直肠癌术后预防性造口不能还纳危险因素及干预手段研究进展

林然, 温镕博, 张卫, 于冠宇

中国实用外科杂志 ›› 2025, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (12) : 1476-1481.

PDF(1298 KB)
PDF(1298 KB)
中国实用外科杂志 ›› 2025, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (12) : 1476-1481. DOI: 10.19538/j.cjps.issn1005-2208.2025.12.23
文献综述

直肠癌术后预防性造口不能还纳危险因素及干预手段研究进展

作者信息 +

Research progress on risk factors and interventions for non-reversal of preventive stoma after rectal cancer surgery

Author information +
文章历史 +

摘要

直肠癌低位前切除术后常行预防性造口以降低吻合口漏等严重并发症风险,但6%~23%的预防性造口最终转为永久性造口,严重影响病人生理及心理健康。预防性造口不能还纳的主要危险因素包括吻合口漏、吻合口狭窄、局部复发及远处转移,新辅助放化疗及肛门功能不良亦可能增加风险。其他潜在影响因素还涉及高龄、男性、环周切缘阳性、营养不良、肿瘤分期晚及美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)分级高等。吻合口漏被认为是最重要的危险因素,既与炎症导致的吻合口狭窄相关,也会因病人恐惧复手术而影响还纳决策。局部复发和远处转移可导致机械性肠梗阻,从而构成造口还纳禁忌。干预措施方面,术中吲哚菁绿荧光造影、经肛管减压管及吻合口漏早期内镜真空辅助治疗均可降低并发症风险;吻合口狭窄可通过内镜球囊扩张、支架置入或再次吻合处理。改善肛门功能的措施包括适形保肛手术、盆底康复、骶神经刺激及经肛灌洗等。识别并干预高危因素、优化围手术期管理及重视功能康复是提高预防性造口还纳率、改善病人生存质量的关键。

Abstract

Preventive stoma is often created after low anterior resection for rectal cancer to reduce the risk of severe complications such as anastomotic leakage. However, 6%-23% of preventive stomas ultimately become permanent, severely affecting patients’ physiological and psychological well-being. Major risk factors for non-reversal of preventive stoma include anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stricture, local recurrence, and distant metastasis, while neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and impaired anal function may also increase the risk. Additional potential factors include advanced age, male sex, positive circumferential resection margin, malnutrition, advanced tumor stage, and high American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification. Anastomotic leakage is considered the most important risk factor, as it is associated with stricture due to inflammation and may also influence patients’ decisions against reversal due to fear of reoperation. Local recurrence and distant metastasis can cause mechanical intestinal obstruction, constituting contraindications for stoma reversal. Interventions including intraoperative indocyanine green fluorescence angiography, transanal decompression tube placement, and early endoscopic vacuum-assisted therapy can reduce complication risk; anastomotic strictures can be managed with endoscopic balloon dilation, stent placement, or redo anastomosis. Measures to improve anal function include conformal sphincter preserving operation, pelvic floor rehabilitation, sacral nerve stimulation, and transanal irrigation. Identifying and intervening in high-risk factors, optimizing perioperative management, and emphasizing functional rehabilitation are key to increasing stoma reversal rates and improving patients’ quality of life.

关键词

直肠肿瘤 / 预防性造口 / 永久性造口 / 危险因素 / 干预手段

Key words

rectal cancer / protective stoma / permanent stoma / risk factors / intervention measures

引用本文

导出引用
林然, 温镕博, 张卫, . 直肠癌术后预防性造口不能还纳危险因素及干预手段研究进展[J]. 中国实用外科杂志. 2025, 45(12): 1476-1481 https://doi.org/10.19538/j.cjps.issn1005-2208.2025.12.23
LIN Ran, WEN Rong-bo, ZHANG Wei, et al. Research progress on risk factors and interventions for non-reversal of preventive stoma after rectal cancer surgery[J]. Chinese Journal of Practical Surgery. 2025, 45(12): 1476-1481 https://doi.org/10.19538/j.cjps.issn1005-2208.2025.12.23
中图分类号: R6   

