Bowel Function Outcomes Research Articles

Correlation of urodynamic studies and somatosensory evoked potential and their prognostic value in children with closed spinal dysraphism

Somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) and urodynamic studies (UD) are valuable tools for assessing patients with closed spinal dysraphism (CSD) before neurosurgical intervention. No studies have correlated their findings in this cohort and our aim is to study their correlation and prognostic value in pediatric patients with closed spinal dysraphism. Retrospective review of all patients referred to a multidisciplinary clinic in a tertiary pediatric surgical center over a 17 years period between April 2004 to September 2021 was performed. Inclusion criteria were <18 years old, diagnosed with CSD, with SSEP and UD done within 1 year of each other. Demographics data collected include age at presentation/at referral/at neurosurgical operation, gender, symptoms at presentation and intra-operative diagnoses. Pre-operative SSEP and UD findings were documented. Primary outcome was UD results in the group with normal and abnormal SSEP. Secondary outcome was urological and bowel function outcome in 4 groups of patients (Group A-both normal SSEP and UD, Group B- abnormal SSEP only, Group C - abnormal UD only and Group D-both abnormal SSEP and UD). A total of 45 patients were included for analysis. Mean follow up time was 118.9 months (24-216 months, SD 55.8 months). SSEP was normal in 20 patients and abnormal in 25 patients. Baseline demographics, preoperative symptoms and imaging were similar between 2 groups. Primary outcome Patients with abnormal SSEP were more likely to have abnormal UD results with a statistically significant difference (84% vs 40%, p<0.05). They have a significantly higher end-fill detrusor pressure (12% vs 0%, p<0.05), abnormal bladder compliance (20% vs 0%, p<0.05), abnormal cystometric capacity (48% vs 10%, p<0.05), poor emptying efficiency (24% vs 5%, p<0.05) and sphincter incompetence (8% vs 0%, p<0.05). Secondary outcome When compared to Groups A to C, patients in group D were more likely to be on anti-cholinergic (33.3% vs 4.3%, p<0.05), required clean intermittent catheterization (42.9% vs 4.3%, p<0.05) and had intravesical botulinum injection (19% vs 0%, p<0.05). All the patients who had augmentation cystoplasty were in this group as well. Bowel function in terms of regular enema use was also statistically significantly higher in this group (33.4% p<0.05). Pre-operative SSEP and UD results correlate well in patients with closed spinal dysraphism. Patients with abnormal SSEP and UD preoperatively have higher risk of urological deterioration over time. Close monitoring in this group is warranted.

Quality of life and function after rectal cancer surgery with and without sphincter preservation.

Despite improvements in surgical techniques, functional outcomes and quality of life after therapy for rectal cancer remain suboptimal. We sought to prospectively evaluate the effect of bowel, bladder, and sexual functional outcomes on health-related quality of life (QOL) in patients with restorative versus non-restorative resections after rectal cancer surgery. A cohort of 211 patients with clinical stage I-III rectal cancer who underwent open surgery between 2006 and 2009 at Memorial Sloan Kettering were included. Subjects were asked to complete surveys preoperatively and at 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. Validated instruments were used to measure QOL, bowel, bladder, and sexual function. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses evaluated predictors of 24- month QOL. In addition, longitudinal trends over the study period were evaluated using repeated measures models. In total, 180 patients (85%) completed at least 1 survey, and response rates at each time point were high (>70%). QOL was most impaired at 6 and 12 months and returned to baseline levels at 24 months. Among patients who underwent sphincter-preserving surgery (SPS; n=153 [85%]), overall bowel function at 24 months was significantly impaired and never returned to baseline. There were no differences in QOL at 24 months between patients who underwent SPS and those who did not (p=.29). Bowel function was correlated with QOL at 24 months (Pearson correlation,.41; p<.001). QOL among patients who have undergone SPS for rectal cancer is good despite poor function. Patients with ostomies are able to adjust to the functional changes and, overall, have good global QOL. Patients with low anastomoses had lower global QOL at 24 months than patients with permanent stomas. Our findings can help patients set expectations about function and quality of life after surgery for rectal cancer with and without a permanent stoma.

