Randomized clinical trial comparing quality of life after straight and pouch coloanal reconstruction

End-to-end anastomosis provides similar quality-of-life, compared with other reconstructive techniques six months following total mesorectal excision: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Colorectal malignancy ranked third globally in cancer incidence with 1.9 million cases and nearly 1 million deaths in 2020. Rectal cancer is primarily treated with total mesorectal excision (TME). This study examines surgical, functional, and quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes for different anastomosis types. Pre-registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022368907), the systematic search on November 8, 2022, covered three databases: MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, and Cochrane Central. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) assessing adults post-TME, comparing end-to-end anastomosis (EEA) to colonic J-pouch (CJP) and/or side-to-end anastomosis (SEA) were eligible. 29 studies out of 4459 were included. EEA vs. CJP showed no significant differences in anastomotic leakage (AL) (RR: 1.03; CI: [0.84-1.26]) or mortality (RR: 0.77; CI: [0.30-1.98]). At 12 months, the mean bowel movement difference was 1.59/day (CI: [(-)0.66-3.84]). QoL at six and 12 months was similar (SMD: -0.22; CI: [(-)0.82-0.37]). Compared with SEA, EEA had similar AL ratios (RR: 1.59; CI: [0.54-4.72]) and QoL at six months (SMD: -0.04; CI: [(-)0.66-0.58]). EEA demonstrates surgical efficacy comparable to other techniques. Six months postoperatively, EEA's impact on QoL appears similar to CJP or SEA, irrespective of daily stool frequency.

Reconstructive techniques following low anterior resection for carcinoma of the rectum

INTRODUCTION

Multiple reconstructive techniques have been described for reconstruction after a low anterior resection for carcinoma rectum. Colonic J pouch (CJP), Side to end anastomosis (SEA), transverse coloplasty pouch (TCP) and Straight Colo-rectal/anal anastomosis were the most widely studied.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

PubMed, Embase and Cochrane data base were searched for randomized, non-randomized studies and systematic reviews from inception of the databases till July 31st, 2023.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Considerable heterogeneity existed among different study findings. Reservoir techniques, including CJP, SEA, and TCP, exhibited reduced stool frequency, decreased urgency, and improved continence status compared to SCA, particularly in the short term. CJP maintained this advantage into the intermediate term. Other functional outcomes were similar among the techniques. However, these functional improvements did not translate into enhanced Quality of Life (QoL). TCP was associated with an elevated risk of anastomotic leaks. Other surgical outcomes remained comparable across all four techniques. Sexual outcomes also exhibited no significant variation. Some studies suggested that the size of the side limb in CJP or SEA may not significantly impact functional outcomes, implying that neorectum capacity may not be the primary determinant of improved function. The precise physiological mechanism underlying these findings remains unknown.

CONCLUSIONS

In the short and intermediate terms, reservoir techniques demonstrated superior functional outcomes, but long-term performance was comparable among all techniques. Notably, enhanced functional outcomes did not translate to improved Quality of Life. TCP, while effective, is linked to an increased risk of anastomotic complications, necessitating cautious utilization.

Comparison of complications and bowel function among different reconstruction techniques after low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Anastomosis for gastrointestinal reconstruction has been contentious after low anterior resection of rectal cancer for the past 30 years. Despite the abundance of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on colon J-pouch (CJP), straight colorectal anastomosis (SCA), transverse coloplast (TCP), and side-to-end anastomosis (SEA), most studies are small and lack reliable clinical evidence. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of the four anastomoses on postoperative complications, bowel function, and quality of life in rectal cancer.

METHODS

We assessed the safety and efficacy of CJP, SCA, TCP, and SEA in adult patients with rectal cancer after surgery by searching the Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed databases to collect RCTs from the date of establishment to May 20, 2022. Anastomotic leakage and defecation frequency were the main outcome indicators. We pooled data through a random effects model in a Bayesian framework and assessed model inconsistency using the deviance information criterion (DIC) and node-splitting method and inter-study heterogeneity using the I-squared statistics (I²). The interventions were ranked according to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to compare each outcome indicator.

RESULTS

Of the 474 studies initially evaluated, 29 were eligible RCTs comprising 2631 patients. Among the four anastomoses, the SEA group had the lowest incidence of anastomotic leakage, ranking first (SUCRA_SEA = 0.982), followed by the CJP group (SUCRA_CJP = 0.628). The defecation frequency in the SEA group was comparable to those in the CJP and TCP groups at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. In comparison, the defecation frequency in the SCA group 12 months after surgery all ranked fourth. No statistically significant differences were found among the four anastomoses in terms of anastomotic stricture, reoperation, postoperative mortality within 30 days, fecal urgency, incomplete defecation, use of antidiarrheal medication, or quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that SEA had the lowest risk of complications, comparable bowel function, and quality of life compared to the CJP and TCP, but further research is required to determine its long-term consequences. Furthermore, we should be aware that SCA is associated with a high defecation frequency.

Reconstructive techniques following low anterior resection for carcinoma of the rectum: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Multiple trials have compared reconstruction techniques used following the resection of distal rectal cancers, including straight colorectal anastomosis (SCA), colonic J pouch (CJP), side-to-end anastomosis (SEA), and transverse coloplasty (TCP). The latest meta-analysis on the subject concluded that all the reservoir techniques produce equally good surgical and functional outcomes compared with SCA. Numerous trials have been published in this regard subsequently. Hence, a network analysis (NMA) was performed to rank these techniques.

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from their inception until April 2021 was conducted to identify randomized trials. Functional and surgical outcome data were pooled. ORs and standardized mean differences (MDs) were used as pooled effect size measures. A frequentist NMA model was used.

RESULTS

Thirty-two trials met the eligibility criteria comprising 3072 patients. CJP showed better functional outcomes, such as low stool frequency and better incontinence score, both in the short term (stool frequency, MD -2.06, P < 0.001; incontinence, MD -1.17, P = 0.007) and intermediate term (stool frequency, MD -0.81, P = 0.021; incontinence MD -0.56, P = 0.083). Patients with an SEA (long-term OR 4.37; P = 0.030) or TCP (long-term OR 5.79; P < 0.001) used more antidiarrheal medications constantly. The urgency and sensation of incomplete evacuation favoured CJP in the short term. TCP was associated with a higher risk of anastomotic leakage (OR 12.85; P < 0.001) and stricture (OR 3.21; P = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

Because of its better functional outcomes, CJP should be the reconstruction technique of choice. TCP showed increased anastomotic leak and stricture rates, warranting judicious use.

Comparison of the colonic J-pouch versus straight (end-to-end) anastomosis following low anterior resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

To evaluate comparative outcomes of straight (end-to-end) anastomosis versus colonic J-pouch anastomosis following anterior resection.

