BACKGROUND: Significant variability and a lack of transparency exist in the reporting of anterior resection outcomes. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to qualitatively analyze the long-term functional outcomes and assessment tools used in evaluating patients with rectal cancer following anterior resection, to quantify the incidence of these outcomes, and to identify risk factors for long-term incontinence. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL were searched using the terms rectal neoplasms, resection, and gastrointestinal function. STUDY SELECTION: The studies included were in English and evaluated adults with rectal cancer, curative anterior resection, and a minimum 1-year follow-up. Patients with recurrent/metastatic disease were excluded. Of the 805 records identified, 48 articles were included. INTERVENTION: The intervention performed was anterior resection. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measure was incontinence (gas, liquid stool, and solid stool). RESULTS: The histories of 3349 patients from 17 countries were summarized. Surgeries were conducted between 1978 to 2004 with a median follow-up of 24 months (interquartile range, 12, 57). Sixty-five percent of studies did not use a validated assessment tool. Reported outcomes and incidence rates were variable. The reported proportion of patients with incontinence ranged from 3.2% to 79.3%, with a pooled incidence of 35.2% (95% CI 27.9, 43.3). Risk factors for incontinence, identified by meta-regression, were preoperative radiation 0.009 and, in particular, short-course radiation (P = .006), and study quality (randomized controlled trial P = .004, observational P = .006). LIMITATIONS: The meta-analysis was limited by the significant heterogeneity of the primary data. CONCLUSIONS: Functional outcomes are inconsistently assessed and reported and require common definitions, and the more regular use of validated assessment tools, as well. Preoperative radiation and, in particular, short-course radiation may be a strong risk factor for incontinence; however, further studies are needed.
BACKGROUND: Significant variability and a lack of transparency exist in the reporting of anterior resection outcomes. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to qualitatively analyze the long-term functional outcomes and assessment tools used in evaluating patients with rectal cancer following anterior resection, to quantify the incidence of these outcomes, and to identify risk factors for long-term incontinence. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL were searched using the terms rectal neoplasms, resection, and gastrointestinal function. STUDY SELECTION: The studies included were in English and evaluated adults with rectal cancer, curative anterior resection, and a minimum 1-year follow-up. Patients with recurrent/metastatic disease were excluded. Of the 805 records identified, 48 articles were included. INTERVENTION: The intervention performed was anterior resection. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measure was incontinence (gas, liquid stool, and solid stool). RESULTS: The histories of 3349 patients from 17 countries were summarized. Surgeries were conducted between 1978 to 2004 with a median follow-up of 24 months (interquartile range, 12, 57). Sixty-five percent of studies did not use a validated assessment tool. Reported outcomes and incidence rates were variable. The reported proportion of patients with incontinence ranged from 3.2% to 79.3%, with a pooled incidence of 35.2% (95% CI 27.9, 43.3). Risk factors for incontinence, identified by meta-regression, were preoperative radiation 0.009 and, in particular, short-course radiation (P = .006), and study quality (randomized controlled trial P = .004, observational P = .006). LIMITATIONS: The meta-analysis was limited by the significant heterogeneity of the primary data. CONCLUSIONS: Functional outcomes are inconsistently assessed and reported and require common definitions, and the more regular use of validated assessment tools, as well. Preoperative radiation and, in particular, short-course radiation may be a strong risk factor for incontinence; however, further studies are needed.
Authors: S Y Parnasa; H Chill; B Helou; A Cohen; R Alter; D Shveiky; I Mizrahi; M Abu-Gazala; A J Pikarsky; N Shussman Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2022-09-12 Impact factor: 3.699
Authors: Felipe Quezada-Diaz; Rosa M Jimenez-Rodriguez; Emmanouil P Pappou; J Joshua Smith; Sujata Patil; Iris Wei; Jose G Guillem; Philip B Paty; Garrett M Nash; Martin R Weiser; Julio Garcia-Aguilar Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2018-10-22 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Rutger C H Stijns; Eelco J R de Graaf; Cornelis J A Punt; Iris D Nagtegaal; Joost J M E Nuyttens; Esther van Meerten; Pieter J Tanis; Ignace H J T de Hingh; George P van der Schelling; Yair Acherman; Jeroen W A Leijtens; Andreas J A Bremers; Geerard L Beets; Christiaan Hoff; Cornelis Verhoef; Corrie A M Marijnen; Johannes H W de Wilt Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2019-01-01 Impact factor: 14.766