Literature DB >> 12780924

A 5-cm colonic J pouch colo-anal reconstruction following anterior resection for low rectal cancer results in acceptable evacuation and continence in the long term.

A I Amin1, O Hallböök, A J Lee, R Sexton, B J Moran, R J Heald.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Optimal treatment for low rectal cancer is total mesorectal excision, with most patients suitable for low colo-rectal or colo-anal anastomosis. A colon pouch has early functional benefits, although long-term function, especially evacuation, might mitigate against its routine use. The aim of this study was to assess evacuation and continence in patients with a colon pouch, and to examine the impact of possible risk factors.
METHODS: In 1998, all 102 surviving patients with a colon pouch, whose stoma had been closed for more than one year, were sent a postal questionnaire. A composite incontinence score was calculated from questions on urgency, use of a pad, incontinence of gas, liquid or faeces; and a composite evacuation score from questions on medication taken to evacuate, straining, the need and number of times returned to evacuate.
RESULTS: The response rate was 90% (50 M, 42 F), with a median age of 68 years (IQR 60-78) and median follow-up of 2.6 years (IQR 1.7-3.9). The anastomosis was 3 cm or less from the anus in 45/92 (49%), and incontinence scores were worse in this group (P = 0.001). There were significantly higher incontinence scores in females (P = 0.014). Age, preoperative radiotherapy, part of colon used for anastomosis, postoperative leak and length of follow-up had no demonstrable effect on either score.
CONCLUSION: Gender and anastomotic height were the only variables which influenced incontinence. Ninety percent of patients reported that their bowel function did not affect their overall wellbeing, and none would have preferred to have a stoma.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12780924     DOI: 10.1046/j.1463-1318.2003.00399.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Colorectal Dis        ISSN: 1462-8910            Impact factor:   3.788


  6 in total

Review 1.  [Late complications and functional disorders after rectal resection : Prevention, detection and therapy].

Authors:  J Reibetanz; M Kim; C-T Germer; N Schlegel
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 0.955

2.  Reconstruction techniques after proctectomy: what's the best?

Authors:  Sebastian G de la Fuente; Christopher R Mantyh
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2007-08

3.  Randomized controlled trial between perineal and anal repairs of rectocele in obstructed defecation.

Authors:  Mohamed Farid; Khaled M Madbouly; Ahmed Hussein; Tarik Mahdy; Hesham A Moneim; Waleed Omar
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  Clinical outcome of intersphincteric resection for ultra-low rectal cancer.

Authors:  Chih-Chien Chin; Chien-Yuh Yeh; Wen-Shih Huang; Jeng-Yi Wang
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-01-28       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Treatment for early ultralow rectal cancer: pull-through intersphincteric stapled transection and anastomosis (PISTA) versus low anterior resection.

Authors:  C G Fu; X H Gao; H Wang; Z Q Yu; W Zhang; E D Yu; L J Liu; R G Meng
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2012-11-23       Impact factor: 3.781

6.  The effect of neo-rectal wall properties on functional outcome after colonic J-pouch-anal anastomosis.

Authors:  Martijn P Gosselink; David D Zimmerman; Rachel L West; Wim C Hop; Ernst J Kuipers; W Rudolph Schouten
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2007-05-23       Impact factor: 2.571

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.