Literature DB >> 12587473

Septic complications after low anterior rectal resection--is diverting stoma still justified?

B Leester1, I Asztalos, C Polnyib.   

Abstract

A retrospective study was designed to determine the effects of faecal diversion on the rate and severity of clinical anastomotic leaks after low anterior resection. The study explored the complications of stoma closure as well. During the period between 1 January 1995 and 30 July 2000, anterior rectal resection was performed on 249 patients with anastomoses created at a 6-cm or smaller distance to the dentate line. In 74 cases, the anastomosis was protected by loop ileostomy. The indications for creating a stoma were evaluated subjectively, by the operating surgeon. In 64 patients, the ileostoma was closed 3 months later. A 'clinical leak' after anterior resection was defined as an anastomotic insufficiency with clinically relevant consequences. The overall rate of anastomotic leak was 6.4 per cent; it was 5.1% (9/175) without and 9.4% (7/74) with a protective stoma. In 8 out of 9 patients, the anastomotic leak that had occurred without a protective stoma warranted laparatomy and defunctioning colostomy. Lavage and drainage of the peritoneal cavity and the presacral space were necessary in 6 out of these 8 cases- and furthermore, the deranged anastomosis had to be removed in 2 patients. Local management was successful in a single case only. Although relaparotomy entails long-term intensive care, all reoperated patients survived anastomotic leakage. Seven patients with a leak despite a protective did not require laparatomy; transanal drainage was appropriate in all cases. There were no fatalities in this group either. Only one fatal complication from suture leakage occurred after stoma-closure. Abdominal exploration was inevitable in almost all patients with a clinical anastomotic leak and without defunctioning stoma. By contrast, patients with anastomotic insufficiency despite a protective stoma were successfully managed without further intra-abdominal intervention. As shown by these results, faecal diversion undoubtedly mitigates the clinical consequences of anastomotic leaks, but cannot prevent its occurrence. When considering the cumulative risk of surgical complications associated with anterior resection, the complications of stoma-closure must also be taken into account. Our data confirm that a defunctioning stoma is beneficial for high-risk patients, who are unfit for a second abdominal procedure required to control suture leakage.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12587473     DOI: 10.2298/aci0202067l

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Chir Iugosl        ISSN: 0354-950X


  9 in total

1.  Diverting stoma with anterior resection for rectal cancer: does it reduce overall anastomotic leakage and leaks requiring laparotomy?

Authors:  Zhi-Jie Cong; Liang-Hao Hu; Ming Zhong; Lu Chen
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-08-15

Review 2.  Emerging Trends in the Etiology, Prevention, and Treatment of Gastrointestinal Anastomotic Leakage.

Authors:  Sami A Chadi; Abe Fingerhut; Mariana Berho; Steven R DeMeester; James W Fleshman; Neil H Hyman; David A Margolin; Joseph E Martz; Elisabeth C McLemore; Daniela Molena; Martin I Newman; Janice F Rafferty; Bashar Safar; Anthony J Senagore; Oded Zmora; Steven D Wexner
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2016-09-16       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 3.  Diverting ileostomy in colorectal surgery: when is it necessary?

Authors:  Mark H Hanna; Alessio Vinci; Alessio Pigazzi
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2015-01-30       Impact factor: 3.445

4.  Diverting ileostomy in laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: high price of protection.

Authors:  Peter Ihnát; Petra Guňková; Matúš Peteja; Petr Vávra; Anton Pelikán; Pavel Zonča
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-02-22       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Anterior resection of rectal cancer without bowel preparation and diverting stoma.

Authors:  Eline A Vlot; Clark J Zeebregts; Jos J G M Gerritsen; H Jan Mulder; Walter J B Mastboom; Joost M Klaase
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 2.549

6.  Low or Ultralow Anterior Resection of Rectal Cancer Without Diverting Stoma: Experience with 28 Patients.

Authors:  E Soltani; A Jangjoo; E Saremi
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2013-02-07       Impact factor: 0.656

7.  Laparoscopic anterior resection: Analysis of technique over 1000 cases.

Authors:  Senthil Kumar Ganapathi; Rajapandian Subbiah; Sathiyamoorthy Rudramurthy; Harish Kakkilaya; Parthasarathi Ramakrishnan; Palanivelu Chinnusamy
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2021 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 1.407

8.  Selective treatment of rectal cancer with single-stage coloanal or ultralow colorectal anastomosis does not adversely affect morbidity and mortality.

Authors:  Allen P Kong; Justin Kim; Alicia Holt; Viken Konyalian; Richard Huynh; Sejal M Udani; Michael J Stamos; Ravin R Kumar
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2007-03-15       Impact factor: 2.796

9.  Systematic review of anastomotic leakage rate according to an international grading system following anterior resection for rectal cancer.

Authors:  Zhi-Jie Cong; Liang-Hao Hu; Zheng-Qian Bian; Guang-Yao Ye; Min-Hao Yu; Yun-He Gao; Zhao-Shen Li; En-Da Yu; Ming Zhong
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-09-25       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.