Comparison of colonic J-pouch reconstruction and straight coloanal anastomosis after intersphincteric rectal resection.

Abstract

The tendency towards sphincter-preserving resection for distal rectal cancers has led to the technique of straight coloanal anastomosis (CAA) and colonic J-pouch anal anastomosis (CPA) after low anterior resection. The aim of the present study was to compare complication rate, anorectal physiology and functional results after both types of reconstruction after ultra-low intersphincteric resection. A total of 31 patients who had undergone CPA were followed up prospectively using anorectal manometry and a standardised questionnaire and were compared with 63 patients who had undergone CAA and were followed up in the same way. The complication rate after CPA did not differ significantly from that after CAA. One year postoperatively, the median stool frequency and urgency were reduced after CPA (1.7+/-2.2/day; 7% vs. 2.4+/-3.6/day; 14%; P<0.05). Three months after colostomy/ileostomy closure, the maximum tolerable volume, threshold volume and compliance were decreased after CAA when compared with CPA (55+/-12, 34+/-12, and 3.9+/-0.3 ml/mmHg vs. 85+/-21, 53+/-11 and 6.2 ml/mmHg, respectively; P<0.05). Anal manometry revealed no significant differences in the anal resting and squeeze pressure. One year postoperatively, continence also did not differ significantly between CPA and CAA. Colonic J-pouch reconstruction seems to be superior to the straight coloanal anastomosis, especially during the first postoperative year. In view of the often poor prognosis of the patients, it is the reconstruction of choice after ultra-low resections of the rectum.