Utility of postoperative anorectal manometry in children with anorectal malformation: a systematic review.

Children with anorectal malformation (ARM) often continue to have disturbances in bowel function long after reconstructive surgery. Anorectal manometry may be utilized to evaluate bowel function in these children. We aimed to describe the reported protocols and manometric findings in children with ARM post-reconstructive surgery and to investigate the correlation between manometric evaluation and bowel functional outcome. PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar databases were searched from 1980 to 2021. Data were reviewed and extracted independently by two authors, in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Included studies were English articles reporting postoperative assessment of children (≤ 18years) with ARM using anorectal manometry. From 128 articles obtained in the initial search, five retrospective cohort studies and one prospective study fulfilled inclusion criteria. The rectoanal inhibitory reflex and mean anal resting pressure were parameters most often reported to correlate with postoperative bowel function. The least reported parameters among the studies were high-pressure zone, rectal volume, and rectal sensation. Anorectal manometry could be an objective method providing important information for personalized management of postoperative ARM patients with bowel function issues, but lack of standardized protocols limits a comprehensive analysis of their utility.

Functional outcomes of intersphincteric resection in low rectal tumors.

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. 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. 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. 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.

Analysis of bowel function, urogenital function, and long-term follow-up outcomes associated with robotic and laparoscopic sphincter-preserving surgical approaches to total mesorectal excision in low rectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study

ObjectiveThe present study comparatively analyzed short-term clinical effectiveness and long-term follow-up endpoints associated with robotic-assisted sphincter-preserving surgery (RAS) and laparoscopic-assisted sphincter-preserving surgery (LAS) when used to treat low rectal cancer.MethodWithin such a single-center retrospective cohort analysis, low rectal cancer patients that underwent RAS (n=200) or LAS (n=486) between January 2015 and beginning of July 2018 were enrolled.ResultsThe mean operative durations in the RAS and LAS cohorts were 249±64 min and 203±47 min, respectively (P<0.001). Temporary ileostomy rates in the RAS and LAS cohorts were 64.5% and 51.6% (P = 0.002). In addition, major variations across such cohorts regarding catheter removal timing, time to liquid intake, time to first leaving bed, and length of hospitalization (all P<0.001). This distal resection margin distance within the RAS cohort was diminished in comparison to LAS cohort (P=0.004). For patients within the LAS cohort, the time required to recover from reduced urinary/female sexual function was > 6 months post-surgery (P<0.0001), whereas within the RAS cohort this interval was 3 months (P<0.0001). At 6 months post-surgery, male sexual function within RAS cohort was improved in comparison to LAS cohort (P<0.001). At 6 months post-surgery, Wexner scores revealed similar results (P<0.001). No major variations within overall or disease-free survival were identified across these cohorts at 3 or 5 years post-surgery.ConclusionRobotic sphincter-preserving surgery is a safe and effective surgical technique in low rectal patients in terms of postoperative oncological safety and long-term endpoints. And the RAS strategy provides certain additional benefits with respect to short-term urogenital/anorectal functional recovery in treated patients compared to LAS.

Long-term functional outcomes of patients with Hirschsprung disease following pull-through

