Sphincter-saving Surgery For Rectal Cancer Research Articles

Low anterior resection syndrome.

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is the distressful defecatory functional problem after sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. Although the symptoms of fecal urgency, frequency, and incontinence may develop in most of the patients after surgery, there is no definitive treatments for LARS. Multifactorial etiologies and various risk factors have been identified, but the reduction of storage capacity in the rectum is one of the main reasons for LARS. Anal sphincter muscle or nerve damage during rectoanal resection or anastomosis construction, and intersphincteric resection for low-lying tumors or hand-sewing anastomosis, are the absolute risk factors for LARS. Preoperative radiotherapy, postoperative complications, such as anastomosis leakage, or longer duration of stoma, are also risk factors. The severity of LARS can be confirmed using the LARS score questionnaire. The questionnaire has been translated to numerous language versions including Korean and have been validated. Diverse empirical treatments, such as loperamide, fiber, probiotics, or enema, have been tried, but the safety and efficacy have not been verified yet. The 5-Hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) receptor antagonist, ramosetron, used for diarrhea-dominant irritable bowel syndrome, is one potential drug for relieving the symptoms of major LARS. A randomized-controlled trial suggested the use of ramosetron could be safe and efficacious for patients who have major LARS after sphincter-saving rectal cancer surgery. Novel techniques or drugs for relieving the symptoms of LARS should be developed more and further studies are necessary.

Comparison of oncological outcomes between low anterior resection and abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer: A retrospective cohort study using a multicenter database in Japan

BackgroundIt remains controversial whether the abdominoperineal resection (APR) procedure itself has a negative impact on prognosis compared with sphincter-saving surgery (SSS). The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the operation type affects the prognostic outcome in rectal cancer using a multicenter database in Japan. MethodsThe study involved 2533 patients who underwent APR or SSS and were registered in the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum database, which includes data from 74 centers, between 2003 and 2007. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS). The secondary endpoints were local recurrence rate (LRR) and pathological radial margin (pRM) status. ResultsMultivariate analysis identified pathological tumor depth, lymph node status, and pRM status to be associated with oncological outcomes (OS, RFS, LRR). Although the oncological outcomes were worse after APR than after SSS in univariate analysis, there was no significant difference in OS (hazard ratio 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85–1.37) or RFS (hazard ratio 1.06; 95% CI 0.87–1.30) between APR and SSS. There was also no significant difference in LRR (odds ratio 1.11, 95% CI 0.70–1.77). Multivariate analysis showed that operation type was associated with positive pRM (odds ratio 3.13, 95% CI 0.18–0.56). ConclusionsThere was no significant difference in oncological outcomes between APR and SSS for rectal cancer. The risk of positive pRM was higher for APR and performing radial margin-negative surgery is an important factor in improving the oncological outcomes of APR.

Experiences of Losing Bowel Control After Lower Anterior Resection With Sphincter Saving Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Qualitative Study.

Rectal cancer patients who have undergone lower anterior resection with sphincter-saving surgery often experience loss of bowel control. We currently do not have suitable treatment regimens for such patients. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of losing bowel control in patients who have undergone lower anterior resection with sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer in Taiwan. A descriptive phenomenological study design was adopted. Purposive sampling and one-on-one semistructured interviews were conducted for data collection. Narratives were analyzed using Colaizzi's method. Data saturation was achieved after interviewing 12 patients (8 men, 4 women) whose average age was 61 years. Three themes and 11 subthemes emerged: physical problems (pain from broken perianal skin, insomnia, decreased physical strength, and body weight loss), adverse psychological reactions (worries, helplessness, and social isolation), and the use of coping strategies (avoidance of inappropriate foods to reduce bowel irritation and peristalsis, reduction of food intake, and use of antidiarrheal drugs and perianal skincare products). The study supports the importance of having a good understanding of patient experiences by healthcare professionals to provide more effective healthcare. Furthermore, awareness of the cultural issue of social isolation was deemed important for providing individualized healthcare. Education, counseling, and psychological support can enhance patients' abilities to use coping strategies to overcome the physical and mental challenges of bowel symptoms. For example, appropriate diet-related education programs must be developed to reduce the trial-and-error learning process commonly adopted by patients to identify inappropriate foods.

