1
|
Collard MK, Tuech JJ, Sabbagh C, Souadka A, Loriau J, Rullier E, Marchal F, Germain A, Benoist S, Faucheron JL, Manceau G, Dubois A, Laforest A, Sourrouille I, Protat A, Mège D, Lakkis Z, Prudhomme M, Derieux S, Ouaissi M, Venara A, Brigand C, Lelong B, Pautrat K, Maggiori L, Lebreton G, Rouanet P, Pocard M, Duchalais E, Denost Q, Parc Y, Lefevre JH. Long-term bowel function following delayed coloanal anastomosis: Analysis of a multicentric cohort study (GRECCAR). Colorectal Dis 2025; 27:e70013. [PMID: 39905658 DOI: 10.1111/codi.70013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2024] [Revised: 09/26/2024] [Accepted: 11/19/2024] [Indexed: 02/06/2025]
Abstract
AIM Alteration of bowel function after delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCAA) might be a limitation to its utilization. Our aim was to assess the long-term bowel function of DCAA in a large multicentric cohort. METHOD All patients who underwent DCAA interventions at 29 GRECCAR-affiliated hospitals between 2010 and 2021 were retrospectively included. Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score or confection of a stoma due to poor bowel function was assessed in eligible patients. Good bowel function was defined by the preservation of bowel continuity with no LARS or a minor LARS. RESULTS Among the 385 eligible patients to assess long-term bowel continuity, 63% (n = 243) responded to the questionnaire or had a definitive stoma because of poor bowel function. After a median follow-up of 32 months, good bowel function was reported by 60% (n = 146) of patients (with no LARS 36% and minor LARS 24%), whereas 40% of patients (n = 146) had a poor bowel function including major LARS (36%) and definitive stoma due to poor bowel function (4%). No variables tested were predictive of a poor bowel function after DCAA, including a history of pelvic radiotherapy (P = 0.722), salvage DCAA after failure of a previous anastomosis (P = 0.755), presence of a diverting stoma (P = 0.556), occurrence of an anastomotic leakage (P = 0.416) and time interval from the DCAA to the bowel function assessment (P = 0.350). CONCLUSIONS No LARS or minor LARS was reached for 60% of patients after DCAA. Less than 5% of patients received a definitive stoma due to a poor bowel function.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maxime K Collard
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| | - Jean-Jacques Tuech
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Charles Nicole, Rouen, France
| | - Charles Sabbagh
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital d'Amiens, Amiens, France
| | - Amine Souadka
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, National Institute of Oncology, Rabat, Morocco
| | - Jérome Loriau
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Saint-Joseph, Paris, France
| | - Eric Rullier
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Saint André Hospital, Bordeaux, France
| | - Frédéric Marchal
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Institut de cancérologie de Lorraine, Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy, France
| | - Adeline Germain
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Universitaire de Nancy, Nancy, France
| | - Stéphane Benoist
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital du Kremlin-Bicêtre, Kremlin-Bicêtre, France
| | - Jean-Luc Faucheron
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Hôpital Unversitaire de Grenoble, La Tronche, France
| | - Gilles Manceau
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France
| | - Anne Dubois
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, CHU Clermont-Ferrand Site Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | - Anaïs Laforest
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Institut Monsouris, Paris, France
| | - Isabelle Sourrouille
- Gustave Roussy, Département d'Anesthésie, Chirurgie et Interventionnel, Villejuif, France
| | - Aurore Protat
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Huriez, Lille, France
| | - Diane Mège
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital de la Timone, Marseille, France
| | - Zaher Lakkis
- Department of Digestive Surgery, University Hospital of Besancon, Besancon, France
| | - Michel Prudhomme
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Universitaire de Nîmes, Nîmes, France
| | - Simon Derieux
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Groupe Hospitalier Diaconesses - Croix Saint Simon, Paris, France
| | - Mehdi Ouaissi
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Trousseau - CHRU Hôpitaux de Tours, Chambray-lès-Tours, France
| | - Aurélien Venara
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Universitaire d'Angers, Angers, France
| | - Cécile Brigand
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital de Hautepierre - Hôpitaux Universitaires, Strasbourg, France
| | - Bernard Lelong
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Institut Paoli-Calmettes, Marseille, France
| | - Karine Pautrat
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Lariboisière, Paris, France
| | - Leon Maggiori
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Lariboisière, Paris, France
| | - Gil Lebreton
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, CHU côte de Nâcre, Caen, France
| | - Philippe Rouanet
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Institut du Cancer de Montpellier, Montpellier, France
| | - Marc Pocard
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, Paris, France
| | - Emilie Duchalais
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes, Nantes, France
| | - Quentin Denost
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Bordeaux Colorectal Institute, Bordeaux, France
| | - Yann Parc
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| | - Jérémie H Lefevre
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Bendib H, Anou A, Hachlaf R, Oukrine H, Djelali N, Chekman C. Modified delayed coloanal anastomosis following TME for mid and low rectal cancer: 19 consecutive patients from a single center. Updates Surg 2024; 76:1729-1734. [PMID: 38976219 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-024-01936-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/18/2024] [Accepted: 07/02/2024] [Indexed: 07/09/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hani Bendib
- Department of Oncologic Surgery, Debussy Clinic, Pierre & Marie Curie Center, Faculty of Medicine, Algiers 1 University, Algiers, Algeria.
