Intersphincteric Resection for Patients With Low-Lying Rectal Cancer: Oncological and Functional Outcomes

Oncologic outcomes of intersphincteric resection versus abdominoperineal resection for lower rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of intersphincteric resection (ISR) surgery for patients with lower rectal cancer remains unclear compared to abdominoperineal resection (APR). The aim of this study is to compare the oncologic outcomes for lower rectal cancer patients after ISR and APR through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic electronic search of the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, and MEDLINE was performed through January 12, 2022. The primary outcomes included 5-year disease-free survival (5y-DFS) and 5-year overall survival. Secondary outcomes included circumferential resection margin involvement, local recurrence, perioperative outcomes, and other long-term outcomes. The pooled odds ratios, mean difference, or hazard ratios (HRs) of each outcome measurement and their 95% CIs were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 20 nonrandomized controlled studies were included in the qualitative analysis, with 1217 patients who underwent ISR and 1135 patients who underwent APR. There was no significant difference in 5y-DFS (HR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.55-1.29; P =0.43) and 5-year overall survival (HR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.60-1.46; P =0.76) between the two groups. Using the results of five studies that reported matched T stage and tumor distance, we performed another pooled analysis. Compared to APR, the ISR group had equal 5y-DFS (HR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.45-1.30; P =0.31) and 5y-LRFS (local recurrence-free survival) (HR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.29-1.78; P =0.48). Meanwhile, ISR had equivalent local control as well as perioperative outcomes while significantly reducing the operative time (mean difference: -24.89, 95% CI: -45.21 to -4.57; P =0.02) compared to APR.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that the long-term survival and safety of patients is not affected by ISR surgery, although this result needs to be carefully considered and requires further study due to the risk of bias and limited data.

Does anastomotic leakage after intersphincteric resection for ultralow rectal cancer influence long-term outcomes? A retrospective observational study

PURPOSE

To determine whether anastomotic leakage (AL) following intersphincteric resection (ISR) for ultralow rectal cancer (uLRC) is associated with long-term negative outcomes.

METHODS

Between June 2011 and January 2022, 236 consecutive patients who underwent ISR with diverting ileostomy for uLRC were included. The primary outcome was long-term clinical consequences of AL, including chronic stricture, stoma reversal, and oncological and functional results.

RESULTS

Forty-one (17.4%) patients developed symptomatic AL, whereas only two (0.8%) required re-laparotomy due to severe leakage. Patients with leaks had a significantly increased incidence of chronic stricture (29.3% vs. 8.7%, P = 0.001) and stoma non-reversal (34.1% vs. 4.6%, P < 0.0001) than controls. The severe consequences were particularly common in patients with anastomotic separation, resulting in 60% of those presenting with chronic stricture and 50% ending up with stoma non-reversal. After a median follow-up of 59 (range, 7-139) months, AL did not compromise long-term oncological outcomes, including tumor recurrence (9.8% vs. 5.6%, P = 0.3), 5-year disease-free, and overall survival (73.4% vs. 74.8% and 85.1% vs. 85.4%, P = 0.56 and P = 0.55). A total of 149 patients with bowel continuity who completed self-assessment questionnaires were enrolled for functional evaluation. The median follow-up was 24 (range, 12-94) months after ileostomy reversal, and functional results were comparable between patients with and without leaks.

CONCLUSION

AL is an unfortunate reality for patients who underwent ISR for uLRC, but the rate of severe leakage is limited. Leaks contribute to possible adverse impacts on chronic stricture and stoma non-reversal, especially for patients with anastomotic separation. However, long-term oncological and functional results may not be compromised.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chictr.org.cn identifier: ChiCTR-ONC-15007506 and ChiCTR2100051614.

Trans-Anastomotic Drainage Tube Placement After Hand-Sewn Anastomosis in Patients Undergoing Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: An Alternative Drainage Method

