Literature DB >> 33074347

Low preoperative maximum squeezing pressure evaluated by anorectal manometry is a risk factor for non-reversal of diverting stoma.

Risa Fukui1, Hiroaki Nozawa2, Yugo Hirata2, Kazushige Kawai2, Keisuke Hata2, Toshiaki Tanaka2, Takeshi Nishikawa2, Yasutaka Shuno2, Kazuhito Sasaki2, Manabu Kaneko2, Koji Murono2, Shigenobu Emoto2, Hirofumi Sonoda2, Hiroaki Ishii2, Soichiro Ishihara2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: A diverting stoma is created to prevent anastomotic leakage and related complications impairing sphincteric function in rectal surgery. However, diverting stoma may be left unclosed. This study is aimed to analyze preoperative factors including anorectal manometric data associated with diverting stoma non-reversal before rectal surgery. We also addressed complications related to diverting stoma in patients undergoing surgery for rectal malignant tumor.
METHODS: A total of 203 patients with rectal malignant tumor who underwent sphincter-preserving surgery with diverting stoma were retrospectively evaluated. The risk factors for non-reversal of diverting stoma were identified by univariate and multivariate analyses. For these analyses, anorectal manometric data were measured before rectal surgery. The association between stoma-related complications and other clinicopathological features was also analyzed.
RESULTS: During the median follow-up of 46.4 months, 24% (49 patients) did not undergo stoma reversal. Among parameters that were available before rectal surgery, age ≥ 75 years, albumin < 3.5 g/dl, tumor size ≥ 30 mm, tumor distance from the anal verge < 4 cm, and maximum squeezing pressure (MSP) < 130 mmHg measured by anorectal manometry (ARM) were independent factors associated with stoma non-reversal. The most common stoma-related complication was peristomal skin irritation (25%). Ileostomy was the only factor associated with peristomal skin irritation.
CONCLUSION: The current study demonstrated that low preoperative MSP evaluated by ARM, old age, hypoalbuminemia, and a large tumor close to the anus were predictive of diverting stoma non-reversal. Stoma site should be well deliberated when patients have the aforementioned risk factors for diverting stoma non-reversal.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anorectal manometry; Diverting stoma; Rectal tumor; Stoma non-reversal

Year:  2020        PMID: 33074347     DOI: 10.1007/s00423-020-02011-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg        ISSN: 1435-2443            Impact factor:   3.445


  25 in total

Review 1.  Role of protective stoma in low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sheng-Wen Wu; Cong-Chao Ma; Yu Yang
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-12-21       Impact factor: 5.742

2.  Loop ileostomies in colorectal cancer patients--morbidity and risk factors for nonreversal.

Authors:  Bodil Gessler; Eva Haglind; Eva Angenete
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2012-08-26       Impact factor: 2.192

3.  Use of a nomogram to predict the closure rate of diverting ileostomy after low anterior resection: A retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Shinya Abe; Kazushige Kawai; Hiroaki Nozawa; Keisuke Hata; Tomomichi Kiyomatsu; Toshiaki Tanaka; Takeshi Nishikawa; Kensuke Otani; Kazuhito Sasaki; Manabu Kaneko; Koji Murono; Shigenobu Emoto; Toshiaki Watanabe
Journal:  Int J Surg       Date:  2017-09-22       Impact factor: 6.071

4.  Failing to reverse a diverting stoma after lower anterior resection of rectal cancer.

Authors:  Andrew Chiu; Hong T Chan; Carl J Brown; Manoj J Raval; P Terry Phang
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2014-03-12       Impact factor: 2.565

5.  Early results of intersphincteric resection for patients with very low rectal cancer: an active approach to avoid a permanent colostomy.

Authors:  Norio Saito; Masato Ono; Masanori Sugito; Masaaki Ito; Masato Morihiro; Chihiro Kosugi; Kazunori Sato; Masahito Kotaka; Satoru Nomura; Manabu Arai; Takaya Kobatake
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2004-02-25       Impact factor: 4.585

Review 6.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of the role of defunctioning stoma in low rectal cancer surgery.

Authors:  Norbert Hüser; Christoph W Michalski; Mert Erkan; Tibor Schuster; Robert Rosenberg; Jörg Kleeff; Helmut Friess
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  Risk Factors for Nonclosure of a Temporary Defunctioning Ileostomy Following Anterior Resection of Rectal Cancer.

Authors:  Hong-Da Pan; Yi-Fan Peng; Lin Wang; Ming Li; Yun-Feng Yao; Jun Zhao; Tian-Cheng Zhan; Jin Gu
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 4.585

8.  Results of intersphincteric resection of the rectum with direct coloanal anastomosis for rectal carcinoma.

Authors:  J Braun; K H Treutner; G Winkeltau; U Heidenreich; M M Lerch; V Schumpelick
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 2.565

9.  Defunctioning stoma reduces symptomatic anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection of the rectum for cancer: a randomized multicenter trial.

Authors:  Peter Matthiessen; Olof Hallböök; Jörgen Rutegård; Göran Simert; Rune Sjödahl
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  Defunctioning Ileostomy Reversal Rates and Reasons for Delayed Reversal: Does Delay Impact on Complications of Ileostomy Reversal? A Study of 170 Defunctioning Ileostomies.

Authors:  Peter Waterland; Kolitha Goonetilleke; David N Naumann; Mathew Sutcliff; Faris Soliman
Journal:  J Clin Med Res       Date:  2015-07-24
View more
  1 in total

1.  Survey Regarding Gastrointestinal Stoma Construction and Closure in Japan.

Authors:  Yoshiko Ando; Arata Takahashi; Makoto Fujii; Hiroshi Hasegawa; Toshimoto Kimura; Hiroyuki Yamamoto; Tetsuya Tajima; Yukio Nishiguchi; Yoshihiro Kakeji; Hiroaki Miyata; Yuko Kitagawa
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol Surg       Date:  2021-11-06
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.