METHODS

A systematic search of multiple electronic data sources was conducted, and all studies comparing straight (end-to-end) anastomosis versus J-pouch anastomosis were included. Anastomotic complications, post-operative complications, re-operation, mortality, and functional outcomes were the evaluated outcome parameters. Revman 5.3 was used for data analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies reporting a total number of 3293 patients who underwent straight anastomosis (n = 1581) or J-pouch (n = 1712) were included. Anastomotic leak and re-operation rates were significantly higher in the straight group compared to the J-pouch group [RD 0.03, P = 0.03] and [OR 1.87, P = 0.003], respectively. Stool frequency per 24 h at 6 months and 12 months was lower in the J-pouch group than the straight group [MD 2.13, P = 0.003] and [MD 1.44, P = 0.00001], respectively. In addition, the use of anti-diarrheal medication is lower at 12 months in the J-pouch group [MD 3.85, P = 0.03]. Moreover, the two groups showed comparable results regarding SSI, sepsis, paralytic ileus, anastomotic stricture formation, anastomotic bleeding, and mortality.

CONCLUSION

J-pouch anastomosis showed lower risk for anastomotic leak and re-operation. Furthermore, better functional outcomes such as stool frequency were achieved using the colonic J-pouch reconstruction over the conventional straight end-to-end anastomosis.

Quality of life assessment in the late postoperative period of patients with rectal cancer submitted to total mesorectal excision

After the introduction of total mesorectal excision (TME) and radiochemotherapy, excellent results have been achieved in the treatment of patients with rectal cancer. With better oncologic control of the disease, the functional results of this type of therapeutic approach and their impact on the quality of life (QOL) of patients started to be increasingly valued. The aims of this study were to evaluate the QOL of patients with rectal cancer submitted to TME in the late postoperative period and the possible factors that directly influence their quality of life. A total of 72 patients submitted to TME due to extraperitoneal rectal tumor were assessed, after at least one postoperative year, by applying QOL questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-CR38), in addition to a specific clinical questionnaire and rectal examination. Patients were evaluated regarding gender, age, indication of radiotherapy and chemotherapy preoperatively, length of postoperative period, distance from the anastomosis to the anal verge and general health status. The mean overall health status of patients was satisfactory (82.06). There was no difference in overall health status between patients with respect to gender, but the male patients had less insomnia (p = 0.002), better future prospects (p = 0.011), fewer effects of chemotherapy (p = 0.020) and better sexual function (p < 0.0001). Patients younger than 50 years had fewer urinary problems (p = 0.035), whereas those older than 65 years reported poorer sexual function (p = 0.012). Patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy had more diarrhea (p = 0.012). Quality of life did not change significantly with time after surgery and the distance from the anastomosis to the anal verge. We conclude that patients undergoing TME have a good quality of life one year after the surgery and that the factors capable of affecting QOL should be identified and improved.

Colonic J-Pouch or Straight Colorectal Reconstruction After Low Anterior Resection For Rectal Cancer: Impact on Quality of Life and Bowel Function: A Multicenter Prospective Randomized Study

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes associated with different bowel reconstruction techniques following anterior resection for rectal cancer are still a matter of debate.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess quality of life and bowel function in patients who underwent colonic J-pouch or straight colorectal anastomosis reconstruction after low anterior resection.

DESIGN

Bowel function and quality of life were assessed within a multicenter randomized trial. Questionnaires were administered before the surgery (baseline) and at 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery.

SETTINGS

Patients were enrolled by 19 centers. The enrollment started in October 2009 and was stopped in February 2016. The study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier: NCT01110798).

PATIENTS

Patients who underwent low anterior resection for primary mid-low rectal cancer and who were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either stapled colonic J-pouch or straight colorectal anastomosis were selected.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were quality of life and bowel function.

RESULTS

Of the 379 patients who were evaluable, 312 (82.3%) completed the baseline, 259 (68.3%) the 6-month, 242 (63.9%) the 12-month, and 199 (52.5%) the 24-month assessment. Bowel functioning and quality of life did not significantly differ between arms for almost all domains. The total bowel function score, the urgency, and the stool fractionation scores significantly worsened after surgery and remained impaired over time in both arms (p < 0.0032), whereas constipation improved after surgery but recovered to baseline levels from 1 year onward (p < 0.0036). All patients showed a significant and continuous improvement in emotional functioning (p < 0.0013) and future perspective (p < 0.0001) from baseline to the end of the study.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations of the study include missing data, which increased over time; the possibility that some treatments have slightly changed since the study was conducted; and investigators not blind to treatment allocation.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study do not support the routine use of colonic J-pouch reconstruction in patients with rectal cancer who undergo a low anterior resection. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B328. BOLSA J COLÓNICA O RECONSTRUCCIÓN COLORRECTAL RECTA DESPUÉS DE RESECCIÓN ANTERIOR BAJA PARA CÁNCER RECTAL: IMPACTO EN LA CALIDAD DE VIDA Y LA FUNCIÓN INTESTINAL: UN ESTUDIO ALEATORIZADO PROSPECTIVO MULTICÉNTRICO: Los resultados informados por el paciente asociados con diferentes técnicas de reconstrucción intestinal después de la resección anterior para el cáncer de recto aún son tema de debate.Evaluar la calidad de vida y la función intestinal en pacientes que se sometieron a una bolsa en J colónica o reconstrucción de anastomosis colorrectal recta después de una resección anterior baja.La función intestinal y la calidad de vida se evaluaron en un ensayo aleatorizado multicéntrico. Los cuestionarios se administraron antes de la cirugía (basal) y a los 6, 12 y 24 meses después de la cirugía.Los pacientes fueron incluidos en 19 centros. La inscripción comenzó en Octubre de 2009 y se detuvo en Febrero de 2016. El estudio se registró en www.clinicaltrials.gov (Identificador: NCT01110798).Pacientes que se sometieron a resección anterior baja por cáncer rectal primario medio-bajo y que fueron aleatorizados en una proporción de 1: 1 para recibir bolsa J colónica con grapas o anastomosis colorrectal recta.calidad de vida y función intestinal.De los 379 pacientes que fueron evaluables, 312 (82.3%) completaron la evaluación inicial, 259 (68.3%) a los 6 meses, 242 (63.9%) a los 12 meses y 199 (52.5%) a los 24 meses. . El funcionamiento intestinal y la calidad de vida no difirieron significativamente entre los dos grupos en casi todos los dominios. La puntuación total de la función intestinal, la urgencia y las puntuaciones de fraccionamiento de las heces empeoraron significativamente después de la cirugía y continuaron con el tiempo extra en ambos grupos (p <0.0032), mientras que el estreñimiento mejoró después de la cirugía pero se recuperó a los niveles basales a partir de 1 año en adelante (p <0.0036). Todos los pacientes mostraron una mejora significativa y continua en el funcionamiento emocional (p <0.0013) y la perspectiva futura (<0.0001) desde el inicio hasta el final del estudio.Datos faltantes, que aumentaron con el tiempo; la posibilidad de que algunos tratamientos hayan cambiado ligeramente desde que se realizó el estudio; investigadores no cegados a la asignación del tratamiento.Los hallazgos de este estudio no respaldan el uso rutinario de la reconstrucción de la bolsa J colónica en pacientes con cáncer rectal que se someten a una resección anterior baja. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B328. (Traducción-Dr. Yesenia Rojas-Khalil).

