Hartmann's procedure versus intersphincteric abdominoperineal excision (HiP Study): a multicentre prospective cohort study

Low Hartmann's procedure versus abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer, a propensity score matching cohort study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare low Hartmann's procedure (LHP) with abdominoperineal resection (APR) for rectal cancer (RC) regarding postoperative complications.

METHOD

RC patients receiving radical LHP or APR from 2015 to 2019 in our center were retrospectively enrolled. Patients' demographic and surgical information was collected and analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the baseline information. The primary outcome was the incidence of major complications. All the statistical analysis was performed by SPSS 22.0 and R.

RESULTS

342 individuals were primarily included and 134 remained after PSM with a 1:2 ratio (50 in LHP and 84 in APR). Patients in the LHP group were associated with higher tumor height (P < 0.001). No significant difference was observed between the two groups for the incidence of major complications (6.0% vs. 1.2%, P = 0.290), and severe pelvic abscess (2% vs. 0%, P = 0.373). However, the occurrence rate of minor complications was significantly higher in the LHP group (52% vs. 21.4%, P < 0.001), and the difference mainly lay in abdominal wound infection (10% vs. 0%, P = 0.006) and bowel obstruction (16% vs. 4.8%, P = 0.028). LHP was not the independent risk factor of pelvic abscess in the multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

Our data demonstrated a comparable incidence of major complications between LHP and APR. LHP was still a reliable alternative in selected RC patients when primary anastomosis was not recommended.

Hartmann's Procedure Versus Intersphincteric Abdominoperineal Excision in Patients with Rectal Cancer: Report from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry (SCRCR)

Objective

The primary outcome was to compare overall postoperative surgical complications within 30 days after Hartmann's procedure (HP) compared with intersphincteric abdominoperineal excision (iAPE). The secondary outcome was major surgical complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III).

Background

There is uncertainty regarding the optimal surgical method in patients with rectal cancer when an anastomosis is unsuitable.

Methods

Rectal cancer patients with a tumor height >5 cm, registered in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry who received HP or iAPE electively in 2017-2020 were included, (HP, n = 696; iAPE, n = 314). Logistic regression analysis adjusting for body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, sex, age, preoperative radiotherapy, tumor height, cancer stage, operating hospital, and type of operation was performed.

Results

Patients in the HP group were older and had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists scores. The mean operating time was less for HP (290 vs 377 min). Intraoperative bowel perforations were less frequent in the HP group, 3.6% versus 10.2%. Overall surgical complication rates were 20.3% after HP and 15.9% after iAPE (P = 0.118). Major surgical complications were 7.5% after HP and 5.7% and after iAPE (P = 0.351). Multiple regression analysis indicated a higher risk of overall surgical complications after HP (odds ratio: 1.63; 95% confidence interval = 1.09-2.45).

Conclusions

HP was associated with a higher risk of surgical complications compared with iAPE. In patients unfit for anastomosis, iAPE may be preferable. However, the lack of statistical power regarding major surgical complications, prolonged operating time, increased risk of bowel perforation, and lack of long-term outcomes, raises uncertainty regarding recommending intersphincteric abdominoperineal excision as the preferred surgical approach.

Postoperative morbidity following Hartmann's procedure in comparison to anterior resection and abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer-a population-based study

AIM

There is ongoing controversy regarding the extent to which Hartmann's procedure (HP) should be used in rectal cancer treatment. This study was designed to investigate 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality following HP, anterior resection (AR) and abdominoperineal resection (APR) for rectal cancer using a national registry.

METHODS

All patients operated for rectal cancer, tumour height 5-15 cm, between the years 2010 and 2017, were identified through the Swedish colorectal cancer registry.

RESULTS

A total of 8476 patients were included: 1210 (14%) undergoing HP, 5406 (64%) AR and 1860 (22%) APR. HP was associated with an increased risk of intra-abdominal infection (OR 1.7, CI 1.26-2.28, P = 0.0004) compared to AR and APR, while APR was related to an increased risk of overall complications (OR 1.18, CI 1.01-1.40, P = 0.040). No significant difference was observed in the rate of reoperations and readmissions between HP, AR and APR, and type of surgical procedure was not a risk factor for 30-day mortality. Findings from a subgroup analysis of patients with a tumour 5-7 cm from the anal verge revealed that HP was not associated with increased risk for complications or 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients where AR is not appropriate HP is a valid alternative with a favourable outcome. APR was associated with the highest overall 30-day complication rate.

