Management and outcome of anastomotic leakage after colonic surgery

Impact of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program on the management of complications after laparoscopic or robotic colectomy for cancer

PURPOSE

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) reduces postoperative complications (POCs) after colorectal surgery; however, its impact on the management of POCs remains unclear. This study compared the diagnosis and management of POCs before and after implementing our ERAS protocol after laparoscopic or robotic colectomy for cancer and examined the short- and mid-term oncologic impacts.

METHODS

This single-center, retrospective study evaluated all consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic colectomy for cancer between 2012 and 2021, focusing on the incidence of POCs within 90 days. We compared outcomes before (standard group) and after (ERAS group) the implementation of our ERAS protocol in January 2016.

RESULTS

Significantly fewer patients in the ERAS group developed POCs (standard vs. ERAS, 136 of 380 patients [35.8%] vs.136 of 660 patients [20.6%]; P<0.01). The ERAS group had a significantly shorter mean total length of stay after POCs (13.1 days vs. 11.4 days, P=0.04), and the rates of life-threatening complications (6.7% vs. 0.7%) and 1-year mortality (7.4% vs. 1.5%) were significantly lower in the ERAS group than in the standard group. Among patients with anastomotic complications, laparoscopic reoperation was significantly more common in the ERAS group than in the standard group (8.3% vs. 75.0%, P<0.01). Among patients with postoperative ileus, the diagnosis and recovery times were significantly shorter in the ERAS group than in the standard group, resulting in a shorter total length of stay (13.5 days vs. 10 days, P<0.01).

CONCLUSION

The implementation of an ERAS protocol did not eliminate all POCs, but it did accelerate their diagnosis and management and improved patient outcomes.

C‐reactive protein as an early predictor of anastomotic dehiscence in various types of reconstruction in elective abdominal surgery

Objective

The most important factor in abdominal surgery is the successful healing of the intestinal anastomosis performed. This study aims to evaluate the role of C‐reactive protein (CRP) in predicting anastomotic dehiscence in the first week following surgery.

Methods

The study included 100 patients surgically treated over a period of 1 year. Postoperative (p/o) values of CRP, leukocyte (white blood cells [WBCs]) and body temperature (BT) were measured in relation to the development of p/o complications.

Results

CRP p/o values were significantly higher in patients with complications and proved helpful in predicting p/o complications, while WBC and BT were not. For the development of anastomotic leakage, receiver operating characteristic curve shows the earliest diagnostic accuracy on the third p/o day with the cut‐off value of 115.1 mg/L; however, the largest area under the curve was on the fifth p/o day with a cut‐off value of 59.2 mg/L, a sensitivity of 89%, a specificity of 61%, a positive predictive value (PPV) of 21.9 and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 100.

Conclusions

Measurement of p/o CRP values may indicate problematic healing of digestive tract anastomosis before the appearance of clinical signs. High sensitivity and high NPV allow us to rule out p/o complications and anastomotic dehiscence with great certainty and safely discharge these patients from the hospital.

Management of Anastomotic Leakage after Colorectal Resection: Survey among the German CHIR-Net Centers

(1) Background: A widely accepted algorithm for the management of colorectal anastomotic leakage (CAL) is difficult to establish. The present study aimed to evaluate the current clinical practice on the management of CAL among the German CHIR-Net centers. (2) Methods: An online survey of 38 questions was prepared using the International Study Group of Rectal Cancer (ISREC) grading score of CAL combined with both patient- and surgery-related factors. All CHIR-Net centers received a link to the online questionary in February 2020. (3) Results: Most of the answering centers (55%) were academic hospitals (41%). Only half of them use the ISREC definition and grading for the management of CAL. A preference towards grade B management (no surgical intervention) of CAL was observed in both young and fit as well as elderly and/or frail patients with deviating ostomy and non-ischemic anastomosis. Elderly and/or frail patients without fecal diversion are generally treated as grade C leakage (surgical intervention). A grade C management of CAL is preferred in case of ischemic bowel, irrespective of the presence of an ostomy. Within grade C management, the intestinal continuity is preserved in a subgroup of patients with non-ischemic bowel, with or without ostomy, or young and fit patients with ischemic bowel under ostomy protection. (4) Conclusions: There is no generally accepted therapy algorithm for CAL management within CHIR-Net Centers in Germany. Further effort should be made to increase the application of the ISREC definition and grading of CAL in clinical practice.