| | - Abdelkrim Anou
- Department of Oncologic Surgery, CLCC Blida, Faculty of Medicine, Blida 1 University, Blida, Algeria
| | - Razika Hachlaf
- Department of Oncologic Surgery, Debussy Clinic, Pierre & Marie Curie Center, Faculty of Medicine, Algiers 1 University, Algiers, Algeria
| | - Hind Oukrine
- Department of Oncologic Surgery, Debussy Clinic, Pierre & Marie Curie Center, Faculty of Medicine, Algiers 1 University, Algiers, Algeria
| | - Nabil Djelali
- Department of Oncologic Surgery, Debussy Clinic, Pierre & Marie Curie Center, Faculty of Medicine, Algiers 1 University, Algiers, Algeria
| | - Chemseddine Chekman
- Department of Oncologic Surgery, Debussy Clinic, Pierre & Marie Curie Center, Faculty of Medicine, Algiers 1 University, Algiers, Algeria
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sharabiany S, Joosten JJ, Musters GD, Talboom K, Tanis PJ, Bemelman WA, Hompes R. Management of acute and chronic pelvic sepsis after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer-a 10-year experience of a national referral centre. Colorectal Dis 2024; 26:650-659. [PMID: 38418896 DOI: 10.1111/codi.16863] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/26/2023] [Revised: 12/09/2023] [Accepted: 12/12/2023] [Indexed: 03/02/2024]
Abstract
AIM Uncontrolled pelvic sepsis following rectal cancer surgery may lead to dramatic consequences with significant impact on patients' quality of life. The aim of this retrospective observational study is to evaluate management of pelvic sepsis after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer at a national referral centre. METHOD Referred patients with acute or chronic pelvic sepsis after sphincter preserving rectal cancer resection, with the year of referral between 2010 and 2014 (A) or between 2015 and 2020 (B), were included. The main outcome was control of pelvic sepsis at the end of follow-up, with healed anastomosis with restored faecal stream (RFS) as co-primary outcome. RESULTS In total 136 patients were included: 49 in group A and 87 in group B. After a median follow-up of 82 months (interquartile range 35-100) in group A and 42 months (interquartile range 22-60) in group B, control of pelvic sepsis was achieved in all patients who received endoscopic vacuum assisted surgical closure (7/7 and 2/2), in 91% (19/21) and 89% (31/35) of patients who received redo anastomosis (P = 1.000) and in 100% (18/18) and 95% (41/43) of patients who received intersphincteric resection (P = 1.000), respectively. Restorative procedures resulted in a healed anastomosis with RFS in 61% (17/28) of patients in group A and 68% (25/37) of patients in group B (P = 0.567). CONCLUSION High rates of success can be achieved with surgical salvage of pelvic sepsis in a dedicated tertiary referral centre, without significant differences over time. In well selected and motivated patients a healed anastomosis with RFS can be achieved in the majority.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Sharabiany
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Johanna J Joosten
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Gijsbert D Musters
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Kevin Talboom
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Wilhelmus A Bemelman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Roel Hompes
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Collard MK, Rullier E, Tuech JJ, Sabbagh C, Souadka A, Loriau J, Faucheron JL, Benoist S, Dubois A, Dumont F, Germain A, Manceau G, Marchal F, Sourrouille I, Lakkis Z, Lelong B, Derieux S, Piessen G, Laforest A, Venara A, Prudhomme M, Brigand C, Duchalais E, Ouaissi M, Lebreton G, Rouanet P, Mège D, Pautrat K, Reynolds IS, Pocard M, Parc Y, Denost Q, Lefevre JH. Is Delaying a Coloanal Anastomosis the Ideal Solution for Rectal Surgery?: Analysis of a Multicentric Cohort of 564 Patients From the GRECCAR. Ann Surg 2023; 278:781-789. [PMID: 37522163 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000006025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/01/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To assess the specific results of delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCAA) in light of its 2 main indications. BACKGROUND DCAA can be proposed either immediately after a low anterior resection (primary DCAA) or after the failure of a primary pelvic surgery as a salvage procedure (salvage DCAA). METHODS All patients who underwent DCAA intervention at 30 GRECCAR-affiliated hospitals between 2010 and 2021 were retrospectively included. RESULTS Five hundred sixty-four