Clinical Anastomotic Leak Rate Research Articles

Indocyanine green angiography for lower incidence of anastomotic leakage after transanal total mesorectal excision: a propensity score-matched cohort study.

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is the most serious complication that can arise during colorectal surgery. Indocyanine green (ICG) angiography offers an intraoperative assessment of colonic vascular perfusion in real time. We aimed to assess ICG's effects on the AL rate in patients who have undergone transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer. This retrospective cohort study was conducted at our center from October 2018 to March 2022 to analyze the clinical data of patients with rectal cancer who have undergone TaTME after propensity score matching (PSM). The primary outcome was the proximal colonic transection line modification and clinical AL rate. A total of 143 patients in the non-ICG group and 143 patients in the ICG group were included after PSM. The proximal colonic transection line of seven patients in the non-ICG group was modified, while 18 were in the ICG group (4.9% vs. 12.5%, p = 0.023). Twenty-three patients (16.1%) in the non-ICG group and five patients (3.5%) in the ICG group were diagnosed with AL (p < 0.001). The ICG group had a less hospital readmission rate than the non-ICG group (0.7% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.003). The between-group differences in basic line and other outcomes were not significant. ICG angiography is a safe and feasible method to help surgeons identify potentially poor colonic vascular perfusion and modify the proximal colonic transection line, resulting in a significant reduction in AL and hospital readmission rates.

The impact of fluorescence angiography on anastomotic leak rate following transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a comparative study.

Anastomotic leak (AL) is the most feared complication in colorectal surgery. Indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence angiography allows for real-time intraoperative evaluation of bowel perfusion. This study aimed to assess the impact of ICG on perioperative outcomes in patients treated with transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer. Comparative study based on a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data, to validate the use of ICG assessment (ICGA) during TaTME (November/2011-June/2018). The primary outcome was the clinical AL rate. The secondary outcomes included modification of proximal colonic transection, anastomotic redo, additional surgical maneuvers and surgical morbidity. Two hundred and eighty-four patients were included, 204 (71.8%) in non-ICG group and 80 (28.2%) in ICG group. No significant differences were found in patient and tumor features. Mean anastomotic height was 4.85cm vs. 5.04cm (p = 0.500), diverting stoma was constructed in 205 patients (72.1% vs. 72.5%; p = 0.941). Fluorescence angiography modified the surgical plan in 23 patients (28.7%). AL was diagnosed in 23 patients (11.3%) in the non-ICG group and in two patients (2.5%) in the ICG group (p = 0.020). Postoperative intraabdominal collection was diagnosed in 19 patients (7.4% vs. 5.1%; p = 0.490), and reintervention was needed in 24 patients (10.8% vs. 7.6%; p = 0.420). Median length of hospital stay was 6.0 (IQR 5.0-9) vs. 4.0 (IQR 3.0-8.5) (p = 0.005). ICGA was found as independent protective factor for AL in the multivariate analysis of the whole cohort (n = 284) (OR 0.142; 95% CI 0.032-0.633; p = 0.010). ICG fluorescence angiography modified the proximal colonic transection in more than one-quarter of patients, leading to a significant decrease of AL rate.

REINFORCEMENT OF STAPLE LINE OF COLORECTAL ANASTOMOSIS AS A METHOD OF LEAKEAGE PREVENTION

AIM: to decrease anastomotic leakage rate using transanal and transabdominal reinforcing sutures of staple line of colorectal anastomosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: a prospective randomized trial is started. The main group included patients which underwent anterior or low anterior resection of the rectum with reinforcing of the staple line of colorectal anastomosis using reinforcing sutures on 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 by conventional dial. The control group consisted of patients without reinforcing of the anastomosis line. RESULTS: from November 2017 to October 2018, 127 patients underwent anterior or low anterior resection of the rectum, 80 of them were included in the study,six were excluded from the study after surgery. Among these 74 patients 40 (54.0 %) were females, mean age was 63.0± 11.0 years. Forty patients consisted the main group, 34 - control. The anastomotic leakage rate in the main group was 7% (3/40), in the control - was 26 % (9/34) (p=0.06). The clinical anastomotic leakage rate in the main group was 3 % (1/40), in the control group - 21 % (7/34) (p=0.03). The anastomotic leakage rate in the main group, after anterior resection of the rectum was 13 % (2/15), in the control - 0 % (0/8) (p=0.8). After low anterior resection the anastomotic leakage rate in the main group was 4 % (1/25), in the control - 35 % (9/26) (p=0.016). Multivariate analysis of risk factors of anastomotic leakage significance associated with male gender (OR 6.88, CI 1,32-of 35.9, p=0,022), positive bubble test (OR 6.26, CI of 1.22-32,2, p=0.028), absence of reinforcing of the anastomosis (OR 4.39, CI 0,96-20,12, p=0,056). CONCLUSION: the reinforcing of colorectal anastomoses decreases anastomotic leakage rate after low anterior resection.