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a common complication after intersphincteric resection (ISR). It significantly reduces quality of life and causes great distress to patients. Although traditional drainage (e.g., anal and pelvic catheters) may reduce the impact of AL to some extent, their role in reducing the incidence of AL remains controversial. In this study, we developed a novel drainage technique involving the placement of drainage tubes through the gap between sutures during handsewn anastomosis, to reduce the occurrence of anastomotic leakage. We retrospectively analyzed 34 consecutive patients who underwent intersphincteric resection requiring handsewn anastomosis between February 1, 2017, and January 1, 2021. Patients were classified into the trans-anastomotic drainage tube group (TADT, n = 14) and the non-TADT group (n = 20) based on whether trans-anastomotic tube placement was performed. The incidence of postoperative complications, such as AL, was compared between the two groups, and anal function of patients at 1-year post-ISR was evaluated. Six cases of AL occurred in the non-TADT group, while none occurred in the TADT group; this difference was statistically significant (p=0.031). The TADT group also had a shorter hospital stay (p=0.007). There were no other significant intergroup differences in operation time, blood loss, pain score, anastomotic stenosis, intestinal obstruction, or incidence of wound infection. In the 30 patients (88.2%) evaluated for anal function, there were no significant intergroup differences in stool frequency, urgency, daytime/nocturnal soiling, Wexner incontinence score, or Kirwan grading. Taken together, trans-anastomotic tube placement is a novel drainage method that may reduce AL after ISR requiring handsewn anastomosis and without adversely affecting anal function.

Functional outcomes of intersphincteric resection in low rectal tumors

OBJECTIVES

Currently, sphincter-saving procedures are increasingly performed in the treatment of low rectal cancers. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of patients who underwent intersphincteric resection.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a single-center, retrospective, cross-sectional study. We evaluated the electronic data files of 29 patients who had intersphincteric resections at our institute between 2008 and 2018. Bowel function outcomes were assessed prospectively using Wexner incontinence score. Histopathological, surgical and functional outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Mean age of nine female and 20 male patients included in the study was 55.8 ± 12.8 (30-76) years. A tumor-free surgical margin was achieved in all patients. Anastomotic leakage was detected in two patients. Mean Wexner incontinence score of 20 patients who still had functional anastomosis was 8.35, whereas 65% of the patients (n= 13) had a good continence status. There was no relationship between the continence status and sex, tumor distance from anal verge, T stage, distal surgical margin, and lymph node involvement. Twenty-one patients underwent primary coloanal anastomosis and eight patients underwent two-stage coloanal anastomosis.

CONCLUSION

In the treatment of distal rectal cancer, adequate oncological surgery and relatively acceptable functional outcomes can be obtained with intersphincteric resection technique in suitable patients.

Current status and role of robotic approach in patients with low-lying rectal cancer

Utilization of robotic surgical systems has increased over the years. Robotic surgery is presumed to have advantages of enhanced visualization, improved dexterity, and reduced tremor, which is purported to be more suitable for rectal cancer surgery in a confined space than laparoscopic or open surgery. However, evidence supporting improved clinical and oncologic outcomes after robotic surgery remains controversial and limited despite the widespread adoption of robotic surgical systems. To date, numerous observational studies and a few randomized controlled trials have failed to demonstrate that short-term, oncological, and functional outcomes after a robotic surgery are superior to those of laparoscopic surgery for low rectal cancer patients. The objective of this review is to summarize the current state of robotic surgery and its impact on low-lying rectal cancer.

Functional outcomes after sphincter-preserving surgeries for low-lying rectal cancer: A review

Sphincter preservation and organ restoration during rectal cancer surgery avoids permanent stoma creation and diminishes psychosocial damages. However, decreased rectal volumes and sphincter dysfunction—including pelvic nerve damage—results in low anterior resection syndrome, as well as urinary and sexual dysfunction after rectal resection. Bowel habit changes such as fecal incontinence, fecal urgency, frequent bowel movements, clustered stools, and difficulties in bowel emptying can be treated using medications, pelvic floor rehabilitation, sacral neuromodulation, or neorectal reservoir reconstruction. Pelvic nerve damage resulting from superior and inferior hypogastric plexi during sphincter-preserving rectal cancer surgery can induce urologic and sexual dysfunctions. Preoperative voiding difficulty, perioperative blood loss, and autonomic nerve injury are considered independent risk factors for postoperative urinary dysfunction. Retrograde ejaculation and erectile dysfunction, female dyspareunia, and vaginal dryness are manifestations of sexual dysfunction resulting from autonomic nerve injury during rectal cancer surgery. Multifactorial causes for functional outcomes after sphincter- preserving surgeries are considered to improve patient’s quality of life with acceptable oncologic outcomes in the treatment of rectal cancer patients.