Clinical Outcomes of Ileostomy Closure before Adjuvant Chemotherapy after Rectal Cancer Surgery: An Observational Study from a Chinese Center.

Background The optimal timing of temporary ileostomy closure with respect to the time of adjuvant chemotherapy following sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer remains unclear. The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical and oncological outcomes of ileostomy closure before, during, and after adjuvant chemotherapy following curative rectal cancer resection. Methods Patients diagnosed with rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent low anterior resection and temporary loop ileostomy during May 2015 and September 2019 were retrospectively evaluated. Patients undergoing ileostomy closure before adjuvant chemotherapy (Group I) were compared to patients undergoing closure during (Group II) and after (Group III) adjuvant chemotherapy. Results A total of 225 patients were evaluated for eligibility, and 132 were finally selected and divided into 3 groups (24 in Group I, 53 in Group II, and 55 in Group III). No significant differences were observed in operative time, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, total adjuvant chemotherapy cycles, and low anterior resection syndrome scores among the three groups. There was no significant difference in disease-free survival (p = 0.834) and overall survival (p = 0.462) between the three groups. Conclusion Temporary ileostomy closure before adjuvant chemotherapy following curative rectal cancer resection can achieve a clinical and oncological safety level equal to stoma closure during or after chemotherapy in selected patients.

Anterior resection syndrome: a randomized clinical trial of a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist (ramosetron) in male patients with rectal cancer.

No effective treatment exists for anterior resection syndrome (ARS) following sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. This RCT assessed the safety and efficacy of a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, ramosetron, for ARS. A single-centre, randomized, controlled, open-label, parallel group trial was conducted. Male patients with ARS 1 month after rectal cancer surgery or ileostomy reversal were enrolled and randomly assigned (1 : 1) to 5 μg of ramosetron (Irribow®) daily or conservative treatment for 4 weeks. Low ARS (LARS) score was calculated after randomization and 4 weeks after treatment. The study was designed as a superiority test with a primary endpoint of the proportion of patients with major LARS between the groups. Primary outcome analysis was based on the modified intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed by monitoring adverse events during the study. : A total of 100 patients were randomized to the ramosetron (49 patients) or conservative treatment group (51 patients). Two patients were excluded, and 48 and 50 patients were analysed in the ramosetron and control groups, respectively. The proportion of major LARS after 4 weeks was 58 per cent (28 of 48 patients) in the ramosetron group versus 82 per cent (41 of 50 patients) in the control group, with a difference of 23.7 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 5.58 to 39.98, P = 0.011). There were minor adverse events in five patients, which were hard stool, frequent stool or anal pain. These were not different between the two groups. There were no serious adverse events. : Ramosetron could be safe and feasible for male patients with ARS. NCT02869984 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Monitoring of C-reactive protein decreases length of stay after laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for cancer: a prospective case-matched study in 236 patients.

The aim of this study was to evaluate a discharge strategy driven by monitoring of C-reactive protein (CRP) in a homogeneous group of patients undergoing laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer (TME). One hundred and thirteen patients who underwent a TME had CRP monitoring on postoperative day (POD) 5. Patients were discharged on POD 6 if the CRP level was ≤100mg/L. Patients were matched (according to age, gender, body mass index, neoadjuvant pelvic irradiation and type of anastomosis) to 123 control patients who underwent the same operation with the same postoperative care but without CRP monitoring. Postoperative 3-month overall [CRP group 62/113 (55%) vs controls 73/123 (59%); p=0.487] and severe (i.e. Clavien-Dindo grade 3 and above) [CRP group 17/113 (15%) vs controls 19/123 (15%); p=0.931] morbidity rates were similar between groups. Mean length of hospital stay (LHS) was significantly shorter in the CRP group (CRP group 9.7±14days vs controls 11.6±7days; p<0.001). Discharge occurred on POD 6 in 55/113 (49%) patients from the CRP group vs 7/123 (6%) from the control group (p<0.001). The rehospitalization rate [CRP group 19/113 (17%) vs controls 13/123 (11%); p=0.177] was similar between groups. The CRP level on POD 5 had a diagnostic property to assess an anastomotic leakage with an area under the curve of 0.81. In patients who underwent TME, a discharge strategy based on CRP monitoring significantly decreased LHS without increasing morbidity, mortality or rehospitalization rates.