Laparoscopic redo anastomosis for management of intraperitoneal anastomotic leakage after colonic surgery

BACKGROUND

There is still no consensus on the management of intraperitoneal anastomotic leakage after colonic surgery. Among of various treatment strategies, laparoscopic redo anastomosis for intraperitoneal leakage has rarely been reported in the literature and is condemned by some. The aim of this study is to demonstrate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic redo anastomosis for intraperitoneal anastomotic leakage.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review of laparoscopic redo anastomosis for intraperitoneal anastomotic leakage after colonic surgery from January 2013 to May 2020. An accompanying video demonstrates the technique.

RESULTS

Fifteen consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic redo anastomosis for management of leakage after colonic surgery; two patients required conversion to open repair. A protective stoma was created in three patients during the second operation. There was no re-leakage nor mortality in this series.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic redo anastomosis was feasible and safe for the management of intraperitoneal anastomotic leakage after colonic surgery. Considering the advantages of re-do laparoscopy, this procedure should be part of every surgeon's armamentarium to deal with anastomotic leakage and represents a logical alternative to the "Diversion and Drainage" technique.

Laparoscopic Reintervention for Intraperitoneal Leaks After Colonic Surgery: Do We Need a Routine Stoma?

INTRODUCTION

No universal consensus exists on the management of intraperitoneal anastomosis leakage after colonic surgery. The aim of the study was to evaluate the outcomes of laparoscopic reintervention without stoma creation for intraperitoneal leaks after colonic surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Single tertiary center study conducted from January 2010 to December 2020. 54 patients with intraperitoneal leakage were divided into 2 groups according to whether they received a stoma (n = 37) or not (n = 17) during laparoscopic reintervention. Short term outcome was analyzed.

RESULTS

Patients in the no stoma group had lower American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (P = .009), lower Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score (5 vs. 10; P < .001) compared with the stoma group. Intensive care unit admission (43.2% vs. 5.8%; P = .006) and major complications (35.1% vs. 5.8%; P = .015) occurred more in the stoma group compared to the no stoma group. After multivariate logistic regression analysis, initial surgical procedure (P = .001) and APACHE II score (P = .039) were significant predictors of no stoma. The APACHE II score(P = .035) was an independent predictor of major complications. Finally, Receiver Operating Characteristic curve analysis showed that the cutoff value of APACHE II score for no stoma was 7.5.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, APACHE II score was an independent predictor of stoma formation and the cutoff value of APACHE II score for no stoma was 7.5. Our results need to be confirmed by larger and randomized studies. In particular, a specific APACHE II threshold to omit a stoma in this setting remains to be determined.

Ketorolac Administration After Colorectal Surgery Increases Anastomotic Leak Rate: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Objective

This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate whether ketorolac administration is associated with an increased anastomotic leak rate after colorectal surgery.

Methods

The literature was searched using the Web of Science, Embase, and PubMed databases, and the search ended on May 31, 2020. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was used to assess methodological quality. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the Chi-square Q test and I² statistics. Subgroup analysis was performed, and Egger's test was used to assess publication bias.

Results

This meta-analysis included seven studies with 400,822 patients. Our results demonstrated that ketorolac administration after surgery increases the risk of anastomotic leak [OR = 1.41, 95% CI: 0.81–2.49, Z = 1.21, P = 0.23]. Low heterogeneity was observed across these studies (I² = 0%, P = 0.51). The results of subgroup analysis showed that the use of ketorolac in case–control and retrospective cohort studies significantly increased the risk of anastomotic leak (P < 0.05). Furthermore, the subgroup analysis revealed that ketorolac use increased anastomotic leak rate in patients in the United States and Canada, and ketorolac plus morphine use did not increase anastomotic leak rate in Taiwanese patients (P < 0.05). No significant publication bias was observed (P = 0.126). Moreover, the analysis of risk factors related to anastomotic leak rate indicated that the total use of ketorolac did not increase the risk of anastomotic leak similar to the control group (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

The meta-analysis indicates that the use of ketorolac increases the risk of anastomotic leak after colorectal surgery.

Systematic Review Registration

PROSPERO, identifier CRD42020195724.

Management and 1-year outcomes of anastomotic leakage after elective colorectal surgery

PURPOSE

To analyze different types of management and one-year outcomes of anastomotic leakage (AL) after elective colorectal resection.