Randomized clinical trial comparing side to end vs end to end techniques for colorectal anastomosis

BACKGROUND

Low anterior resection syndrome affects 60%-90% of patients with anastomoses after colorectal resection. Consensus regarding the best anastomosis is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To compare outcomes after end-to-end versus side-to-end anastomoses.

DESIGN

Randomized clinical trial.

SETTINGS

University hospital (April 2016-October 2017).

PATIENTS

Patients aged ≥18 years with rectal or sigmoid adenocarcinoma.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized to undergo mechanical end-to-end or side-to-end (n = 33) anastomosis after laparoscopic resection.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome was to assess intestinal function (COREFO and LARS questionnaires) 12 months after surgery or ileostomy closure. Secondary outcomes were postoperative complications and intestinal function and quality of life (SF-36® questionnaire) at different time points after surgery or ileostomy closure.

RESULTS

No significant differences in intestinal function were observed between the two groups 12 months after surgery. Subanalysis of low-mid rectum tumors with end-to-end anastomosis yielded better function at 12 months. Postoperative complications did not differ between the two groups (p = 0.070), but reinterventions were more common in the side-to-end group (p = 0.040). Multivariate analysis found neoadjuvant treatment was independently associated with intestinal dysfunction at 12 months (β = 0.41, p = 0.033, COREFO; β = 0.41, p = 0.024, LARS).

CONCLUSIONS

End-to-end anastomosis yielded low rates of severe complications and reintervention, as well as better intestinal function at 12 months in the subgroup with tumors in the low-mid rectum.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02746224.

Multicentre randomized clinical trial of colonic J pouch or straight stapled colorectal reconstruction after low anterior resection for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Colonic J pouch reconstruction has been found to be associated with a lower incidence of anastomotic leakage than straight anastomosis. However, studies on this topic are underpowered and retrospective. This randomized trial evaluated whether the incidence of anastomotic leakage was reduced after colonic J pouch reconstruction compared with straight colorectal anastomosis following anterior resection for rectal cancer.

METHODS

This multicentre RCT included patients with rectal carcinoma who underwent low anterior resection followed by colorectal anastomosis. Patients were assigned randomly to receive a colonic J pouch or straight colorectal anastomosis. The main outcome measure was the occurrence of major anastomotic leakage. The incidence of global (major plus minor) anastomotic leakage and general complications were secondary outcomes. Risk factors for anastomotic leakage were identified by regression analysis.

RESULTS

Of 457 patients enrolled, 379 were evaluable (colonic J pouch arm 190, straight colorectal arm 189). The incidence of major and global anastomotic leakage, and general complications was 14·2, 19·5 and 34·2 per cent respectively in the colonic J pouch group, and 12·2, 19·0 and 27·0 per cent in the straight colorectal anastomosis group. No statistically significant differences were observed between the two arms. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, male sex (odds ratio 1·79, 95 per cent c.i. 1·02 to 3·15; P = 0·042) and high ASA fitness grade (odds ratio 2·06, 1·15 to 3·71; P = 0·015) were independently associated with the occurrence of anastomotic leakage.

CONCLUSION

Colonic J pouch reconstruction does not reduce the incidence of anastomotic leakage and postoperative complications compared with conventional straight colorectal anastomosis. Registration number NCT01110798 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Quality of Life After Total Mesorectal Excision and Rectal Replacement: Comparing Side-to-End, Colon J-Pouch and Straight Colorectal Reconstruction in a Randomized, Phase III Trial (SAKK 40/04)

BACKGROUND

Functional outcomes of different reconstruction techniques have an impact on patients' quality of life (QoL), but information on long-term QoL is lacking. We compared QoL among three reconstruction techniques after total mesorectal excision (TME).

METHODS

Quality of life was assessed within a randomized, multicenter trial comparing rectal surgery using side-to-end anastomosis (SEA), colon J-pouch (CJP), and straight colorectal anastomosis (SCA) by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal scale (FACT-C) before randomization and every 6 months up to 2 years post-TME. The primary QoL endpoint was the change in the Trial Outcome Index (TOI), including the FACT-C subscales of physical and functional well-being and colorectal cancer symptoms (CSS), from baseline to month 12. Pair-wise comparisons of changes from baseline (presurgery) to each timepoint between the three arms were analyzed by Mann-Whitney tests.

RESULTS

For the QoL analysis, 257 of 336 randomized patients were in the per protocol evaluation (SEA = 95; CJP = 63; SCA = 99). Significant differences between the reconstruction techniques were found for selected QoL scales up to 12 months, all in favor of CJP. Patients with SEA or SCA reported a clinically relevant deterioration for TOI and CSS at 6 months, those with SCA for CSS also at 12 months after TME. Patients with CJP remained stable.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the three reconstruction techniques differ in their effects on QoL at months 6 and 12, these differences did not persist over the whole observation period of 24 months. Patients with a colon J-pouch may benefit with respect to QoL in the short-term.

'Trial Exegesis': Methods for Synthesizing Clinical and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Data in Trials to Inform Clinical Practice. A Systematic Review

Purpose

The CONSORT extension for patient reported outcomes (PROs) aims to improve reporting, but guidance on the optimal integration with clinical data is lacking. This study examines in detail the reporting of PROs and clinical data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in gastro-intestinal cancer to inform design and reporting of combined PRO and clinical data from trials to improve the ‘take home’ message for clinicians to use in practice.

Materials and Methods

The case study was undertaken in gastro-intestinal cancer trials. Well-conducted RCTs reporting PROs with validated instruments were identified and categorized into those combining PRO and clinical data in a single paper, or those separating data into linked primary and supplemental papers. Qualitative methods were developed to examine reporting of the critical interpretation of the trial results (trial exegesis) in the papers in relation of the PRO and clinical outcomes and applied to each publication category. Results were used to inform recommendations for practice.

Results

From 1917 screened abstracts, 49 high quality RCTs were identified reported in 36 combined and 15 linked primary and supplemental papers. In-depth analysis of manuscript text identified three categories for understanding trial exegesis: where authors reported a “detailed”, “general”, or absent PRO rationale and integrated interpretation of clinical and PRO results. A total of 11 (30%) and 6 (16%) combined papers reported “detailed” PRO rationale and integrated interpretation of results although only 2 (14%) and 1 (7%) primary papers achieved the same standard respectively. Supplemental papers provide better information with 11 (73%) and 3 (20%) achieving “detailed” rationale and integrated interpretation of results. Supplemental papers, however, were published a median of 20 months after the primary RCT data in lower impact factor journals (median 16.8 versus 5.2).

Conclusion

It is recommended that single papers, with detailed PRO rationale and integrated PRO and clinical data are published to optimize trial exegesis. Further work to examine whether this improves the use of PRO data to inform practice is needed.