Surgical Treatment of Low-Lying Rectal Cancer: Updates

Despite innovative advancements, distally located rectal cancer remains a critical disease of challenging management. The crucial location of the tumor predisposes it to a circumferential resection margin (CRM) that tends to involve the anal sphincter complex and surrounding organs, with a high incidence of delayed anastomotic complications and the risk of the pelvic sidewall or rarely inguinal lymph node metastases. In this regard, colorectal surgeons should be aware of other issues beyond total mesorectal excision (TME) performance. For decades, the concept of extralevator abdominoperineal resection to avoid compromised CRM has been introduced. However, the complexity of deep pelvic dissection with poor visualization in low-lying rectal cancer has led to transanal TME. In contrast, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) has allowed for the execution of more sphincter-saving procedures without oncologic compromise. Significant tumor regression after NCRT and complete pathologic response also permit applying the watch-and-wait protocol in some cases, now with more solid evidence. This review article will introduce the current surgical treatment options, their indication and technical details, and recent oncologic and functional outcomes. Lastly, the novel characteristics of distal rectal cancer, such as pelvic sidewall and inguinal lymph node metastases, will be discussed along with its tailored and individualized treatment approach.

Comparative study of functional outcomes between ultra-low anterior resection and inter-sphincteric resection: a propensity matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Comparative bowel functional outcomes between ultralow anterior resections (ULAR) and inter-sphincteric resection (ISR) for similar tumour and patient characteristics is not known.

METHODS

Single centre study of low rectal caners (<5cm from anal verge) with 1:1 propensity matching of age, sex, body mass index, prior radiation, and surgical approach (open vs. minimally invasive) was performed for the ULAR and ISR groups. Primary outcome measure was Wexner Incontinence scores and Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) score at a single time point after stoma reversal.

RESULTS

Seventy-two matched patients were included. Median Wexner scores were five and eight for the ULAR and ISR cohorts (p = 0.006). Major incontinence (Wexner >11) was found in 5.6% versus 33% after ULAR and ISR, respectively. Major LARS (score > 29) was demonstrated in 11% versus 25% in ULAR versus ISR (p = 0.293). Majority in both groups has no LARS (score < 20), that is, 72.2% versus 63.9% in ULAR against ISR. Besides these, stool fragmentation (p < 0.001), nocturnal defecation (p < 0.001) and use of anti-diarrhoeal medications (p = 0.023) were significantly more after ISR.

CONCLUSIONS

Bowel continence was relatively inferior after ISR as compared to an ULAR for low rectal cancers in matched cohorts. Major LARS in ISR was twice as prevalent without statistical differences.

Robotic Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: Technical Controversies and a Systematic Review on the Perioperative, Oncological, and Functional Outcomes

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is the ultimate anus-sparing technique for low rectal cancer and is considered an oncologically safe alternative to abdominoperineal resection. The application of the robotic approach to ISR (RISR) has been described by few specialized surgical teams with several differences regarding approach and technique. This review aims to discuss the technical aspects of RISR by evaluating point by point each surgical controversy. Moreover, a systematic review was performed to report the perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes of RISR. Postoperative morbidities after RISR are acceptable. RISR allows adequate surgical margins and adequate oncological outcomes. RISR may result in severe bowel and genitourinary dysfunction affecting the quality of life in a portion of patients.

Oncologic and Functional Outcomes of Pelvic Perineal Reconstruction by Perineal Colostomy and Malone Procedure After Abdominoperineal Resection

BACKGROUND

Abdominoperineal resection is the standard curative surgical technique for locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the lower rectum and squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal after chemoradiotherapy. However, it requires a definitive abdominal colostomy that modifies the body appearance.

OBJECTIVE

The study aim was to evaluate the combination of abdominoperineal resection with perineal colostomy reconstruction and Malone antegrade continence enema.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective study.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at the Toulouse Hospital Digestive Surgery Department.

PATIENTS

All of the patients with advanced adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma who underwent abdominoperineal resection with perineal colostomy reconstruction and Malone antegrade continence enema (n = 80) between December 1999 and December 2016 were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome was the 5-year overall survival rate.

RESULTS

The 5-year overall survival was 74.89% (95% CI, 62.91%-83.50%), and the median recurrence-free survival was 107.6 months (95% CI, 65.1-198.1 mo). The median follow-up was 91.0 months (95% CI, 70.4-116.6 mo). R0 resection was obtained in 64 patients (80.0%). The median Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Score (to assess the functional outcomes) was 9.0 (interquartile range, 1.0-18.0), and it was lower in patients with advanced adenocarcinoma than with squamous cell carcinoma (7.0 (interquartile range, 2.0-18.0) vs 11.0 (interquartile range, 1.0-17.0); p = 0.01). Eleven patients (13.8%) reported perineal stains during the night, and 19 patients (23.8%) needed drugs to reduce colon motility. The rate of severe complications (Clavien-Dindo >II) was 11.7% (n = 9). Definitive colostomy was performed in 15 patients (18.8%).

