A prospective cohort study on the clinical value of pelvic peritoneal reconstruction in laparoscopic anterior resection for middle and low rectal cancer

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the safety and efficacy of pelvic peritoneal reconstruction and its effect on anal function in laparoscopy-assisted anterior resection of low and middle rectal cancer. Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted. Consecutive patients with low and middle rectal cancer who underwent laparoscopy-assisted transabdominal anterior resection at Naval Military Medical University Changhai Hospital from February 2020 to February 2021 were enrolled. Inclusion criteria: (1) the distance from tumor to the anal verge ≤10 cm; (2) laparoscopy-assisted transabdominal anterior resection of rectal cancer; (3) complete clinical data; (4) rectal adenocarcinoma diagnosed by postoperative pathology. Exclusion criteria: (1) emergency surgery; (2) patients with a history of anal dysfunction or anal surgery; (3) preoperative diagnosis of distant (liver, lung) metastasis; (4) intestinal obstruction; (5) conversion to open surgery for various reasons. The pelvic floor was reconstructed using SXMD1B405 (Stratafix helical PGA-PCL, Ethicon). The first needle was sutured from the left anterior wall of the neorectum to the right. Insertion of the needle was continued to suture the root of the sigmoid mesentery while the Hemo-lok was used to fix the suture. The second needle was started from the beginning of the first needle, after 3-4 needles, a drainage tube was inserted through the left lower abdominal trocar to the presacral space. Then, the left peritoneal incision of the descending colon was sutured, after which Hemo-lok fixation was performed. The operative time, perioperative complications, postoperative Wexner anal function score and low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score were compared between the study group and the control group. Three to six months after the operation, pelvic MRI was performed to observe and compare the pelvic floor anatomical structure of the two groups. Results: A total of 230 patients were enrolled, including 58 who underwent pelvic floor peritoneum reconstruction as the study group and 172 who did not undergo pelvic floor peritoneum reconstruction as the control group. There were no significant differences in general data between the two groups (all P>0.05). The operation time of the study group was longer than that of control group [(177.5±33.0) minutes vs. (148.7±45.5) minutes, P<0.001]. There was no significant difference in the incidence of perioperative complications (including anastomotic leakage, anastomotic bleeding, postoperative pneumonia, urinary tract infection, deep vein thrombosis, and intestinal obstruction) between the two groups (all P>0.05). Eight cases had anastomotic leakage, of whom 2 cases (3.4%) in the study group were discharged after conservative treatment, 5 cases (2.9%) of other 6 cases (3.5%) in the control group were discharged after the secondary surgical treatment. The Wexner score and LARS score were 3.1±2.8 and 23.0 (16.0-28.0) in the study group, which were lower than those in the control group [4.7±3.4 and 27.0 (18.0-32.0)], and the differences were statistically significant (t=-3.018, P=0.003 and Z=-2.257, P=0.024). Severe LARS was 16.5% (7/45) in study group and 35.5% (50/141) in control group, and the difference was no significant differences (Z=4.373, P=0.373). Pelvic MRI examination 3 to 6 months after surgery showed that the incidence of intestinal accumulation in the pelvic floor was 9.1% (3/33) in study group and 46.4% (64/138) in control group (χ(2)=15.537, P<0.001). Conclusion: Pelvic peritoneal reconstruction using stratafix in laparoscopic anterior resection of middle and low rectal cancer is safe and feasible, which may reduce the probability of the secondary operation in patients with anastomotic leakage and significantly improve postoperative anal function.