Synthesis and summary of patient-reported outcome measures to inform the development of a core outcome set in colorectal cancer surgery

AIM

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures (PROMs) are standard measures in the assessment of colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment, but the range and complexity of available PROMs may be hindering the synthesis of evidence. This systematic review aimed to: (i) summarize PROMs in studies of CRC surgery and (ii) categorize PRO content to inform the future development of an agreed minimum 'core' outcome set to be measured in all trials.

METHOD

All PROMs were identified from a systematic review of prospective CRC surgical studies. The type and frequency of PROMs in each study were summarized, and the number of items documented. All items were extracted and independently categorized by content by two researchers into 'health domains', and discrepancies were discussed with a patient and expert. Domain popularity and the distribution of items were summarized.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight different PROMs were identified from the 104 included studies. There were 23 generic, four cancer-specific, 11 disease-specific and 16 symptom-specific questionnaires, and three ad hoc measures. The most frequently used PROM was the EORTC QLQ-C30 (50 studies), and most PROMs (n = 40, 69%) were used in only one study. Detailed examination of the 50 available measures identified 917 items, which were categorized into 51 domains. The domains comprising the most items were 'anxiety' (n = 85, 9.2%), 'fatigue' (n = 67, 7.3%) and 'physical function' (n = 63, 6.9%). No domains were included in all PROMs.

CONCLUSION

There is major heterogeneity of PRO measurement and a wide variation in content assessed in the PROMs available for CRC. A core outcome set will improve PRO outcome measurement and reporting in CRC trials.

Meta-analysis of reconstruction techniques after low anterior resection for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Options for reconstruction after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer include straight or side-to-end coloanal anastomosis (CAA), colonic J pouch and transverse coloplasty. This systematic review compared these techniques in terms of function, surgical outcomes and quality of life.

METHODS

A systematic literature search (MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library, from inception of the databases until November 2014) was conducted to identify randomized clinical trials comparing reconstructive techniques after LAR. Random-effects meta-analyses were carried out, and results presented as weighted odds ratios or mean differences with corresponding 95 per cent c.i. A network meta-analysis was conducted for the outcome anastomotic leakage.

RESULTS

The search yielded 965 results; 21 trials comprising data from 1636 patients were included. Colonic J pouch was associated with lower stool frequency and antidiarrhoeal medication use for up to 1 year after surgery compared with straight CAA. Transverse coloplasty and side-to-end CAA had similar functional outcomes to the colonic J pouch. No superiority was found for any of the techniques in terms of anastomotic leak rate.

CONCLUSION

Colonic J pouch and side-to-end CAA or transverse coloplasty lead to a better functional outcome than straight CAA for the first year after surgery.

The Functional Outcomes of Coloanal and Low Colorectal Anastomoses with Reservoirs after Low Rectal Cancer Resections

Nearly half of patients undergoing low anterior rectal cancer resection have a functional sequelae after straight coloanal or low colorectal anastomoses (SA), including low anterior rectal resection syndrome, which combines stool fragmentation, urge incontinence, and incontinence. SA are responsible for anastomotic leakage rates of 0 to 29.2 per cent. Adding a colonic reservoir improves the functional results while reducing anastomotic complications. These colonic reservoir techniques include the colonic J pouch (CJP), transverse coloplasty (TC), and side-to-end anastomosis (STEA) procedures. The aim of this literature review was to compare the functional outcomes of these three techniques from a high level of evidence. CJP with a 4- to 6-cm reservoir is a good surgical option because it reduces functional impairments during the first year, and probably up to 5 years, but is not always feasible. TC appears to perform as well as CJP, is achievable in over 95 per cent of patients, but still with some doubts about a higher anastomotic leakage rate and worse functional outcomes. STEA appears equivalent to CJP in terms of morbidity and even better functional outcomes. STEA, with a terminal side segment size of 3 cm, is feasible in the majority of nonobese patients, combines good functional results, has low anastomotic leakage rates, and is easy to complete.

Long-term changes in physical capacity after colorectal cancer treatment

Older patients with colorectal cancer are faced with the dilemma of choosing between the short-term risks of treatment and the long-term risks of insufficiently treated disease. In addition to treatment-related morbidity and mortality, patients may suffer from loss of physical capacity. The purpose of this review was to gather all available evidence regarding long-term changes in physical functioning and role functioning after colorectal cancer treatment, by performing a systematic Medline and Embase search. This search yielded 27 publications from 23 studies. In 16 studies addressing physical functioning after rectal cancer treatment, a median drop of 10% (range -26% to -5%) in the mean score for this item at three months. At six months, mean score was still 7% lower than baseline (range -18% to 0%) and at twelve months 5% lower (range -13% to +5%). For role functioning (i.e. ability to perform daily activities) after rectal cancer treatment, scores were -18% (range -39% to -2%), -8% (range -23% to +6%) and -5% (range -17% to +10%) respectively. Elderly patients experience the greatest and most persistent decline in self-care capacity (up to 61% at one year). This systematic review demonstrates that both physical functioning and role functioning are significantly affected by colorectal cancer surgery. Although initial losses are recovered partially during follow-up, there is a permanent loss in both aspects of physical capacity, in patients of all ages but especially in the elderly. This aspect should be included in patient counselling regarding surgery.

Comparison of Colonic J-pouch and Straight Coloanal anastomosis after Low Anterior Resection

Background

The tendency towards sphincter preserving for low rectal cancers with low anterior resection, has led to the technique of straight coloanal anastomosis (SCAA) or colonic J-pouch anal anastomosis (CPAA).

Objectives

The aim of our study was to compare functional outcomes, complication rates and quality of life (QoL) after LAR with either a straight or colonic J pouch anastomosis.

Patients and Methods

In 88 patients with rectal tumors located in lower third, who were candidate for LAR with coloanal anastomosis. They were divided for reconstruction using either SCAA (n= 47) or CPAA (n= 41) from January 2007 to May 2009. Functional results were assessed after closure of temporary loop ileostomy, 6 months postoperatively. Quality of life (QoL) was measured using European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30.

Results

The two groups were matched for gender, age, and preoperative chemotherapy and radiotherapy. There were no significant differences between the SCAA and CPAA groups relative to anastomotic leakage. Among patients with CPAA, the mean of 24 hours bowel movements, daytime bowel movements, incontinence scores, and incidence of urgency were significantly lower than those in the SCAA group. Also, patients with a CPAA had a significantly better quality of life.

Conclusions

CPAA provided not only better functional results than SCAA, but also improved quality of life, thus may be the better choice.

Colorectal cancer surgery: what is evidence based and how should we do it?