参考文献

[1]
Bray F, Laversanne M, Sung H, et al. Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2024, 74(3):229-263.DOI:10.3322/caac.21834.
[2]
Engel RM, Oliva K, Centauri S, et al. Impact of anastomotic leak on long-term oncological outcomes after restorative surgery for rectal cancer: A retrospective cohort study[J]. Dis Colon Rectum, 2023, 66(7):923-933.DOI:10.1097/DCR.0000000000002454.
Anastomotic leak after restorative surgery for rectal cancer is a major complication and may lead to worse long-term oncological and survival outcomes.
[3]
He F, Tang C, Yang F, et al. Preoperative risk factors and cumulative incidence of temporary ileostomy non-closure after sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer: A meta-analysis[J]. World J Surg Oncol, 2024, 22(1):94.DOI:10.1186/s12957-024-03363-z.
Temporary ileostomy (TI) has proven effective in reducing the severity of anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery; however, some ileostomies fail to reverse over time, leading to conversion into a permanent stoma (PS). In this study, we aimed to investigate the preoperative risk factors and cumulative incidence of TI non-closure after sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer.We conducted a meta-analysis after searching the Embase, Web of Science, PubMed, and MEDLINE databases from their inception until November 2023. We collected all published studies on the risk factors related to TI non-closure after sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer.A total of 1610 studies were retrieved, and 13 studies were included for meta-analysis, comprising 3026 patients. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the identified risk factors included older age (p = 0.03), especially > 65 years of age (p = 0.03), male sex (p = 0.009), American Society of Anesthesiologists score ≥ 3 (p = 0.004), comorbidity (p = 0.001), and distant metastasis (p < 0.001). Body mass index, preoperative hemoglobin, preoperative albumin, preoperative carcinoma embryonic antigen, tumor location, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, smoking, history of abdominal surgery, and open surgery did not significantly change the risk of TI non-closure.We identified five preoperative risk factors for TI non-closure after sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer. This information enables surgeons to identify high-risk groups before surgery, inform patients about the possibility of PS in advance, and consider performing protective colostomy or Hartmann surgery.© 2024. The Author(s).
[4]
Tan W, Cai S, Wu J, et al. Risk prediction models for permanence of temporary stoma after radical surgery of rectal cancer: A systematic review[J]. World J Surg Oncol, 2025, 23(1):246. DOI: 10.1186/s12957-025-03895-y.
To methodologically assess the prediction model for temporary stoma permanence in patients with rectal cancer and provide evidence-based guidance for the construction and clinical application of related models.From launch to January 3, 2025, computer searches were performed in nine databases. Two researchers independently searched the literature, and the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction Checklist for Systematic Evaluation of Predictive Modelling was used to extract data. The Predictive Modelling Research Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used to assess the studies' applicability and risk of bias.Nine studies were incorporated, exhibiting AUC/C-index values between 0.612 and 0.942, signifying good predictive efficacy in some models. Nonetheless, the included studies showed restricted applicability and a high risk of bias, especially regarding the selection of research populations and data analysis. The predominant determinants across models encompassed T-stage, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, carcinoembryonic antigen level, distant metastasis, lymph node metastasis, anastomotic leakage, and age.Current prediction models for temporary stoma permanence in rectal cancer patients exhibit significant limitations. In order to improve the accuracy of clinical predictions and inform clinical decision-making, future research should improve study design and reporting standards, as well as build and verify a prediction model that is highly applicable to real-world clinical demands and has a low risk of bias.PROSPERO: CRD420250637947.© 2025. The Author(s).
[5]
Wen R, Zheng K, Zhang Q, et al. Machine learning-based random forest predicts anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer[J]. J Gastrointest Oncol, 2021, 12(3):921-932.DOI:10.21037/jgo-20-436.
Anastomotic leakage (AL) is one of the commonest and most serious complications after rectal cancer surgery. The previous analyses on predictors for AL included small-scale patients, and their prediction models performed unsatisfactorily.Clinical data of 5,220 patients who underwent anterior resection for rectal cancer were scrutinized to create a prediction model via random forest classifier. Additionally, data of 836 patients served as the test dataset. Patients diagnosed with AL within 6 months' follow-up were recorded. A total of 20 candidate factors were included. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was conducted to determine the clinical efficacy of our model, and compare the predictive performance of different models.The incidence of AL was 6.2% (326/5,220). A multivariate logistic regression analysis and the random forest classifier indicated that sex, distance of tumor from the anal verge, bowel stenosis or obstruction, preoperative hemoglobin, surgeon volume, diabetes, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, and surgical approach were significantly associated with AL. After propensity score matching, the temporary stoma was not identified as a protective factor for AL (P=0.58). Contrastingly, the first year of performing laparoscopic surgery was a predictor (P=0.009). We created a predictive random forest classifier based on the above predictors that demonstrated satisfactory prediction efficacy. The area under the curve (AUC) showed that the random forest had higher efficiency (AUC =0.87) than the nomogram (AUC =0.724).Our findings suggest that eight factors may affect the incidence of AL. Our random forest classifier is an innovative and practical model to effectively predict AL, and could provide rational advice on whether to perform a temporary stoma, which might reduce the rate of stoma and avoid the ensuing complications.2021 Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology. All rights reserved.
[6]
Ge Z, Zhao X, Liu Z, et al. Complications of preventive loop ileostomy versus colostomy: A meta-analysis,trial sequential analysis, and systematic review[J]. BMC Surg, 2023, 23(1):235.DOI:10.1186/s12893-023-02129-w.
Preventive colostomy is required for colorectal surgery, and the incidence of complications associated with ileostomy and colostomy remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the incidence of postoperative complications between ileostomy and colostomy procedures.
