Predicting bowel function after diverting stoma closure in patients with rectal cancer.

Background: Patients with rectal cancer undergoing laparoscopic anterior resection and diverting stomas often suffer from bowel dysfunction after stoma closure, impairing their quality of life. This study aims to develop a machine learning tool to predict bowel function after diverting stoma closure. Methods: Clinicopathological data and post-operative follow-up information from patients with mid-low rectal cancer after diverting stoma closure were collected and analyzed. Patients were randomly divided into training and test sets in a 7:3 ratio. A machine learning model was developed in the training set to predict major low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) and evaluated in the test set. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to assess clinical utility. Results: The study included 396 eligible patients who underwent laparoscopic anterior resection and diverting stoma in Tongji Hospital affiliated with Huazhong University of Science and Technology from 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2020. The interval between stoma creation and closure, neoadjuvant therapy, and body mass index were identified as the three most crucial characteristics associated with patients experiencing major LARS in our cohort. The machine learning model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.78 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.74-0.83] in the training set (n=277) and 0.74 (95% CI: 0.70-0.79) in the test set (n=119), and area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) of 0.73 and 0.69, respectively, with sensitivity of 0.67 and specificity of 0.66 for the test set. DCA confirmed clinical applicability. Conclusions: This study developed a machine learning model to predict major LARS in rectal cancer patients after diverting stoma closure, aiding their decision-making and counseling.

SafeHeal Colovac Colorectal Anastomosis Protection Device evaluation (SAFE-2) pivotal study: an international randomized controlled study to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the Colovac Colorectal Anastomosis Protection Device.

AIM: Although proximal faecal diversion is standard of care to protect patients with high-risk colorectal anastomoses against septic complications of anastomotic leakage, it is associated with significant morbidity. The Colovac device (CD) is an intraluminal bypass device intended to avoid stoma creation in patients undergoing low anterior resection. A preliminary study (SAFE-1) completed in three European centres demonstrated 100% protection of colorectal anastomoses in 15 patients, as evidenced by the absence of faeces below the CD. This phase III trial (SAFE-2) aims to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the CD in a larger cohort of patients undergoing curative rectal cancer resection. METHODS: SAFE-2 is a pivotal, multicentre, prospective, open-label, randomized, controlled trial. Patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the CD arm or the diverting loop ileostomy arm, with a recruitment target of 342 patients. The co-primary endpoints are the occurrence of major postoperative complications within 12 months of index surgery and the effectiveness of the CD in reducing stoma creation rates. Data regarding quality of life and patient's acceptance and tolerance of the device will be collected. DISCUSSION: SAFE-2 is a multicentre randomized, control trial assessing the efficacy and the safety of the CD in protecting low colorectal anastomoses created during oncological resection relative to standard diverting loop ileostomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05010850.

Comparison Between Primary Anastomosis Without Diverting Stoma and Hartmann's Procedure for Colorectal Perforation: A Retrospective Observational Study.

Background Hartmann's procedure (HP) is performed for colorectal perforation to avoid the risk of anastomotic leakage. Few reports have compared the safety between primary anastomosis without diverting stoma (PAWODS) and HP for colorectal perforation, and whether PAWODS or HP should be performed has remained controversial. We aimed to investigate the feasibility and safety of performing PAWODS in comparison to HP for colorectal perforation. Methods The data of 97 consecutive patients with colorectal perforation who underwent surgery from April 2010 to December 2020 were collected retrospectively. PAWODS and HP were performed in 51 and 46 patients, respectively. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to compare the clinical characteristics and postoperative outcomes of patients treated with PAWODS with those treated with HP. Results In the multivariate analysis, low serum albumin (hazard ratio (HR)=3.49; 95%CI=1.247-9.757; P=0.017) and left-sided colon and rectum perforation (HR=16.8; 95%CI=1.792-157.599; P=0.014) were significantly associated with the decision to perform HP. There was a significant difference in the mortality of the two groups (PAWODS vs. HP: 0% vs. 8.7%; P=0.047). The severe morbidity rate (Clavien-Dindo III-V) was significantly higher in the HP group (PAWODS vs. HP: 10% vs. 30%; P=0.020). In the PAWODS group, anastomotic leakage occurred in five of 51 patients (9.8%), four (8.7%) of whom required re-operation. Conclusions In appropriately selected patients, PAWODS could be safely performed with an acceptable rate of anastomotic leakage. The serum albumin level and site of perforation may be simple and useful factors for guiding decision-making on the surgical procedure.

Effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients with obstructive colon cancer: A multicenter propensity score-matched analysis (YCOG2101).

Aim: Obstructive colon cancer is locally advanced colon cancer with poor prognosis. However, the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on obstructive colon cancer remains unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of NAC in patients with obstructive colon cancer. Methods: From January 2012 to December 2017, we collected patient data for clinical stage II/III obstructive colon cancer at seven Yokohama Clinical Oncology Group (YCOG) institutions. The long-term outcomes of the NAC and non-NAC groups were analyzed retrospectively after adjusting for patients' background characteristics using propensity score matching. Results: Among the 202 eligible patients, propensity score matching extracted 51 patients each for the NAC and non-NAC groups. After matching, the groups showed no marked differences in the background factors. All the patients in the NAC group underwent diverting stoma construction. Nineteen patients (37.3%) experienced grade 3-4 adverse events during NAC. The incidence of postoperative complications was similar between groups. The 5-year progression-free survival rates were 75.8% in the NAC group and 63.0% in the non-NAC group (p = 0.22, log-rank test). The 5-year overall survival rates were 88.5% in the NAC group and 78.8% in the non-NAC group (p = 0.09, log-rank test). Conclusion: Although NAC was feasible for obstructive colon cancer after diverting stoma construction, its effects on long-term outcomes could not be proven.

A comparative study of stoma-related complications from diverting loop ileostomy or colostomy after colorectal surgery.

PURPOSE: Even though minor, stoma-related complications significantly impact quality of life, they are often excluded from clinical analyses that compare short-term postoperative outcomes of loop ileostomy and loop colostomy. This study compares stoma-related complications between loop ileostomy and loop colostomy after rectal resection, including minor complications, and discusses the characteristics of diverting stoma types. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted in patients who underwent diverting stoma construction after rectal resection. Data on patient background and postoperative short-term outcomes, including stoma-related complications and morbidity after stoma closure, were collected and compared between loop ileostomy and loop colostomy groups. Morbidities of all severity grades were targeted for analysis. RESULTS: A total of 47 patients (27 loop ileostomy, 20 loop colostomy) underwent diverting stoma construction following rectal resection. Overall stoma-related complications, incidence of skin irritation, high-output stoma, and outlet obstruction were significantly higher in the loop ileostomy group but high-output stoma and outlet obstruction were absent in the loop colostomy group. Regarding morbidity after stoma closure, operation times and surgical site infections were significantly higher in the loop colostomy group while anastomotic leakage after diverting stoma closure occurred (2 cases; 15%) in the loop colostomy group but not the loop ileostomy group. CONCLUSION: Because stoma-related complications were significantly higher in the loop ileostomy group, and even these minor complications may impair QOL, early loop ileostomy closure is recommended. For loop colostomy, stoma-related morbidities are lower but post-closure leakage is a calculated risk.

Temporary diverting stoma in therapy-refractory luminal colonic Crohn's disease: an alternative to immediate colorectal resection?

AIM: Creation of a diverting stoma in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) can counteract luminal inflammation. The clinical utility of a diverting stoma with the prospect of restoration of gastrointestinal continuity warrants further investigation. The aim of this work was to evaluate the long-term effects of creation of a diverting stoma on the disease course in patients with luminal colonic CD. METHOD: In this retrospective, multicentre cohort study we investigated the disease course of patients who received a diverting stoma in the biological era. Clinical characteristics, medication use and surgical course were assessed at the time of creation of the diverting stoma and during follow-up. The primary outcome was the rate of successful and lasting reestablishment of gastrointestinal continuity. RESULTS: Thirty six patients with refractory luminal CD from four institutions underwent creation of a diverting stoma. Of the overall cohort, 20 (56%) patients had their gastrointestinal continuity reestablished after initial stoma creation and 14 (39%) who had their stoma reversed remained stoma-free during a median of 3.3 years follow-up (interquartile range 2.1-6.1 years). Absence of stoma reversal was associated with the presence of proctitis (p = 0.02). Colorectal resection after creation of a diverting stoma was performed in 28 (78%) patients, with 7 (19%) having a less extensive resection and 6 (17%) having a more extensive resection compared with the surgical plan before stoma creation. CONCLUSION: A diverting stoma could potentially be an alternative to immediate definitive stoma placement in specific populations consisting of patients with luminal colonic CD, especially in the absence of proctitis.

Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prevention of Ileostomy Complications: An Updated Review.

An ileostomy is associated with multiple complications that may frequently or persistently affect the life of ostomates. All healthcare professionals should have knowledge of the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of ileostomy complications. Peristomal dermatitis is caused by watery and highly alkaline effluent. Skin protective products are typically used for local treatment. Ischemia/necrosis occurs due to insufficient arterial blood supply. Retraction is seen in patients with a bulky mesentery and occurs following ischemia. Convex stoma appliances can be used for skin protection against fecal leakage. Small bowel obstruction (SBO) is common and occurs only at the stoma site. Trans-stomal decompression is most effective in these cases. High output stoma (HOS) is defined as a condition when the output exceeds 1,000- 2,000 ml/day, lasting for one to three days. Treatment includes intravenous fluid and electrolyte resuscitation followed by restriction of hypotonic fluid and the use of antimotility (and antisecretory) drugs. Stomal prolapse is a full-thickness protrusion of an inverted bowel. Manual reduction is attempted initially, whereas emergency bowel resection may be needed for incarcerated cases. A parastomal hernia (PSH) is an incisional hernia of the stoma site. Surgery is considered in cases of incarceration, but most cases are manageable with non-surgical treatment.

Clinical Factors Contributing to Anastomotic Leak After Mid-to-High Colorectal Anastomosis.

BACKGROUND: Low colorectal anastomoses carry a high anastomotic leak (AL) rate (up to 20%) and thus are commonly diverted. Much less is known about mid-to-high colorectal anastomosis, which carries a leak rate of 2-4%. The objective of this study was to determine our AL rate after mid-to-high colorectal anastomosis and associated risk factors. METHODS: A single center retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing left colonic resections with mid-to-high colorectal anastomosis (≥7 cm from the anal verge) from January 2008 to October 2017 was utilized. Main outcome, AL, defined as clinical suspicion supported by radiological or intraoperative findings, was calculated and risk factors assessed using multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: 977 patients were included; 487 (49.9%) were male, with a mean age of 59.8 (+/-12.1) years. Mean BMI was 27.5 (+/-5.5) kg/m2. Diverticular disease (67.5%), malignancy (17.4%), and inflammatory bowel disease (2.2%) were the main indications for resection. Mean length of stay was 6.7 (+/-4.5) days. 455 (46.8%) colonic resections were performed by laparoscopy, 283 (29.1%) by hand assisted surgery, 219 (22.5%) by laparotomy, and 16 (1.6%) by robotics. Majority of patients had complete donuts (99.6%) and a negative air leak test (97.7%). 149 patients (15.3%) underwent construction of a diverting stoma. The overall AL rate was 2.1% (n = 20). Increased BMI (>30 kg/m2), P = .02, was an independent risk factor for AL and a trend observed for positive air leak tests (P = .05), with other factors failing to achieve statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with mid-to-high colorectal anastomosis have a 2% AL risk. Increased BMI was a risk factor for AL.

Early Experience of Undertaking Robotic Assisted Total Mesorectal Excision in Rectal Resections, Avoiding a Diverting Stoma: Key eHancement of the Anastomosis for No Stoma Technique - A Case Series.