Evidence-based medicine was first defined by Sackett as 'the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of the current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients'. This requires good quality studies with a high level of proof. However, these studies are often lacking in colorectal surgery. Nevertheless, the topics on which there is general agreement will be discussed. There is now good evidence that the laparoscopic approach is at least equivalent in oncological terms to the conventional open approach in colonic surgery. The question, however, remains unanswered for rectal cancer surgery, which is technically more demanding. Although there are no randomized studies, the introduction of total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer has achieved a major reduction in local recurrence and has been adopted as the gold standard by all colorectal surgeons. Extending this concept to colonic cancer surgery is currently under discussion. The different types of reconstruction in sphincter-preserving surgery which achieve a better functional result than straight anastomosis, including colonic pouch, transverse coloplasty and side-to-end anastomosis, will be discussed. The benefit of temporary fecal diversion in low anastomosis has now been demonstrated with a good level of evidence. The technique of abdominoperineal resection has evolved in the last years and now aims at obtaining a cylindrical specimen, which has resulted in a significant reduction of the local recurrence rate. In early rectal cancer, the technique of local resection has been improved by the introduction of transanal endoscopic microsurgery.

Sexual function, incontinence, and wellbeing in women after rectal cancer--a review of the evidence

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cancer. One-third of these cancers occur in the rectum. Treatment of rectal cancer involves surgery with/without radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Surgery is undertaken to prevent damage to the nerves controlling bladder, bowel, and sexual organs, whether this translates into preservation of urinary and fecal continence and sexual function and, ultimately, quality of life (QoL) is not known.

AIM

The aim of this review was to summarize the literature regarding the impact of treatment for rectal cancer on bladder and bowel continence, sexual function and QoL in women.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

A comprehensive review of the current literature on sexual function, incontinence and wellbeing in women after treatment for rectal cancer highlighting prevalence rates, trial design, and patient population.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of the literature using A systematic search of the literature using Medline (Ovid, 1946-present) and PubMed (1966-2011) for English-language studies that included the following search terms: "colorectal cancer," or "rectal cancer," or "rectal neoplasm," and "sexual function," or "sexual dysfunction," or "wellbeing," or "QoL," or "urinary or fecal incontinence."

RESULTS

Although around 1/3 of women aged 50 to 70 years report lack of sexual desire, sexual function problems after treatment for rectal cancer are in the order of 60% among women. QoL improves with length of survival. Urinary and fecal incontinence are ongoing concerns for many women after treatment with rates up to 60%.

CONCLUSION

There is a gap in our knowledge of the effects of rectal cancer and its treatment on urinary and fecal continence, sexual function and QoL in women. There is a need for studies of sufficient size and duration to gain a better understanding of the disease and its management and the long-term effects on these parameters. This information is needed to develop preventative health care plans for women treated for rectal cancer that target those most at risk for these adverse outcomes.

Long-term quality of life in pouch patients compared with stoma patients following rectal cancer surgery

AIM

Low and ultralow anterior resection for rectal cancer with colorectal or coloanal anastomosis does not compromise oncological results compared with abdominoperineal excision. Although avoidance of a permanent colostomy is regarded as beneficial for a patient's quality of life (QoL), patients undergoing sphincter-sparing surgery may develop a number of functional problems. A colonic pouch significantly improves functional outcome after rectal resection and low anastomosis and may positively influence QoL. The aim of this study was to compare QoL in long-term survivors who underwent ultralow anterior resection with total mesorectal excision and colonic J-pouch anastomosis (CPA) with patients treated with abdominoperineal excision (APE) and end colostomy for rectal cancer.

METHOD

The medical records from our institution's prospectively maintained rectal cancer database of 151 patients who underwent surgery for ultralow rectal cancer from 2001 to 2007 were analysed. QoL in 59 eligible patients was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 core and Colorectal Cancer 29. Results were compared for patients with CPA and APE.

RESULTS

The median follow-up in the 59 patients was 74 (37-119) months. QoL was good in all patients, but it was better in CPA than in APE patients. Global health status (P = 0.009), physical functioning (P = 0.0002), role functioning (P = 0.03), cognitive functioning (P = 0.046), social functioning (P = 0.002), body image (P = 0.053), embarrassment (P = 0.002) and urinary frequency (P = 0.003) were significantly improved for patients with CPA.

CONCLUSION

QoL after rectal resection and CPA was better than after APE in several respects. However, QoL should not be regarded as an isolated concept but rather as one of several possible clinical outcomes of interest.

The long-term gastrointestinal functional outcomes following curative anterior resection in adults with rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Significant variability and a lack of transparency exist in the reporting of anterior resection outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to qualitatively analyze the long-term functional outcomes and assessment tools used in evaluating patients with rectal cancer following anterior resection, to quantify the incidence of these outcomes, and to identify risk factors for long-term incontinence.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL were searched using the terms rectal neoplasms, resection, and gastrointestinal function.

STUDY SELECTION

The studies included were in English and evaluated adults with rectal cancer, curative anterior resection, and a minimum 1-year follow-up. Patients with recurrent/metastatic disease were excluded. Of the 805 records identified, 48 articles were included.

INTERVENTION

The intervention performed was anterior resection.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measure was incontinence (gas, liquid stool, and solid stool).

RESULTS

The histories of 3349 patients from 17 countries were summarized. Surgeries were conducted between 1978 to 2004 with a median follow-up of 24 months (interquartile range, 12, 57). Sixty-five percent of studies did not use a validated assessment tool. Reported outcomes and incidence rates were variable. The reported proportion of patients with incontinence ranged from 3.2% to 79.3%, with a pooled incidence of 35.2% (95% CI 27.9, 43.3). Risk factors for incontinence, identified by meta-regression, were preoperative radiation 0.009 and, in particular, short-course radiation (P = .006), and study quality (randomized controlled trial P = .004, observational P = .006).

LIMITATIONS

The meta-analysis was limited by the significant heterogeneity of the primary data.

CONCLUSIONS

Functional outcomes are inconsistently assessed and reported and require common definitions, and the more regular use of validated assessment tools, as well. Preoperative radiation and, in particular, short-course radiation may be a strong risk factor for incontinence; however, further studies are needed.

Quality of life after coloanal anastomosis and abdominoperineal resection for distal rectal cancers: sphincter preservation vs quality of life

AIM

A permanent colostomy is considered to have an adverse impact on quality of life (QOL). However, functional outcomes following sphincter preservation also affect QOL. Our aim was to determine differences in QOL of patients undergoing coloanal anastomosis (CAA) or abdominoperineal resection (APR) for distal rectal cancer.

METHOD

Eighty-five patients underwent CAA (72 with intestinal continuity and 13 with a stoma because of complications) and 83 patients underwent APR for a distal rectal cancer between 1995 and 2001 at a single institution and responded to our survey. QOL was evaluated using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR38.

RESULTS

Patients with CAA were younger than APR patients (mean age 57 vs 62 years, P < 0.001), but gender distribution, tumour stage and proportion of subjects receiving radiotherapy was not significantly different. Patients undergoing CAA had higher scores (better QOL) for physical functioning; lower scores (fewer symptoms) for fatigue, pain, financial difficulties, weight loss and chemotherapy side effects; and higher scores (more symptoms) for constipation and gastrointestinal symptoms compared with APR patients. CAA patients had higher scores (better QOL) for body image in men but not in women. Sexual functioning scores in men and women were lower (worse QOL) in CAA patients compared with APR patients.