[7]
Chaouch MA, Kellil T, Jeddi C, et al. How to prevent anastomotic leak in colorectal surgery? a systematic review[J]. Ann Coloproctol, 2020, 36(4):213-222.DOI:10.3393/ac.2020.05.14.2.
Anastomosis leakage (AL) after colorectal surgery is an embarrassing problem. It is associated with poor consequence. This review aims to summarize published evidence on prevention of AL after colorectal surgery and provide recommendations according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. We conducted bibliographic research on January 15, 2020, of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar. We retained meta-analysis, reviews, and randomized clinical trials. We concluded that mechanical bowel preparation did not reduce AL. It seems that oral antibiotic or oral antibiotic with mechanical bowel preparation could reduce the risk of AL. The surgical approach did not affect the AL rate. The low ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery could reduce the AL rate. The mechanical anastomosis is superior to handsewn anastomosis only in case of right colectomies, with similar results in rectal surgery between the 2 anastomosis techniques. In the case of right colectomies, this anastomosis could be performed intracorporeally or extracorporeally with similar outcomes. The air leak test did not reduce AL. There is no interest of external drainage in colonic surgery but drains reduced the rate of AL and rate of reoperation after low anterior resection. The transanal tube reduced the rate of AL.
[8]
Song L, Han X, Zhang J, et al. Body image mediates the effect of stoma status on psychological distress and quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer[J]. Psychooncology, 2020, 29(4):796-802.DOI: 10.1002/pon.5352.
We investigated the effect of stoma status (permanent stoma, temporary stoma, or non-stoma) on psychological distress and quality of life (QOL) in Chinese patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) in the early postoperative stage. We also investigated whether body image mediated the association between stoma status and psychological distress and QOL.A convenience sample of 282 CRC patients 1 to 2 weeks postsurgery participated in an observational, cross-sectional study. Participants completed the following self-report measures: Body Image Scale, Distress Thermometer, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and Core Quality of Life Questionnaire.The temporary stoma group (TS) and the permanent stoma group (PS) reported worse body image and higher levels of anxiety and depression than the non-stoma group (P < .05). PS reported worse body image than TS (P < .01). Depression and significant body image problems were more prevalent in PS than in TS (P < .05). Stoma status was the strongest factor associated with body image, distress, and depression (P < .05). CRC patients who were younger or in later clinical stages had poorer body image. Body image fully mediated the effect of stoma status on anxiety, depression, and global QOL in PS and TS, but mediated the effect on distress only in PS.Body image problems are common in stoma patients in the early postoperative stage and require early assessment. This study helps to elucidate the role of body image as a mediator. Longitudinal studies are needed to further explore body image distress trajectories.© 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
[9]
李东明, 宋建宁, 杨鋆, 等. 直肠癌根治术预防性回肠造口术后还纳失败的预后因素分析[J]. 中华外科杂志, 2022, 60(8):756-761.DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn112139-20220321-00126.
[10]
Davis BR, Valente MA, Goldberg JE, et al. The American Society of colon and rectal surgeons clinical practice guidelines for ostomy surgery[J]. Dis Colon Rectum, 2022, 65(10):1173-1190.DOI:10.1097/DCR.0000000000002498.
[11]
中国医师协会肛肠医师分会造口专业委员会, 中国医师协会肛肠医师分会, 中华医学会外科学分会结直肠外科学组, 等. 中低位直肠癌手术预防性肠造口中国专家共识(2022版)[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志, 2022, 25(6):471-478.DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn116260-20220421-00217.
[12]
Kuo CY, Lin YK, Wei PL, et al. Clinical assessment for non-reversal stoma and stoma re-creation after reversal surgery for patients with rectal cancer having undergoing sphincter-saving operation[J]. Asian J Surg, 2023, 46(5):1944-1950.DOI:10.1016/j.asjsur.2022.09.107.
[13]
Thomas F, Menahem B, Lebreton G, et al. Permanent stoma after sphincter preservation for rectal cancer: A situation that occurs more often than you might think[J]. Front Oncol, 2023, 12:1056314.DOI:10.3389/fonc.2022.1056314.
[14]
Huang SH, Tsai KY, Tsai TY, et al. Preoperative risk stratification of permanent stoma in patients with non-metastatic mid and low rectal cancer undergoing curative resection and a temporary stoma[J]. Langenbecks Arch Surg, 2022, 407(5):1991-1999.DOI:10.1007/s00423-022-02503-x.
[15]
Burghgraef TA, Geitenbeek RTJ, Broekman M, et al. Permanent stoma rate and long-term stoma complications in laparoscopic,robot-assisted, and transanal total mesorectal excisions: A retrospective cohort study[J]. Surg Endosc, 2024, 38(1):105-115.DOI:10.1007/s00464-023-10517-9.
The surgical resection of rectal carcinoma is associated with a high risk of permanent stoma rate. Primary anastomosis rate is suggested to be higher in robot-assisted and transanal total mesorectal excision, but permanent stoma rate is unknown.
[16]
Greijdanus NG, Wienholts K, Ubels S, et al. Stoma-free survival after rectal cancer resection with anastomotic leakage: Development and validation of a prediction model in a large international cohort[J]. Ann Surg, 2023, 278(5):772-780.DOI:10.1097/SLA.0000000000006043.
This study aimed to develop and validate a prediction model (STOMA-score) for one-year stoma-free survival in rectal cancer (RC) patients with anastomotic leakage (AL).AL after RC resection often results in a permanent stoma.This international retrospective cohort study (TENTACLE-Rectum) encompassed 216 participating centres, and included patients who developed AL after RC surgery between 2014-2018. Clinically relevant predictors for one-year stoma-free survival were included in uni- and multivariable logistic regression models. The STOMA-score was developed and internally validated in a cohort of patients operated between 2014-2017, with subsequent temporal validation in a 2018 cohort. The discriminative power and calibration of the models' performance were evaluated.This study included 2499 AL patients; 1954 in the development cohort and 545 in the validation cohort. Baseline characteristics were comparable. One-year stoma-free survival was 45.0% in the development cohort and 43.7% in the validation cohort. The following predictors were included in the STOMA-score: sex, age, ASA-classification, body mass index, clinical M-disease, neoadjuvant therapy, abdominal- and transanal approach, primary defunctioning stoma, multivisceral resection, clinical setting in which AL was diagnosed, postoperative day of AL diagnosis, abdominal contamination, anastomotic defect circumference, bowel wall ischemia, anastomotic fistula, retraction and reactivation leakage. The STOMA-score showed good discrimination and calibration (c-index 0.71, 95%CI 0.66-0.76).The STOMA-score consists of eighteen clinically relevant factors and estimates the individual risk for one-year stoma-free survival in patients with AL after RC surgery, which may improve patient counselling and give guidance when analyzing efficacy of different treatment strategies in future studies.Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
