cm, p < 0.0001), and the length of the anal canal was longer (31.9 ± 3 mm vs 27.4 ± 3.2 mm, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

This study highlights clear risk factors for ischemia/necrosis of the colonic stump after proctectomy with DCAA.

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.

Tailored Management with Highly-Selective Diversion for Low Colorectal Anastomosis: Biochemical Postoperative Follow-Up and Long-Term Results from a Single-Institution Cohort

BACKGROUND

Defunctioning stoma (DS) can decrease the rate of symptomatic anastomotic leakage (AL). Since 2010, we have used tailored, highly selective DS management for low colorectal anastomosis (LCRA).

METHODS

In total, 433 rectal cancer patients underwent the same standardized procedure. Non-stoma (NS) management was used in patients with no surgical difficulties as well as good colonic preparation and quality of anastomoses. In all other cases, DS was used. C-reactive protein was measured during postoperative follow-up. Imbalance in the initial population was adjusted using propensity-score matching according to sex, age, body mass index, tumor location, and American Society of Anesthesiologists score. Rate of AL within 30 days, 5-year overall survival, local relapse-free survival, and disease-free survival were recorded.

RESULTS

Anastomosis was mostly ultra-low and was performed equally by laparoscopy or robotic surgery. The overall rate of AL was 13.4%, with no significant differences between groups (DS, 12.2%; NS, 14.6%; p = 0.575). Operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay were significantly lower for NS patients. The rate of secondary stoma was 11.4% overall. Pathological results were similar, with a 98% R0 resection rate. With a median follow-up of 5.5 years for the NS and DS groups, the overall survival was 84.9% and 73.4%, respectively (p = 0.064), disease-free survival was 67.0% and 55.8%, respectively (p = 0.095), and local relapse-free survival was 95.2% and 88.7%, respectively (p = 0.084). The long-term, stoma-free rate was 89.1% overall.

CONCLUSIONS

Tailoring DS for LCRA seems safe and could provide potential benefits in postoperative morbidity with the same long-term oncological results in NS patients. Prospective, multicentric studies should validate this approach.

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 Minimally Invasive Proctectomy With Two-Stage Turnbull-Cutait Pull-Through Coloanal Anastomosis for Iatrogenic Rectourethral Fistulas

INTRODUCTION

Rectourethral fistula is an uncommon pathology, usually iatrogenic, occurring as a complication of surgical or ablative treatments for prostate or rectal cancer. Among other surgical techniques, restorative ultralow rectal anterior resection may be an option of last resort to achieve fistula closure avoiding the need for a permanent stoma. This article aims to describe a transanal minimally invasive-assisted Turnbull-Cutait technique for radiated rectourethral fistulas with a complementary video.

TECHNIQUE

Turnbull-Cutait pull-through with delayed coloanal anastomosis technique with a proctectomy by transanal minimally invasive surgery and loop ileostomy was performed in 3 patients who developed delayed rectourethral fistula after prostate cancer treatment. Ileostomy was reversed after fistula closure confirmation.

RESULTS

The first patient had brachytherapy with no surgery. The second patient had radical prostatectomy and adjuvant radiotherapy, developing the fistula after a pelvic abscess drained transrectally. The third patient underwent prostatectomy and brachytherapy, developing the fistula after transanal endoscopic microsurgery resection of a rectal villous polyp. Surgical intervention and postoperative recovery was uneventful. Fistula closure was confirmed in the 3 cases, and all ileostomies were closed without further recurrence at follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Transanal minimally invasive proctectomy-assisted Turnbull-Cutait procedure for the treatment of rectourethral fistula is a new combination of already existing techniques, enabling the creation of safe colorectal anastomosis in high-risk cases. Given the difficulty obtaining healing with sphincter preservation in cases of postradiation rectourethral fistula, this technique aids in fistula closure and restoration of the intestinal continuity, and potentially represents an added resource in the surgical armamentarium for this challenging pathology.

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.

Two-stage Turnbull-Cutait pull-through coloanal anastomosis versus coloanal anastomosis with protective loop ileostomy for low rectal cancer. Protocol for a randomized controlled trial (Turnbull-BCN)

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to determine whether patients that underwent ultra-low rectal resection for cancer can benefit from the recently reintroduced two-stage Turnbull-Cutait abdominoperineal pull-through procedure.

METHODS

Patients with low rectal tumors undergoing radical sphincter-sparing resection are eligible for inclusion in a randomized multicenter study. Whether two-stage Turnbull-Cutait coloanal anastomosis provides significant benefits over hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis and associated lateral ileostomy in terms of postoperative morbidity is the primary endpoint. In addition, the study aims to assess secondary endpoints such as quality of life, fecal incontinence, and locoregional recurrence of the neoplasm. Patients with adenocarcinoma of the lower rectum diagnosed by rigid proctoscopy, with histological confirmation of malignancy, and who are candidates of rectal removal and coloanal anastomosis will be included in a randomized controlled and multicenter trial. Postoperative morbidity is defined as complications that occur within 30 days of the data of the second surgical procedure of the last patient included in the trial. Patients will be followed for a minimum period of 3 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The two-stage Turnbull-Cutait coloanal anastomosis may constitute an effective surgical alternative in the current approach to the treatment of low rectal cancer without the need of a temporary loop colostomy, preventing the wide range of complications related to stoma surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (trial number: NCT01766661). This trial is registered in January 10, 2013.