METHODS

All patients with anastomotic leakage after elective colorectal surgery with anastomosis (76/1,546; 4.9%), with the exclusion of cases with proximal diverting stoma, were followed-up for at least one year. Primary endpoints were as follows: composite outcome of one-year mortality and/or unplanned intensive care unit (ICU) admission and additional morbidity rates. Secondary endpoints were as follows: length of stay (LOS), one-year persistent stoma rate, and rate of return to intended oncologic therapy (RIOT).

RESULTS

One-year mortality rate was 10.5% and unplanned ICU admission rate was 30.3%. Risk factors of the composite outcome included age (aOR = 1.08 per 1-year increase, p = 0.002) and anastomotic breakdown with end stoma at reoperation (aOR = 2.77, p = 0.007). Additional morbidity rate was 52.6%: risk factors included open versus laparoscopic reoperation (aOR = 4.38, p = 0.03) and ICU admission (aOR = 3.63, p = 0.05). Median (IQR) overall LOS was 20 days (14-26), higher in the subgroup of patients reoperated without stoma. At 1 year, a stoma persisted in 32.0% of patients, higher in the open (41.2%) versus laparoscopic (12.5%) reoperation group (p = 0.04). Only 4 out of 18 patients (22.2%) were able to RIOT.

CONCLUSION

Mortality and/or unplanned ICU admission rates after AL are influenced by increasing age and by anastomotic breakdown at reoperation; additional morbidity rates are influenced by unplanned ICU admission and by laparoscopic approach to reoperation, the latter also reducing permanent stoma and failure to RIOT rates.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov # NCT03560180.

Management of colorectal anastomotic leakage using endoscopic negative pressure therapy with or without protective ostomy: a retrospective study

PURPOSE

Management of colorectal anastomotic leakage (AL) is patient-oriented and requires an interdisciplinary approach. We analyzed the management of AL according to its severity and presence of ostomy and proposed a therapy algorithm.

METHODS

We identified all patients who underwent colorectal surgery and developed an AL in our clinic between 2012 and 2017. The management of AL was retrospectively analyzed according to the severity grade: asymptomatic (A), requesting interventional or antibiotic therapy (B), undergoing re-operation (C). The groups were compared according to the leakage characteristics, presence of ostomy, and patient clinical conditions.

RESULTS

We identified 784 consecutive patients meeting the inclusion criteria. Of these, 10.8% experienced an AL (A = 18%, B = 48%, and C = 34%). The rate of successful ostomy closure was 100% (A), 68% (B), and 62% (C), respectively. Within group B, 91% of the patients were treated solely by endoscopic negative pressure therapy (ENPT), whereas 37% of the patients within group C required ENPT in addition to surgery. Seven cases within group B (17%) required no protective ostomy (nOB) during ENPT which was itself shorter and required less cycles in comparison to group B with ostomy (OB) (p = 0.017 and 0.111, respectively). Moreover, the leakage distance to anal verge was higher in the OB subgroup (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

ENPT for the treatment of colorectal AL is efficient in combination with operative revision or protective ostomy. In selected patients, it is feasible also in the absence of a protective ostomy.

Anastomotic Leakage After Laparoscopic Colectomy: Who Will Require Emergency Fecal Diversion?

Background: To identify predictive factors for reoperation because of anastomotic leakage (AL) after colectomy. Methods: Between 2007 and 2016, all patients who developed AL following right or left colectomy in an expert center were included. Patients who were treated surgically (all including fecal diversion) were compared with those who were managed conservatively. Results: Overall, 81 (6.5%) patients developed AL, of which 32 (39%) were managed nonoperatively and 49 (61%) required reoperation. On average, AL was diagnosed on postoperative day 4 (3-8) and mortality reached 4.9% (n = 4). Reoperation included anastomosis resection in 31 (67%) patients of which 26 (100%) had right colectomy and 5 (25%) left colectomy. Reoperation for AL was associated with increased intensive care management (P = .026) and deep abdominal collection (P = .002). T stage >2 and right-sided colectomy were the only independent risk factors associated with the need for reoperation for AL. Stoma reversal was performed in 42 (98%) patients after a median of 4 months. Conclusions: AL after colectomy is more likely to require reoperation with fecal diversion after right-sided colectomy and T > 2 colorectal cancer.