patients (male: 63%; median age: 62 years; interquartile range: 53-69) underwent a DCAA: 66% for primary DCAA and 34% for salvage DCAA. Overall morbidity, major morbidity, and mortality were 57%, 30%, and 1.1%, respectively, without any significant differences between primary DCAA and salvage DCAA ( P = 0.933; P = 0.238, and P = 0.410, respectively). Anastomotic leakage was more frequent after salvage DCAA (23%) than after primary DCAA (15%), ( P = 0.016).Fifty-five patients (10%) developed necrosis of the intra-abdominal colon. In multivariate analysis, intra-abdominal colon necrosis was significantly associated with male sex [odds ratio (OR) = 2.67 95% CI: 1.22-6.49; P = 0.020], body mass index >25 (OR = 2.78 95% CI: 1.37-6.00; P = 0.006), and peripheral artery disease (OR = 4.68 95% CI: 1.12-19.1; P = 0.030). The occurrence of this complication was similar between primary DCAA (11%) and salvage DCAA (8%), ( P = 0.289).Preservation of bowel continuity was reached 3 years after DCAA in 74% of the cohort (primary DCAA: 77% vs salvage DCAA: 68%, P = 0.031). Among patients with a DCAA mannered without diverting stoma, 75% (301/403) have never required a stoma at the last follow-up. CONCLUSIONS DCAA makes it possible to definitively avoid a stoma in 75% of patients when mannered initially without a stoma and to save bowel continuity in 68% of the patients in the setting of failure of primary pelvic surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maxime K Collard
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| | - Eric Rullier
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Saint André Hospital, Bordeaux, France
| | - Jean-Jacques Tuech
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hospital Charles Nicole, Rouen, France
| | - Charles Sabbagh
- Department of General and Digestive surgery, Amiens Hospital, France
| | - Amine Souadka
- Department of General and Digestive surgery, National Institute of Oncology, Rabat, Marocco
| | - Jérome Loriau
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Saint-Joseph Hospital, Paris, France
| | - Jean-Luc Faucheron
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Hôpital Unversitaire de Grenoble, France
| | - Stéphane Benoist
- Department of General and Digestive surgery, Hôpital du Kremlin-Bicêtre, Kremlin-Bicêtre, France
| | - Anne Dubois
- Department of General and Digestive surgery, CHU Clermont-Ferrand Site Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | - Frédéric Dumont
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Institut de cancérologie de l'ouest, Saint-Herblain, France
| | - Adeline Germain
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Universitaire de Nancy, France
| | - Gilles Manceau
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France
| | - Frédéric Marchal
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine, Université de Lorraine, Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy, France
| | | | - Zaher Lakkis
- Department of Digestive Surgery, University Hospital of Besancon, Besancon, France
| | - Bernard Lelong
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Institute Paoli-Calmettes, Marseille, France
| | - Simon Derieux
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Groupe Hospitalier Diaconesses-Croix Saint Simon, Paris, France
| | - Guillaume Piessen
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Huriez, Lille, France
| | - Anaïs Laforest
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Institute Monsouris, Paris, France
| | - Aurélien Venara
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Universitaire d'Angers, France
| | - Michel Prudhomme
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Universitaire de Nîmes, France
| | - Cécile Brigand
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital de Hautepierre-Hôpitaux Universitaires, Strasbourg, France
| | - Emilie Duchalais
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes, France
| | - Mehdi Ouaissi
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Trousseau - CHRU Hôpitaux de Tours, Chambray-lès-Tours, France
| | - Gil Lebreton
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, CHU côte de Nâcre, Caen, France
| | - Philippe Rouanet
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Institut du Cancer de Montpellier, Montpellier, France
| | - Diane Mège
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital de la Timone, Marseille, France
| | - Karine Pautrat
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Lariboisière, Paris, France
| | - Ian S Reynolds
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Marc Pocard