[17]
Li C, Qin X, Yang Z, et al. A nomogram to predict the incidence of permanent stoma in elderly patients with rectal cancer[J]. Ann Transl Med, 2021, 9(4):342.DOI:10.21037/atm-21-29.
Creation of a temporary diverting stoma during rectal cancer surgery is used widely to prevent undesirable outcomes related to anastomotic leakage (AL). The transition from temporary stoma (TS) to permanent stoma (PS) is a frequent outcome. Elderly patients may have a greater probability of PS. We aimed to identify risk factors of PS and developed a nomogram to predict the rate of PS for elderly patients.We enrolled elderly patients (≥70 years) who underwent rectal cancer surgery with a TS between January 2014 and December 2017 at our hospital. We divided patients into two groups: a TS group and a PS group. We then identified the risk factors for PS and developed a nomogram to predict the possibility of PS.Of the 278 elderly patients who received a diverting stoma, 220 (79.14%) eventually underwent stoma reversal, and 58 (20.86%) had PS. The proportion of males in the PS group was significantly higher than that of the TS group (P=0.048). Univariate and multivariate analysis showed that American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (P<0.001), laparotomy (P=0.004), AL (P<0.001), and tumor recurrence (P<0.001) were significantly correlated with PS. These four factors were included to construct the nomogram. The consistency index of the nomogram was 0.833 and the model yielded an area under the curve of 0.833.ASA score (≥3), laparotomy, AL, and tumor recurrence were independent risk factors for PS in elderly patients. Our nomogram exhibited moderate predictive ability.2021 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved.
[18]
da-Fonseca LM, Buzatti KCLR, Castro LL, et al. Factors preventing restoration of bowel continuity in patients with rectal cancer submitted to anterior rectal resection and protective ileostomy[J]. Rev Col Bras Cir, 2019, 45(6):e1998.DOI:10.1590/0100-6991e-20191998.
to evaluate the factors associated with non-closure of protective ileostomy after anterior resection of the rectum with total mesorectum excision for rectal cancer, the morbidity associated with the closure of ileostomies and the rate of permanent ileostomy in patients with rectal adenocarcinoma.we conducted a retrospective study with 174 consecutive patients diagnosed with rectal tumors, of whom 92 underwent anterior resection of the rectum with coloanal or colorectal anastomosis and protective ileostomy, with curative intent. We carried out a multivariate analysis to determine the factors associated with definite permanence of the stoma, as well as studied the morbidity of patients who underwent bowel continuity restoration.In the 84-month follow-up period, 54 of the 92 patients evaluated (58.7%) had the ileostomy closed and 38 (41.3%) remained with the stoma. Among the 62 patients who had the ileostomy closed, 11 (17.7%) presented some type of postoperative complication: three had ileal anastomosis dehiscence, five had intestinal obstruction, two had surgical wound infection, and one, pneumonia. Eight of these patients required a new stoma.according to the multivariate analysis, the factors associated with stoma permanence were anastomotic fistula, presence of metastases and closure of the ileostomy during chemotherapy.
[19]
汪欣宇, 陶燃, 屈展, 等. 经腹直肠癌前切除术临时性造口永久化的危险因素分析[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志, 2020, 23(8):780-785.DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn116260-20191010-00537.
[20]
Lee SY, Kim CH, Kim YJ, et al. Anastomotic stricture after ultralow anterior resection or intersphincteric resection for very low-lying rectal cancer[J]. Surg Endosc, 2018, 32(2):660-666.DOI:10.1007/s00464-017-5718-3.
Anastomotic stricture following colorectal cancer surgery is not a rare complication, but proper management of anastomotic stricture located close to the anal verge is uncertain. This study aimed to investigate risk factors and management strategies for anastomotic stricture after ultralow anterior resection (ULAR).We retrospectively reviewed a database of patients with rectal cancer who underwent surgery between January 2007 and June 2015, and included patients with an anastomosis within 4 cm from the anal verge. Clinical outcomes and risk factors for anastomotic stricture were investigated.Among the 586 patients included, 46 (7.8%) were diagnosed as having anastomotic stricture. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that intersphincteric resection (ISR) with hand-sewn anastomosis (odds ratio [OR] = 3.070; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.247-7.557) and postoperative radiotherapy (OR 6.237; 95% CI 1.961-19.841) were independent risk factors of anastomotic stricture. Forty-one (89.1%) underwent anastomotic dilatation with a Hegar dilator; while three patients (6.5%) underwent endoscopic balloon dilatation and two (4.3%) underwent surgery initially. Among the patients with initial nonoperative management (n = 44), 21 (47.7%) were completely cured with nonoperative management alone, 12 (27.3%) experienced complications, such as bowel perforation, anastomotic rupture, and perirectal abscess; and 21 (47.7%) underwent further surgical management. Fifteen patients (32.6%) eventually had permanent stoma.ISR with a hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis, compared to ULAR with double-stapling anastomosis, and postoperative radiotherapy were independent risk factors of anastomotic stricture after surgery for very low-lying rectal cancer. Nonoperative anastomotic dilatation showed poor clinical outcome, with high complication rates, and subsequent surgical management. Therefore, nonoperative management of such patients should be carefully selected.
[21]
Kuo CY, Wei PL, Chen CC, et al. Nomogram to predict permanent stoma in rectal cancer patients after sphincter-saving surgery[J]. World J Gastrointest Surg, 2022, 14(8):765-777.DOI:10.4240/wjgs.v14.i8.765.
[22]
Zhang B, Zhuo GZ, Zhao K, et al. Cumulative incidence and risk factors of permanent stoma after intersphincteric resection for ultralow rectal cancer[J]. Dis Colon Rectum, 2022, 65(1):66-75.DOI:10.1097/DCR.0000000000002036.