Does a transanal drainage tube reduce anastomotic leakage? A matched cohort study in 144 patients undergoing laparoscopic sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer.

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of transanal drainage (TD) tube (a Foley catheter) on the anastomotic leak (AL) rate after laparoscopic sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer (SSS). A prospective study was conducted on, all consecutive patients undergoing SSS at our institution between June 2017 and October 2018. All patients had TD for at least 4days after surgery and constituted the TD group. The patients from TD group were matched to patients who underwent SSS without TD between January 2015 and May 2017 (no-TD group) according to age, sex, body mass index, neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy, mesorectal excision (total vs partial), and type of anastomosis (stapled vs hand sewn and side-to-end versus end-to-end). The primary endpoint was the AL rate, including both clinical and radiological AL. A total of 258 patients were included. Eighty-nine patients (34%) had a TD tube. After matching, 72 patients were included in each group. Mean TD duration was 3.9 [2.0-5.9]days. No significant differences between groups were observed in the rates of overall AL: 25/72 (35%) (TD) vs 17/72 (22%) (no-TD), (p = 0.14), clinical AL: 13/72 (18%) (TD) vs 7/72 (10%) (no-TD), (p = 0.23), and asymptomatic radiological AL: 12/72 (17%) (TD) vs 9/72 (13%) (no-TD), (p = 0.64). Multivariate analysis showed that male sex (OR 2.92, 95% CI [1.04-8.24]) and preoperative radiochemotherapy (OR 5.66, 95% CI [1.36-23.53]) were associated with AL. Our case-matched study suggested that a TD tube does not reduce the AL rate after laparoscopic sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer.

Clinical Outcomes of Ileostomy Closure According to Timing During Adjuvant Chemotherapy After Rectal Cancer Surgery.

PurposeNo guidelines exist detailing when to implement a temporary ileostomy closure in the setting of adjuvant chemotherapy following sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and oncological outcomes of ileostomy closure during adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with curative resection of rectal cancer.MethodsThis retrospective study investigated 220 patients with rectal cancer undergoing sphincter-saving surgery with protective loop ileostomy from January 2007 to August 2016. Patients were divided into 2 groups: group 1 (n = 161) who underwent stoma closure during adjuvant chemotherapy and group 2 (n = 59) who underwent stoma closure after adjuvant chemotherapy.ResultsNo significant differences were observed in operative time, blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, or postoperative complications in ileostomy closure between the 2 groups. No difference in overall survival (P = 0.959) or disease-free survival (P = 0.114) was observed between the 2 groups.ConclusionIleostomy closure during adjuvant chemotherapy was clinically safe, and interruption of chemotherapy due to ileostomy closure did not change oncologic outcomes.

Hospital stay for temporary stoma closure is shortened by C-reactive protein monitoring: a prospective case-matched study.