BackgroundHirschsprung disease (HSCR) is a common congenital disorder presenting with functional obstruction due to aganglionosis of the colon. There are numerous types of pull-through surgery for managing HSCR, such as transabdominal endorectal (Soave), Swenson, Duhamel, transanal endorectal pull-through (TEPT), and laparoscopic (Georgeson) approach. Here, we aimed to describe the long-term outcome of patients with HSCR who underwent transabdominal Soave, Duhamel, and TEPT in our institution.MethodsWe performed a cross-sectional analysis for patients who underwent Duhamel, Soave, and TEPT at our institution from January 2012 to December 2015. Long-term functional outcome was determined by bowel function score (BFS). The BFS was obtained by interviewing patients who had completed at least three years of follow-up.ResultsTwenty-five patients were included in this study who underwent transabdominal Soave (n = 8), Duhamel (n = 4), and TEPT (n = 13). There were 24 patients with short aganglionosis type. The median age of HSCR diagnosis was 10 (IQR = 1–39) months, while the median age of pull-through surgery was 17 (IQR = 7–47) months. The median follow-up of BFS level for HSCR patients after pull-through was 72 (IQR, 54–99) months. There were 11 patients with good BFS level and 10 patients with normal BFS level. Additionally, 50% of Duhamel patients had poor BFS level, while 50% of Soave patients had good BFS level, and 54% of TEPT patients had normal BFS level (p = 0.027). As many as 50% of Duhamel patients showed daily soiling and required protective aids, while 38.5% of TEPT had staining less than 1/week and no change of underwear required, and 50% of Soave patients revealed no soiling, respectively (p = 0.030). Furthermore, 75% of Duhamel patients had accidents, while 75% of Soave and 46.2% of TEPT patients had no accidents (p = 0.035).ConclusionOur study shows that the type of definitive surgery might affect the long-term bowel functional outcome; particularly, the TEPT approach might have some advantages over the transabdominal Soave and Duhamel procedures.

Bowel function and associated risk factors at preschool and early childhood age in children with anorectal malformation type rectovestibular fistula: An ARM-Net consortium study

BackgroundOutcome of patients operated for anorectal malformation (ARM) type rectovestibular fistula (RVF) is generally considered to be good. However, large multi-center studies are scarce, mostly describing pooled outcome of different ARM-types, in adult patients. Therefore, counseling parents concerning the bowel function at early age is challenging. Aim of this study was to evaluate bowel function of RVF-patients at preschool/early childhood age and determine risk factors for poor functional outcome. MethodsA multi-center cohort study was performed. Patient characteristics, associated anomalies, sacral ratio, surgical procedures, post-reconstructive complications, one-year constipation, and Bowel Function Score (BFS) at 4–7 years of follow-up were registered. Groups with below normal (BFS < 17; subgroups ‘poor’ ≤ 11, and ‘fair’ 11 < BFS < 17) and good outcome (BFS ≥ 17) were formed. Univariable analyses were performed to detect risk factors for outcome. ResultsThe study included 111 RVF-patients. Median BFS was 16 (range 6–20). The ‘below normal’ group consisted of 61 patients (55.0%). Overall, we reported soiling, fecal accidents, and constipation in 64.9%, 35.1% and 70.3%, respectively. Bowel management was performed in 23.4% of patients. Risk factors for poor outcome were tethered cord and low sacral ratio, while sacral anomalies, low sacral ratio, prior enterostomy, post-reconstructive complications, and one-year constipation were for being on bowel management. ConclusionsAlthough median BFS at 4–7 year follow-up is nearly normal, the majority of patients suffers from some degree of soiling and constipation, and almost 25% needs bowel management. Several factors were associated with poor bowel function outcome and bowel management. Level of EvidenceLevel III.

Patient-reported bowel and bladder function is not adversely impacted by bariatric surgery.

IntroductionThis study aims to assess the effect of bariatric surgery on patient-reported outcomes of bowel and bladder function. We hypothesized that bariatric surgery does not worsen bowel and bladder function.Methods and proceduresA retrospective review was conducted of a prospectively maintained surgical quality database. We included patients who underwent primary bariatric surgery at a single institution between 2012 and 2020, excluding revisional procedures. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using Surgical Outcomes Measurement System (SOMS) bowel and bladder function questionnaires at time of pre-operative consult and routine post-operative follow-up visits through 2 years. Data were analyzed using a statistical mixed effects model.Results573 patients (80.6% female) were identified with completed SOMS questionnaire data on bowel and bladder function. Of these, 370 (64.6%) underwent gastric bypass, 190 (33.2%) underwent sleeve gastrectomy, and 13 (2.3%) underwent either gastric banding or duodenal switch. Compared to pre-operative baseline scores, patients reported a transient worsening of bowel function at 2-weeks post-op (p = 0.009). However, by 3-months post-op, bowel function improved and was significantly better than baseline (p = 0.006); this improvement was sustained at every point through 2-year follow-up (p = 0.026). Bladder function scores improved immediately at 2-weeks post-op (p = 0.026) and showed sustained improvement through 1-year follow-up. On subgroup analysis, sleeve patients showed greater improvement in bowel function than bypass patients at 1-year (p = 0.031). Multivariable analysis showed significant improvement in bowel function associated with greater total body weight loss (TBWL) (p = 0.002).ConclusionsBariatric surgery does not worsen patient-reported bowel or bladder function. In fact, there is overall improvement from pre-operative scores for both bowel and bladder function by 3-months post-op which is sustained through 2-year and 1-year follow-up, respectively. Most encouragingly, a greater TBWL is significantly associated with improved bowel function after bariatric surgery.