Laparoscopic surgery may decrease the risk of clinical anastomotic leakage and a nomogram to predict anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer

IntroductionAnastomotic leakage is still one of the most dreaded complications after anterior resection for rectal cancer. This study aimed to identify risk factors for anastomotic leakage and to create a nomogram for precise prediction of anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer.MethodsTwo thousand six hundred eighteen consecutive patients who underwent anterior resection for rectal cancer with primary anastomosis, with or without diverting stoma, were retrospectively analyzed as a training dataset. Univariate and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to determine independent risk factors associated with anastomotic leakage. A nomogram was constructed to predict anastomotic leakage. Data containing 611 patients were prospectively collected as a test dataset. The performance of the nomogram was evaluated by using a bootstrapped-concordance index and calibration plots.ResultsThe rate of clinical anastomotic leakage was 9.3% in the training dataset. Multivariate analysis identifies the following variables as independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage: gender (male) (odds ratio (OR) = 2.286), distance of tumor to anal verge (OR = 0.791), tumor size (OR = 1.175), operating time (OR = 1.009), diabetes mellitus (OR = 1.704), laparoscopic surgery (OR = 0.445), anastomotic bleeding (OR = 13.46), and diverting stoma (OR = 0.386). We created a nomogram with high discriminative ability (concordance index, 0.722). The area under the curve value, which evaluated the predictive performance of external validation, was 0.723.ConclusionsA protective diverting stoma and laparoscopic surgery significantly decrease the risk of anastomotic leakage. Our nomogram was a useful tool for precise prediction of anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer.

Efficacy of transanal tube placement after anterior resection for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BackgroundAnastomotic leakage is a serious complication that can occur after anterior resection of the rectum. There is a question regarding whether the placement of a transanal tube can decrease the rate of anastomotic leakage. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of transanal tube placement after anterior resection.MethodsWe searched three major databases (PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library) up until January 2015 for studies evaluating the benefit of transanal tubes after anterior resection for rectal cancer. The primary outcome measure was the rate of clinical anastomotic leakage. Secondary outcome was the rate of reoperation. Pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were obtained using random effects models.ResultsOne randomized controlled trial and three observational studies involving 909 patients met inclusion criteria. Clinical anastomotic leakage occurred in 3.49 % (14 of 401) of patients with transanal tubes and 12.01 % (61 of 508) of patients without transanal tubes. Meta-analysis of the studies showed a lower risk of anastomotic leakage (RR, 0.32; 95 % CI 0.18–0.58) and reoperation related to leakage (RR, 0.19; 95 % CI 0.08–0.46) when the transanal tube was placed.ConclusionsWhile studies are few and mostly observational, the data to date indicate that placement of a transanal tube decreases the rate of clinical anastomotic leakage and reoperation related to leakage. More studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Value of protective stoma in rectal cancer surgery

Anastomotic leakage is the most serious surgical complication in rectal surgery. The aim of this study was to find out whether a protective stoma was capable of lowering the rate of clinical anastomotic leakage and to evaluate the rate of anastomotic leakages requiring resurgery. A retrospective study included a sample of 149 consecutive patients with rectal cancer who had undergone elective rectal resection with primary anastomosis. After total mesorectal excision, the anastomosis was created using either the single stapling or double stapling anastomotic technique. Anastomotic integrity was verified by transanal air insufflations with the pelvis filled with saline. A protective covering colostomy was added in selected cases and according to the surgeon's preference. A protective stoma was created in 31% of patients. Clinical anastomotic leakage occurred in 6.7% of patients (10/149). Anastomotic leakage occurred in 8.5% of the patients with a protective stoma (4/47) and in 5.9% of those without a protective stoma (6/102), which was not statistically significant. Surgery lasted significantly longer when a stoma had to be created than in case when it was not needed (p=0.024). The overall rate of resurgery due to postoperative surgical complications was 5.3% and in three cases this happened because of anastomotic leakage. All patients with a protective stoma and clinical anastomotic leakage were treated conservatively, compared to 50% of patients without a protective stoma who suffered anastomotic leakage and had to be operated. A stoma cannot prevent but it can surely minimize surgical complications related to anastomotic leakage and it does reduce the rate of resurgery.

