Intraoperative Anastomotic Evaluation Methods: Rigid Proctoscopy Versus Flexible Endoscopy

Abstract

IntroductionRigid proctosigmoidoscopy (RP) and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) are two modalities commonly used for intraoperative evaluation of colorectal anastomoses. This study seeks to determine whether there is an association between the endoscopic modality used to evaluate colorectal anastomoses and the rate of anastomotic leak (AL), organ space infection, and overall infectious complication. MethodsThe 2012-2018 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for patients undergoing colorectal anastomoses. Anastomotic evaluation method (RP versus FS) was identified by Current Procedural Terminologycoding and used for group classification. Outcomes measured included AL, organ space infections, and overall infection. Multivariable logistic regression analysis for predicting AL was performed. ResultsWe identified 7100 patients who underwent a colorectal anastomosis with intraoperative endoscopic evaluation. RP was utilized in 3397 (47.8%) and FS in 3703 (52.2%) patients. RP was used more commonly in diverticulitis (44.5% versus 36.2%, P < 0.01), while FS was used more frequently in malignancy (47.5% versus 36.7%, P < 0.01). Anastomotic evaluation with FS was associated with lower rates of organ space infection (3.8% versus 4.8%, P = 0.025) and AL (2.9% versus 3.8%, P = 0.028) compared to RP. On multivariate logistic regression modeling, anastomotic evaluation with RP was associated with a higher risk of AL (odds ratio 1.403, 95% CI 1.028-1.916, P = 0.033) compared to FS. ConclusionsCompared to FS, rigid proctosigmoidoscopic evaluation of a colorectal anastomosis was associated with an increased rate of AL and organ space infection.