LIMITATIONS

This retrospective study included a small number of patients from a single center. Moreover, the functional outcome was tested with self-report questionnaires (risk of response bias).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that abdominoperineal resection associated with perineal reconstruction by perineal colostomy and Malone antegrade continence enema is safe and may improve patient quality of life. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B629.

RESULTADOS ONCOLGICOS Y FUNCIONALES DE LA RECONSTRUCCIN PLVIPERINEAL MEDIANTE COLOSTOMA PERINEAL Y PROCEDIMIENTO DE MALONE DESPUS DE LA RESECCIN ABDOMINOPERINEAL

ANTECEDENTES:La resección abdominoperineal es la técnica quirúrgica curativa estándar para el tratamiento del adenocarcinoma localmente avanzado del recto inferior y el carcinoma a células escamosas del canal anal, después de radio-quimioterapia. Sin embargo, requiere una colostomía abdominal definitiva que modifica la apariencia corporal.OBJETIVO:El propósito del presente estudio fue el evaluar la combinación de la resección abdominoperineal con la confección de una colostomía perineal asociada a enemas de continencia anterógrada según Malone.DISEÑO:Estudio retrospectivo.AJUSTES:Servicio de Cirugía Digestiva del Hospital de Toulouse, Francia.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron todos los pacientes con adenocarcinoma avanzado o carcinoma de células escamosas que se sometieron a resección abdominoperineal con la confección de una colostomía perineal asociada a enemas de continencia anterógrada según Malone (n = 80) entre diciembre de 1999 y diciembre de 2016.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El principal resultado fue la tasa de sobrevida global a 5 años.RESULTADOS:La sobrevida global a 5 años fue de 74,89% (IC del 95%, 62,91 a 83,50) y la mediana de supervivencia libre de recurrencia fue de 107,6 meses (IC del 95%, 65,1 a 198,1). La mediana de seguimiento fue de 91,0 meses (IC del 95%, 70,4-116,6). La resección R0 se obtuvo en 64 pacientes (80,0%). La mediana de puntuación de la escala de incontinencia de la Cleveland Clinic (para evaluar los resultados funcionales) fue de 9,0 [1,0; 18,0], y fue menor en pacientes con adenocarcinoma avanzado que con carcinoma de células escamosas (7,0 [2,0; 18,0] versus 11,0 [1,0; 17,0]; p = 0,01). Once pacientes (13,8%) refirieron manchado perineal nocurno y 19 pacientes (23,8%) necesitaron fármacos para reducir la motilidad del colon. La tasa de complicaciones graves (Clavien-Dindo > II) fue del 11,7% (n = 9). Se realizó colostomía definitiva en 15 (18,8%) pacientes.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio retrospectivo incluyó un pequeño número de pacientes y de un solo centro. Además, el resultado funcional se probó con cuestionarios de autoinforme (riesgo de sesgo de respuesta).CONCLUSIONES:Este estudio sugiere que la resección abdominoperineal asociada con la confección de una colostomía perineal asociada a enemas de continencia anterógrada según Malone es segura y puede mejorar la calidad de vida de los pacientes. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B629.

A case of effective Delorme's procedure for colonic mucosal prolapse after intersphincteric resection

Recent surgical technical improvements, such as endoscopic surgery with intersphincteric resection (ISR), could help avoid a permanent colostomy for patients with low-lying rectal tumors. However, the problems associated with anal dysfunction following ISR remain unresolved. We performed ISR and temporary ileostomy in a patient with low-lying rectal cancer. After evaluating the stability of the anastomosis, we planned to close the ileostomy, but the patient developed post-operative colonic mucosal prolapse (CMP). Although there are treatment methods available for CMP, there is no consensus on the treatment for post-operative CMP. In this case, we performed Delorme’s procedure because the method has been reported to have advantages in terms of improving post-operative anal function. Post-operative anorectal manometry showed improvement in maximum squeeze pressure, and the patient’s anal function improved; subsequently, ileostomy closure was performed. Delorme’s procedure may be useful for patients with CMP after ISR to achieve good post-operative anal function.