Background. Anastomotic leak is a feared complication in rectal cancer surgery, and a proximal diverting stoma to protect the rectal anastomosis is used to minimize its impact. We evaluated a novel technique that uses the da Vinci® robotic platform (Intuitive Surgical) to reinforce the colorectal anastomosis and rectal staple line with sutures, and rectal resection and assessment of the anastomotic perfusion, using our Portsmouth protocol. Methods. During robotic rectal cancer surgery, we used indocyanine green to determine the level of transection and check the vascularity of the circular anastomosis. The distal transverse staple line and circular staple line of the colorectal anastomosis were reinforced with absorbable interrupted stitches (KHANS technique - Key enHancement of the Anastomosis for No Stoma). The integrity of the colorectal/anal anastomosis was also checked using the underwater air-water leak test, with concomitant flexible sigmoidoscopy to visualize the circular staple line. Results. Fifty patients underwent total mesorectal excision for cancer. Using the KHANS technique, we avoided a diverting stoma in all cases. One patient had a radiological leak, leading to a pelvic abscess. In 56% of cases, the anastomosis was within 5 cm of the anal verge. Median length of stay was 5 (3-34) days, with two 30-day readmissions. No 90-day mortality or 30-day reoperations were observed. Conclusion. The KHANS technique appears feasible, successful, and safe in decreasing the incidence of diverting stomas in rectal resections.

Scarless two-stage delayed coloanal anastomosis: a technique description

Introduction: In current clinical practice, immediate coloanal anastomosis (ICA) remains the standard technique for restoring the gastrointestinal tract following coloproctectomy for low rectal cancer. This anastomosis still requires a temporary diverting stoma to decrease the postoperative morbidity, which remains significantly high. As an alternative, some authors have proposed a two-stage delayed coloanal anastomosis (TS-DCA). This article reports on the surgical technique of TS-DCA. Methods: The case described is of a 53-year-old woman, without any particular history, in whom colonoscopy motivated by rectal bleeding revealed an adenocarcinoma of the low rectum. Magnetic resonance imaging showed a tumor ~ 1 cm above the puborectalis muscle, graded cT3N +. The extension workup was negative. Seven weeks after chemoradiotherapy, a coloproctectomy with total mesorectal excision (TME) was performed. A TS-DCA was chosen to restore the digestive tract. Conclusion: Two-stage delayed coloanal anastomosis is a safe and effective alternative for restoring the digestive tract after proctectomy for low rectal cancer. Recent data seem to show a clear advantage of this technique in terms of morbidity. (AU)

Benefits and risks of diverting stoma creation during rectal cancer surgery.

Purpose: A consensus has been reached regarding diverting stoma (DS) construction in rectal cancer surgery to avoid reoperation related to anastomotic leakage. However, the incidence of stoma-related complications (SRCs) remains high. In this study, we examined the perioperative outcomes of DS construction in patients who underwent sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer. Methods: We included 400 participants who underwent radical sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer between 2005 and 2017. These participants were divided into the DS (+) and DS (-) groups, and the outcomes, including postoperative complications, were compared. Results: The incidence of ileus was higher in the DS (+) group than in the DS (-) group (P<0.01); however, no patients in the DS (+) group showed grade 3 anastomotic leakage. Furthermore, early SRCs were observed in 33 patients (21.6%) and bowel obstruction-related stoma outlet syndrome occurred in 19 patients (12.4%). There was no significant intergroup difference in the incidence of grade 3b postoperative complications. However, the most common reason for reoperation was different in the 2 groups: anastomotic leakage in 91.7% of patients with grade 3b postoperative complications in the DS (-) group, and SRCs in 85.7% of patients with grade 3b postoperative complications in the DS (+) group. Conclusion: Patients with DS showed higher incidence rates of overall postoperative complications, severe postoperative complications (grade 3), and bowel obstruction, including stoma outlet syndrome, than patients without DS. Therefore, it is important to construct an appropriate DS to avoid SRCs and to be more selective in assigning patients for DS construction.

Effect of the transanal drainage tube on preventing anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a common postoperative complication of rectal cancer, and transanal drainage tube (TDT) efficacy is still contentious. This study aimed to evaluate the TDT effect on AL prevention. METHODS: All relevant papers were searched by using a predefined search strategy (two randomized controlled trials (RCTs), one prospective study, and four retrospective studies). Meta-analysis was conducted to estimate AL and re-operation pooled rates. RESULTS: A total of 7 studies (1556 patients) were included: No significant statistic difference was found between two groups on AL rate (odds ratio (OR) 0.61, P = 0.11) and re-operation rate (OR 0.52, P = 0.10). For subgroup analysis, significant statistic difference was found between two groups on AL rate (OR 0.29, P = 0.002) and re-operation rate (OR 0.15, P = 0.04) in patients without neoadjuvant therapy. As for patients without diverting stoma, the AL rate (OR 0.35, P = 0.002) was significantly lower than that in patients without TDT. CONCLUSIONS: TDT may reduce AL morbidity and re-operation rate for patients without high risk of AL, but may be useless for those in high-risk situations.