[Turnbull-cutait technique in low rectal cancer: Case report]

BACKGROUND

The surgical treatment for low rectal cancer involves an ultra-low anterior resection with complete mesorectal resection and coloanal anastomosis. Two-stage coloanal anastomosis such as the Turnbull-Cutait technique represents an option for patients with low rectal cancer.

CLINICAL CASE

A 69 year-old female patient with a diagnosis of adenocarcinoma (T2N1), located 4 cm from the anal margin. She received neoadjuvant radiotherapy. An ultra-low anterior resection and total resection of the mesorectum were performed. The intestinal transit was reconstructed by coloanal anastomosis using the Turnbull-Cutait technique.

CONCLUSION

Coloanal anastomosis with the Turnbull-Cutait technique represents a primary option for patients with low rectal cancer, avoiding a loop ileostomy, its economic impact and on their quality of life.

The clinical results of the Turnbull-Cutait delayed coloanal anastomosis: a systematic review

Turnbull and Cutait described abdominoperineal pull-through followed by delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCA) in 1961. DCA could reduce anastomotic leaks, pelvic morbidity and use of stomas. Strong evidence about its clinical benefits is still lacking. This systematic review examined the clinical outcomes of DCA for the treatment of malignant or benign colorectal conditions. A systematic search of electronic medical databases was conducted. Two independent reviewers selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. The primary outcome was pelvic morbidity (anastomotic leak, pelvic abscess or sepsis, use of stoma). Fecal continence and survival data were also analyzed. From 1,251 citations, we included seven observational studies including 1,124 patients. All included studies were considered at high risk of bias. Two studies comparing DCA with immediate anastomosis reported a significant decrease in anastomotic leak, and pelvic abscess or sepsis. Low rates of pelvic morbidity were reported in the other five studies: anastomotic leak 0-7 %, pelvic abscess 0-11.8 % and pelvic sepsis 6.8-10 %. Rates of permanent stoma after DCA were low in six studies (1-6 %), with one study reporting an incidence of 25 %. Fecal continence was reported as satisfying in all studies. No differences were observed in a comparative setting. Survival data were reported in four studies. Clinical heterogeneity and methodological issues precluded meta-analysis. Based on retrospective evidence, DCA offers a low rate of anastomotic leak, pelvic morbidity and use of stoma, with reasonable fecal continence. Results are encouraging, but prospective studies are needed for comparison with standard of care.

[Conservative treatment of adenocarcinomas of the anorectal junction by preoperative radiotherapy and intersphincteral resection]

AIM

Adenocarcinomas of the anorectal junction, especially T3 lesions, are usually treated by abdominoperineal resection. The aim of this study was to evaluate oncologic and functional results following conservative radiosurgical treatment of cancers of the anorectal junction.

METHODS

From 1990 to 1999, among 395 patients with rectal carcinoma, 31 had sphincter-saving resection for a tumour located between 2 to 4.5 cm (mean 3.6) from the anal verge. There were 16 men and 15 women, mean age 62 years (range 30-86). There were 5 T2, 23 T3 and 3 T4 tumours; 17 were N1 and 3 were M1. Preoperative radiotherapy was performed in 26 patients (dose: 46 Gy, range: 36-54), with concomitant chemotherapy in 14 cases. Intersphincteric resection was performed six weeks after neoadjuvant treatment. Coloanal anastomoses were associated with a colonic pouch in 22 cases and with a protecting stoma in all cases.

RESULTS

There was no postoperative mortality. Seven complications occurred: 3 anastomotic fistulas, 3 pelvic haemorrhages and 1 acute pancreatitis. Three patients had a definitive stoma. After preoperative radiotherapy, down-staging (pT0-2 N0) occurred in 46% of cases (12/26). Distal margin was 2.2 cm (range: 1-3) and was microscopically safe in all cases. Lateral margin was safe (> or = 1 mm) in 97% of cases. With a mean follow-up of 36 months, no local recurrence was suspected. Twenty-six patients (84%) were alive, 23 free of disease. Half of the patients had perfect continence, whereas the other half had occasional minor soiling. Functional results were better in patients with a colonic pouch.

CONCLUSION

Conservative treatment of carcinomas of the anorectal junction is possible without compromising pelvic control and patient survival. Pelvic control was probably achieved by using preoperative radiotherapy with intersphincteric resection, ensuring safe distal and lateral margins.