Laparoscopic Colorectal Cancer Resection in High-Volume Surgical Centers: Long-Term Outcomes from the LAPCOLON Group Trial.

Strong evidence has confirmed the benefit of laparoscopy in colorectal cancer resection but remains a challenging procedure. It is not clear that such promising results in selected patients translate into a favorable risk-benefit balance in real practice. We conducted a multicenter national observational registry to assess operative and oncologic long-term outcomes following laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection. All patients with laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection between 2001 and 2004 were included. Data were extracted from the prospective Italian national database of 10 high-volume centers (≥40 colorectal cancer laparoscopic resections per year). Surgical technique and follow-up were standardized. Survivals were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method. We reported 1832 patients with colon (58.5%) and rectal cancer (41.5%). TNM stage was 0-I-II in 1044 patients (57%) and III-IV in 788 patients (43%). Surgery included a totally laparoscopic procedure in 1820 patients (99.3%). Conversion was 10.5%. Postoperative morbidity and 30-day mortality rates were 17 and 1.2%, respectively. Clinical anastomotic leakage rate was 8.3% (n=152). R0 resection was 95%. With a median follow-up of 54.2 months, cancer recurrence rate was 13.3%. At 5 years, cancer-free survival was 86.7%. Upon multivariate analysis, age (P=0.001) and TNM stage (P<0.001) were associated with cancer-free survival. Predictive factors of cancer recurrence were gender (P=0.029) and TNM stage (P<0.001). In high-volume centers and non-selective patients, laparoscopic colorectal resection for cancer achieves good operative results with satisfactory long-term oncologic results. Even in the laparoscopy era, age, gender, and TNM stage remain the most powerful predictor of oncologic outcomes.

Role of fecal diversion in colorectal anastomotic failure: Where are we now?

The value of a diverting ostomy after low colorectal anastomosis continues to be a controversial subject in the literature. Sphincter salvage surgery has increased in recent years, and the role of prophylactic diversion continues to evolve. The authors sought to provide an evidence-based review of current recommendations for use of a diverting stoma in the setting of a low pelvic anastomosis. A search of MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane database was performed. Abstracts were evaluated for relevance. Selected articles were then reviewed in detail, including references. Recommendations were then drafted based on evidence and conclusions in the selected articles. A total of 100 articles were identified, of which 54 were included for complete analysis, including 2 meta-analyses. A diverting ostomy lowers clinical anastomotic leak rate and need for re-operation as a consequence of a leak by 30–70%. Small non-randomized studies have suggested that a diverting ostomy can be selectively omitted in some low-risk patients with good results. The morbidity associated with diverting ostomies is not inconsequential and includes risk for readmission and increased odds of renal failure. This risk must be balanced against that of anastomotic leak. The current data suggests that a diverting ostomy does not prevent anastomotic leak but can significantly limit the clinical sequelae and need for re-operation. The creation of a diverting stoma is not without morbidity and as such should be selectively performed in high-risk colorectal anastomosis that meets specific criteria.

Early Outcomes for Rectal Cancer Surgery in the Republic of Ireland Following a National Centralization Program