Assessment of the Clinical Usefulness of Preoperative Computed Tomography in Colorectal Cancer Patients Who Received Unplanned Reoperation

Background

In the unplanned reoperation of colorectal cancer patients, computed tomography (CT) is increasingly utilized to locate postoperative complications and previously unlocalized lesions. The purpose of this study is to explore the application of CT in the mortality and complications of the reoperation of colorectal cancer. Patients and Methods. We performed a retrospective review of collected data from the colorectal surgeries of 90 identified colorectal cancer patients who received an unplanned reoperation from 2010 to 2018. Patients were stratified according to those with preoperative CT imaging (CT group, n = 36) and those without preoperative CT imaging (NCT group, n = 54). Twenty-four statistical indicators of each patient were studied, including their preoperative risk, surgical characteristics, and postoperative outcomes, and satisfaction was evaluated. All data were statistically analysed for predicting postoperative complications by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses.

Results

Ninety patients received an unplanned reoperation in the study, and 40% (36/90) of these patients underwent preoperative CT examination. Patients' risk factors were similar between CT and NCT groups. Preoperative imaging was more commonly performed for reoperative new anastomosis + ileostomy but less common for reoperative Dixon's procedure. The operative duration of the NCT group was longer (139 vs. 104 min, respectively, P = 0.01). Preoperative NCT examination (OR 1.24; 95% CI = 1.09-1.42; P = 0.01) was an independent predictor of postoperative complications. Importantly, three patients died after an unplanned reoperation for colorectal cancer, which occurred only in the NCT group (5.6% vs. 0.0%, P = 0.01).

Conclusion

The use of conventional preoperative CT optimizes the choice of the surgical site and the strategy of laparotomy, so as to reduce the length of operation. Preoperative imaging evaluation should be performed for patients undergoing repeat abdominal surgery.

Serum C-reactive protein is a useful marker to exclude anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery

Anastomotic leakage is a complication of colorectal surgery. C-reactive protein (CRP) is an acute-phase marker that can indicate surgical complications. We determined whether serum CRP levels in patients who had undergone colorectal surgery can be used to exclude the presence of anastomotic leakage and allow safe early discharge. We included 90 patients who underwent colorectal surgery with primary anastomosis. Serum CRP levels were measured retrospectively on postoperative days (PODs) 1 - 7. Patients with anastomotic leakage (n = 11) were compared to those without leakage (n = 79). We statistically analysed data and plotted receiver operating characteristic curves. The incidence of anastomotic leakage was 12.2%. Diagnoses were made on PODs 3 - 24. The overall mortality rate was 3.3% (18.2% in the leakage group, 1.3% in the non-leakage group; P < 0.045). CRP levels were most accurate on POD 4, with a cutoff level of 180 mg/L, showing an area under the curve of 0.821 and a negative predictive value of 97.2%. Lower CRP levels after POD 2 and levels <180 mg/L on POD 4 may indicate the absence of anastomotic leakage and may allow safe discharge of patients who had undergone colorectal surgery with primary anastomosis.

Microbial findings, sensitivity and outcome in patients with postoperative peritonitis a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Acute postoperative peritonitis resulting from previous abdominal surgery is still a severe and potentially fatal disease, which is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The aim of the present study was to evaluate patients' outcome after postoperative peritonitis and identify the most effective empiric antibiotic regimes.

METHODS

422 patients with acute postoperative peritonitis as a result to earlier abdominal operation (e.g. anastomotic leakage) were analyzed retrospectively focusing on the origin of the peritonitis, microbial flora and resistance patterns. Furthermore, mortality was estimated according to sensitivity results of the tested antibiotics.

RESULTS

In 50% of the patients, anastomotic leakage was located in the colon. The predominantly cultured microorganisms were Escherichia coli and Enterobacteriaceae. The combination of meropenem and vancomycin was effective in 96% of these microbes. The frequently used combinations of piperacillin/sulbactam and cefotaxime/metronidazole were effective in only 67% and 43%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We were able to show that the currently used antibiotic regimes with piperacillin/sulbactam and cefotaxime/metronidazole are ineffective in a relevant number of patients with anastomotic leakage. Only meropenem or meropenem/vancomycin cover most of the microbes predominant in postoperative peritonitis.

Is Diversion with Ileostomy Non-inferior to Hartmann Resection for Left-sided Colorectal Anastomotic Leak?

BACKGROUND

Treatment of left-sided colorectal anastomotic leaks often requires fecal stream diversion for prevention of further septic complications. To manage anastomotic leak, it is unclear if diverting ileostomy provides similar outcomes to Hartmann resection with colostomy.

METHODS

We identified all patients who developed anastomotic leak following left-sided colorectal resections from 1/2012 through 12/2014 using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Then, we examined the risk of mortality and abdominal reoperation in patients treated with diverting ileostomy as compared to Hartmann resection.