A permanent stoma is an unintended consequence that cannot be avoided completely after intersphincteric resection for ultralow rectal cancer. Unfortunately, its incidence and risk factors have been poorly defined.The objective was to determine the cumulative incidence and risk factors of permanent stoma after intersphincteric resection for ultralow rectal cancer.This study was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data.This study was conducted at a colorectal surgery referral center.A total of 185 consecutive patients who underwent intersphincteric resection with diverting ileostomy from 2011 to 2019 were included.The primary outcome was the incidence of and risk factors for the permanent stoma. The secondary outcome included differences in stoma formation between patients with partial, subtotal, and total intersphincteric resection.After a median follow-up of 40 months (range, 6-107 months), 26 of 185 patients eventually required a permanent stoma, accounting for a 5-year cumulative incidence of 17.4%. The causes of permanent stoma were anastomotic morbidity (46.2%, 12/26), local recurrence (19.2%, 5/26), distant metastasis (19.2%, 5/26), fecal incontinence (3.8%, 1/26), perioperative mortality (3.8%, 1/26), patients' refusal (3.8%, 1/26), and poor general condition (3.8%, 1/26). Although the incidence of permanent stoma was significantly different between the intersphincteric resection groups (partial vs subtotal vs total: 8.3% vs 20% vs 25.8%, p = 0.02), it was not an independent predictor of stoma formation. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that anastomotic leakage (OR = 5.29; p = 0.001) and anastomotic stricture (OR = 5.13; p = 0.002) were independently predictive of permanent stoma.This study was limited by its retrospective nature and single-center data.The 5-year cumulative incidence of permanent stoma was 17.4%. Anastomotic complications were identified as risk factors. Patients should be informed of the risks and benefits when contemplating the ultimate sphincter-sparing surgery. It might be preferable to decrease the probability of permanent stoma by further minimizing anastomotic complications. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B704.ANTECEDENTES:La necesidad de efectuar un estoma permanente es la consecuencia no intencional e inevitable por completo después de una resección interesfintérica en presencia de un cáncer rectal ultra bajo. Desafortunadamente, la incidencia y los factores de riesgo se han definido en una forma limitada.OBJETIVO:El objetivo fue determinar la incidencia acumulada y los factores de riesgo para la necesidad de efectuar un estoma permanente después de la resección intersfintérica de un cáncer rectal ultra bajo.DISEÑO:El presente estudio es un análisis retrospectivo de la información obtenida.ESCENARIO:Centro de referencia de cirugía colo-rectal.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron un total de 185 pacientes consecutivos que se sometieron a resección intersfintérica de un cáncer rectal ultra bajo con ileostomía de derivación de 2011 a 2019.MEDICION DE RESULTADOS:El resultado principal fue la identificación de la incidencia y los factores de riesgo para la presencia de un estoma permanente. En forma secundaria se describieron los resultados de las diferentes técnicas de la formación de un estoma entre los pacientes con resección interesfintérica parcial, subtotal o total.RESULTADOS:Posterior a una media de seguimiento de cuarenta meses (rango de 6 a 107), 26 de 185 pacientes requirieron en forma eventual un estoma permanente, lo que equivale a una incidencia acumulada a cinco años de 17.4 %. Las causas para dejar un estoma permanente fueron morbilidad de la anastomosis (46.2%, 12/26), recurrencia local (19.2%, 5/26), metástasis a distancia (19.2%, 5/26), incontinencia fecal (3.8%, 1/26), mortalidad perioperatoria (3.8%, 1/26), rechazo del paciente (3.8%, 1/26), y malas condiciones generales (3.8%, 1/26). Aunque la incidencia de un estoma permanente fue significativamente diferente entre los grupos de resección interesfintérica (parcial vs subtotal vs total: 8.3% vs 20% vs 25.8%, p = 0.02), no se consideró un factor predictor independiente para la formación de estoma. En el análisis multivariado se demostró que la fuga anatomótica (OR = 5.29; p = 0.001) y la estenosis anastomótica (OR = 5.13; p = 0.002) fueron factores independientes para predecir la necesidad de un estoma permanente.LIMITACIONES:La naturaleza retrospectiva del estudio y la información proveniente de un solo centro.CONCLUSIONES:La incidencia acumulada a cinco años de estoma permantente fue de 17.4%. Se consideran a las complicaciones anastomóticas como factores de riesgo. Los pacientes deberán ser informados de los riesgos y beneficios cuando se considere la posibilidad de efectuar una cirugía preservadora de esfínteres finalmente. Puede ser preferible disminuir la probabilidad de dejar un estoma permanente tratando de minimizar la posibilidad de complicaciones de la anastomosis. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B704.Copyright © The ASCRS 2021.
[23]
Barenboim A, Geva R, Tulchinsky H. Revised risk factors and patient characteristics for failure to close a defunctioning ileostomy following low anterior resection for locally advanced rectal cancer[J]. Int J Colorectal Dis, 2022, 37(7):1611-1619.DOI:10.1007/s00384-022-04188-6.
[24]
Zhou X, Wang B, Li F, et al. Risk factors associated with nonclosure of defunctioning stomas after sphincter-preserving low anterior resection of rectal cancer: A meta-analysis[J]. Dis Colon Rectum, 2017, 60(5):544-554.DOI:10.1097/DCR.0000000000000819.
Some patients receiving defunctioning stomas will never undergo stoma reversal, but it is difficult to preoperatively predict which patients will be affected.The aim of this meta-analysis was to identify the risk factors associated with nonclosure of temporary stomas after sphincter-preserving low anterior resection for rectal cancer.We performed a comprehensive search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Library databases for all of the studies analyzing risk factors for nonclosure of defunctioning stomas.We only included articles published in English in this meta-analysis. The inclusion criteria were as follows: 1) original article with extractable data, 2) studies including only defunctioning stomas created after low anterior resection for rectal cancer, 3) studies with nonclosure rather than delayed closure as the main end point, and 4) studies analyzing risk factors for nonclosure.Defunctioning stomas were created after low anterior resection for rectal cancer.Stoma nonclosure was the only end point, and it included nonclosure and permanent stoma creation after primary stoma closure. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess methodologic quality of the studies, and risk ratios and 95% CIs were used to assess risk factors.Ten studies with 8568 patients were included. The nonclosure rate was 19% (95% CI, 13%-24%; p < 0.001; I= 96.2%). Three demographic factors were significantly associated with nonclosure: older age (risk ratio= 1.50 (95% CI, 1.12-2.02); p = 0.007; I= 39.3%), ASA score >2 (risk ratio = 1.66 (95% CI, 1.51-1.83); p < 0.001; I= 0%), and comorbidities (risk ratio = 1.58 (95% CI, 1.29-1.95); p < 0.001; I= 52.6%). Surgical complications (risk ratio = 1.89 (95% CI, 1.48-2.41); p < 0.001; I= 29.7%), postoperative anastomotic leakage (risk ratio = 3.39 (95% CI, 2.41-4.75); p < 0.001; I= 53.0%), stage IV tumor (risk ratio = 2.96 (95% CI, 1.73-5.09); p < 0.001; I= 88.1%), and local recurrence (risk ratio = 2.84 (95% CI, 2.11-3.83); p < 0.001; I= 6.8%) were strong clinical risk factors for nonclosure. Open surgery (risk ratio = 1.47 (95% CI, 1.01-2.15); p = 0.044; I= 63.6%) showed a borderline significant association with nonclosure.Data on some risk factors could not be pooled because of the low number of studies. There was conspicuous heterogeneity between the included studies, so the pooled data were not absolutely free of exaggeration or influence.Older age, ASA score >2, comorbidities, open surgery, surgical complications, anastomotic leakage, stage IV tumor, and local recurrence are risk factors for nonclosure of defunctioning stomas after low anterior resection in patients with rectal cancer, whereas tumor height, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy are not. Patients with these risk factors should be informed preoperatively of the possibility of nonreversal, and joint decision-making is preferred.
[25]
Zhang L, Zheng W, Cui J, et al. Risk factors for nonclosure of defunctioning stoma and stoma-related complications among low rectal cancer patients after sphincter-preserving surgery[J]. Chronic Dis Transl Med, 2020, 6(3):188-197.DOI:10.1016/j.cdtm.2020.02.004.
[26]
胡刚, 刘军广, 邱文龙, 等. 腹腔镜直肠癌经括约肌间切除术预防性造口永久化的术前预测因素及模型构建[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志, 2022, 25(11):997-1004.DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn116260-20220328-00203.
[27]
Zhang H, Li S, Jin X, et al. Protective ileostomy increased the incidence of rectal stenosis after anterior resection for rectal cancer[J]. Radiat Oncol, 2022, 17(1):93.DOI:10.1186/s13014-022-02031-4.
In most of the views, rectal stenosis after anterior resection for rectal cancer results from pelvic radiotherapy. However, patients without receiving radiotherapy also suffer stenosis. In this study, we evaluated the factors associated with rectal stenosis after anterior rectal resection (ARR).We conducted a retrospective study with ARR patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and the patients without radiotherapy. Patients who received watch and wait strategy with a clinical complete response after chemoradiotherapy were also included. Patients with colonoscopy follow-up were included for further analyses; 439 patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy; 545 patients who received ARR without radiotherapy and 33 patients who received watch and wait strategy. Stenosis was diagnosed when a 12-mm diameter colonoscopy could not be passed through the rectum. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify variables associated with rectal stenosis.According to the multivariate analysis in patients receiving ARR, both protective stoma and preoperative radiotherapy affected the occurrence of stenosis, with the odds ratios (ORs) of 3.375 and 2.251, respectively. According to the multivariate analysis, a preventive ileostomy was the only factor associated with stenosis both in patients receiving preoperative radiotherapy and without radiotherapy. Non-reversal ileostomy and long time between ileostomy and restoration increased the possibility of stenosis. In 33 patients who received watch and wait strategy, only one patient (3%) experienced stenosis.Both surgery and radiotherapy are risk factors for rectal stenosis in rectal cancer patients. Compared to preoperative radiotherapy, a protective ileostomy is a more critical factor associated with rectal stenosis.© 2022. The Author(s).
[28]
Celerier B, Denost Q, Van Geluwe B, et al. The risk of definitive stoma formation at 10 years after low and ultralow anterior resection for rectal cancer[J]. Colorectal Dis, 2016, 18(1):59-66.DOI:10.1111/codi.13124.
The long-term risk of definitive stoma after sphincter-saving resection (SSR) for rectal cancer is underestimated and has never been reported for ultralow conservative surgery. We report the 10-year risk of definitive stoma after SSR for low rectal cancer.From 1994 to 2008, patients with low rectal cancer who were suitable for SSR were analysed retrospectively. Patients were divided into the following four groups: low colorectal anastomosis (LCRA); coloanal anastomosis (CAA); partial intersphincteric resection (pISR); and total intersphincteric resection (tISR). The end-point was the risk of a definitive stoma according to the type of anastomosis.During the study period, 297 patients had SSR for low rectal cancer. The incidence of definitive stoma increased from 11% at 1 year to 22% at 10 years. The reasons were no closure of the loop ileostomy (4.7%), anastomotic morbidity (6.5%), anal incontinence (8%) and local recurrence (5.2%). The risk of definitive stoma was not influenced by type of surgery: 26% vs 18% vs 18% vs 19% (P = 0.578) for LCRA, CAA, pISR and tISR, respectively. Independent risk factors for definitive stoma were age > 65 years and surgical morbidity.The risk of a definitive stoma after SSR increased two-fold between 1 and 10 years after surgery, from 11% to 22%. Ultralow conservative surgery (pISR and tISR) did not increase the risk of definitive stoma compared with conventional CAA or LCRA.Colorectal Disease © 2015 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.
[29]
张巍巍, 徐华, 菅书明, 等. 直肠癌新辅助放化疗联合直肠前切除术及预防性造瘘患者永久性造口形成的危险因素及预后分析[J]. 安徽医学, 2021, 42(7):718-723.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1000-0399.2021.07.018.
[30]
Hsu CC, Tsai WS, Tsai TY, et al. Predictors for temporary stomas non-closure among non-metastatic rectal cancer patients undergoing curative resection: A retrospective analysis[J]. World J Surg Oncol, 2024, 22(1):124.DOI:10.1186/s12957-024-03403-8.
The primary treatment for non-metastatic rectal cancer is curative resection. However, sphincter-preserving surgery may lead to complications. This study aims to develop a predictive model for stoma non-closure in rectal cancer patients who underwent curative-intent low anterior resection.
[31]
Wang X, Cheng G, Tao R, et al. Clinical characteristics and predictors of permanent stoma in rectal cancer patients underwent anterior resections: The value of preoperative prognostic nutritional index[J]. Int J Clin Oncol, 2020, 25(11):1960-1968.DOI:10.1007/s10147-020-01743-5.
[32]
Zhou L, Qin Z, Wang L. Risk factors and incidence of non-closure stoma in patients with anterior resection of rectal cancer with temporary stoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Eur J Surg Oncol, 2023, 49(12):107120.DOI:10.1016/j.ejso.2023.107120.
[33]
Chiarello MM, Bianchi V, Fransvea P, et al. Endoluminal vacuum-assisted therapy as a treatment for anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2022, 28(28):3747-3752.DOI:10.3748/wjg.v28.i28.3747.
[34]