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrère, Paris, France
| | - Yann Parc
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| | - Quentin Denost
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Bordeaux Colorectal Institute, Bordeaux, France
| | - Jérémie H Lefevre
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Galletti RP, Agareno GA, Sesconetto LDA, da Silva RBR, Pandini RV, Gerbasi LS, Seid VE, Araujo SEA, Tustumi F. Outcomes of redo for failed colorectal or coloanal anastomoses: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Coloproctol 2023; 39:375-384. [PMID: 36535708 PMCID: PMC10626334 DOI: 10.3393/ac.2022.00605.0086] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/02/2022] [Revised: 11/01/2022] [Accepted: 11/04/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE This study aimed to review the outcomes of redo procedures for failed colorectal or coloanal anastomoses. METHODS A systematic review was performed using the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and LILACS databases. The inclusion criteria were adult patients undergoing colectomy with primary colorectal or coloanal anastomosis and studies that assessed the postoperative results. The protocol is registered in PROSPERO (No. CRD42021267715). RESULTS Eleven articles met the eligibility criteria and were selected. The studied population size ranged from 7 to 78 patients. The overall mortality rate was 0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0%-0.01%). The postoperative complication rate was 40% (95% CI, 40%-50%). The length of hospital stay was 13.68 days (95% CI, 11.3-16.06 days). After redo surgery, 82% of the patients were free of stoma (95% CI, 75%-90%), and 24% of patients (95% CI, 0%-39%) had fecal incontinence. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (P=0.002) was associated with a lower probability of being free of stoma in meta-regression. CONCLUSION Redo colorectal and coloanal anastomoses are strategies to restore colonic continuity. The decision to perform a redo operation should be based on a proper evaluation of the morbidity and mortality risks, the probability of remaining free of stoma, the quality of life, and a functional assessment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Rafael Vaz Pandini
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil
| | | | - Victor Edmond Seid
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil
| | | | - Francisco Tustumi
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
The Quality of Life of Patients with Surgically Treated Colorectal Cancer: A Narrative Review. J Clin Med 2022; 11:jcm11206211. [PMID: 36294531 PMCID: PMC9604858 DOI: 10.3390/jcm11206211] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2022] [Revised: 10/14/2022] [Accepted: 10/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Quality of life is a topic increasingly being addressed by researchers. Due to the increasing incidence of colorectal cancer, this issue is particularly relevant. Despite the increasing number of publications on this topic each year, it still requires further research. The aim of this study was to analyze the available literature from the past 10 years, addressing the topic of QoL in patients with colorectal cancer which has been treated surgically. MATERIAL AND METHODS This review is based on 93 articles published between 2012 and 2022. It analyzes the impact of socioeconomic factors, the location and stage of the tumor, stoma and the method of surgical treatment on patients' QoL and sexual functioning. RESULTS CRC has a negative impact on patients' financial status, social functioning, pain and physical functioning. Patients with stage II or III cancer have an overall lower QoL than patients with stage I. The more proximally the lesion is located to the sphincters, the greater the negative impact on the QoL. There was a significant difference in favor of laparoscopic surgery compared with open surgery. In patients with a stoma, the QoL is lower compared with patients with preserved gastrointestinal tract continuity. The more time has passed since surgery, the more the presence of a stoma has a negative impact on QoL. Surgery for CRC negatively affects patients' sex lives, especially in younger people and among men. CONCLUSIONS This study may contribute to the identification of the factors that affect the QoL of patients with surgically treated colorectal cancer. This will allow even more effective and complete treatment, facilitating patients' return to normal physical, mental and social functioning.