Comparison of postoperative complication rates between a novel endoluminal balloon-assisted drainage and diverting stoma after low rectal cancer

AimTo introduce a novel endo-luminal balloon-assisted drainage (EBAD) and compare postoperative complication rates between EBAD and diverting stoma (DS) groups.MethodsThe single center prospective non-random cohort study included a total of 163 patients in convenience patients with rectal cancer between January 2019 and January 2021. Out of 163 patients, 83 underwent DS and 80 EBAD. Primary endpoints were postoperative complication rate.ResultsThe total number of complications was 28 in the DS group vs. 22 in the EBAD group (P = 0.388). 18 patients (21.7%) in the DS group and 14 patients (17.5%) in the EBAD group developed postoperative complication (P = 0.501). There were no differences identified for anastomotic leak rates between the two groups (P = 0.677). The rate of the pelvic abscess was lower in the EBAD group (1/80, 1.3%) than in the DS group (4/83, 4.8%) but with no statistical significance (P = 0.386). Compared with the DS group, the median operative time was shorter in the EBAD group (225 vs. 173.5 min, P < 0.001). Regarding incomplete small bowel obstruction, a higher prevalence was observed in the DS group compared to the EBAD group (7.2% vs 2.5%, P = 0.301). 7 patients (11.3%) in the DS group developed a para-stomal hernia, while no patient suffered a catheter-related complication. The median postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the DS groups than in the EBAD group (7 vs 8 days, P = 0.009). The median residence time of endo-luminal balloon-assisted drainage was 5.41 days. The median average and total volume of drainage were 51.57 ml/day and 255 ml, respectively.ConclusionEBAD is feasible and safe with similar postoperative complications when compared with a DS. EBAD may replace DS after rectum resection.

Ano-rectovaginal fistula after obstetrical anal sphincter injury: Diverting stoma does not improve the surgical results.

AIM: Ano-rectovaginal fistulas (ARVF) are challenging for the surgeon. Most of the series mix aetiologies, leading to confusion with respect to the conclusion. The aim of this study was to assess the factors associated with the success of ARVF management following obstetrical anal sphincter injury (OASIS). METHODS: This retrospective multicentric study included all the patients undergoing surgery for ARVF identified by the hospital codes. Patients for whom the aetiology of ARVF was not OASIS were excluded. The major outcome measure was the success of the procedure. RESULTS: Sixty patients with treated ARVF due to OASIS were identified. The success of overall management was 91.7%. Female patients underwent a mean of 2.5 (±1.7) procedures. A diverting stoma was formed in 29 patients (48.3%) of which 26 were closed at the end of the management period (89.7%). Of the 148 surgical procedures, only 55 were successful (37.2%). The order of the procedures (OR = 1.38; 95% CI: 0.75-2.51) or the diverting stoma (OR = 1.46; 95% CI: 0.31-6.91) were not significantly associated with the success of the surgery. However, Martius flap (OR = 4.13; 95% CI: 1.1-15.54) and Musset procedures (OR = 5.79; 95% CI: 1.77-18.87) produced better results than the endorectal advancement flap (ERAF). The other procedures did not show a significant correlation with management success. CONCLUSION: A diverting stoma is not mandatory in the management of ARVF due to OASIS to improve the success of the surgical procedure. While the Martius flap procedure offers better results, the ERAF procedure may be preferred as a primary intervention in the absence of sphincter injury as it is less invasive. In cases of residual sphincter injury, the Musset procedure is most likely to be the best option.

Prophylactic transanal drainage tube placement for preventing anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer: A meta-analysis.