Following a national audit of rectal cancer management in 2007, a national centralization program in the Republic of Ireland was initiated. In 2010, a prospective evaluation of rectal cancer treatment and early outcomes was conducted. A total of 29 colorectal surgeons in 14 centers prospectively collated data on all patients with rectal cancer who underwent curative surgery in 2010. Data were available on 447 patients who underwent proctectomy with curative intent for rectal cancer in 2010; 23.7% of patients underwent abdominoperineal excision. The median number of lymph nodes identified was 12. The 30-day mortality rate was 1.1%. Compared with 2007, there was a reduction in positive circumferential margin rate (15.8 vs 4.5%, P<0.001), clinical anastomotic leak rate (10.8 vs 4.3%, P=0.002), and postoperative radiotherapy use (17.8 vs 4.0%, P<0.001). Also, 53.9% received preoperative radiotherapy in 2010. Four centers gave statistically more patients (high-administration), and four centers gave fewer patients (low-administration) preoperative radiotherapy for T2/T3 tumors (P<0.05). On multivariate analysis, being treated in a "high-administration center" increased the likelihood (likelihood ratio [LR], 2.9; 95% CI 1.7-4.8; P<0.001) while attending a "low-administration center" (LR, 0.3; 95% CI 0.2-0.5; P<0.001) reduced the likelihood of receiving preoperative radiotherapy for a T2/T3 rectal cancer. Patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery in hospitals following a national centralization initiative received high-quality surgery. Significant heterogeneity exists in radiotherapy administration, and evidence-based guidelines should be developed and implemented.

Single versus double stapling anastomotic technique in rectal cancer surgery

The present study was designed to investigate whether there is a difference in the anastomotic leakage rate (AL) between the single stapling (CSA) and double stapling (DSA) anastomosis techniques. One hundred consecutive rectal cancer patients who underwent rectal resection with primary anastomosis were enrolled in this study. The overall rate of clinical anastomotic leakage in both groups was 7 % (7/100); 6 % (3/50) in the CSA group and 8 % (4/50) in the DSA group. The anastomotic technique did not have any significant influence on the rate of AL. All AL were seen in low anastomoses (7 cm and below). The rate of AL in patients with a diverting stoma (13 %, 3/23) was not significantly different from that of the patients without (5.2 %, 4/77) (p = 0.195). The mean length of the operation was significantly shorter in the DSA group compared to the CSA group, at 127 and 141 min, respectively (p = 0.005). There were significantly higher rates of AL in patients receiving preoperative long course radiotherapy (15.4 %, 6/39) compared with those who did not receive radiotherapy (1.63 %, 1/61) (p = 0.014). The CSA and DSA techniques are equally safe for the creation of a rectal anastomosis, without any significant difference in the AL rate. However, we recommend using the DSA technique because it has other definite advantages. In cases of neoadjuvant treatment and a low anastomosis, proximal diversion is recommended.

Risk adjusted benchmarking of clinical anastomotic leakage rate after total mesorectal excision in the context of an improvement project

Anastomotic leakage (AL) after total mesorectal excision (TME) is a major adverse event. This study evaluates variability in AL between centres participating on a voluntary basis in PROCARE, a Belgian improvement project, and how further improvement of the AL rate might be achieved. Between January 2006 and March 2011, detailed data on 1815 patients (mean age 65.5 years, 63% male) who underwent elective TME with colo-anal reconstruction for rectal cancer were registered by 48 centres. Variability in early clinical AL rate was analysed before and after adjustment for gender, age > 60 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists score of 3 or more and body mass index > 25 kg/m(2). The overall AL rate was 6.7% (95% CI 5.6%-7.9%). Early AL required reoperation in 86.8% of patients. It increased length of hospital stay from 14.7 days to 32.4 days and in-hospital mortality from 1.1% to 4.8%. Statistically significant variability in AL rate between centres was not observed, either before or after risk adjustment. Nonetheless, further improvement may be achievable in some centres by targeting the adjusted performance of better performing centres. These centres used neoadjuvant treatment, rectal irrigation, mobilization of the splenic flexure, resection of the sigmoid colon, side-to-end colo-anastomosis with or without pouch and defunctioning stoma at primary surgery in a significantly higher proportion of patients than less well performing centres. The overall AL rate was low but needs to be interpreted with caution because of incomplete registration. Further improvement might be achieved by adopting the approach of better performing centres.