C-reactive protein (CRP) has been suggested as a satisfactory early marker of postoperative complications after colorectal surgery. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of a CRP monitoring-driven discharge strategy, after stoma reversal following laparoscopic sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. Eighty-eight patients who had stoma reversal between June 2016 and April 2018 had CRP serum level monitoring on postoperative day (POD) 3 and, if necessary, on POD5. Patients were discharged on POD4 if the CRP level was < 100 mg/L. Patients were matched [according to age, gender, body mass index, neoadjuvant pelvic irradiation, type of anastomosis (stapled or manual), and adjuvant chemotherapy] to 109 identical control patients who had stoma reversal between 2012 and 2016 with the same postoperative care but without CRP monitoring. Postoperative 30-day overall morbidity [CRP group: 12/88 (14%) vs controls: 11/109, (10%), p = 0.441] and severe morbidity rates (i.e. Dindo 3-4) [CRP group: 2/88 (2%) vs controls: 2/109 (2%), p = 0.838] were similar between groups. Mean length of stay was significantly shorter in the CRP group (CRP group: 4.6 ± 1.3 vs controls: 5.8 ± 1.8 days; p < 0.001). Discharge occurred before POD5 in 59/88 (67%) CRP patients vs 15/109 (14%) controls (p < 0.001). The unplanned rehospitalization rate [CRP group: 6/88 (7%) vs controls: 4/109 (4%), p = 0.347] was similar between groups. In patients having temporary stoma closure after laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer, postoperative CRP monitoring is associated with a significant shortening of hospital stay without increasing morbidity or rehospitalization rates.

Risk factors for prolonged postoperative ileus after laparoscopic sphincter-saving total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: an analysis of 428 consecutive patients.

Prolonged postoperative ileus (PPOI) is a common complication after colorectal resection but data regarding PPOI risk factors after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery is lacking. This study aimed to identify risk factors for PPOI after laparoscopic sphincter-saving total mesorectal excision (TME) for cancer. All patients who underwent a laparoscopic sphincter-saving TME for cancer from 2005 to 2014 were identified from our prospective database. PPOI was defined as abdominal distension, nausea, and/or vomiting, requiring a nasogastric tube insertion, during the postoperative period. Among 428 consecutive patients, 65 patients (15%) presented with POI. In multivariate analysis, male gender (Odds Ratio (OR) 2.3 [1.1-4.5]; p=0.026, age >70years (OR: 2.0 [1.1-4.0]; p=0.037)], conversion to open approach (OR 4.9 [1.5-15.4]; p=0.007), and intra-abdominal surgical site infection (OR 3.8 [1.9-7.5]; p<0.001) were identified as independent risk factor for PPOI. PPOI risk was 5% in patients without any risk factor but raised to 11, 28, and 54% in patients with 1, 2, or ≥3 risk factors, respectively (p<0.001). PPOI is observed in 15% of the patients after laparoscopic sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. We identified four independent factors for PPOI in multivariate analysis: male, gender, age >70, conversion to open approach, and intra-abdominal surgical site infection, leading to the construction of a simple and pragmatic predictive score. This score might help the surgeon to assess patient at risk of PPOI.

Persistent Asymptomatic Anastomotic Leakage After Laparoscopic Sphincter-Saving Surgery for Rectal Cancer: Can Diverting Stoma Be Reversed Safely at 6 Months?

Anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery raises the problem of the timing of diverting stoma reversal. The purpose of this study was to assess whether stoma reversal can be safely performed at 6 months after laparoscopic sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer with total mesorectal excision in patients with persistent asymptomatic anastomotic leakage. This was a retrospective analysis of a prospective database. The study was conducted at a tertiary colorectal surgery referral center. All of the patients with anastomotic leakage were treated conservatively after sphincter-saving laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. The main study measure was postoperative morbidity. A total of 110 (26%) of 429 patients who presented with anastomotic leakage and were treated conservatively were diagnosed only on CT scan (60 symptomatic (14%) and 50 asymptomatic (12%)). During follow up, 82 (75%) of 110 anastomotic leakages healed spontaneously after a mean delay of 16 ± 6 weeks (range, 4-30 weeks). Among these patients, 7 (9%) of 82 developed postoperative symptomatic pelvic sepsis after stoma reversal. Among the 28 patients remaining, 3 died during follow-up. The remaining 25 patients (23%) presented with persistent asymptomatic anastomotic leakage with chronic sinus >6 months after rectal surgery. Stoma reversal was performed in 19 asymptomatic patients, but 3 (16%) of 19 developed postoperative symptomatic pelvic sepsis after stoma reversal (3/19 vs 7/82 patients; p = 0.217), requiring a redo surgery with transanal colonic pull-through and delayed coloanal anastomosis (n = 2) or standard coloanal anastomosis (n = 1). Regarding the 6 final patients, abdominal redo surgery was performed because of either symptoms or anastomotic leakage with a large presacral cavity. This study was limited by its small sample size. In the great majority of patients with persistent anastomotic leakage at 6 months after total mesorectal excision, stoma reversal can be safely performed.

