A D Rink1, F Haaf, N Knupper, K-H Vestweber. 1. Department of General Surgery, Leverkusen General Hospital, Dhünnberg 60, 51375 Leverkusen, Germany. rink@klinikum-lev.de
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Ileocaecal interposition (ICI) is a technique of rectal replacement after total mesorectal excision (TME), but the method has never been evaluated in a randomised fashion. We performed a randomised, controlled trial to compare ICI and colon-J-pouch (CJP) for rectal replacements after TME for rectal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Fifteen patients were enrolled into each treatment group of the trial according to the protocol. Follow-up evaluations were performed 3 months and 1 year after ileostomy closure and at a mean of 5 years after initial surgery. RESULTS: Similar results between the groups were found for incontinence, urgency, constipation and quality of life at all follow-ups. The frequency of defecation was slightly lower in the CJP group at 3 months [3 (2-6) vs 5 (2-11) (p=0.043)] and at 1 year [3 (2-5) vs 5 (2-8) (p=0.034)]. However, this difference lost significance if patients who had postoperative radiotherapy were excluded from the analysis. Four out of the 15 patients treated with ICI experienced bowel obstruction, which required open surgery in two, endoscopic dilatation in one or maintenance of the ileostomy in one patient. None of the patients treated with CJP had similar complications. CONCLUSIONS:ICI and CJP reconstruction result in a similar functional outcome and quality of life. As ICI did not show any benefit over CJP and tended to result in a higher frequency of defecation, it should not be used as a first choice treatment. In addition, ICI was associated with significant complications after radiotherapy. Therefore, it must not be used if postoperative radiochemotheray is intended.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Ileocaecal interposition (ICI) is a technique of rectal replacement after total mesorectal excision (TME), but the method has never been evaluated in a randomised fashion. We performed a randomised, controlled trial to compare ICI and colon-J-pouch (CJP) for rectal replacements after TME for rectal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen patients were enrolled into each treatment group of the trial according to the protocol. Follow-up evaluations were performed 3 months and 1 year after ileostomy closure and at a mean of 5 years after initial surgery. RESULTS: Similar results between the groups were found for incontinence, urgency, constipation and quality of life at all follow-ups. The frequency of defecation was slightly lower in the CJP group at 3 months [3 (2-6) vs 5 (2-11) (p=0.043)] and at 1 year [3 (2-5) vs 5 (2-8) (p=0.034)]. However, this difference lost significance if patients who had postoperative radiotherapy were excluded from the analysis. Four out of the 15 patients treated with ICI experienced bowel obstruction, which required open surgery in two, endoscopic dilatation in one or maintenance of the ileostomy in one patient. None of the patients treated with CJP had similar complications. CONCLUSIONS: ICI and CJP reconstruction result in a similar functional outcome and quality of life. As ICI did not show any benefit over CJP and tended to result in a higher frequency of defecation, it should not be used as a first choice treatment. In addition, ICI was associated with significant complications after radiotherapy. Therefore, it must not be used if postoperative radiochemotheray is intended.
Authors: A Berger; E Tiret; R Parc; P Frileux; L Hannoun; B Nordlinger; R Ratelle; R Simon Journal: World J Surg Date: 1992 May-Jun Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: E Leo; F Belli; M T Baldini; M Vitellaro; L Mascheroni; S Andreola; M Bellomi; G Rebuffoni; F Lombardi; R Audisio Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 1994-05 Impact factor: 2.571