A multi-centre randomized controlled trial of open vs closed management of the rectal defect after transanal endoscopic microsurgery.

AIM: Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is a technically challenging strategy that allows expanded indications for local excision of rectal lesions. Transluminal suturing is difficult, so open management of the resultant defect is appealing. Expert opinion suggests there is more pain when the defect is left open. The aim of this study was to determine if closure of the defect created during full thickness excision of rectal lesions with TEM leads to less postoperative pain compared to leaving the defect open. METHOD: At the time of surgery, patients undergoing a full thickness TEM were randomized to sutured (TEM-S) or open (TEM-O) management of the rectal defect. At five Canadian academic colorectal surgery centres, experienced TEM surgeons enrolled patients ≥ 18 years treated by full thickness TEM. The primary outcome was postoperative pain measured by the visual analogue scale. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain medication use and 30-day postoperative complications, including bleeding, infection and hospital readmission. RESULTS: Between March 2012 and October 2013, 50 patients were enrolled and randomized to sutured (TEM-S, n = 28) or open (TEM-O, n = 22) management of the rectal defect. There was no difference between the two study groups in postoperative pain on postoperative day 1 (2.8 vs 2.6, P = 0.76), day 3 (2.8 vs 2.1, P = 0.23) and day 7 (2.8 vs 1.7, P = 0.10). CONCLUSION: In this multicentre randomized controlled trial, there was no difference in postoperative pain between sutured or open defect management in patients having a full thickness excision with TEM.

The clinical results of the Turnbull-Cutait delayed coloanal anastomosis: a systematic review.

Turnbull and Cutait described abdominoperineal pull-through followed by delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCA) in 1961. DCA could reduce anastomotic leaks, pelvic morbidity and use of stomas. Strong evidence about its clinical benefits is still lacking. This systematic review examined the clinical outcomes of DCA for the treatment of malignant or benign colorectal conditions. A systematic search of electronic medical databases was conducted. Two independent reviewers selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. The primary outcome was pelvic morbidity (anastomotic leak, pelvic abscess or sepsis, use of stoma). Fecal continence and survival data were also analyzed. From 1,251 citations, we included seven observational studies including 1,124 patients. All included studies were considered at high risk of bias. Two studies comparing DCA with immediate anastomosis reported a significant decrease in anastomotic leak, and pelvic abscess or sepsis. Low rates of pelvic morbidity were reported in the other five studies: anastomotic leak 0-7 %, pelvic abscess 0-11.8 % and pelvic sepsis 6.8-10 %. Rates of permanent stoma after DCA were low in six studies (1-6 %), with one study reporting an incidence of 25 %. Fecal continence was reported as satisfying in all studies. No differences were observed in a comparative setting. Survival data were reported in four studies. Clinical heterogeneity and methodological issues precluded meta-analysis. Based on retrospective evidence, DCA offers a low rate of anastomotic leak, pelvic morbidity and use of stoma, with reasonable fecal continence. Results are encouraging, but prospective studies are needed for comparison with standard of care.