P108 Identifying Patient-Centered Future Research Priorities: A Report from the Patient Reported Outcomes after Pouch Surgery (PROPS) Delphi Consensus Study

Abstract Background The Patient Reported Outcomes after Pouch Surgery (PROPS) Delphi Consensus Study recently described Ileoanal Pouch Syndome – the constellation of functional outcomes that should be the focus of future research. Importantly, several additional items not related to bowel function were identified by patients as critical to their quality of life. The aim of this abstract is to highlight these additional items. Methods Three panels of expert stakeholders were chosen to correlate with the clinical scenario of the multidisciplinary team that cares for pouch patients: (A) patients, (B) colorectal surgeons, (C) gastroenterologists/other clinicians. IPAA patients were recruited by advertisements on the social media pages of a national patient advocacy groups. Clinicians were recruited by a 14 member scientific committee with the aim of selecting experts in inflammatory bowel disease and IPAAs. A starting list of items was generated by systematic literature review. Three rounds of Delphi surveys were employed to select high priority items based on an a priori threshold. Participants had the opportunity to suggest additional symptoms not included in the starting list. A final online consensus meeting with representation from all three expert panels was held to finalize a consensus statement. Results After three rounds of voting, 195 patients, 62 colorectal surgeons, and 48 gastroenterologists/other specialists completed all three rounds. In the patient group, 95% had UC and J-pouch anatomy. In the early Delphi rounds, approximately 74% of patients identified impact on sexual function/intimacy as a high priority outcomes, while 70% of patients identified impact on ability to conceive as a high priority. Similarly, 78% of patients believed that risk of pouchitis was a high priority, compared to 47% of surgeons and 66% of gastroenterologists. Furthermore, patients participating in the subsequent online focus groups and final consensus meeting felt strongly that future research on delivery of care, long term follow up, and proper consent before surgery (including accurate counseling on function and perception of being “cured”) were critical areas for future research. Conclusion PROPS was the first study to identify key functional outcomes after pouch surgery with direct input from a large panel of IPAA patients. The inclusion of patients in all stages of the consensus process allowed for a true patient-centered approach in defining the core domains that should be focused on in future studies of pouch function. In addition to the identification of key bowel function outcomes, the study highlighted additional patient-centered core outcomes that clinicians should focus future research efforts on.

Early investigations into improving bowel and bladder function in fetal ovine myelomeningocele repair