Therapeutic Evaluation of Biofeedback Therapy in the Treatment of Anterior Resection Syndrome After Sphincter-Saving Surgery for Rectal Cancer

BackgroundAnterior resection syndrome (ARS) is common after sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. It includes changes in the frequency and urgency of bowel movements and fecal incontinence. The therapeutic efficacy of biofeedback on ARS is unclear. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of biofeedback therapy in patients with ARS after anterior resection for rectal cancer and to investigate the associated factors for therapeutic success. Patients and MethodsThe study was designed as a retrospective review of the data from 61 patients with ARS collected from a prospectively maintained institutional cancer database. Therapeutic efficacy was evaluated using anorectal manometry, the number of bowel movements daily, and fecal incontinence scoring systems (Vaizey and/or Wexner scores). Changes of > 15% in the Vaizey and/or Wexner scores were considered to indicate effectiveness. Stepwise logistic regression models were performed to evaluate whether the associated factors influenced therapeutic efficacy. ResultsThe parameters of anorectal manometry in patients with rectal cancer were significantly lower than those in control group (P < .01). After biofeedback therapy, significant improvements were observed in the incontinence scale scores (P < .001), number of bowel movements (P < .001), and anorectal manometry data (maximum resting pressure, P < .001; maximum squeeze pressure, P = .001; and rectal capacity, P = .015). In contrast, no significant difference in the rectal initial sensation threshold was observed (P = .089). Patients with fecal incontinence as the primary symptom experienced significant improvements in all variables (P < .01), except for the rectal initial sensation threshold (P = .125). Age at surgery, current smoking status, diabetes, treatment cycles, laparoscopic surgery, interval from surgery to biofeedback therapy, and the use of radiation therapy were closely associated with therapeutic success. On multivariate analysis, current smoking status (odds ratio [OR], 0.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.87), number of biofeedback therapy cycles (OR, 0.01; 95% CI, 0.00-0.06), and laparoscopic surgery (OR, 11.53; 95% CI, 1.17-113.61) were factors contributing to biofeedback therapeutic success. ConclusionBiofeedback therapy can improve the anal function of patients after restorative resection for rectal cancer.

When is the best time for temporary stoma closure in laparoscopic sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer? A study of 259 consecutive patients.

There is no consensus regarding the best timing for temporary stoma closure after proctectomy for rectal cancer, especially if the patient requires adjuvant chemotherapy. This study aimed to assess whether the timing of stoma closure could influence postoperative morbidity. Patients with rectal cancer undergoing laparoscopic proctectomy with temporary stoma were included and divided into three groups according to the delay of stoma closure after proctectomy: ≤60 days (Group A), 61-90 days (Group B), and >90 days (Group C). From 2008 to 2013, 259 patients (146 men, median age 61 years) were divided into Groups A (n = 65), B (n = 115), and C (n = 79). At the time of stoma closure, seven (11%) patients received adjuvant chemotherapy in Group A versus 42 (37%) in Group B (p = 0.0002) and 24 (30%) in Group C (p = 0.004), and peristomal hernia was noted in four patients (6%) in Group A versus 14 (12%) in Group B and 21 (27%) in Group C (p < 0.0001). Although overall postoperative morbidity was similar between groups, anastomotic leakage (at the stoma closure site) was noted in one patient in Group A versus zero in Group B versus four in Group C (p = 0.03). Median hospital stay was 5 days in Group A versus 6 in Group B versus 6 in Group C (p = 0.004). Our results suggested that timing of temporary stoma closure can influence postoperative morbidity. Best results were obtained if stoma closure was performed before 90 days, even during adjuvant chemotherapy. There is no benefit in delaying stoma closure after completion of adjuvant chemotherapy.

Low anterior resection combined with a covering stoma in the treatment of rectal cancer reduces the risk of permanent anastomotic failure.