Collapse
|
7
|
Talboom K, Tanis PJ, Bemelman WA, Hompes R. Dealing with Complications of Colorectal Surgery Using the Transanal Approach-When and How? Clin Colon Rectal Surg 2022; 35:155-164. [PMID: 35237112 PMCID: PMC8885159 DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1742117] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
The transanal approach is a new and exciting addition to the surgeons' repertoire to deal with complications after colorectal surgery. Improved exposure, accessibility, and visibility greatly facilitate adequate dissection of the affected area with potential increase in effectiveness and reduced morbidity. An essential component in salvaging anastomotic leaks of low colorectal, coloanal, or ileoanal anastomoses is early diagnosis and early treatment, especially when starting with endoscopic vacuum therapy, followed by early surgical closure (endoscopic vacuum-assisted surgical closure). Redo surgery using a transanal minimally invasive surgery platform for chronic leaks after total mesorectal excision surgery or surgical causes of pouch failure successfully mitigates limited visibility and exposure by using a bottom-up approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K. Talboom
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P. J. Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location VUMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands,Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands,Cancer Centre Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands,Address for correspondence P. J. Tanis, MD, PhD Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMCDe Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV AmsterdamThe Netherlands
| | - W. A. Bemelman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands,Cancer Centre Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - R. Hompes
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands,Cancer Centre Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Keller DS, Talboom K, van Helsdingen CPM, Hompes R. Treatment Modalities for Anastomotic Leakage in Rectal Cancer Surgery. Clin Colon Rectal Surg 2021; 34:431-438. [PMID: 34853566 DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1736465] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
Despite advances in rectal cancer surgery, anastomotic leakage (AL) remains a common complication with a significant impact on patient recovery, health care costs, and oncologic outcomes. The spectrum of clinical severity associated with AL is broad, and treatment options are diverse with highly variable practices across the colorectal community. To be effective, the treatment must match not only the patient's current status but also the type of leak, the surgeon's skill, and the resources available. In this chapter, we will review the current and emergent treatment modalities for AL after rectal cancer surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deborah S Keller
- Division of Colorectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California at Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, California
| | - K Talboom
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - C P M van Helsdingen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Roel Hompes
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Majbar MA, Courtot L, Dahbi-Skali L, Rafik A, Jouppe PO, Moussata D, Benkabbou A, Mohsine R, Ouaissi M, Souadka A. Two-step pull-through colo-anal anastomosis aiming to avoid stoma in rectal cancer surgery: A "real life" study in a developing country. J Visc Surg 2021; 159:187-193. [PMID: 34092526 DOI: 10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2021.04.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M A Majbar
- Digestive Surgical Oncology Department, National Institute of Oncology, Ibn Sina University Hospital, Rabat, Morocco; Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Mohammed V University, Rabat, Morocco
| | - L Courtot
- Department of Digestive, Oncological, Endocrine, Hepato-Biliary, Pancreatic, and Liver Transplant Surgery, Trousseau Hospital, Tours, France
| | - L Dahbi-Skali
- Digestive Surgical Oncology Department, National Institute of Oncology, Ibn Sina University Hospital, Rabat, Morocco; Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Mohammed V University, Rabat, Morocco
| | - A Rafik
- Digestive Surgical Oncology Department, National Institute of Oncology, Ibn Sina University Hospital, Rabat, Morocco; Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Mohammed V University, Rabat, Morocco
| | - P O Jouppe
- Department of Digestive, Oncological, Endocrine, Hepato-Biliary, Pancreatic, and Liver Transplant Surgery, Trousseau Hospital, Tours, France
| | - D Moussata
- Department of Digestive, Oncological, Endocrine, Hepato-Biliary, Pancreatic, and Liver Transplant Surgery, Trousseau Hospital, Tours, France
| | - A Benkabbou
- Digestive Surgical Oncology Department, National Institute of Oncology, Ibn Sina University Hospital, Rabat, Morocco; Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Mohammed V University, Rabat, Morocco
| | - R Mohsine
- Digestive Surgical Oncology Department, National Institute of Oncology, Ibn Sina University Hospital, Rabat, Morocco; Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Mohammed V University, Rabat, Morocco
| | - M Ouaissi
- Department of Digestive, Oncological, Endocrine, Hepato-Biliary, Pancreatic, and Liver Transplant Surgery, Trousseau Hospital, Tours, France
| | - A Souadka
