C La Raja1,2, C Foppa1,2, A Maroli2, C Kontovounisios3,4,5, N Ben David2, M Carvello1,2, A Spinelli6,7. 1. Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy. 2. Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy. 3. Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK. 4. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, London, UK. 5. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK. 6. Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy. antonino.spinelli@hunimed.eu. 7. Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy. antonino.spinelli@hunimed.eu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Theoretical advantages of Turnbull-Cutait pull-through delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCAA) are a reduced risk of anastomotic leak and therefore avoidance of stoma. Gradually abandoned in favor of immediate coloanal anastomosis (ICAA) with diverting stoma, DCAA has regained popularity in recent years in reconstructive surgery for low RC, especially when combined with minimally invasive surgery (MIS). The aim of this study was to perform the first meta-analysis, exploring the safety and outcomes of DCAA compared to ICAA with protective stoma. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL and Google Scholar databases was performed for studies published from January 2000 until December 2020. The systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review on Interventions recommendations and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. RESULTS: Out of 2626 studies screened, 9 were included in the systematic review and 4 studies in the meta-analysis. Outcomes included were postoperative complications, pelvic sepsis and risk of definitive stoma. Considering postoperative complications classified as Clavien-Dindo III, no significant difference existed in the rate of postoperative morbidity between DCAA and ICAA (13% versus 21%; OR 1.17; 95% CI 0.38-3.62; p = 0.78; I2 = 20%). Patients in the DCAA group experienced a lower rate of postoperative pelvic sepsis compared with patients undergoing ICAA with diverting stoma (7% versus 14%; OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.16-0.85; p = 0.02; I2 = 0%). The risk of definitive stoma was comparable between the two groups (2% versus 2% OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.15-3.85; p = 0.75; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: According to the limited current evidence, DCAA is associated with a significant decrease in pelvic sepsis. Further prospective trials focusing on oncologic and functional outcomes are needed.
BACKGROUND: Theoretical advantages of Turnbull-Cutait pull-through delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCAA) are a reduced risk of anastomotic leak and therefore avoidance of stoma. Gradually abandoned in favor of immediate coloanal anastomosis (ICAA) with diverting stoma, DCAA has regained popularity in recent years in reconstructive surgery for low RC, especially when combined with minimally invasive surgery (MIS). The aim of this study was to perform the first meta-analysis, exploring the safety and outcomes of DCAA compared to ICAA with protective stoma. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL and Google Scholar databases was performed for studies published from January 2000 until December 2020. The systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review on Interventions recommendations and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. RESULTS: Out of 2626 studies screened, 9 were included in the systematic review and 4 studies in the meta-analysis. Outcomes included were postoperative complications, pelvic sepsis and risk of definitive stoma. Considering postoperative complications classified as Clavien-Dindo III, no significant difference existed in the rate of postoperative morbidity between DCAA and ICAA (13% versus 21%; OR 1.17; 95% CI 0.38-3.62; p = 0.78; I2 = 20%). Patients in the DCAA group experienced a lower rate of postoperative pelvic sepsis compared with patients undergoing ICAA with diverting stoma (7% versus 14%; OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.16-0.85; p = 0.02; I2 = 0%). The risk of definitive stoma was comparable between the two groups (2% versus 2% OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.15-3.85; p = 0.75; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: According to the limited current evidence, DCAA is associated with a significant decrease in pelvic sepsis. Further prospective trials focusing on oncologic and functional outcomes are needed.
Authors: Anne K Danielsen; Jennifer Park; Jens E Jansen; David Bock; Stefan Skullman; Anette Wedin; Adiela Correa Marinez; Eva Haglind; Eva Angenete; Jacob Rosenberg Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Magdalena Pisarska; Natalia Gajewska; Piotr Małczak; Michał Wysocki; Jan Witowski; Grzegorz Torbicz; Piotr Major; Magdalena Mizera; Marcin Dembiński; Marcin Migaczewski; Andrzej Budzyński; Michał Pędziwiatr Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2018-04-17