The adoption of the total mesorectum excision technique and circular stapler devices has enabled the performance of ultralow colorectal anastomosis in rectal cancer surgery. However, rupture of the anastomosis still usually leads to a permanent stoma. The aim of this study was to analyze the cumulative failure rate and risk factors associated with reversal of colorectal or coloanal anastomosis after sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer, using standardized surgical regimen with the routine use of covering stoma. Our secondary interest was the feasibilities of redo surgery after failure. This was a retrospective study with 579 consecutive rectal cancer patients operated on at Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland during 2005-2011. Data were collected from patient records. After exclusions, 273 consecutive patients treated with a low anterior resection with a protective stoma were included. In total, 23 out of 271 (8.5 %) of the colorectal/coloanal anastomoses were converted to a permanent stoma. In five patients (1.8 %), the covering stoma was not closed. The permanent stoma rate was thus 28 out of 271 (10.3 %). The risk factors associated with failure were the tumor distance from the anal verge (p = 0.03), coloanal anastomosis (p = 0.003), early anastomotic complication (p < 0.001), anastomotic fistula (p < 0.001), anal incontinence (p = 0.05), and local recurrence (p < 0.001). Our standardized surgical regimen with a covering stoma in low anterior resection for rectal cancer resulted in a minor anastomosis failure rate and a low risk of permanent stoma.

Biofeedback Therapy Before Ileostomy Closure in Patients Undergoing Sphincter-Saving Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Pilot Study.

PurposeThis study prospectively investigated the effects of biofeedback therapy on objective anorectal function and subjective bowel function in patients after sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer.MethodsSixteen patients who underwent an ileostomy were randomized into two groups, one receiving conservative management with the Kegel maneuver and the other receiving active biofeedback before ileostomy closure. Among them, 12 patients (mean age, 57.5 years; range, 38 to 69 years; 6 patients in each group) completed the study. Conservative management included lifestyle modifications, Kegel exercises, and medication. Patients were evaluated at baseline and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after ileostomy closure by using anal manometry, modified Wexner Incontinence Scores (WISs), and fecal incontinence quality of life (FI-QoL) scores.ResultsBefore the ileostomy closure, the groups did not differ in baseline clinical characteristics or resting manometric parameters. After 12 months of follow-up, the biofeedback group demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in the mean maximum squeezing pressure (from 146.3 to 178.9, P = 0.002). However, no beneficial effect on the WIS was noted for biofeedback compared to conservative management alone. Overall, the FI-QoL scores were increased significantly in both groups after ileostomy closure (P = 0.006), but did not differ significantly between the two groups.ConclusionAlthough the biofeedback therapy group demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in the maximum squeezing pressure, significant improvements in the WISs and the FI-QoL scores over time were noted in both groups. The study was terminated early because no therapeutic benefit of biofeedback had been demonstrated.

Patients’ bowel symptom experiences and self‐care strategies following sphincter‐saving surgery for rectal cancer

To investigate patients' bowel symptom experiences and self-care strategies following sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer and the relationship between bowel symptom experiences and the self-care strategies used. Earlier diagnosis of rectal cancer allows for less invasive surgical treatments such as sphincter-saving procedures to be performed. Although a permanent stoma is generally not required, patients experience changes in bowel function following this surgery. However, limited research exists on patients' bowel symptom experiences and the self-care strategies used to manage symptoms following sphincter-saving surgery of rectal cancer. Quantitative descriptive correlational. A convenience sample of 143 patients aged 30 to over 70years was used. Data were collected (April 2010-December 2010) using the Illness Perception Questionnaires, the Difficulties of Life Scale and a researcher developed Self-care Strategy Measure. The research was underpinned by the Symptom Management Theory. Relating to the four most effective self-care strategies used respondents reporting more bowel symptom were more likely to use the self-care strategy proximity/knowing the location of a toilet at all times. Females, respondents with high timeline cyclical scores and respondents with high physiological responses scores were more likely to use protective clothing. Respondents reporting more bowel symptom and with high social responses scores were more likely to use bowel medication. Females were more likely to wear incontinence pads. This research provides insights into the daily bowel symptom experiences of patients following sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. It demonstrates the range of self-care strategies that individuals use to manage their bowel symptoms and the self-care-strategies that were most effective for them. Patients should be encouraged to report on-going bowel problems following sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. Supportive care for patients should be comprehensive and tailored to meet individual needs.