CONCLUSIONS

QOL after APR is comparable to sphincter preservation, although there are some differences that need to be considered. QOL and functional results should be taken into account with the oncological outcome when devising management strategy for distal rectal cancer.

Management and results of complications after anterior resection with colonic pouch reconstruction for rectal cancer

AIM

Colonic J-pouch reconstruction is widely carried out during low anterior resection. The aim of this observational study was to describe the complications and evaluate the results of adverse event management.

METHOD

A total of 128 patients underwent an elective anterior resection with colorectal or coloanal J-pouch reconstruction for primary rectal cancer between January 1997 and December 2008.

RESULTS

The overall mortality was 1.6%. Three (2.3%) patients developed pouch necrosis, one of whom died. The rate of anastomotic leakage was 11.7%. Other major complications included intra-abdominal abscess (3.1%), haemorrhage (0.8%) and abdominal dihiscence (0.8%). In all cases of anastomotic leakage, the pouch was salvaged, with 80% of patients undergoing surgical revision with relaparotomy and transanal suture. Patients with pouch necrosis underwent relaparotomy with removal of the pouch and a terminal colostomy. In all cases of intra-abdominal abscess without anastomotic leakage, radiologically controlled percutaneous drainage was carried out.

CONCLUSION

Anal function can usually be saved after anastomotic leakage by salvage surgery without increase in mortality.

Low anterior resection: alternative anastomotic techniques

Low anterior resection (LAR), with its numerous technical modifications, is one of the most commonly performed operations for rectal cancer. In the past, patients with locally advanced distal rectal cancer were most frequently treated by abdominoperineal resection and permanent colostomy. However, over the past two decades and with improved understanding of tumor biology and refinement in technique, use of LAR to treat rectal cancer has increased substantially. Yet, despite the significant increase in LAR and sphincter preservation, patients in many areas of the country have little access to these techniques and continue to commonly be treated with abdominoperineal resection. This article examines the surgeon's unique and critical role in the pretreatment evaluation and decisions leading to choice of surgical therapy for locally invasive distal rectal cancer. In particular, the authors focus on technical aspects to preserve the anal sphincter, and review methods to optimize functional outcomes in the setting of low pelvic anastomosis.

Reconstruction techniques after proctectomy: what's the best?

There are approximately 40,000 new rectal cancer cases diagnosed each year in the United States, representing the second most common gastrointestinal malignancy (behind colon cancer). With the advent of sphincter preserving techniques, patients with mid and low colorectal cancers enjoy the benefits of better postoperative functional outcomes and quality of life; however, controversy exists over which reconstructive technique is superior in restoring bowel continuity. Construction of a straight coloanal anastomosis is technically simpler, but functional outcomes are inferior compared with colonic reservoirs. The purpose of this review is to summarize the current data regarding reconstructive techniques following proctectomy.

Postoperative complications following surgery for rectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review was designed to determine postoperative complication rates of radical surgery for rectal cancer (abdominal perineal resection and anterior resection).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Lack of accepted complication rates for rectal cancer surgery may hinder quality improvement efforts and may impede the conception of future studies because of uncertainty regarding the expected event rates.

METHODS

All prospective studies of rectal cancer receiving radical surgery published between 1990 and August 2008 were obtained by searching Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, as well as ASCO GI, CAGS, and ASCRS meeting abstracts between 2004 and 2008. There was no language restriction. The outcomes extracted were anastomotic leak, pelvic sepsis, postoperative death, wound infection, and fecal incontinence. Summary complication rates were obtained using a random effects model; the Z-test was used to test for study heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Fifty-three prospective cohort studies and 45 randomized controlled studies with 36,315 patients (24,845 patients had an anastomosis) were eligible for inclusion. Most of the studies found were based in continental Europe (58%), followed by Asia (25%), United Kingdom (10%), North America (5%), and Australia/New Zealand. The anastomotic leak rate, reported in 84 studies, was 11% (95% CI: 10, 12); the pelvic sepsis rate, in 29 studies, was 12% (9, 16); the postoperative death rate, in 75 studies, was 2% (2, 3); and the wound infection rate, in 50 studies, was 7% (5, 8). Fecal incontinence rates were reported in too few studies and so heterogeneously that numerical summarization was inappropriate. Year of publication, use of preoperative radiation, use of laparoscopy, and use of protecting stoma were not significant variables, but average age, median tumor height, and method of detection (clinical vs. radiologic) showed significance to explain heterogeneity in anastomotic leak rates. Year of publication, study origin, average age, and use of laparoscopy were significant, but median tumor height and preoperative radiation use were not significant in explaining heterogeneity among observed postoperative death rates. With multivariable analysis, only average age for anastomotic leak and year of publication for postoperative death remained significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Benchmark complication rates for radical rectal cancer surgery were obtained for use in sample size calculations in future studies and for quality control purposes. Postoperative death rates showed improvement in recent years.

Pouch operation for rectal cancer

Many retrospective studies have found that the functional outcome after a low anterior resection for rectal cancer is better with colonic J-pouch reconstruction than with conventional straight anastomosis. This advantage was demonstrated in prospective, randomized trials and meta-analyses. However, despite its increasing popularity there are several areas of controversy about the use of the colonic J-pouch reconstruction. These issues include anastomotic leaks, the part of the colon used for the pouch, the pouch size, causes of difficulty in evacuation, indications (the optimum level of anastomosis), appropriateness for the elderly, and long-term (2 years or more after surgery) functional outcome. All relevant articles identified from MEDLINE databases were reviewed. The incidence of anastomotic leaks is apparently reduced by colonic J-pouch reconstruction. A 5-cm colonic J-pouch using the sigmoid colon increases the reservoir function without compromising evacuation, and provides better functional outcome than straight anastomosis, even 2 years or more after surgery, in patients whose anastomosis is less than 8 cm from the anal verge. Patients with ultralow anastomoses, less than 4 cm from the verge, appear to benefit the most. At a time when the indications for abdominoperineal excision appear to be reduced for low rectal cancer, the demand for colonic J-pouch reconstruction (the best technique in pouch operations) is therefore likely to increase.

Randomized clinical trials in rectal and anal cancers

This article reviews randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published between April 2001 and November 2008 on the management of patients with rectal cancer. In total, the authors reviewed 78 RCTs on therapy for rectal cancer. Of these, five met the authors' criteria for level 1a evidence. The article discusses the major RCTs and relevant findings that have impacted clinical management most and includes most but not all RCTs on therapy for rectal cancer published during this period.

Intersphincteric resection with direct coloanal anastomosis for ultralow rectal cancer: the experience of People's Republic of China

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the oncologic and functional outcomes of intersphincteric resection in ultralow rectal cancer.

METHODS

From 2000 to 2007, intersphincteric resection with total mesorectal excision was performed in 40 patients with very low rectal cancer (total intersphincteric resection in 5 patients, partial intersphincteric resection in 23 patients, and partial intersphincteric resection with partial dentate line preservation [modified partial intersphincteric resection] in 12 patients). The preoperative tumor stage was T12N01M0.

