Yolanda Ribas1, Francesc Aguilar2, Esther Jovell-Fernández3, Ladislao Cayetano2, Albert Navarro-Luna4, Arantxa Muñoz-Duyos4. 1. Department of Surgery, Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa, Ctra. de Torrebonica s/n, 080227, Terrassa, Barcelona, Spain. yribas@cst.cat. 2. Department of Surgery, Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa, Ctra. de Torrebonica s/n, 080227, Terrassa, Barcelona, Spain. 3. Department of Epidemiology, Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa, Terrassa, Spain. 4. Department of Surgery, Hospital Universitari Mútua Terrassa, Terrassa, Spain.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The impact of the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) on quality of life has underscored the importance of measuring functional outcomes after treatment for rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the LARS score as a single questionnaire was useful enough in the clinical setting. METHODS: Patients treated by curative anterior resection for rectal cancer were sent the LARS score and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 questionnaires by post. Patients classified as "minor" and "major" LARS according to the LARS score were visited. Assessment included several scores (Vaizey score, Altomare Obstructed Defecation Syndrome score, Bristol scale). Patients with urgency/faecal incontinence also filled in a bowel diary and the FIQL score. RESULTS: Seventy patients returned the questionnaires, 49 of whom ("major LARS" and "minor LARS") were visited and 19 ("no LARS") were assessed by phone. Four different clinical patterns were identified. The group with urgency/faecal incontinence was the largest (33.8 %), whereas 17.7 % referred evacuatory dysfunction. The LARS score did not correctly evaluate 18 patients: 5 who were classified as no LARS but had severe evacuatory dysfunction and 13 patients categorized as LARS but without significant bowel dysfunction, 9 of whom were classified as major LARS. CONCLUSION: The LARS score may overestimate the impact on quality of life in some patients and may underestimate the impact of severe evacuatory dysfunction. Due to the complexity of the LARS, the LARS score as a single questionnaire might not be enough to assess bowel function. A complete clinical evaluation and additional questionnaires might be required.
PURPOSE: The impact of the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) on quality of life has underscored the importance of measuring functional outcomes after treatment for rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the LARS score as a single questionnaire was useful enough in the clinical setting. METHODS:Patients treated by curative anterior resection for rectal cancer were sent the LARS score and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 questionnaires by post. Patients classified as "minor" and "major" LARS according to the LARS score were visited. Assessment included several scores (Vaizey score, Altomare Obstructed Defecation Syndrome score, Bristol scale). Patients with urgency/faecal incontinence also filled in a bowel diary and the FIQL score. RESULTS: Seventy patients returned the questionnaires, 49 of whom ("major LARS" and "minor LARS") were visited and 19 ("no LARS") were assessed by phone. Four different clinical patterns were identified. The group with urgency/faecal incontinence was the largest (33.8 %), whereas 17.7 % referred evacuatory dysfunction. The LARS score did not correctly evaluate 18 patients: 5 who were classified as no LARS but had severe evacuatory dysfunction and 13 patients categorized as LARS but without significant bowel dysfunction, 9 of whom were classified as major LARS. CONCLUSION: The LARS score may overestimate the impact on quality of life in some patients and may underestimate the impact of severe evacuatory dysfunction. Due to the complexity of the LARS, the LARS score as a single questionnaire might not be enough to assess bowel function. A complete clinical evaluation and additional questionnaires might be required.
Entities:
Keywords:
Evacuatory dysfunction; Faecal incontinence; LARS score; Low anterior resection syndrome; Rectal cancer
Authors: Adena S Scheer; Robin P Boushey; Shuyin Liang; Steve Doucette; Annette M O'Connor; David Moher Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Catherine L C Bryant; Peter J Lunniss; Charles H Knowles; Mohamed A Thaha; Christopher L H Chan Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2012-09 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: N K Aaronson; S Ahmedzai; B Bergman; M Bullinger; A Cull; N J Duez; A Filiberti; H Flechtner; S B Fleishman; J C de Haes Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1993-03-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: H Jervoise N Andreyev; Susan E Davidson; Catherine Gillespie; William H Allum; Edwin Swarbrick Journal: Gut Date: 2011-11-04 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: F Al-Rashid; S Robitaille; A S Liberman; P Charlebois; B Stein; L S Feldman; J F Fiore; L Lee Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2022-01-18 Impact factor: 3.781
Authors: F Al Rashid; A S Liberman; P Charlebois; B Stein; L S Feldman; J F Fiore; L Lee Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2022-03-03 Impact factor: 3.699
Authors: Anne Asnong; André D'Hoore; Marijke Van Kampen; Nele Devoogdt; An De Groef; Kim Sterckx; Hilde Lemkens; Albert Wolthuis; Yves Van Molhem; Bart Van Geluwe; Lynn Debrun; Inge Geraerts Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-01-22 Impact factor: 2.692