Hartmann's procedure in rectal cancer surgery is often an intraoperative decision: a retrospective multicenter study

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate patient-related factors predicting the selection of rectal cancer patients to Hartmann's procedure as well as to investigate how often, and on what grounds, anterior resection is intraoperatively changed to Hartmann's procedure.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry regarding patients with rectal cancer operated upon from January 1 2007 to June 30 2017 in the county of Skåne were retrospectively reviewed. Data were expanded with further details from medical charts. A univariable analysis was performed to investigate variables associated with unplanned HP and significant variables included in a multivariable logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Altogether, 1141 patients who underwent Hartmann's procedure (275 patients, 24%), anterior resection (491 patients, 43%), or abdominoperineal resection (375 patients, 33%) were included. Patients undergoing Hartmann's procedure were significantly older and had more frequently comorbidity. The decision to perform Hartmann's procedure was made preoperatively in 209 (76%) patients, most commonly because of a comorbidity (27%) or oncological reasons (25%). Patient preference was noted in 8% of cases. In 64 cases (23%), the decision was made intraoperatively, most often due to anastomotic difficulties (60%) and oncological reasons (22%). Anastomotic difficulties were most often reported due to technical difficulties, a low tumor or neoadjuvant radiotherapy. Male gender was a significant risk factor for undergoing unplanned Hartmann's procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

The decision to perform Hartmann's procedure was frequently made intraoperatively. Hartmann's procedure should be considered and discussed preoperatively in old and frail patients, especially in the presence of mid-rectal cancer and/or male gender, since these factors increase the risk of intraoperative anastomotic difficulties.

Incidence and risk factors of blowout within 90 days after a primary Hartmann's procedure: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

The literature reports a varying occurrence (3-33%) of blowout of the rectal remnant after Hartmann's procedure, and there is a lack of multivariate analyses on potential risk factors for blowout following Hartmann's procedure. We aimed to estimate the incidence of blowout within 90 days after a primary Hartmann's procedure and to identify potential risk factors for blowout through multivariate analysis.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Department of Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital, a Danish primary and tertiary hospital. Patients who underwent primary surgery with Hartmann's procedure irrespective of surgical setting and indications between September 2016 and August 2021 were included. Blowout was defined as a defective closure line of the rectal stump or a pelvic abscess.

RESULTS

A total of 178 patients were included, and blowout occurred in 30 patients (16.9%) within 90 days after a primary Hartmann's procedure. Multivariate analysis showed increased risk of blowout among patients with Hinchey IV diverticulitis (relative risk 6.32 (95% CI 4.09-9.75)), previous radiotherapy (relative risk 3.35 (95% CI 1.67-6.74)), and alcohol overconsumption (relative risk 1.69 (95% CI 1.05-2.72)). Intraoperative insertion of a Foley catheter in the rectal remnant significantly reduced the risk of blowout within 90 days after a primary Hartmann's procedure (relative risk 0.18 (95% CI 0.05-0.65)).

CONCLUSION

Blowout remains a severe and common complication within 90 days after a primary Hartmann's procedure. Hinchey IV diverticulitis, pelvic radiotherapy, and alcohol overconsumption are risk factors. An intraoperatively inserted rectal Foley catheter is a protective factor and can be considered used in all patients undergoing Hartmann's procedure.

Low incidence of pelvic sepsis following Hartmann's procedure for rectal cancer: a retrospective multicentre study

BACKGROUND

Results of previous studies regarding pelvic sepsis after Hartmann's procedure (HP) for rectal cancer have been inconsistent and few studies report the risk factors. This study aimed to investigate the incidence of pelvic sepsis after HP, identify risk factors and describe when as well as how pelvic sepsis was diagnosed and treated.

METHODS

Data were collected from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry on all patients undergoing HP for rectal cancer in the county of Skåne from 2007-2017. Patients diagnosed with pelvic sepsis were compared with patients without pelvic sepsis and risk factors for developing pelvic sepsis were analysed in a multivariable model.