Local recurrence with intersphincteric resection in adverse histology rectal cancers. A retrospective study with competing risk analysis

BACKGROUND

The safety of inter-sphincteric resection (ISR) for low rectal cancer with adverse histologic subtypes has been incompletely studied. The present study aims at determining the risk of local recurrence with this procedure in poorly differentiated and signet ring cell (PDSR) adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis from a single tertiary cancer centre of non-metastatic primary rectal cancer <6 cm from the anal verge that underwent ISR. Competing risk analysis and sub-distribution hazard ratios for local recurrence free survivals were calculated to determine factors that influenced local recurrence with the competing risk of death from any cause to overcome the exceeding risk of distant metastasis associated with adverse histologic types.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-two patients underwent ISR and 22.6% has PDSR histology. At a median follow up of 61 months, 15.6% of the PDSR cohort developed local recurrence (five patients) compared to 11.7% in the non-PDSR group. PDSR histology influenced overall and disease free survival but not local recurrence on cox regression. On competing risk analysis, only ypT stage ≥3 predicted worse local recurrence free survival and not histology.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of PDSR histology did not increase the risk of local recurrence after ISR in this retrospective competing risk analysis.

Latest Advances in Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer

Background

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) has been a preferable alternative to abdominoperineal resection (APR) for anal preservation in patients with low rectal cancer. Laparoscopic ISR and robotic ISR have been widely used with the proposal of 2 cm or even 1 cm rule of distal free margin and the development of minimally invasive technology. The aim of this review was to describe the newest advancements of ISR.

Methods

A comprehensive literature review was performed to identify studies on ISR techniques, preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT), complications, oncological outcomes, and functional outcomes and thereby to summarize relevant information and controversies involved in ISR.

Results

Although PCRT is employed to avoid positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) and decrease local recurrence, it tends to engender damage of anorectal function and patients' quality of life (QoL). Common complications after ISR include anastomotic leakage (AL), anastomotic stricture (AS), urinary retention, fistula, pelvic sepsis, and prolapse. CRM involvement is the most important predictor for local recurrence. Preoperative assessment and particularly rectal endosonography are essential for selecting suitable patients. Anal dysfunction is associated with age, PCRT, location and growth of anastomotic stoma, tumour stage, and resection of internal sphincter.

Conclusions

The ISR technique seems feasible for selected patients with low rectal cancer. However, the postoperative QoL as a result of functional disorder should be fully discussed with patients before surgery.

Avoidance of Overtreatment of Rectal Cancer by Selective Chemoradiotherapy: Results of the Optimized Surgery and MRI-Based Multimodal Therapy Trial

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in patients with rectal cancer carries a high risk of adverse effects. The aim of this study was to examine the selective application of nCRT based on patient risk profile, as determined by MRI, to find the optimal range between undertreatment and overtreatment.

STUDY DESIGN

In this prospective multicenter observational study, nCRT before total mesorectal excision (TME) was indicated in high-risk patients with involved or threatened mesorectal fascia (≤1 mm), or cT4 or cT3 carcinomas of the lower rectal third. All other patients received primary surgery.

RESULTS

Of the 1,093 patients, 878 (80.3%) were treated according to the protocol, 526 patients (59.9%) underwent primary surgery, and 352 patients (40.1%) underwent nCRT followed by surgery. The 3-year locoregional recurrence (LR) rate was 3.1%. Of 604 patients with clinical stages II and III, 267 (44.2%) had primary surgery; 337 (55.8%) received nCRT followed by TME. The 3-year LR rate was 3.9%, without significant differences between groups. In patients with clinical stages II and III who underwent primary surgery, 27.3% were diagnosed with pathological stage I.

CONCLUSIONS

The results justify the restriction of nCRT to high-risk patients with rectal cancer classified by pretreatment MRI. Provided that a high-quality MRI diagnosis, TME surgery, and standardized examination of the resected specimen are performed, nCRT, with its adverse effects, costs, and treatment time can be avoided in more than 40% of patients with stage II or III rectal cancer with minimal risk of undertreatment. (clinicaltrials.gov NCT325649).

Oncologic safety and bowel function after ultralow anterior resection with or without intersphincteric resection for low lying rectal cancer: Comparative cross sectional study

BACKGROUND

Despite acceptable oncologic outcomes of sphincter preserving surgeries for low rectal cancer, bowel dysfunction occurs. This study aimed to compare the oncologic and functional bowel outcomes between ultralow anterior resection (ULAR) and intersphincteric resection (ISR) for low rectal cancer.