RESULTS

There were 1745 patients who experienced an anastomotic leak in a cohort of 63,748 patients (3.7%). Two hundred thirty-five patients had a reoperation for anastomotic leak involving the formation of a diverting ileostomy (n = 77) or Hartmann resection (n = 158). There was no difference in mortality or abdominal reoperation in patients treated with diverting ileostomy (3.9, 7.8%) versus Hartmann resection (3.8, 6.3%) (p = 0.8).

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in the outcomes of mortality or need for second abdominal reoperation in patients treated with diverting ileostomy as compared to Hartmann resection for left-sided colorectal anastomotic leak. Thus, select patients with left-sided colorectal anastomotic leaks may be safely managed with diverting ileostomy.

Resection enterostomy versus Hartmann's procedure for emergency colonic resections

BACKGROUND

If a primary anastomosis is considered too risky after emergency colon resection either a resection enterostomy or an end stoma with closure of the distal bowel (Hartmann's procedure) is possible. This study analyzes the rate of restoration of intestinal continuity and other surgical outcomes after resection enterostomy placement versus Hartmann's procedure for emergency colon resections.

METHODS

All patients who underwent emergency colorectal resections between August 2009 and June 2014 at the University Medical Center Mannheim were reviewed in regard to therapeutic approach, rate of restoration of bowel continuity, and surgical morbidity after the primary operation and after reversal surgery.

RESULTS

Fifty-five patients in whom both studied interventions would have been technically feasible were further analyzed. The rate of revisional surgery was significantly higher in the resection enterostomy cohort after the primary operation. There were no significant differences regarding morbidity, mortality, and the rate of restoration of intestinal continuity. Overall, bowel continuity could be restored in 63% (29/46) of the surviving patients. The median time of surgery of the initial as well as of the reversal surgery was significantly longer in the Hartmann's group. Five of 13 patients underwent protective ileostomy placement in the Hartmann's group at the time of the reversal (vs. none in the resection enterostomy group).

CONCLUSIONS

The bowel continuity can be restored in the majority of patients after emergency colonic resection. Conclusive evidence which surgical option should be preferred when a primary anastomosis is considered too risky-Hartmann's procedure or resection enterostomy-is still lacking.

Very Early Colorectal Anastomotic Leakage within 5 Post-operative Days: a More Severe Subtype Needs Relaparatomy

Early anastomotic leakage (AL), usually defined as leakage within 30 post-operative days, represents a severe entity. However, mounting evidence has indicated that majorities of leakage occur within one week after surgery, making late AL rarity. Here we analyzed 101 consecutive colorectal AL, all of which occurred within 30 post-operative days, during Jan 2013 and Dec 2015 in cancer hospital of Fudan University. AL occurring within 5 post-operative days was defined as very early AL (vE-AL). We evaluated risk factors of vE-AL compared with non-vEAL and correlated with post-leakage peritonitis and need of relaparatomy. We found that AL occurred at median time of 7 days after surgery. 23 cases were vE-AL. Reconstruction of post-peritoneum for mid-low rectal carcinoma significantly reduced incidence of vE-AL compared with non-vE-AL (p = 0.042). Patients with vE-AL was associated with presence of peritonitis (p = 0.031), the latter significantly correlated with increased re-operation rate (p = 6.8E-13). Besides, patients with vE-AL trended to correlate with increased re-operation rate after leakage (p = 0.088). In concludsion, vE-AL occurring within 5 post-operative days represents a severe subtype associated with general peritonitis and need of relaparatomy.

A collaborative review of the current concepts and challenges of anastomotic leaks in colorectal surgery

The reduction of the incidence, detection and treatment of anastomotic leakage (AL) continues to challenge the colorectal surgical community. AL is not consistently defined and reported in clinical studies, its occurrence is variably reported and its impact on longterm morbidity and health-care resources has received relatively little attention. Controversy continues regarding the best strategies to reduce the risk. Diagnostic tests lack sensitivity and specificity, resulting in delayed diagnosis and increased morbidity. Intra-operative fluorescence angiography has recently been introduced as a means of real-time assessment of anastomotic perfusion and preliminary evidence suggests that it may reduce the rate of AL. In addition, concepts are emerging about the role of the rectal mucosal microbiome in AL and the possible role of new prophylactic therapies. In January 2016 a meeting of expert colorectal surgeons and pathologists was held in London, UK, to identify the ongoing controversies surrounding AL in colorectal surgery. The outcome of the meeting is presented in the form of research challenges that need to be addressed.