Yang Y, Shu Y, Su F, et al. Prophylactic transanal decompression tube versus non-prophylactic transanal decompression tube for anastomotic leakage prevention in low anterior resection for rectal cancer: A meta-analysis[J]. Surg Endosc, 2017, 31(4):1513-1523.DOI:10.1007/s00464-016-5193-2.
Transanal decompression tube (TDT), an alternative intervention believed to have potential equivalent efficacy in reducing anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery and lower complication rates compared to protective stoma, was sporadically applied in some medical centers during recent decade. The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of the TDT in preventing the anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection for rectal cancer.The studies comparing TDT and non-TDT in rectal cancer were researched up to March 22, 2016 without language preference, in databases of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane library, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and National Clinical Trials Registry. The rates of anastomotic leakage, bleeding, and re-operation were separately calculated and compared between TDT and non-TDT groups using RevMan 5.3. Funnel plots, and Egger's tests were used to evaluate the publication biases of the studies.Two prospective randomized controlled trial studies and five observational cohort studies with 833 participants in TDT group and 939 participants in non-TDT group were finally included in this meta-analysis. The results indicated that the TDT group had lower anastomotic leakage rate than non-TDT group with significant RR (RR 0.44; 95 % CI 0.29-0.66; P < 0.0001) and heterogeneity (I  = 33 %; P = 0.18). So did the re-operation rate, with RR (RR 0.16; 95 % CI 0.07-0.37; P < 0.0001) and heterogeneity among the studies (I  = 0 %; P = 0.80). There was no significant difference in anastomotic bleeding rates (RR 1.48; 95 % CI 0.79-2.77; P = 0.22) (I  = 58 %; P = 0.09). No publication bias was found by Egger's test (anastomotic leakage rate, Pr > |z| = 0.224; re-operation rate, Pr > |z| = 0.425).TDT might be an efficient and economic intervention in preventing anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery.
[35]
黄泳霖, 武爱文. 预防性造口永久化的危险因素和对策[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志, 2022, 25(11):965-969.DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn116260-20220620-00452.
[36]
骆洋, 钟鸣. 腹腔镜低位直肠癌前切除术吻合口漏的预防和治疗[J]. 外科理论与实践, 2023, 28(3):220-225.DOI:10.16139/j.1007-9610.2023.03.008.
[37]
Vignali A, De Nardi P. Endoluminal vacuum-assisted therapy to treat rectal anastomotic leakage: A critical analysis[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2022, 28(14):1394-1404.DOI:10.3748/wjg.v28.i14.1394.
[38]
徐晓佳, 王昕, 黄平. 低位直肠癌术后吻合口相关并发症的治疗及改良Bacon术再保肛的要点[J]. 中国普通外科杂志, 2024, 33(4):553-560.DOI:10.7659/j.issn.1005-6947.2024.04.005.
[39]
Clifford RE, Fowler H, Manu N, et al. Management of benign anastomotic strictures following rectal resection: A systematic review[J]. Colorectal Dis, 2021, 23(12):3090-3100.DOI:10.1111/codi.15865.
Benign anastomotic strictures following colorectal surgical resection can be a commonly under-reported complication in up to 30% of patients, with a significant impact upon quality of life. In this systematic review, we aim to assess the utility of endoscopic techniques to avoid the need for surgical re-intervention.A literature search was performed for published full text articles using the PubMed, Cochrane and Scopus databases. Additional papers were detected by scanning the references of relevant papers.A total of 34 papers were included focusing upon balloon dilatation, endoscopic stenting, electroincision, stapler stricturoplasty and cortiocosteroids alone and in combination with varying success rates of 20-100%. The most challenging strictures were reported as those with a narrow lumen, frequently observed following neo-adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy or an anastomotic leak. Endoscopic balloon dilatation was the most commonly used first line method, however, repeated dilatations were often required, which was also associated with an increased risk of perforation. Although initial success rates for stents were good, patients often experienced stent migration and local symptoms. Only a small number of patients experienced endoscopic management failure and progressed to surgical intervention.Following identification of an anastomotic stricture and exclusion of underlying malignancy, endoscopic management is both safe and feasible as a first line option, even if multiple treatment exposures or multimodal management is required. Surgical resection or defunctioning stoma should be reserved for emergency or failed cases. Further research is required into multimodal and novel therapies to improve quality of life for these patients.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
[40]
Mathew J, Kazi M, Sukumar V, et al. Factors predicting successful resolution and long-term outcomes of benign anastomotic strictures following rectal cancer surgery[J]. Eur J Surg Oncol, 2023, 49(7):1307-1313.DOI:10.1016/j.ejso.2023.02.012.
Although advances in treatment have improved sphincter-preservation rates in rectal cancer, the incidence of benign anastomotic strictures has also increased. This retrospective single-institution study sought to determine the incidence of benign anastomotic strictures and the factors associated with their successful resolution following treatment.From January 2010 to December 2019, consecutive patients undergoing endoscopic dilatation and/or surgery for benign anastomotic strictures developing after radical sphincter-sparing resections for rectal cancer were evaluated. To model the relationship between outcomes and potential independent variables, sequential univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using binary logistic regression.Of 2069 rectal cancer patients undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery, benign anastomotic strictures were identified in 110 (5.3%). Mean age was 48.2 ± 13.98 years; 73.6% were male. Distal tumor-extent was within 6 cm of the anal verge in 60%; 80.9% patients received neoadjuvant radiotherapy. Surgical approach in 71.8% was open, 74.5% being anterior or low anterior resections and 70.9% of anastomoses stapled. Covering stoma was performed in 91.8%. On follow-up, strictures of median length 4 cm were identified at median 3 cm from the anal verge. Endoscopic dilatation was offered in 89.1%, whereas 9.1% required redo-surgery. Overall, 49.1% experienced sustained stricture-resolution with dilatation and 45.4% required re-intervention. At last follow-up, 72.7% were stoma-free. On multivariate analysis, good performance status, absence of anastomotic leak, and short-segment strictures predicted successful stricture-resolution.Endoscopic dilatation is an effective first-line therapy, with redo anastomosis used to salvage those failing conservative measures. Adverse performance status, anastomotic leak and greater stricture length may predict detrimental outcomes in terms of stricture resolution.Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.