Defunctioning Stoma and Anastomotic Leak Rate after Total Mesorectal Excision with Coloanal Anastomosis in the Context of PROCARE

Background : Anastomotic leakage (AL) after total mesorectal excision is a major adverse event. Construction of a defunctioning stoma (DS) reduces the morbidity of AL. This study aims to illustrate the AL rate and its related morbidity with and without primary stoma formation in the context of a Belgian project, PROCARE. Methods : Between January 2006 and March 2011, 1912 patients who underwent elective TME with colo-anal anastomosis for invasive rectal adenocarcinoma up to 15 cm above the anal verge were registered. A primary DS was constructed in 1183 patients (62%). Early clinical AL rate, AL-related re-operation rate, length of stay (LoS), inhospital mortality were analysed.Results : In patients without leak, mortality was 1.1% and the mean LoS was 14.7 days. AL occurred in 6.5%, varying from 0%-25% between participating centres. In patients with AL, mortality was 4.8% (p < 0.001). In the presence of a primary DS, AL rate was 4.3%, requiring re-operation under narcosis in 78% with no mortality, resulting in a mean LoS of 30.4 days. In the absence of a primary DS, AL rate was 10.2%, requiring re-operation under narcosis in 93% with a mortality of 8.1% and a mean LoS of 33.4 days. Analysis per centre showed a weak relation between percentage of DS construction and AL rate.Conclusion : Construction of a primary DS significantly reduced the incidence of early AL, re-operation rate, and mortality. Although technical aspects of colo-anal anastomosis are of paramount importance, construction of a DS at primary surgery has to be considered by those teams with high early AL rate and/or high AL related mortality.

Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a single-centre experience of 120 cases

For colorectal surgeons, laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery poses a new challenge. The defence of the questionable oncological safety tempered by the impracticality of the long learning curve is rapidly fading. As a unit specialising in minimally invasive surgery, we have routinely undertaken rectal cancer surgery laparoscopically since 2005. Patients undergoing surgery for rectal cancer between June 2005 and February 2010 were retrospectively reviewed from a prospectively maintained colorectal cancer database. One hundred and thirty patients underwent surgery for rectal cancer during the study period. One hundred and twenty patients had a laparoscopic resection, six were converted to open (conversion rate 5%) and 10 had a planned primary open procedure. Fifty four were low rectal tumours and 76 were upper rectal tumours. One hundred and thirteen patients had an anterior resection (87%), 17 patients an abdomino-perineal resection (13%) and 62 of the 130 patients (47.6%) had neoadjuvant radiotherapy. The median lymph node retrieval rate was 12 (9-14), five patients (3.8%) had a positive circumferential margin and the clinical anastomotic leak rate was 3.8% (n = 5 patients). There was no significant difference in the stated parameters for neoadjuvant versus non-neoadjuvant patients and for upper versus lower rectal tumours. Ninety three percent of mesorectal excision specimens were complete on pathological assessment. During the study period, 92% of rectal cancers underwent a laparoscopic resection with low rates of morbidity and acceptable short-term oncological outcomes. This data supports the view that laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer can be safely delivered in mid-volume centres by surgeons who have completed the learning curve for laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

T4 colorectal cancer: is laparoscopic resection contraindicated?

T4 colorectal cancer remains a contraindication for laparoscopy. It is argued that the risk of incomplete resection could be higher than in open surgery. Furthermore, difficulty in dissection could lead to a very high rate of conversion. There is little information on this. The study aimed at assessing feasibility and operative and oncologic results of laparoscopic resection for T4 colorectal cancer. Between 2006 and 2009, 39 patients with colorectal cancer with suspected involvement of another organ (T4) on computed tomography scanning and/or magnetic resonance imaging were included. The cancers were in the right colon (n = 18), left colon (n =9) and rectum (n = 12). The distribution of possible organ involvement was abdominal or pelvic side-wall (n = 21), urinary bladder (n = 4), small bowel or colon (n = 6), vagina and ovary (n = 3), prostate or seminal vesicles (n = 3) and duodenum (n = 2). The overall conversion rate was 18%. Postoperative mortality and morbidity were 2.5 and 33%, respectively. Clinical anastomotic leakage rate was 15% (n = 6). Abdominal reoperation was required in three (7%) patients. Pathological invasion to other organs (pT4) was confirmed in 30 (77%) patients. The R1 resection rate was 13% (4 of 30). After a median follow up of 19 months (range 1.5-45 months), the overall survival and disease-free survival rates were 97 and 89%, respectively. This study suggests that laparoscopic surgery is feasible for colorectal T4 cancer resection. Laparoscopy cannot therefore be considered an absolute contraindication for T4 colorectal cancer.