Colorectal anastomotic leakage corrected by transanal laparoscopy

AIM

Interest in transanal laparoscopy has increased in the last decade. This approach can allow primary procedures such as polypectomy, total mesorectal excision and the treatment of postoperative complications such as bleeding, leakage and fistula formation.

METHOD

Two patients treated by transanal repair for leakage of a colorectal anastomosis after laparoscopic anterior resection of the rectum are reported. The first developed leakage immediately during the surgery and in the second leakage presented at 4 weeks. A new transanal platform according to DAPRI (Karl Storz-Endoskope, Tuttlingen, Germany), formed by a reusable port and reusable monocurved instruments was developed to permit manipulation of sutures introduced via the anus in a maximally ergonomic manner. Laparoscopic suturing was performed transanally and a protective ileostomy was added as well.

RESULTS

The transanal procedures took 60 and 45 min and the patients were discharged after 5 days and 2 days. At 2 months both defects were found to be healed on contrast radiology and endoscopy; therefore the ileostomy was closed. Anal function was satisfactory with a frequency of two and one times per 24 h with no incontinence or evidence of sepsis.

CONCLUSION

Intra-operative or late leakage of colorectal anastomosis can be safely treated by transanal laparoscopy. This new transanal platform offers the surgeon the possibility to work in ergonomic positions, without increasing the cost of the procedure thanks to the reusable nature of the material used.

Management of Colorectal Anastomotic Leak

The aim of this article is to present strategies for preventing and managing the failure of the surgical restoration of intestinal continuity. Despite improvements in surgical technique and perioperative care, anastomotic leaks still occur, and with them occur increased morbidity, mortality, length of stay, and costs. Due to the devastating consequences for patients with failed anastomoses, there have been a myriad of materials and techniques used by surgeons to create better intestinal anastomoses. We will also discuss the management strategies for anastomotic leak when they do inevitably occur.

Contemporary management of anastomotic leak after colon surgery: assessing the need for reoperation

BACKGROUND

We sought to investigate contemporary management of anastomosis leakage (AL) after colonic anastomosis.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database 2012 to 2013 was used to identify patients with AL. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to find predictors of the need for surgical intervention in management of AL.

RESULTS

A total of 32,280 patients underwent colon resection surgery with 1,240 (3.8%) developing AL. Overall, 43.9% of patients with AL did not require reoperation. Colorectal anastomosis had significantly higher risk of AL compared with ileocolonic anastomosis (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.20; P = .04). However, the rate of need for reoperation was higher for AL in colocolonic anastomosis compared with ileocolonic anastomosis (AOR, 1.48; P = .04). White blood cell count (AOR, 1.07; P < .01), the presence of intra-abdominal infection with leakage (AOR, 1.47; P = .01), and protective stoma (AOR, .43, P = .02) were associated with reoperation after AL.

CONCLUSIONS

Nonoperative treatment is possible in almost half of the patients with colonic AL. The anatomic location of the anastomosis impacts the risk of AL. Severity of leakage, the presence of a stoma, and general condition of patients determine the need for reoperation.

Anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic single-port sigmoid resection: combined transanal and transabdominal minimal invasive management

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery has become the gold standard in the therapy of benignant and malignant colorectal pathologies. Anastomotic leakage is still a reason for laparotomy; applying a diverting stoma or performing a Hartman's procedure is common [1, 2]. Laparoscopic treatment of an early-detected anastomotic leakage is suggested from other authors [3, 4]. In our video we demonstrate a combined minimal invasive transabdominal and transanal treatment concept in patients with early-detected anastomotic leakage.

METHODS

Two consecutive patients developing an anastomotic leakage after single-port laparoscopic sigmoid resection for stage II/III diverticulitis (Hanson & Stock) were treated with a combined minimal invasive approach. Anastomotic leakage was diagnosed by triple contrast computed tomography on postoperative day 4 in patient one and on postoperative day 7 in patient two. Operative treatment was performed immediately on the same day without delay.

RESULTS

In both patients a combined transanal and transabdominal approach was performed. First step was a diagnostic laparoscopy in order to exclude fecal peritonitis. Using a single-port device (SILS Port Covidien), transanal inspection of the anastomosis was also performed: In both patients anastomotic tissue margins were vital, and the leakage affected only a quarter of the anastomotic circumference. Transanal stitches were placed to close the anastomotic leakage. Laparoscopic transabdominal irrigation was performed, and two suction drainages were placed in the pelvis. Postoperative antibiotic treatment and a gradual return to slid food were carried out. Functional result at follow-up of 102 and 112 days (with rectoscopy) showed no residual leak and no stricture of the anastomosis, and both of patients had a normal rectal function.

