Literature DB >> 15785900

Quality of life, functional outcome, and complications of coloplasty pouch after low anterior resection.

Feza H Remzi1, Victor W Fazio, Emre Gorgun, Massarat Zutshi, James M Church, Ian C Lavery, Tracy L Hull.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The colonic J-pouch has been used to improve bowel function in patients undergoing low colorectal or coloanal anastomosis. However, a narrow pelvis, difficulties in reach, a long anal canal with prominent sphincters, or a fatty mesentery may turn this technique into a technically challenging procedure in certain patients. In these circumstances, "coloplasty" offers an alternative to a straight anastomosis. The purpose of this study was to compare the quality of life, functional outcome, and complications between patients undergoing coloplasty, colonic J-pouch, or straight anastomosis.
METHODS: Altogether, 162 patients who underwent coloanal or low colorectal anastomosis between 1998 and 2001 were studied. Data collected included demographics, length of follow-up, technique and type of anastomosis, complications, quality of life, and functional outcome. Results were analyzed according to use of a coloplasty (n = 69), colonic J-pouch (n = 43), or straight anastomosis (n = 50). The choice of the technique was based on the surgeon's preference. Usually coloplasty or straight anastomosis was favored in male patients with a narrow pelvis or when a handsewn anastomosis was used.
RESULTS: Quality of life assessment with the short form-36 questionnaire revealed better scores in coloplasty and colonic J-pouch groups. The coloplasty (1.0 +/- 1.7) and colonic J-pouch (1.0 +/- 1.2) groups had fewer night bowel movements than the straight anastomosis group (1.5 +/- 2.0) (P < 0.05). The coloplasty group also had fewer bowel movements per day than the straight anastomosis group (3.8 +/- 2.9 vs. 4.8 +/- 3.6; P < 0.05); also, less clustering and less antidiarrheal medication use were observed than in the straight anastomosis group. Colonic J-pouch patients with handsewn anastomosis had a higher anastomotic leak rate (44 percent) than the patients in the coloplasty with handsewn anastomosis group (3.6 percent).
CONCLUSIONS: Coloplasty seems to be a safe, effective technique for improving the outcome of low colorectal or coloanal anastomosis. It is especially applicable when a colonic J-pouch anastomosis is technically difficult.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15785900     DOI: 10.1007/s10350-004-0862-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum        ISSN: 0012-3706            Impact factor:   4.585


  15 in total

1.  Prospective evaluation of the defecatory functional results in patients following aorto-aortic reconstruction surgery for an abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Authors:  Sebastian Dobrowolski; Jacek Wojciechowski; Marek Dobosz; Stanisław Hać; Zbigniew Sledziński
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2007-09-26       Impact factor: 2.549

2.  Total mesorectal excision: what are we doing?

Authors:  David B Stewart; David W Dietz
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2007-08

3.  The transverse coloplasty pouch is technically easy and safe and improves functional outcomes after low rectal cancer resection-a single center experience with 397 patients.

Authors:  Stefan Fritz; René Hennig; Christine Kantas; Hansjörg Killguss; André Schaudt; Katharina Feilhauer; Jörg Köninger
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2021-03-11       Impact factor: 3.445

Review 4.  Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS): cause and effect and reconstructive considerations.

Authors:  Y Ziv; A Zbar; Y Bar-Shavit; I Igov
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2012-10-18       Impact factor: 3.781

5.  Anastomotic leak after restorative proctosigmoidectomy for cancer: what are the chances of a permanent ostomy?

Authors:  James W Ogilvie; David W Dietz; Luca Stocchi
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2012-02-16       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Comparison of the colonic J-pouch versus straight (end-to-end) anastomosis following low anterior resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Shafquat Zaman; Ali Yasen Y Mohamedahmed; Adewale Adeoba Ayeni; Elizabeth Peterknecht; Sadiq Mawji; Mohamed Albendary; Rajnish Mankotia; Akinfemi Akingboye
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2022-03-19       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  A randomized multicenter trial to compare long-term functional outcome, quality of life, and complications of surgical procedures for low rectal cancers.

Authors:  Victor W Fazio; Massarat Zutshi; Feza H Remzi; Yann Parc; Reinhard Ruppert; Alois Fürst; James Celebrezze; Susan Galanduik; Guy Orangio; Neil Hyman; Leslie Bokey; Emmanuel Tiret; Boris Kirchdorfer; David Medich; Marcus Tietze; Tracy Hull; Jeff Hammel
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Validation of the standardized index of shape tool to analyze DCE-MRI data in the assessment of neo-adjuvant therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer.

Authors:  Roberta Fusco; Vincenza Granata; Mario Sansone; Daniela Rega; Paolo Delrio; Fabiana Tatangelo; Carmen Romano; Antonio Avallone; Davide Pupo; Marzia Giordano; Roberto Grassi; Vincenzo Ravo; Biagio Pecori; Antonella Petrillo
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2021-05-26       Impact factor: 3.469

9.  Quality of life in rectal cancer surgery: What do the patient ask?

Authors:  Giovanni D De Palma; Gaetano Luglio
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2015-12-27

10.  Outcomes of asymptomatic anastomotic leaks found on routine postoperative water-soluble enema following anterior resection for cancer.

Authors:  S Killeen; P Souroullas; H Ho Tin; I A Hunter; H O'Grady; J Gunn; J E Hartley
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 3.352

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.