AIM: The aim was to evaluate the efficacy of transanal drainage tube (TDT) placement for preventing anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection for rectal cancer. METHOD: PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched up to October 2021. Studies comparing outcomes following low anterior resection with or without TDT were included. The primary outcomes measured were anastomotic leakage rate, reoperation rate and anastomotic bleed rate. RESULTS: Three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 16 observational studies (prospective or retrospective) involving 4560 patients satisfied the basic inclusion criteria. In RCTs, a TDT was associated with no statistically significant differences in anastomotic leakage (OR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.42-1.05, P = 0.08), reduction in reoperation (OR = 0.11, 95% CI 0.03-0.51, P = 0.004) and increased anastomotic bleeding rate (OR = 2.36, 95% CI 1.11-5.01, P = 0.03). In observational studies, a TDT was associated with significant reduction in anastomotic leak (OR = 0.44, 95% CI 0.30-0.64, P < 0.0001) and reoperation (OR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.33-0.69, P < 0.0001), with no statistically significant differences in anastomotic bleeding (OR = 1.30, 95% CI 0.20-8.30, P = 0.78). CONCLUSION: In RCTs, a TDT for rectal cancer was correlated with no detectable differences in anastomotic leakage and with an increased risk of anastomotic bleeding. In observational studies, a TDT was correlated with reduction in anastomotic leakage and no detectable differences in anastomotic bleeding. Both RCTs and observational studies demonstrated a comparable reduction in reoperation rate with TDT. These data in aggregate indicated that TDTs may not show superiority but emphasized differences between RCT and observational data.

Morbidity of diverting stoma during colorectal surgery for deep infiltrating endometriosis - an observational study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate stoma-related complications after rectal resection and colorectal anastomosis with diverting stoma for deep infiltrating colorectal endometriosis. METHODS: All the consecutive adult women who underwent colorectal resection with low anastomosis and diverting stoma for deep infiltrating endometriosis in one center between 2013 and 2020 were retrospectively included. Stoma-related complications were retrieved during the stoma period and after stoma reversal. RESULTS: 33 patients (mean age = 32 years (±6, range=24-45 years) were included. After the first surgery, overall and surgical morbidities were observed in 42% and 30% of patients, including stoma-related complications in 3 patients (9%): high output (n = 2) and prolapse (n = 1). One patient presented with rectovaginal fistula, requiring several unplanned surgeries. No anastomotic leakage was observed. All the patients underwent stoma reversal, after mean delay of 3 months (±3, range=1-20 months). Overall morbidity after stoma closure occurred in 9 patients (27%), including 1 major morbidity (digestive bleeding). Long-term results were obtained after a mean follow-up of 21 months (±9, range=14-34 months). Four patients presented with hernia at the stoma site (12%). The cumulative rate of stoma-related complications was 45%. CONCLUSION: There is no consensus about the impact of diverting stoma after rectal resection with colorectal anastomosis for deep infiltrating colorectal endometriosis. Stoma-related complications are frequently observed but there are major in only 12% of patients. High risk patients of rectovaginal fistula and/or anastomotic leakage need to be identified to better indicate the diverting stoma, waiting for randomized trials evaluating the real impact of diverting stoma.

Surgical outcomes of Turnbull-Cutait delayed coloanal anastomosis with pull-through versus immediate coloanal anastomosis with diverting stoma after total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Theoretical advantages of Turnbull-Cutait pull-through delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCAA) are a reduced risk of anastomotic leak and therefore avoidance of stoma. Gradually abandoned in favor of immediate coloanal anastomosis (ICAA) with diverting stoma, DCAA has regained popularity in recent years in reconstructive surgery for low RC, especially when combined with minimally invasive surgery (MIS). The aim of this study was to perform the first meta-analysis, exploring the safety and outcomes of DCAA compared to ICAA with protective stoma. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL and Google Scholar databases was performed for studies published from January 2000 until December 2020. The systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review on Interventions recommendations and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. RESULTS: Out of 2626 studies screened, 9 were included in the systematic review and 4 studies in the meta-analysis. Outcomes included were postoperative complications, pelvic sepsis and risk of definitive stoma. Considering postoperative complications classified as Clavien-Dindo III, no significant difference existed in the rate of postoperative morbidity between DCAA and ICAA (13% versus 21%; OR 1.17; 95% CI 0.38-3.62; p = 0.78; I2 = 20%). Patients in the DCAA group experienced a lower rate of postoperative pelvic sepsis compared with patients undergoing ICAA with diverting stoma (7% versus 14%; OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.16-0.85; p = 0.02; I2 = 0%). The risk of definitive stoma was comparable between the two groups (2% versus 2% OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.15-3.85; p = 0.75; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: According to the limited current evidence, DCAA is associated with a significant decrease in pelvic sepsis. Further prospective trials focusing on oncologic and functional outcomes are needed.

