Shun-Yu Deng1,2, Jia-Di Xing2, Mao-Xing Liu2, Kai Xu2, Fei Tan2, Zhen-Dan Yao2, Nan Zhang2, Hong Yang2, Cheng-Hai Zhang2, Ming Cui2, Xiang-Qian Su3. 1. Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, 100038, China. 2. Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery IV, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Haidian District, No. 52 Fucheng Road, Beijing, 100142, China. 3. Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery IV, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Haidian District, No. 52 Fucheng Road, Beijing, 100142, China. suxiangqian@bjmu.edu.cn.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a common postoperative complication of rectal cancer, and transanal drainage tube (TDT) efficacy is still contentious. This study aimed to evaluate the TDT effect on AL prevention. METHODS: All relevant papers were searched by using a predefined search strategy (two randomized controlled trials (RCTs), one prospective study, and four retrospective studies). Meta-analysis was conducted to estimate AL and re-operation pooled rates. RESULTS: A total of 7 studies (1556 patients) were included: No significant statistic difference was found between two groups on AL rate (odds ratio (OR) 0.61, P = 0.11) and re-operation rate (OR 0.52, P = 0.10). For subgroup analysis, significant statistic difference was found between two groups on AL rate (OR 0.29, P = 0.002) and re-operation rate (OR 0.15, P = 0.04) in patients without neoadjuvant therapy. As for patients without diverting stoma, the AL rate (OR 0.35, P = 0.002) was significantly lower than that in patients without TDT. CONCLUSIONS: TDT may reduce AL morbidity and re-operation rate for patients without high risk of AL, but may be useless for those in high-risk situations.
PURPOSE: Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a common postoperative complication of rectal cancer, and transanal drainage tube (TDT) efficacy is still contentious. This study aimed to evaluate the TDT effect on AL prevention. METHODS: All relevant papers were searched by using a predefined search strategy (two randomized controlled trials (RCTs), one prospective study, and four retrospective studies). Meta-analysis was conducted to estimate AL and re-operation pooled rates. RESULTS: A total of 7 studies (1556 patients) were included: No significant statistic difference was found between two groups on AL rate (odds ratio (OR) 0.61, P = 0.11) and re-operation rate (OR 0.52, P = 0.10). For subgroup analysis, significant statistic difference was found between two groups on AL rate (OR 0.29, P = 0.002) and re-operation rate (OR 0.15, P = 0.04) in patients without neoadjuvant therapy. As for patients without diverting stoma, the AL rate (OR 0.35, P = 0.002) was significantly lower than that in patients without TDT. CONCLUSIONS: TDT may reduce AL morbidity and re-operation rate for patients without high risk of AL, but may be useless for those in high-risk situations.