RESULTS

A total of 252 patients were included in the study, with 149 (59%) males, and a median age of 75 years (range 20-92). Altogether, 27 patients (11%) were diagnosed with pelvic sepsis. Risk factors for developing pelvic sepsis were neoadjuvant radiotherapy (OR 7.96, 95% CI 2.54-35.36) and BMI over 25 kg/m² (OR 5.26, 95% CI 1.80-19.50). Median time from operation to diagnosis was 21 days (range 5-355) with 11 (40%) patients diagnosed beyond 30 days postoperatively. The majority of cases 19 (70%) were treated conservatively and none needed major surgery.

CONCLUSION

Pelvic sepsis occurred in 11% of patients. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy and higher BMI were significant risk factors for developing pelvic sepsis. Forty percent of patients were diagnosed later than 30 days postoperatively and most patients were successfully treated conservatively. Our findings suggest that HP is a valid treatment option for rectal cancer when anastomosis is inappropriate, even in patients receiving neoadjuvant radiotherapy.

The complication profile of low Hartmann's in rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Non-restorative options for low rectal cancer not invading the sphincter includes low Hartmann's procedure (LH) and inter-sphincteric abdominoperineal resection (ISAPR). There is currently little comparative data to differentiate these options.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to assess the peri-operative morbidity of LH, and then to compare it to that of ISAPR.

DATA SOURCES

An up-to-date systematic review was performed on the available literature between 2000-2020 on PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, and Cochrane Library databases.

STUDY SELECTION

All studies reporting on non-restorative surgeries for rectal cancer were analysed. Outcomes were firstly analysed between LH and non-LH groups, with further sub-analysis comparing the LH and ISAPR groups.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The main outcome measures were the rates of pelvic sepsis, rates of overall post-operative complication rates, oncological outcomes, and survival.

RESULTS

A total of 12 observational studies were included. There were 3526 patients (61.1%) in the LH group, and 2238 patients (38.9%) in the non-LH group, which included 461 patients who underwent ISAPR. The LH group had a higher rate of pelvic sepsis as compared to the non-LH group (OR: 1.79, 95% CI: 1.39-2.29, P < 0.001). The difference is more marked in the sub-analysis comparing LH and ISAPR alone (OR: 3.94, 95% CI: 1.88-7.84, P < 0.01) corresponding to a higher rate of unplanned re-intervention. LH was associated with a higher rate of short-term post-operative mortality as compared to the non-LH group.

CONCLUSION

ISAPR is the preferred option for non-restorative rectal surgery, with a more favourable peri-operative morbidity and short-term mortality profile as compared to LH.

A meta-analysis of low Hartmann's procedure versus abdominoperineal resection for non-restorative treatment of rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Non-restorative surgery for rectal cancer is indicated in patients with comorbidities, advanced disease and poor continence. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the postoperative morbidity of Hartmann's procedure (HP) with that of extrasphincteric and intersphincteric abdominoperineal resection (APR) in the treatment of rectal cancer.

METHODS

The Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched for publications comparing postoperative morbidity of HP and APR. The incidence of overall surgical complications, pelvic-perineal complications and pelvic abscess was analysed as primary endpoints. Readmissions requiring reintervention and postoperative mortality were also compared.

RESULTS

A cumulative analysis showed a significantly higher rate of overall complications (odds ratio (OR) 0.553, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.320 to 0.953 and P value 0.033) and pelvic-perineal complications (OR 0.464, 95% CI 0.250 to 0.861 and P value 0.015) after APR. The incidence of isolated pelvic abscess formation was significantly higher after HP (OR 2.523, 95% CI 1.383 to 4.602 and P value 0.003). A subgroup analysis of intersphincteric APR compared with HP did not show any significant difference in the incidence of overall complications, pelvic-perineal complications or pelvic abscess formation (P values of 0.452, 0.258 and 0.100, respectively). There was no significant difference in readmissions, reinterventions and mortality after HP and APR (P 0.992, 0.198 and 0.151).

CONCLUSION

An extrasphincteric APR is associated with higher overall and pelvic-perineal complications and may be reserved for tumours invading the anal sphincter complex. In the absence of sphincter involvement, both HP and intersphincteric APR are better alternatives with comparable morbidity.