Colonic anastomosis with a doxycycline-coated stent: an experimental study in a porcine model

BACKGROUND

Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) are supposed to be potential drug targets to prevent leakage after colonic anastomosis. A method of colonic anastomosis by using a stent coated with doxycycline, a MMP inhibitor, was developed and its safety and feasibility, as well as the effect of locally regulating MMPs, were evaluated by comparing with the conventional method or the method with a doxycycline-free stent.

METHODS

48 pigs were assigned randomly to doxycycline-coated stent anastomosis group (DSA), doxycycline-free stent anastomosis group (SA), or conventional anastomosis group (CA). In each group, pigs were subdivided into four subgroups according to postoperative observation time (3, 7, 14, and 30 days). Healing of anastomosis and expressions of MMP-2/9 were evaluated.

RESULTS

No anastomotic leakage, stricture or necrosis was observed in the DSA group. No significant difference of bursting pressure was found between the DSA group and SA group. Relative expression of MMP-2 in the DSA group was significantly lower than in the SA group on postoperative days 3 and 7. No significant differences of hydroxyproline content, microvessel density and TGF-β1 level were found in these groups.

CONCLUSION

These results suggested this method was feasible and safe for colonic anastomosis with the advantage of locally inhibiting MMPs.

Permanent stoma rates: a misleading marker of quality in rectal cancer surgery

AIM

The latest National Bowel Cancer Audit Programme (NBOCAP) audit identified our colorectal unit as an outlier with regard to the high permanent stoma rate. The aim of this study was to perform an audit of the rationale for stoma formation in patients undergoing rectal cancer resection in our unit.

METHOD

A review was conducted of all rectal cancer operations between April 2011 and March 2013. Preoperative staging investigations and operation reports were reviewed to identify the reasons for nonrestorative surgery. Postoperative histology reports were used to identify circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement and tumour height.

RESULTS

One-hundred and twenty-five patients underwent surgery for rectal cancer, of whom 102 underwent elective resection with curative intent. The permanent stoma rate was 63.2% when emergency and palliative procedures were included and 54.9% when only elective curative cases were considered. Tertiary referrals made up 31.4% of elective cases. The main reasons for nonrestorative surgery included multivisceral resection (n = 24) for locally advanced cancer and operations for lesions close to the anal sphincter (n = 21). The median length of stay was 8 days, the 90-day mortality was 2.9% and the rate of CRM involvement was 2.0%.

CONCLUSION

Our unit provides multivisceral surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer and receives a substantial number of tertiary referrals. Many of the rectal cancers referred are locally advanced or threaten the anal sphincter. This study demonstrates that the complexity of a unit's case-mix can have a profound effect on the permanent stoma rate. Stoma rates taken at face value do not therefore provide an accurate representation of surgical quality. What does this paper add to the literature? The study reviews the practice of a colorectal surgical unit with an interest in multivisceral surgery with regard to the permanent stoma rate. The reasons for nonrestorative surgery are analysed, and the problems associated with the use of stoma rates as a marker of quality in colorectal surgery are highlighted.

Management of anastomotic leakage in a nationwide cohort of colonic cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The mortality associated with anastomotic leakage (AL) after colonic cancer surgery is high and management often results in permanent fecal diversion. Preservation of bowel continuity in combination with proximal loop diversion (salvage) may reduce the number of permanent ostomies without jeopardizing safety.

STUDY DESIGN

This nationwide study used prospective data from the database of the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group, the National Patient Registry, and patient files. Patients with AL requiring surgery (grade C) were categorized according to the type of surgical treatment as anastomotic takedown with an end-ostomy or salvage. Thirty-day mortality, long-term mortality, and permanent ostomy rates were analyzed using multivariable logistic and Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

Anastomotic leakage occurred in 593 of 9,333 patients (6.4%), of whom 507 with grade C were included. Takedown and salvage were undertaken in 433 (85.4%) and 74 (14.6%) patients, respectively. Salvage was performed more frequently for Hinchey I-II or minor anastomotic defects and resulted in increased likelihood of stoma reversal (adjusted hazard ratio 3.24, 95% CI 2.04 to 5.16, p < 0.001), corresponding to a risk of permanent fecal diversion of 16.8%, compared with 54.5% after takedown. Adjusted mortality rates were comparable between the groups. A second episode of AL after stoma reversal occurred more frequently in patients with end-ileostomies (10 of 64) than in patients with end-colostomies (1 of 64) or loop-ileostomies (3 of 36), p = 0.017.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with Hinchey I-II and small anastomotic defect were safely managed by anastomotic salvage, which reduced the risk of permanent fecal diversion. Anastomotic salvage is a viable option for this subset of patients.