[41]
中国医师协会肛肠医师分会. 低位前切除综合征诊治中国专家共识(2025版)[J/OL]. 中国普通外科杂志, 2025:1-15[2025-09-07].https://link.cnki.net/urlid/43.1213.r.20250722.0956.002.DOI:10.7659/j.issn.1005-6947.250357.
[42]
Chan H, Savoie MB, Munir A, et al. Multi-disciplinary management in rectal cancer survivorship: A clinical practice review[J]. J Gastrointest Cancer, 2023, 54(4):1102-1115.DOI: 10.1007/s12029-022-00885-1.
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in the USA and worldwide. In the USA, nearly one-third of CRC cases are anatomically classified as rectal cancer. Over the past few decades, continued refinement of multimodality treatment and the introduction of new therapeutic agents have enhanced curative treatment rates and quality of life outcomes. As treatments improve and the incidence of young onset rectal cancer rises, the number of rectal cancer survivors grows each year. This trend highlights the growing importance of rectal cancer survivorship. Multimodality therapy with systemic chemotherapy, chemoradiation, and surgery can result in chronic toxicities in multiple organ systems, requiring a multi-disciplinary care model with services ranging from appropriate cancer surveillance to management of long-term toxicities and optimization of modifiable risk factors. Here, we review the evidence on these long-term toxicities and provide management considerations from consensus guidelines. Specific topics include bowel dysfunction from radiation and surgery, oxaliplatin-induced neuropathy, accelerated bone degeneration, the impact of fluoropyrimidines on long-term cardiovascular health, urinary incontinence, sexual dysfunction, and psychosocial distress. Additionally, we review modifiable risk factors to inform providers and rectal cancer survivors of various lifestyle and behavioral changes that can be made to improve their long-term health outcomes.© 2022. The Author(s).
[43]
姚宏伟, 杨正阳, 张忠涛. 局部进展期中低位直肠癌综合治疗焦点问题[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2024, 44(7):737-740.DOI:10.19538/j.cjps.issn1005-2208.2024.07.04.
[44]
冯波, 马韬. 局部进展期直肠癌全程新辅助治疗的发展与挑战[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2024, 44(7):744-751.DOI:10.19538/j.cjps.issn1005-2208.2024.07.06.
[45]
国家卫生健康委员会医政司, 中华医学会肿瘤学分会. 国家卫健委中国结直肠癌诊疗规范(2023版)[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2023, 43(6):602-630.DOI:10.19538/j.cjps.issn1005-2208.2023.06.02.
[46]
张卫, 朱晓明. 极低位直肠癌经括约肌间切除术的分类及其优势与局限性[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志, 2023, 26(6):557-561.DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn116260-20220906-00412.
[47]
余可欣, 罗绰, 汪晓东, 等. 直肠癌术后肛门功能康复的研究进展[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2021, 10(3):298-301.DOI:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3224.2021.03.016.
[48]
王晨童, 周皎琳, 安杨, 等. 局部进展期直肠癌新辅助放化疗联合根治术后预防性肠造口永久化的影响因素分析[J]. 中华消化外科杂志, 2024, 23(12):1524-1529.DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn115610-20241022-00460.
[49]
Zhang X, Meng Q, Du J, et al. High output stoma after surgery for rectal cancer - a risk factor for low anterior resection syndrome?[J]. BMC Gastroenterol, 2025, 25(1):32.DOI: 10.1186/s12876-025-03614-7.
The relationship between high-output stoma (HOS) and low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) was previously unclear. This study investigated the association between HOS and major LARS in rectal cancer patients with preventive stoma.We conducted a retrospective analysis of 653 rectal cancer patients who underwent prophylactic ileostomy reversal after low anterior resection at the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University between 2018 and 2021. Patients were categorized into HOS and non-HOS groups based on stoma output within 3 months before surgery. Major LARS was assessed using the LARS score. The association between HOS and major LARS was analyzed using multifactor logistic regression models, subgroup analyses, and smoothing curve fitting methods.Among the 653 patients, 53 (8.1%) experienced HOS, and 81 (12.4%) developed major LARS after stoma closure. The HOS group exhibited a significantly higher risk of major LARS compared to the non-HOS group (P < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression indicated that HOS was associated with a 210% increased risk of major LARS (OR: 3.10; 95% CI: 1.56, 6.14; P = 0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed that this association was more pronounced in older patients (age > 60), those without hypertension, with N0-N1 staging, a history of chemotherapy, and longer stoma closure intervals (Q3, Q4).HOS is significantly associated with major LARS in rectal cancer patients, particularly in certain clinical subgroups. These findings suggest the need for careful management of HOS to potentially reduce LARS occurrence after stoma closure.© 2025. The Author(s).
[50]
Fukudome I, Maeda H, Okamoto K, et al. Early stoma closure after low anterior resection is not recommended due to postoperative complications and asymptomatic anastomotic leakage[J]. Sci Rep, 2023, 13(1):6472. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-33697-9.
The safety of early stoma closure after lower anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer remains controversial. In this study, patients scheduled to undergo LAR and stoma creation for rectal cancer were recruited. In absence of anastomotic leakage on radiological examination, closure of the diverting ileostomy was performed within 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was incidence of the colorectal anastomosis leakage after early stoma closure. Because of the slow accrual rate, the study was closed before recruitment reached the planned number of patients (n = 20). Among the 13 patients enrolled between April 2019 and March 2021, early stoma closure was performed in seven patients (53.8%). Non-clinical anastomotic leakage, leakage identified only on radiological examination, occurred in five cases, resulting in rescheduling of stoma closure. One patient did not undergo early stoma closure due to ileus. After stoma closure, colorectal anastomotic leakage manifested in one case; its incidence rate was 14.2%. Surgical site infection occurred in 42.8% of patients. This study revealed that asymptomatic anastomotic leakage occurred frequently. Considering the low rate of successful cases and the high rate of complications, early stoma closure within 2 weeks after LAR should not be performed routinely. Trial registration: (UMIN000036382 registered on 03/04/2019).© 2023. The Author(s).
[51]
中华医学会外科学分会结直肠外科学组. 中国结直肠癌手术病人营养治疗指南(2025版)[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2025, 45(2):137-148.DOI:10.19538/j.cjps.issn1005-2208.2025.02.03.

基金

国家自然科学基金项目(82203137)
国家自然科学基金项目(82473439)
上海市卫健委“医苑新星”项目
上海市卫健委临床研究专项(2024Y0348)
海军军医大学第一附属医院重大疾病多中心临床研究项目(2024LYA02)

PDF(1298 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

段落导航
相关文章

/