Comparison of postoperative complication rates between a novel endoluminal balloon-assisted drainage and diverting stoma after low rectal cancer.

AIM: To introduce a novel endo-luminal balloon-assisted drainage (EBAD) and compare postoperative complication rates between EBAD and diverting stoma (DS) groups. METHODS: The single center prospective non-random cohort study included a total of 163 patients in convenience patients with rectal cancer between January 2019 and January 2021. Out of 163 patients, 83 underwent DS and 80 EBAD. Primary endpoints were postoperative complication rate. RESULTS: The total number of complications was 28 in the DS group vs. 22 in the EBAD group (P = 0.388). 18 patients (21.7%) in the DS group and 14 patients (17.5%) in the EBAD group developed postoperative complication (P = 0.501). There were no differences identified for anastomotic leak rates between the two groups (P = 0.677). The rate of the pelvic abscess was lower in the EBAD group (1/80, 1.3%) than in the DS group (4/83, 4.8%) but with no statistical significance (P = 0.386). Compared with the DS group, the median operative time was shorter in the EBAD group (225 vs. 173.5 min, P < 0.001). Regarding incomplete small bowel obstruction, a higher prevalence was observed in the DS group compared to the EBAD group (7.2% vs 2.5%, P = 0.301). 7 patients (11.3%) in the DS group developed a para-stomal hernia, while no patient suffered a catheter-related complication. The median postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the DS groups than in the EBAD group (7 vs 8 days, P = 0.009). The median residence time of endo-luminal balloon-assisted drainage was 5.41 days. The median average and total volume of drainage were 51.57 ml/day and 255 ml, respectively. CONCLUSION: EBAD is feasible and safe with similar postoperative complications when compared with a DS. EBAD may replace DS after rectum resection.

Fecal diversion in complex anal fistulas: Is there a way to avoid it?

Temporary fecal diversion by a diverting colostomy or ileostomy is occasionally performed for serious complex fistulas. The main indications are highly complex and extensive cryptoglandular anal fistula, anal fistula associated with severe anorectal Crohn's disease, recurrent rectovaginal fistula, radiation-induced fistula and anal fistula with associated necrotizing fasciitis. The purpose of stoma formation is to divert the fecal stream away from the anorectum and the perianal region so as to control the infective process and prevent trauma to the operated repaired tissues. Once the fistula has healed, the diverting stoma is closed. However, two questions are relevant. First, is it certain that the same disease would not relapse (or the fistula would not recur) once the colostomy is closed? Second, is there a non-surgical method which can obviate the need for a diverting colostomy? An attempt is made to answer both these questions in this review.

Risks of anastomotic leakage in patients with colorectal cancer after operation and how to effectively avoid it. / ç›´è§†ç»“ç›´è‚ ç™Œæ‚£è€ æœ¯åŽå»åˆå£æ¼åŠå ¶é£Žé™©è§„é¿.

Despite the considerable progress in surgical level and imaging examination methods, anastomotic leakage is still the major complication after intestinal surgery with high incidence rate and mortality rate. Moreover, anastomotic leakage has become one of the serious complications threatening the postoperative life safety, prognosis and quality of life. The occurrence of anastomotic leakage involves the changes of a variety of pathophysiological factors, and is affected by intestinal microbiota, inflammation and immune system. Preoperative intestinal preparation will change the type and number of microbial population in the intestine. Intraoperative anastomotic mode and bleeding volume are also closely related to the occurrence of anastomotic leakage. In addition, the occurrence of anastomotic leakage is associated with local recurrence of colorectal cancer after surgery. Intraoperative protective stoma is confirmed to reduce the incidence of anastomotic leakage. Combined preoperative adjustment of nutritional status and inflammatory factors is important for avoiding anastomotic leakage after surgery.