IntroductionFetal myelomeningocele (MMC) repair improves lower extremity motor function. We have previously demonstrated that augmentation of fetal MMC repair with placental mesenchymal stromal cells (PMSCs) seeded on extracellular matrix (PMSC-ECM) further improves motor function in the ovine model. However, little progress has been made in improving bowel and bladder function, with many patients suffering from neurogenic bowel and bladder. We hypothesized that fetal MMC repair with PMSC-ECM would also improve bowel and bladder function. MethodsMMC defects were surgically created in twelve ovine fetuses at median gestational age (GA) 73 days, followed by defect repair at GA101 with PMSC-ECM. Fetuses were delivered at GA141. Primary bladder function outcomes were voiding posture and void volumes. Primary bowel function outcome was anorectal manometry findings including resting anal pressure and presence of rectoanal inhibitory reflex (RAIR). Secondary outcomes were anorectal and bladder detrusor muscle thickness. PMSC-ECM lambs were compared to normal lambs (n = 3). ResultsEighty percent of PMSC-ECM lambs displayed normal voiding posture compared to 100% of normal lambs (p = 1). Void volumes were similar (PMSC-ECM 6.1 ml/kg vs. normal 8.8 ml/kg, p = 0.4). Resting mean anal pressures were similar between cohorts (27.0 mmHg PMSC-ECM vs. normal 23.5 mmHg, p = 0.57). RAIR was present in 3/5 PMSC-ECM lambs that underwent anorectal manometry and all normal lambs (p = 0.46). Thicknesses of anal sphincter complex, rectal wall muscles, and bladder detrusor muscles were similar between cohorts. ConclusionOvine fetal MMC repair augmented with PMSC-ECM results in near-normal bowel and bladder function. Further work is needed to evaluate these outcomes in human patients.

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

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

Local Excision ± Chemoradiotherapy vs. Total Mesorectal Excision for Early Rectal Cancer: Case-Matched Analysis of Long-Term Results.

Background: Our aim was to compare the bowel function and oncologic outcomes following these two treatment modalities.Materials and methods: This was a single-center study with 67 patients included between 2009 and 2018. A total of 32 patients underwent total mesorectal excision (TME) group and 35 transanal local excisions (LE) ± chemoradiation. We performed a case-matched analysis: we matched the patients by age, cancer stage, and comorbidities. Duration of operation, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and long-term functional and oncological outcomes were compared. We calculated oncological outcomes using Kaplan–Meier Cox diagrams. In addition, we used a low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score for the bowel function assessment.Results: Mean operation time in the LE group was 58.8 ± 45 min compared with the TME group that was 121.1 ± 42 min (p = 0.032). Complications were seen in 5.7% in LE group and 15.62% in TME group (p = 0.043). ~85.2% of the patients had no LARS in LE group compared with 54.5% in TME group (p = 0.018). Minor LARS was 7.4% in LE group compared with 31.8% in TME group (p = 0.018); major LARS was 7.4 and 13.7%, respectively (p = 0.474). Hospital stay was 2.77 days in LE group compared with 9.21 days in TME group (p = 0.036). The overall survival was 68.78 months in LE group compared with 74.81 months in TME group (p = 0.964).Conclusion: Our results of a small sample size showed that local excision ± chemoradiation is a rather safe method for early rectal cancer compared with gold standard treatment. In addition, better bowel function is preserved with less postoperative complications and shorter hospital stays.

Colonic J-pouch versus side-to-end anastomosis for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BackgroundThis study aims to compare colonic J-pouch and side-to-end anastomosis for rectal cancer in terms of surgical and bowel functional outcomes and quality of life (QoL).MethodsA systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane. The last search was performed on March 28, 2021. All randomized controlled trials comparing colonic J-pouch with side-to-end anastomosis for rectal cancer were enrolled. The main outcomes were bowel functional outcomes and QoL. The secondary outcomes were surgical outcomes including operative time, postoperative hospital stay, complications, and mortality.ResultsNine articles incorporating 7 trials with a total of 696 patients (330 by J-pouch and 366 by side-to-end) were enrolled in this meta-analysis. The bowel functional outcomes were comparable between J-pouch and side-to-end groups in terms of stool frequency, urgency, and incomplete defecation at the short term (< 8 months), medium term (8–18 months), and long term (> 18 months) follow up evaluations. No difference was observed between groups with regards to QoL (SF-36: physical function, social function, and general health perception). Besides, surgical outcomes were also similar in two groups.ConclusionThe currently limited evidence suggests that colonic J-pouch and side-to-end anastomosis are comparable in terms of bowel functional outcomes, QoL, and surgical outcomes. Surgeons may choose either of the two techniques for anastomosis. A large sample randomized controlled study comparing colonic J-pouch and side-to-end anastomosis for rectal cancer is warranted.