RESULTS

Morbidity occurred in three patients (anastomotic leakage in one patient, wound infection in two patients), but there was no postoperative mortality. The five-year overall survival rate was 97 percent, and the five-year disease-free survival rate was 86 percent. Patients who underwent a modified partial intersphincteric resection (P = 0.004) or a partial intersphincteric resection (P = 0.008) had significantly better continence than those who underwent total intersphincteric resection, and patients with a diverting stoma had significantly better continence (P = 0.043) than those without a stoma, at 12 months after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Intersphincteric resection is a safe procedure for sphincter-saving rectal surgery in selected patients with very low rectal tumors. A temporary diverting stoma may be beneficial to improve anal function. Modified partial intersphincteric resection under the precondition of radical resection yielded better anal function and a lower rate of incontinence.

Bowel problems, self-care practices, and information needs of colorectal cancer survivors at 6 to 24 months after sphincter-saving surgery

The aim of this study was to describe bowel problems, self-care practices, and information needs of patients who have recovered from the acute effects of sphincter-saving surgery for colorectal cancer. A retrospective, descriptive survey was conducted using a structured telephone interview and mailed questionnaires. The sample consisted of 101 patients who had undergone sphincter-saving surgery for colorectal cancer in the last 6 to 24 months. Most participants (71.3%) reported a change in bowel habits after surgery. The 6 most frequently reported gastrointestinal problems were incomplete evacuation (75.2%), excessive flatus (75.2%), urgency (73.3%), straining (61.4%), perianal soreness or itching (49.5%), and bloating (43.6%). Incontinence of feces (varying from smears to complete bowel action) was reported by 37.6% of participants. The most frequently reported information needs were related to diet (50.5%) and managing conditions such as diarrhea (31.7%), bloating/wind/gas (28.7%), pain (21.8%), and incomplete emptying of the bowel (18.8%). Patients who had recovered from the acute effects of sphincter-saving surgery for colorectal cancer reported a wide range of bowel problems and ongoing concerns about managing symptoms. Findings from this study provide valuable information to guide the development of educational resources to prevent or better manage bowel problems after surgery.

Early results from a randomized clinical trial of colon J pouch versus transverse coloplasty pouch after low anterior resection for rectal cancer

Background

Patients with primary rectal cancer undergoing low anterior resection are often reconstructed using a pouch procedure. The aim of this trial was to compare colon J pouch (CJP) with transverse coloplasty pouch (TCP) reconstruction with regard to functional results, perioperative mortality and morbidity. As there is considerable uncertainty over the true anastomotic leak rate in patients with a TCP, the study analysed short-term outcome data.

Methods

Elective patients suitable for either procedure after sphincter-saving low anterior resection were eligible. Randomization took place during surgery. The primary endpoint was the rate of late evacuation problems after 2 years; secondary endpoints were anastomotic leak rate, perioperative morbidity and mortality.

Results

Between 21 October 2002 and 5 December 2005, 149 patients were randomized. All 76 patients randomized to TCP had the procedure compared with 68 of the 73 patients (93 per cent) randomized to CJP. Both groups were comparable with regard to demographic and clinical characteristics. Surgical complications (CJP: 19 per cent; TCP: 18 per cent) and the overall anastomotic leak rate (8 per cent) were equally distributed in both groups.

Conclusion

This trial demonstrated a comparable early outcome for TCP and CJP. This contradicts previous reports suggesting a higher leak rate after TCP. Registration number: ISRCTN78983587 (http://www.controlled-trials.com).

Colo-anal pouches: lessons from a prospective audit

OBJECTIVE

Colonic pouch formation with pouch-anal anastomosis is the treatment of choice following restorative anterior resection for low rectal cancers with a proximal loop ileostomy to defunction the anastomosis. Controversy exists as to whether anastomotic integrity needs to be checked prior to ileostomy reversal. The aim of this prospective study was to audit our current practice.

METHOD

Data on all patients undergoing resectional surgery for rectal cancer in our unit are entered prospectively onto a database. Patients who underwent an anterior resection with pouch formation and defunctioning ileostomy were identified and a review of notes and radiological records was carried out.

RESULTS

Forty-two patients with rectal adenocarcinoma underwent an anterior resection with colo-colonic pouch, colo-anal anastomosis and a covering loop ileostomy. Of these, 38(90.5%) had water-soluble contrast enemas (WSCE) 6-8 weeks postoperatively. Two studies (5.3%) confirmed the presence of normal colo-colonic pouch but 24(63.2%) normal reports made no mention of the presence of pouch. Three studies (7.9%) reported true leaks, one study (2.6%) an anastomotic stricture and eight studies (21.1%) anastomotic leaks. Review by radiologists and surgeons, and examination with flexible sigmoidoscopy of these final eight confirmed that these appearances were consistent with normal colo-colonic pouches and anastomosis with no leak. These patients went on to have uneventful stoma closure.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that Colon pouches are difficult to clearly delineate on WSCE and appearances may be mistaken for leaks leading to questioning of the suitability of WSCE in assessing anastomotic integrity. A true positive leak rate of 7.9% would suggest that postoperative assessment prior to closure is still necessary in some patients.

Reconstructive techniques after rectal resection for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Total mesorectal resection (TME) has led to improved survival and reduced local recurrence in patients with rectal cancer. Straight coloanal anastomosis after TME can lead to problems with frequent bowel movements, fecal urgency and incontinence. The colonic J pouch, side-to-end anastomosis and transverse coloplasty have been developed as alternative surgical strategies in order to improve bowel function.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study is to determine which rectal reconstructive technique results in the best postoperative bowel function.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A systematic search of the literature (MEDLINE, Cancerlit, Embase and Cochrane Databases) was conducted from inception to Feb 14, 2006 by two independent investigators.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials in which patients with rectal cancer undergoing low rectal resection and coloanal anastomosis were randomized to at least two different anastomotic techniques. Furthermore, a measure of postoperative bowel function was necessary for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies identified for potential inclusion were independently assessed for eligibility by at least two reviewers. Data from included trials was collected using a standardized data collection form. Data was collated and qualitatively summarized for bowel function outcomes and meta-analysis statistical techniques were used to pool data on postoperative complications.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 2609 relevant studies, 16 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met our inclusion criteria. Nine RCTs (n=473) compared straight coloanal anastomosis (SCA) to the colonic J pouch (CJP). Up to 18 months postoperatively, the CJP was superior to SCA in most studies in bowel frequency, urgency, fecal incontinence and use of antidiarrheal medication. There were too few patients with long-term bowel function outcomes to determine if this advantage continued after 18 months postop. Four RCTs (n=215) compared the side-to-end anastomosis (STE) to the CJP. These studies showed no difference in bowel function outcomes between these two techniques. Similarly, three RCTs (n=158) compared transverse coloplasty (TC) to CJP. Similarly, there were no differences in bowel function outcomes in these small studies. Overall, there were no significant differences in postoperative complications with any of the anastomotic strategies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In several randomized controlled trials, the CJP has been shown to be superior to the SCA in bowel function outcomes in patients with rectal cancer for at least 18 months after gastrointestinal continuity is re-established. The TC and STE anastomoses have been shown to have similar bowel function outcomes when compared to the CJP in small randomized controlled trials; further study is necessary to determine the role of these alternative coloanal anastomotic strategies.