Characteristics and Risk Factors Associated with Permanent Stomas After Sphincter‐Saving Resection for Rectal Cancer

The aim of the present study was to identify the risk factors and patient characteristics associated with permanent stomas after sphincter-saving resection for rectal cancer. Between 2000 and 2007, 2,362 patients underwent sphincter-saving surgery [low anterior resection or ultra-low anterior resection (uLAR)] for rectal cancer. These patients were divided into two groups: 71 patients with permanent stomas and 2,291 patients without permanent stomas after rectal cancer surgery. Of the 71 permanent stomas (3 % of the patients), 34 (48 %) were ileostomies, 11 (15 %) were loop colostomies, 10 (14 %) were treated by Hartmann's operation, and 16 (23 %) were treated by abdominoperineal resection. Diverting stomas were created in 364 patients; 3 % (n = 11) of them could not be reversed due to anastomosis-related complications. Permanent stomas were constructed at a median of 20 months after sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. The main causes of permanent stomas were local recurrence (n = 27), anastomotic leakage (n = 12), fistula (n = 9), and anastomosis site stricture (n = 7). The main causes of early permanent stomas (<1 year) were anastomosis-related complications, whereas for late permanent stomas (≥1 year), the main cause was local cancer recurrence. The independent risk factors for permanent stomas were local recurrence, postoperative pelvic sepsis, male gender of the patient, the uLAR operation type, and perioperative radiation therapy. In a high-volume surgical center, sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer is associated with a low incidence of permanent stoma.

A theoretical framework to guide a study of patients' bowel symptoms and self-care strategies following sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer

A paucity of research is available on patients' bowel symptom experiences and self-care strategies following sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. Most research undertaken to date on patients' bowel symptoms following surgery for rectal cancer has been largely atheoretical. The purpose of this paper is to describe the process of choosing a theoretical framework to guide a study of patients' bowel symptoms and self-care strategies following sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. As a result of a thorough literature review, we determined that the Symptom Management Theory provided the most comprehensive framework to guide our research.

A review on functional results of sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer: the anterior resection syndrome

The aim of this review is to characterize the functional results and "anterior resection syndrome" (ARS) after sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. The purpose of sphincter-saving operations is to save the anal sphincters by avoiding the need for rectal abdomino-perineal resection with a permanent stoma. A variety of alternative techniques have been proposed and, today, ultra-low anterior resections of the rectum are commonplace. Inevitably rectal resections modify anorectal physiology. The backdrop of the functional asset for ultralow anterior resections is related to a small neorectal capacity with high endo-neorectal pressures that act together on a weakened sphincteric mechanism. Sometimes a defecation disorder called ARS may be induced and the patient experiences an extremely low quality of life. Impaired bowel function is usually provoked either by colonic dysmotility, neorectal reservoir dysfunction, anal sphincter damage or by a combination of these factors. Surgical technique defects can contribute to these possible causes: anastomotic ischemia, short length of the descending colon and stretching of neorectal mesentery may play a role. Unfortunately, there is no therapeutic algorithm or gold standard treatment that may be used for ARS. Nevertheless, it is rational to use conservative therapy first and then resort to surgery. Drugs, rehabilitative treatment and sacral neuromodulation may be used; after failure of conservative methods, surgical treatment can be considered.

Органосохраняющая хирургия рака прямой кишки - эволюция, современные тенденции и перспективы

Diseases desperate grown; By desperate appliances are relieved. William Shakespeare «Hamlet» (1601) The article describes the main stages of the development of sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. An historical look at this issue from the standpoint of research of past years in our country and abroad, as well as analysis of current sphincter-preserving surgery and future directions in this area.