Colonic pouch confers better bowel function and similar postoperative outcomes compared to straight anastomosis for low rectal cancer.

BACKGROUNDWith advancements in laparoscopic technology and the wide application of linear staplers, sphincter-saving procedures are increasingly performed for low rectal cancer. However, sphincter-saving procedures have led to the emergence of a unique clinical disorder termed anterior rectal resection syndrome. Colonic pouch anastomosis improves the quality of life of patients with rectal cancer > 7 cm from the anal margin. But whether colonic pouch anastomosis can reduce the incidence of rectal resection syndrome in patients with low rectal cancer is unknown.AIMTo compare postoperative and oncological outcomes and bowel function of straight and colonic pouch anal anastomoses after resection of low rectal cancer.METHODSWe conducted a retrospective study of 72 patients with low rectal cancer who underwent sphincter-saving procedures with either straight or colonic pouch anastomoses. Functional evaluations were completed preoperatively and at 1, 6, and 12 mo postoperatively. We also compared perioperative and oncological outcomes between two groups that had undergone low or ultralow anterior rectal resection.RESULTSThere were no significant differences in mean operating time, blood loss, time to first passage of flatus and excrement, and duration of hospital stay between the colonic pouch and straight anastomosis groups. The incidence of anastomotic leakage following colonic pouch construction was lower (11.4% vs 16.2%) but not significantly different than that of straight anastomosis. Patients with colonic pouch construction had lower postoperative low anterior resection syndrome scores than the straight anastomosis group, suggesting better bowel function (preoperative: 4.71 vs 3.89, P = 0.43; 1 mo after surgery: 34.2 vs 34.7, P = 0.59; 6 mo after surgery: 22.70 vs 29.0, P < 0.05; 12 mo after surgery: 15.5 vs 19.5, P = 0.01). The overall recurrence and metastasis rates were similar (4.3% and 11.4%, respectively).CONCLUSIONColonic pouch anastomosis is a safe and effective procedure for colorectal reconstruction after low and ultralow rectal resections. Moreover, colonic pouch construction may provide better functional outcomes compared to straight anastomosis.

Robotic versus laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA): a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal-pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) is a curative and cancer preventative procedure in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). It can be technically difficult laparoscopically, and hence the robotic platform has been suggested as a way to enable minimally invasive surgery in more patients. This systematic review examines robotic proctectomy or proctocolectomy with IPAA. A limited meta-analysis was performed on data comparing the robotic approach to laparoscopy. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane database for case series of robotic IPAA procedures and studies comparing the robotic to laparoscopic or open procedures. Data examined includes operating time, conversion to open, length of stay, complications, blood loss, return of bowel function, reoperation rate and functional outcomes. Five non-randomised studies compared robotic to laparoscopic techniques; one compared robotic to open surgery and three case series are included. Operating time was significantly longer in robotic cases. Estimated blood loss was significantly less in three of four studies which reported this; hospital stay was significantly less in two. There were nonsignificant reductions in complications and readmission rates. Pooled analysis of four papers with adequate data showed a nonstatistically significant trend to less complications in robotic procedures. Three studies assessed functional and quality of life outcomes, with little difference between the platforms. Available data suggests that the robotic platform is safe to use for IPAA procedures. There is minimal evidence for clinical advantages, but with little data to base decisions and significant potential for improvements in technique and cost-effectiveness, further use of the platform for this operation is warranted. It is vital that this occurs within an evaluation framework.