Morbidity after Closure of a Defunctioning Loop Ileostomy

Purpose : A low pelvic anastomosis is associated with a substantial risk of leakage. A defunctioning stoma (DS) reduces the clinical anastomotic leak rate and the need for re-operation, but stoma closure has its own risk of morbidity and mortality. This study aims to audit morbidity and mortality after loop ileostomy (LI) closure. Patients and methods : The medical records of 197 consecutive patients who underwent closure of a defunctioning LI between August 2003 and July 2008 were reviewed. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were recorded. Results : Transverse closure of the enterotomy was performed in 149 patients (75.6%), segmental enterectomy with hand-sewn end-to-end anastomosis in 26 (13.2%) and stapled side-to-side anastomosis in 22 (11.2%). Overall postoperative morbidity and mortality were 32.0% and 0.5%, respectively. The surgical complication rate was 30.5%, including prolonged ileus (11.2%), small bowel obstruction (4.1%), anastomotic leak (3.0%) and wound infection (4.6%). Surgical complications were more frequent in male patients (p = 0.005). Prolonged ileus was more frequent when the interval to stoma reversal exceeded 12 weeks (14.3% versus 3.5%; p = 0.02). The incidence of complications was not influenced by the closure technique. Nineteen patients (9.6%) required re-operation for anastomotic leak (n = 8), wound infection (n = 1), small bowel obstruction (n = 3) and incisional herniation (n = 7).Conclusion : LI closure is associated with clinically relevant morbidity and mortality. This association should be taken into account in the context of a routine DS policy and should be part of the patient’s information.

Use of severity classification systems in the surgical decision-making process in emergency laparotomy for perforated diverticulitis

Hartman's procedure (HP) or primary anastomosis (PA) are the two surgical techniques used in patients undergoing emergency colectomy for perforated diverticulitis. There are no objective criteria to guide the surgeon's choice of procedure. This study assesses whether classification and scoring systems can be used in the decision-making process. One hundred eleven patients undergoing emergency laparotomy for perforated diverticulitis were analyzed. Logistic regression and interaction models were used to determine the predictive value in the two settings. Sixty five patients underwent HP and 46 patients underwent PA. Patients with HP had significantly higher scores, median age, and were more often on immunosuppressive medication. Mortality and surgical morbidity did not differ between the groups. The clinical anastomotic leak rate was 28.3% in the PA group. In the univariate logistic regression for in-hospital death, all scores showed a significant influence. The multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that only Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and American Society of Anesthesiologists score had a significant influence on mortality. Each score was analyzed for its predictive value regarding mortality and morbidity with respect to type of operative procedure. Only CCI revealed a trend towards statistical significance. The risk of death increases with increasing CCI when PA is performed compared to HP. None of the tested scores can be used to help the surgeon decide whether a PA or HP is appropriate in a specific patient. Comorbidity, represented as CCI in this study, might be more important than the locoregional situation.

Meta-analysis of defunctioning stomas in low anterior resection for rectal cancer

A defunctioning stoma is frequently created to minimize the impact of any subsequent anastomotic leak after a low rectal anastomosis. This review evaluates the need for routine stoma formation. A meta-analysis was performed of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies with an interventional group evaluating the need for a defunctioning stoma after low anterior resection for rectal cancer. Primary outcomes analysed included clinical anastomotic leak rate, reoperation rate and mortality related to leak. Four RCTs and 21 non-randomized studies, with 11,429 patients in total, were analysed. Meta-analysis of the RCTs showed a lower clinical anastomotic leak rate (risk ratio (RR) 0.39 (95 per cent c.i. 0.23 to 0.66); P < 0.001) and a lower reoperation rate (RR 0.29 (0.16 to 0.53); P < 0.001) in the stoma group. Meta-analysis of the non-randomized studies showed a lower clinical anastomotic leak rate (RR 0.74 (0.67 to 0.83); P < 0.001), lower reoperation rate (RR 0.28 (0.23 to 0.35); P < 0.001) and lower mortality rate (RR 0.42 (0.28 to 0.61); P < 0.001) in the stoma group. A defunctioning stoma decreases clinical anastomotic leak rate and reoperation rate. It is recommended after low anterior resection for rectal cancer.