METHODS

One hundred sixty-four patients who underwent ULAR with or without ISR for low rectal cancer between December 2010 and May 2018 were included. The Wexner and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) scores were used to evaluate the bowel function of patients. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared between patients.

RESULTS

The ISR group had higher incidence of major fecal incontinence than the ULAR group (75.9% vs 49.3%; P = .016). The median Wexner score decreased from 12 to 9 (P = .062) at 1-year follow-up. However, the frequency and urgency/soilage subscales of MSKCC score improved significantly in the ULAR group. ISR and follow-up interval less than 1-year significantly increased the major incontinence risk. The OS in the ULAR and ISR groups was 91.4% and 91.7%. Whereas the DFS in both groups was 79% and 79.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

ULAR and ISR are comparable in oncologic outcomes. Severe bowel dysfunctions and major incontinence were noted in ISR group. Careful selection of patients is mandatory.

Long Term Results of Modified Intersphincteric Resections for Low Rectal Cancer: A Single Center Experience

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The objective of this article is to evaluate the long-term oncological and functional outcomes following modified intersphincteric resections (ISR) for low rectal cancer. The modified technique consisted of the abandonment of colonic J-pouches, transverse coloplasty, or defunctioning temporary stoma in favor of a direct handsewn coloanal anastomosis (CAA).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Sixty consecutive patients with type II and III (juxta-anal or intra-anal) low rectal tumors underwent modified ISR by the same surgical team and were followed for a period of five years. Functional outcomes using the Wexner Score, postoperative complications, recurrence rates, morbidity, and mortality rates were assessed.

RESULTS

The five-year survival rate was 93.3% with a disease-free interval at three years of 98%. Morbidity was 15% (n = 9) consisting of intestinal wall necrosis (n = 6), stenosis (n = 2), and sacral metastasis (n = 1). The Wexner score values were, at 1 year, 8.5 (range, 4-13); at three years 7.2 (range, 2-11); and at 5 years 6.7 (range, 2-12). A second surgery was needed in only one case that showed postoperative transmural necrosis of the colonic wall.

CONCLUSIONS

In highly selected patients with type II or III low rectal tumors and proper preoperative imaging staging, ISR might be a viable alternative to other techniques such as abdominoperineal resection and low anterior resection, both from a functional and an oncological perspective.

Postoperative Bowel Function After Anal Sphincter-Preserving Rectal Cancer Surgery: Risks Factors, Diagnostic Modalities, and Management

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) refers to a disturbance of bowel function that commonly manifests within 1 month after rectal cancer surgery. A low level of anastomosis and chemoradiotherapy have been consistently found to be risk factors for developing LARS. Thorough history taking and physical examination with adjunctive procedures are essential when evaluating patients with LARS. Anorectal manometry, fecoflowmetry, and validated questionnaires are important tools for assessing the quality of life of patients with LARS. Conservative management (medical, physiotherapy, transanal irrigation), invasive procedures (neuromodulation), and multimodal therapy are the mainstay of treatment for patients with LARS. A stoma could be considered when other treatment modalities have failed. An initial meticulous surgical procedure for rectal cancer, creation of a neorectal reservoir during anastomosis, and proper exercise of the anal sphincter muscle (Kegel’s maneuver) are essential to combat LARS. Pretreatment counseling is a crucial step for patients who have risk factors for developing LARS.

Factors influencing changing bowel habits in patients undergoing sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer

A research survey research was conducted to identify factors affecting changes in bowel habits of rectal cancer patients undergoing sphincter-saving surgery and to provide basic information useful in nursing interventions supporting treatment for rectal cancer patients. The subjects were rectal cancer patients who had undergone sphincter-saving surgery over 2 years ago. The final analysis included 107 patients who had made outpatient visits to the colorectal surgery from 12th to 31st May, 2014. Collected data were processed with SPSS Version 21.0. Changes in bowel habits in the subjects were observed: frequent bowel movement in 74 patients (69.2%) and faecal incontinence in 48 (44.9%). Most of the patients used self-care to improve their bowel function including dietary modification (78.5%), regular exercise (72.0%) and pelvic floor exercise (34.6%). Frequent defecation was associated with adjuvant chemoradiation therapy (P < 0.001) and faecal incontinence was associated with age of ≥65 years (P = 0.019) and a group who underwent adjuvant radiation therapy (P < 0.001). It is necessary to give sufficient information about possible postoperative changes in bowel habits to patients with the risk factors before surgery.