- Digestive Surgical Oncology Department, National Institute of Oncology, Ibn Sina University Hospital, Rabat, Morocco; Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Mohammed V University, Rabat, Morocco.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
What management for patients with R1 resection after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer? A review of the literature. J Visc Surg 2021; 159:47-54. [PMID: 34049826 DOI: 10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2021.04.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
AIM OF THE STUDY Treatment for rectal cancer is very standardized. However, for total mesorectal excision (TME) with positive margins at microscopic pathological examination (classified R1 ), there is no consensus regarding management. The objective of this update was, through a review of the literature, to identify the most suitable management to improve overall survival and/or recurrence-free survival after R1 TME for rectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Published national quality guidelines and original studies were searched on Pubmed. Only studies and recommendations concerning the specific management of patients who had undergone R1 TME resection were selected. RESULTS Five original non-randomized studies and seven published national quality guidelines were selected for review. For patients who have undergone R1 TME resection, the French and European published guidelines issued a Grade A recommendation in favor of post-operative radio-chemotherapy (RCT) for those in whom it had not already been performed pre-operatively. The French and European guidelines recommendation for adjuvant chemotherapy was based only on expert agreement. The original studies emphasized the survival benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy, as opposed to post-operative RCT, which did not seem to improve survival. Salvage surgery was not recommended in any of the studies. CONCLUSION After R1 TME resection for rectal cancer, adjuvant chemotherapy seems to be indicated when feasible, whereas post-operative RCT and salvage surgery do not appear to improve patient survival.
Collapse
|
11
|
Lin SY, Ow ZGW, Tan DJH, Tay PWL, Lim SY, Xiao J, Wong NW, Wong KY, Foo FJ, Chong CS. Delayed coloanal anastomosis as a stoma-sparing alternative to immediate coloanal anastomosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. ANZ J Surg 2021; 92:346-354. [PMID: 34031967 DOI: 10.1111/ans.16964] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2020] [Revised: 04/18/2021] [Accepted: 05/02/2021] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Snow Y Lin
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Zachariah G W Ow
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Darren J H Tan
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Phoebe W L Tay
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Sze Y Lim
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Jieling Xiao
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Neng W Wong
- Department of Surgery, University Surgical Cluster, National University Health System, Singapore
| | - Kar Y Wong
- Department of General Surgery, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore
| | - Fung J Foo
- Department of General Surgery, Sengkang General Hospital, Singapore
| | - Choon S Chong
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.,Department of Surgery, University Surgical Cluster, National University Health System, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Functional outcomes of patients undergoing successful redo surgery after failed primary colorectal or coloanal anastomosis for rectal cancer. Surgery 2020; 169:782-789. [PMID: 33276975 DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2020.10.037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2020] [Revised: 10/07/2020] [Accepted: 10/26/2020] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND After a failure of a colorectal or coloanal anastomosis, redo anastomotic surgery aims to avoid the risk of permanent stoma but, overall, to provide a satisfactory functional result and quality of life. Very limited data exist regarding the long-term results after a successful redo anastomosis. The present study aimed to report the long-term functional outcomes and quality of life in patients after a successful redo colorectal anastomosis or coloanal anastomosis. METHODS Between 2007 and 2018, all patients who had a successful restoration of bowel continuity after a failed primary anastomosis performed for a rectal cancer were included. Functional outcomes and quality of life were assessed using the low anterior rectal syndrome score and the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index. RESULTS One hundred and twenty-seven patients were eligible for inclusion in this study, with long-term functional outcomes assessed in 73 patients (57%). After a median follow-up of 69 months, 31 patients presented no or minor low anterior rectal syndrome (42%), whereas 31 patients reported a major low anterior rectal syndrome (42%). A definitive stoma was confectioned in 11 patients (15%), despite the technical success of redo anastomosis due to poor functional results. Only operative interval <36 months was associated with a poor functional outcome (P = .001), whereas all other factors such as pelvic radiotherapy were not (P = .848). An absence of major low anterior rectal syndrome was the only factor associated with improved quality of life (P = .001). CONCLUSION After successful redo colorectal anastomosis or coloanal anastomosis, good functional outcomes can be achieved in almost half of patients with a well-preserved quality of life but requires a prolonged postoperative period of rehabilitation.
Collapse
|