Not Available

A prospective audit of all patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery with the intention of primary colonic left-sided intracorporeal stapled anastomosis to identify the clinical anastomotic leak rate on an intention to treat basis. All patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery resulting in left-sided stapled anastomosis were included. All operations were conducted by the same surgical team with the same pre-operative preparation and surgical technique. The factors analysed for this audit were patient demographics (age and sex), indication for operation, procedure performed, height of anastomosis, leak rate and the outcome, inpatient stay, mortality, rate of defunctioning stomas, and rate of conversion to open procedure. Eighty-four patients (49 females, 35 males; median age 70 years, range 19-89 years) underwent colonic procedures with left-sided intracorporeal stapled anastomosis. An intra-operative air leak was evident in one patient, whose anastomosis was oversewn intracorporeally and defunctioned by ileostomy. There were only two clinically evident anastomotic leaks post-operatively (2.9%). One patient died of overwhelming sepsis within 48h of re-operation: Seven patients (8.3%) had a primary defunctioning stoma, with two further stomas formed due to anastomotic leakage. Five cases (6%) were converted to open surgery. The median post-operative stay was six days, range 2-23. Thirty-day mortality was 50% in the leak group and 0% in the non-leak group. We believe that this study demonstrates that the anastomotic leak rate from intra-corporeal laparoscopic anastomosis is no greater than for open surgery or laparoscopic surgery with extra-corporeal anastomosis.

Risk Factors for Anastomotic Leakage after Laparoscopic Rectal Resection in Rectal Cancer: Does Laparoscopic Rectal Resection Increase Anastomotic Leakage Rate?

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the risk factors for clinical anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer. Methods: From March 2001 and February 2006 in Seoul Veterans’ Hospital, the prospective laparoscopic colorectal resection database identified 101 patients who a had laparoscopic rectal resection with colorectal or coloanal anastomosis. The associations between clinical anastomotic leakage and patient-, tumor-, surgery- and laparoscopic-related variables were studied. Results: The rate of clinical anastomotic leakage was 4 percent (4 of 101). The patient-related variable significantly associated with clinical anastomotic leakage was preoperative radiotherapy. The surgery-related factor that turned out to be significant was anastomosis situated less than 5 cm from the anal verge. No tumor- or laparoscopic-related variables were significantly associated with clinical anastomotic leakage. Conclusions: A protective ileostomy should be considered after a laparoscopic rectal resection for an rectal cancer for anastomosis situated less than 5 cm from the anal verge, particularly when preoperative radiotherapy is being used.

Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Versus Hyperfractionated Accelerated Radiotherapy in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

Neoadjuvant therapy is increasingly used in resectable locally advanced rectal cancer. The exact role of the addition of chemotherapy is not established. We compared neoadjuvant therapy using chemoradiation (CRT) or hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy (HART). Clinical, pathological, and survival data were obtained from patients with resectable stage II or III rectal cancer within 7 cm from the anal verge. A group of 50 patients was treated with a preoperative dose of 41.6 Gy of radiotherapy (RT) in two daily fractions of 1.6 Gy over 13 days immediately followed by surgery (HART). A second group of 96 patients received 45 Gy of conventionally fractionated RT in 25 daily fractions of 1.8 Gy combined with 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy followed by surgery within 4 to 6 weeks (CRT). Both groups were compared in terms of morbidity, pathological downstaging, local recurrence, and survival. Both groups were comparable in terms of preoperative clinicopathological variables. The mean distance from the anal verge was 5.8 cm (HART) versus 4.9 cm (CRT). Sphincter preservation was possible in 74% (HART) versus 83.5% (CRT) of patients (P = .013). The clinical anastomotic leak rate was 2% (HART) versus 2.2% (CRT). Pathological complete response was observed in 4% (HART) versus 18% (CRT) of the resected specimens (P = .002). A pelvic recurrence developed in 6% (HART) versus 4.4% (CRT) of patients (P = .98). Overall 5-year survival was 58% (HART) versus 66% (CRT) (P = .19); disease-free 5-year survival was 51% (HART) versus 62% (CRT) (P = .037). Compared with preoperative HART followed by immediate surgery, preoperative CRT followed by a 6-week waiting period enhances pathological response and increases sphincter preservation rate. This could be explained by the addition of chemotherapy or the longer interval between neoadjuvant therapy and surgery. No statistically significant difference was observed in local control or overall survival.