Treatment of colorectal anastomotic leakage: results of a questionnaire amongst members of the Dutch Society of Gastrointestinal Surgery

Anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery is correlated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Although many studies focus on risk factors and detection, studies on the treatment strategy for colorectal anastomotic leakage are scarce. A national questionnaire amongst 350 members of the Dutch Society for Gastrointestinal Surgery was undertaken on the current treatment of colorectal anastomotic leakage. The response was 40% after two anonymous rounds. 27% of the respondents state that a leaking anastomosis above the level of the promontory should be salvaged in ASA 1-2 patients <80 years of age, for ASA 3 and/or >80 years of age this percentage is 7.3%. For an anastomosis under the promontory, 50% of the respondents choose preserving the anastomosis for ASA 1-2 compared to 17% for ASA 3 and/or >80 years of age. In ASA 1-2 patients with a local abscess after a rectum resection without protective ileostomy, 31% of the respondents will create an protective ileostomy, 40% break down the anastomosis to create a definite colostomy, in ASA 3 and/or >80 years of age 14% of the respondents create a protective ileostomy and 63% a definitive colostomy. In ASA 1-2 patients with peritonitis after a rectum resection with deviating ileostomy, 31% prefer a laparotomy for lavage and repair of the anastomosis, 25% for lavage without repair and 36% of the respondents prefer to break down the anastomosis. When the patient is ASA 3 and/or >80 years of age, 13% prefer repair, 9% a lavage and 74% breaking down the anastomosis. This questionnaire shows that in contrast to older people, more surgeons make an effort to preserve the anastomosis in younger people.

Experimental study of primary repair of colonic leakage with a degradable stent in a porcine model

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage is a major complication of colon resection. Fecal diversion is necessary in most patients and restoration of intestinal continuity has to be performed several months later. It carries a long treatment time and a considerable financial cost. We have developed a method of primary repair of colonic leakage with a degradable stent.

METHODS

Thirty pigs were included in this study. Colonic anastomotic leakage model was made successfully by open procedure in 15 pigs and primary repair with a degradable stent was performed 3 days later. Conventional colonic anastomosis was performed in the other 15 pigs without making leakage. Pigs of each group were sacrificed at schedule to evaluate the healing of anastomosis and observe the occurrence of complications.

RESULTS

No re-leakage occurred after primary repair, and no anastomotic stricture, peritoneal abscess, or colonic necrosis occurred in either group. No significant difference in bursting pressure or hydroxyproline content was found between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary repair of colonic leakage with a degradable stent is a feasible method in this porcine model.

Foley catheter enterostomy for postoperative bowel perforation: an effective source control

BACKGROUND

Control of bowel effluents is imperative in cases of postoperative bowel perforation, and this is best achieved by stoma formation. When stoma formation is impossible, the surgeon is often left with less optimal choices. We have used a Foley catheter enterostomy to provide source control in difficult cases of bowel perforation, and the details are reviewed in this report.

METHODS

Three patients underwent reoperation for postoperative bowel perforation. Two patients had leaking ileocolic anastomoses, and one patient had a leak from a serosal tear. In all cases a Foley catheter enterostomy was constructed at the point of the leak. The balloon was filled with 3 ml of saline, and the affected bowel segment was fixed to the inside of the abdominal wall by a purse-string suture supplied with a few additional stitches. Moreover, gentle traction was applied to the balloon by external suture fixation of the catheter.

RESULTS

Immediate control of bowel effluents from the leak was achieved in all cases. Early enteral feeding was possible in two of the three patients, and the catheter was removed after 17-28 days. Drainage of bowel contents from the catheter wounds stopped within 2 days.

CONCLUSIONS

This report demonstrates an effective and safe technique for sealing a postoperative bowel perforation with a Foley catheter enterostomy. It is useful in cases where a stoma cannot be brought out. The technique provides immediate source control and enables early enteral feeding. The utility of the procedure may be limited when the defect is large, when the surrounding bowel wall lacks integrity, and when it is not possible to mobilize the affected bowel segment toward the inside of the abdominal wall without tension.