Recurrence after Delorme's procedure in a single and multi-surgeon setting

Background Delorme's procedure (DP) is a perineal repair reserved for full-thickness rectal prolapse (FTRP) in elderly/comorbid patients due to its low perioperative morbidity. Reported recurrence rates are higher than for abdominal approaches. This study reports the long-term clinical outcomes of recurrence and postoperative bowel function after DP. Methods A retrospective cohort study including all patients who underwent a DP for FTRP between February 2001 and March 2014 at two primary study sites: Groote Schuur Hospital (multi-surgeon) and Kingsbury Hospital (singlesurgeon). Primary outcome was the absence of recurrence of FTRP after DP. Secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality and morbidity, postoperative bowel function and length of hospital stay. Results 70 patients underwent DP: 37 were operated on by the single surgeon and 33 by multiple surgeons. The median age was 76 years (IQR 20 years). Median length of follow-up was 46 months (IQR 55 months). 16 recurrences occurred: 7 in the single-surgeon cohort and 9 in the multi-surgeon cohort (p = 0.4). Median time to recurrence was 23 months (IQR 36 months): 48 months in the single-surgeon cohort and 15 months in the multi-surgeon cohort (p = 0.6). Six patients each had minor and major complications. Three patients died postoperatively. 8 patients required reoperation. Median postoperative hospital stay was three days (IQR 2 days). There were no significant differences between the multi-surgeon and single-surgeon cohorts. Conclusion Long-term follow-up demonstrates a recurrence rate of 23% after DP, with no difference between an experienced colorectal specialist and supervised trainee surgeons.

Efficacy of pelvic floor rehabilitation for bowel dysfunction after anterior resection for colorectal cancer: a systematic review.

Bowel dysfunction is common after anterior resection for colorectal cancer (CRC). Pelvic floor rehabilitation (PFR) may improve functional outcomes after surgery. This review aimed to evaluate the efficacy of PFR for patients with bowel symptoms after anterior resection. MEDLINE, CINHAL, PUBMED, EMBASE, Scopus, PsycINFO, Web of Science, PEDRO and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to June 2019. A final search was performed on 11 July 2020. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, case-control studies and case series of bowel dysfunction after CRC surgery and PFR were eligible for review. Outcome measures were bowel function changes measured by patient-reported outcomes and manometric measurement. Risk of bias assessments using Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) tool and Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) were conducted. Eleven trials met eligibility criteria: four retrospective studies and seven prospective, non-randomised controlled studies. A total of 516 participants were included, of which 455 received PFR. Functional outcomes were measured by bowel functional outcome questionnaires, patient diary, anorectal manometry and three studies measured quality of life. Faecal incontinence was improved in seven studies, and bowel frequency also decreased in five studies. The mean MINORS score was 10 (8-13) out of 16 in non-comparative groups and 18 (16-22) out of 24 in comparative groups; the NOS was 4.2 (3-7) out of 9. The overall risk of bias was high in most studies. PFR appears to be beneficial for improving bowel function after anterior resection for CRC. However, the studies included had methodological limitations, so further investigation on the effectiveness of PFR is warranted.

Restorative reconstruction after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer is associated with significant bowel dysfunction from initial presentation

BackgroundPatients often desire restorative reconstruction following total mesorectal excision. Reconstruction has become synonymous with providing high-quality rectal cancer care. However, the bowel functional outcomes of restoration from presentation are unknown. We aimed to evaluate the bowel functional effects of rectal cancer treatment from presentation through surveillance. MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study from 2014 to 2019 using prospectively collected data. Patients underwent treatment for rectal adenocarcinoma including restorative reconstruction. Patients completed the validated Colorectal Functional Outcome questionnaire during clinic visits (1) at presentation, (2) after neoadjuvant therapy, (3) after restoration of continuity, and (4) at surveillance. Scores range from 0 to 100 with a higher score indicating worse bowel function. ResultsSixty-eight patients (age: 62 ± 12 years, 40% female) were included. The mean tumor height was 7 ± 4 cm with 85% symptomatic. Bowel function did not worsen from presentation to after neoadjuvant therapy in Total Colorectal Functional Outcome and most domain scores; there was improvement in frequency and stool-related aspects. Bowel function worsened in all scores from after neoadjuvant to restoration of continuity (mean anastomotic height: 5 ± 2 cm); there were similar findings between presentation and restoration of continuity. At surveillance, there was improvement in most domains compared with restoration of continuity. There remained significant worsening of incontinence, social impact, and need for medication scores at surveillance compared with presentation. ConclusionRestorative reconstruction after total mesorectal excision is associated with significant bowel dysfunction. For some patients, restorative reconstruction may not be high-quality rectal cancer care.

Radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy: Effect of timing of postprostatectomy radiation on functional outcomes

Introduction and objectiveThe timing of radiotherapy (RT) after prostatectomy is controversial, and its effect on sexual, urinary, and bowel function is unknown. This study seeks to compare patient-reported functional outcomes after radical prostatectomy (RP) and postprostatectomy radiation as well as elucidate the timing of radiation to allow optimal recovery of function. MethodsThe Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Surgery and Radiation (CEASAR) study is a prospective, population-based, observational study of men with localized prostate cancer. Patient-reported sexual, urinary, and bowel functional outcomes were measured using the 26-item Expanded Prostate Index Composite at baseline and at 6, 12, 36, and 60 months after enrollment. Functional outcomes were compared among men undergoing RP alone, post-RP adjuvant radiation (RP + aRT), and post-RP salvage radiation (RP + sRT) using multivariable models controlling for baseline clinical, demographic, and functional characteristics. ResultsAmong 1,482 CEASAR participants initially treated with RP for clinically localized prostate cancer, 11.5% (N = 170) received adjuvant (aRT, N = 57) or salvage (sRT, N = 113) radiation. Men who received post-RP RT had worse scores in all domains (sexual function [−9.0, 95% confidence interval {−14.5, −3.6}, P < 0.001], incontinence [−8.8, {−14.0, −3.6}, P < 0.001], irritative voiding [−5.9, {−9.0, −2.8}, P < 0.001], bowel irritative [−3.5, {-5.8, −1.2}, P = 0.002], and hormonal function [−4.5, {−7.2, −1.7}, P = 0.001]) compared to RP alone at 5 years of follow-up. Compared to men treated with RP alone in an adjusted linear model, sRT was associated with significantly worse scores in all functional domains. aRT was associated with significantly worse incontinence, urinary irritation, and hormonal function domain scores compared to RP alone at 5 years of follow-up. On multivariable modeling, RT administered approximately 24 months after RP was associated with the smallest decline in sexual domain score, with an adjusted mean decrease of 8.85 points (95% confidence interval [−19.8, 2.1]) from post-RP, pre-RT baseline. ConclusionsIn men with localized prostate cancer, post-RP RT was associated with significantly worse sexual, urinary, and bowel function domain scores at 5 years compared to RP alone. Radiation delayed for approximately 24 months after RP may be optimal for preserving erectile function compared to radiation administered closer to the time of RP.

Therapeutic Suggestion in Postoperative Pain Control: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

There is conflicting research on the effect of therapeutic suggestion in the perioperative period. This study systematically compared subjective and objective measures of postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting, urinary and bowel function, and global perception of symptomatic improvement between participants receiving perioperative therapeutic suggestion versus routine perioperative care during minimally invasive pelvic reconstructive surgery. This was a single-blinded, randomized controlled trial of participants undergoing vaginal hysterectomy with minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy and concomitant prolapse repairs. The intervention group received perioperative therapeutic suggestion, whereas the control group did not. Primary outcomes included postoperative pain scores and analgesic use. Secondary outcomes included a postoperative nausea and vomiting scale, the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory Questionnaire-Short Form 20, the Patient Global Impression of Improvement scale, and time to return of bowel and bladder function. Sixteen participants were randomized to each group. Final analysis included 15 intervention and 14 control participants. Overall measures of postoperative pain and analgesic use were low across all participants without a significant difference between intervention and control groups (opioid: 52.5; interquartile range [IQR], 25.5-58.9 vs 66 IQR, 7.3-125.8; morphine milligram equivalents; P = 0.64; acetaminophen: 2225 mg; IQR, 500-2600 mg vs 2800 mg; IQR, 650-4775 mg; P = 0.38). There were no statistically significant differences in secondary outcomes of urinary symptoms, bowel function, and subjective improvement of prolapse symptoms. No differences in postoperative pain, analgesic use, return of bowel and bladder function, or pelvic organ prolapse symptoms were noted in participants receiving perioperative therapeutic suggestion versus routine perioperative care.