Safety and morbidity after ultra-low coloanal anastomoses: J-pouch vs end-to-end reconstruction

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Anastomotic failure after ultra-low anterior rectum resection is the most important complication, and it is influenced by the type of reconstruction. The aim of this study was to compare retrospectively the straight coloanal anastomosis with the J-pouch reconstruction concerning the development of anastomotic leakage.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty-six of 381 consecutive patients underwent low anterior rectum resection with total mesorectal excision and ultra-low coloanal anastomosis at 3-4 cm from the anocutan line. A 5-cm J-pouch (side-to-end) was performed in 25, a straight coloanal anastomosis in 25, and a coloplasty in 6 patients, respectively.

RESULTS/FINDINGS

No influence by age, body mass index, and operating time on anastomotic leakage rate was found. Leakage was found in eight patients with straight coloanal anastomosis, resulting in a leakage rate of 32% compared to one patient in the J-pouch group (P = 0.023).

INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSION

Patient's safety is higher after J-pouch reconstruction because of the lower anastomotic failure rate, and functional results had been reported as similar after J-pouch reconstruction and straight coloanal anastomosis. Therefore, we clearly argue for a J-pouch reconstruction as the standard method after ultra-low coloanal anastomosis.

Effect of anastomosis level on continence performance and quality of life after colonic J-pouch reconstruction

Total mesorectal excision (TME) has become the recommended method for treatment of cancer in the middle or lower third of the rectum. Thus very low anastomoses are necessary to preserve continence, and pouch reconstruction is favored. It is unclear whether the level of anastomosis is important for continence and quality of life in colonic J-pouch reconstruction. In this investigation all patients were included who underwent curative elective anterior continuity resection with colorectal or coloanal J-pouch reconstruction for primary rectal cancer between January 2001 and December 2004. Exclusion criteria were distant metastases and any signs of recurrence at the time of investigation. Evaluation of continence performance by Wexner and Holschneider questionnaire and quality of life using the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR38 (EORTC) questionnaires was done 220 +/- 38 days after closure of the protective Ileostomy, which was performed 106 +/- 48 days after primary intervention. Fifty-two patients (79%) were analyzed. Colopouch rectal anastomosis was performed in eighteen cases and colopouch anal anastomosis in thirty-four cases. Fifty percent of the patients in both groups were continent for solid stool. Patients with a colopouch anal anastomosis had a significantly higher rate of incontinence for liquid stool, however. They took stool-regulating medicine more frequently and complained of fecal soiling and a restricted quality of life. Patients with a colopouch anal anastomosis had a significantly lower score on the most important points of the QLQ-C30 (emotional functioning, social functioning, pain, and quality of life). The same applied to the QLQ-CR38 for body image and problems with defecation. The quality of life of patients with a colopouch anal anastomosis was still considered acceptable compared with reference data for the normal healthy population, however. Both continence and quality of life are substantially affected by the level of the anastomosis after colonic pouch reconstruction. This suggests preservation of a small part of the rectum when oncologically feasible and performing a colopouch rectal anastomosis.

Total mesorectal excision and management of rectal cancer

Treatment of rectal cancer over the last two decades has evolved with changes in techniques of surgery and radiation based on national and international trials. Preoperative adjuvant radiation is now preferred over postoperative adjuvant radiation, and total mesorectal excision with preservation of pelvic nerves is the gold standard for surgical treatment of rectal cancer. Preservation of the anal sphincter without compromising oncological outcome is an additional benefit for patients with carcinoma in the distal rectum. Further progress in imaging and a multidisciplinary team approach will facilitate individualization of treatment strategy with more focus on quality of life.

Evolution of the restorative proctocolectomy and its effects on gastrointestinal hormones

Gastrointestinal (GI) peptide hormones are chemical messengers that regulate secretory, mechanical, metabolic, and trophic functions of the gut. Restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) or resection of the colon and rectum with maintenance of intestinal continuity through the construction of an ileal pouch reservoir and preservation of the anal sphincters has become the standard of care for the surgical treatment of ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis. The manipulation of the digestive system to create the ileal pouch involves altering gut-associated lymphoid tissue among other anatomic changes that lead to changes in GI peptides. In addition, the ileal pouch epithelium responds to a wide variety of stimuli by adjusting its cellularity and function. These adaptive mechanisms involve systemic factors, such as humoral and neural stimuli, as well as local factors, such as changes in intestinal peristalsis and intraluminal nutrients. There have been conflicting reports as to whether the alterations in GI hormones after RPC have actual clinical implications. What the studies on alterations of GI peptides' response and behavior after RPC have contributed, however, is a window into the possible etiology of complications after pouch surgery, such as pouchitis and malabsorption. Given the possibility of pharmacologically modifying GI peptides or select components of adaptation as a therapeutic strategy for patients with ileal pouch dysfunction or pouchitis, a clear understanding of human pouch mucosal adaptation is of paramount importance. In this review, we summarize the evolution of the RPC and its effects on the GI hormones as well as their possible clinical implications.

A diverting stoma is not necessary when performing a handsewn coloanal anastomosis for lower rectal cancer

PURPOSE

Although a temporary diverting stoma is a frequent surgical procedure for the protection of anastomosis in a sphincter-preserving operation for lower rectal cancer, its impact on anastomotic leakage is not conclusive. This study was designed to evaluate anastomotic complications after ultralow anterior resection and handsewn coloanal anastomosis without a diverting stoma for lower rectal cancer patients.

METHODS

Between January 1995 and December 2005, 96 patients were treated by ultralow anterior resection and handsewn coloanal anastomosis for lower rectal cancer. Fifty-one patients received preoperative concurrent chemoradiation, whereas 45 had no preoperative treatment. No diverting stoma was created in any of these cases. The anastomotic complications were evaluated between the groups.

RESULTS

Six of 96 patients (6.1 percent) developed anastomotic complications: three anastomotic stenoses, one partial anastomotic dehiscence, one retrorectal abscess, and one rectovaginal fistula. All of the complications occurred in the preoperative radiation group, whereas none from the nonradiation group had an anastomotic complication (P=0.017). The patients with stenosis and partial dehiscence were managed conservatively. The patient with retrorectal abscess was treated with debridement, irrigation and drainage, and seton procedure with a transanal approach. The patient with rectovaginal fistula underwent a second coloanal anastomosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The anastomotic complication rate was low even without a diverting stoma. This study suggests that a diverting stoma is not necessary when performing a handsewn coloanal anastomosis for lower rectal cancer however, an effort should be made for healthy anastomotic healing in patients with rectal cancer who are preoperatively radiated.