Surgical site infections (SSIs)-especially anastomotic dehiscence-are major contributors to morbidity and mortality after rectal resection. The role of mechanical and oral antibiotics bowel preparation (MOABP) in preventing complications of rectal resection is currently disputed.To assess whether MOABP reduces overall complications and SSIs after elective rectal resection compared with mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) plus placebo.This multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted at 3 university hospitals in Finland between March 18, 2020, and October 10, 2022. Patients aged 18 years and older undergoing elective resection with primary anastomosis of a rectal tumor 15 cm or less from the anal verge on magnetic resonance imaging were eligible for inclusion. Outcomes were analyzed using a modified intention-to-treat principle, which included all patients who were randomly allocated to and underwent elective rectal resection with an anastomosis.Patients were stratified according to tumor distance from the anal verge and neoadjuvant treatment given and randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive MOABP with an oral regimen of neomycin and metronidazole (n = 277) or MBP plus matching placebo tablets (n = 288). All study medications were taken the day before surgery, and all patients received intravenous antibiotics approximately 30 minutes before surgery.The primary outcome was overall cumulative postoperative complications measured using the Comprehensive Complication Index. Key secondary outcomes were SSI and anastomotic dehiscence within 30 days after surgery.In all, 565 patients were included in the analysis, with 288 in the MBP plus placebo group (median [IQR] age, 69 [62-74] years; 190 males [66.0%]) and 277 in the MOABP group (median [IQR] age, 70 [62-75] years; 158 males [57.0%]). Patients in the MOABP group experienced fewer overall postoperative complications (median [IQR] Comprehensive Complication Index, 0 [0-8.66] vs 8.66 [0-20.92]; Wilcoxon effect size, 0.146; P < .001), fewer SSIs (23 patients [8.3%] vs 48 patients [16.7%]; odds ratio, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.27-0.77]), and fewer anastomotic dehiscences (16 patients [5.8%] vs 39 patients [13.5%]; odds ratio, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.21-0.72]) compared with patients in the MBP plus placebo group.Findings of this randomized clinical trial indicate that MOABP reduced overall postoperative complications as well as rates of SSIs and anastomotic dehiscences in patients undergoing elective rectal resection compared with MBP plus placebo. Based on these findings, MOABP should be considered as standard treatment in patients undergoing elective rectal resection.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04281667.

Evidence about the efficacy of laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer is incomplete, particularly for patients with more advanced-stage disease.To determine whether laparoscopic resection is noninferior to open resection, as determined by gross pathologic and histologic evaluation of the resected proctectomy specimen.A multicenter, balanced, noninferiority, randomized trial enrolled patients between October 2008 and September 2013. The trial was conducted by credentialed surgeons from 35 institutions in the United States and Canada. A total of 486 patients with clinical stage II or III rectal cancer within 12 cm of the anal verge were randomized after completion of neoadjuvant therapy to laparoscopic or open resection.Standard laparoscopic and open approaches were performed by the credentialed surgeons.The primary outcome assessing efficacy was a composite of circumferential radial margin greater than 1 mm, distal margin without tumor, and completeness of total mesorectal excision. A 6% noninferiority margin was chosen according to clinical relevance estimation.Two hundred forty patients with laparoscopic resection and 222 with open resection were evaluable for analysis of the 486 enrolled. Successful resection occurred in 81.7% of laparoscopic resection cases (95% CI, 76.8%-86.6%) and 86.9% of open resection cases (95% CI, 82.5%-91.4%) and did not support noninferiority (difference, -5.3%; 1-sided 95% CI, -10.8% to ∞; P for noninferiority = .41). Patients underwent low anterior resection (76.7%) or abdominoperineal resection (23.3%). Conversion to open resection occurred in 11.3% of patients. Operative time was significantly longer for laparoscopic resection (mean, 266.2 vs 220.6 minutes; mean difference, 45.5 minutes; 95% CI, 27.7-63.4; P < .001). Length of stay (7.3 vs 7.0 days; mean difference, 0.3 days; 95% CI, -0.6 to 1.1), readmission within 30 days (3.3% vs 4.1%; difference, -0.7%; 95% CI, -4.2% to 2.7%), and severe complications (22.5% vs 22.1%; difference, 0.4%; 95% CI, -4.2% to 2.7%) did not differ significantly. Quality of the total mesorectal excision specimen in 462 operated and analyzed surgeries was complete (77%) and nearly complete (16.5%) in 93.5% of the cases. Negative circumferential radial margin was observed in 90% of the overall group (87.9% laparoscopic resection and 92.3% open resection; P = .11). Distal margin result was negative in more than 98% of patients irrespective of type of surgery (P = .91).Among patients with stage II or III rectal cancer, the use of laparoscopic resection compared with open resection failed to meet the criterion for noninferiority for pathologic outcomes. Pending clinical oncologic outcomes, the findings do not support the use of laparoscopic resection in these patients.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00726622.

After the impressive response of rectal cancers to neoadjuvant therapy, it seems reasonable to ask: can we can excise the small ulcer locally or avoid a radical resection if there is no gross residual tumor? Does gross response reflect what happens to tumor cells microscopically after radiation?The aim of this study was to identify microscopic tumor cell response to radiation.This study is a retrospective review of a prospectively collected database.This investigation was conducted at a single tertiary medical center.Patients were selected who had elective radical resection for rectal cancer after preoperative chemotherapy and radiation performed by 2 colorectal surgeons between 2006 and 2011.The primary outcome measured was tumor presence after radiation therapyOf the 75 patients, 20 patients were complete responders and 55 had residual cancer. Of these patients, 28 had no tumor cells seen outside the gross ulcer, and 27 (49.1%) had tumor outside the visible ulcer or microscopic tumor present with no overlying ulcer. Of these tumors, 81.5% were skewed away from the ulcer center. The mean distance of distal scatter was 1.0 cm from the visible ulcer edge to a maximum of 3 cm; 3 patients had tumor cells more than 2 cm distal to the visible ulcer edge. Tumor scatter outside the ulcer was not associated with poor prognostic factors, such as nodal and distant disease, perineural invasion, or mucin; however, it was associated with lymphovascular invasion (χ2 = 4.12, p = 0.038)There was limited access to clinical information gathered outside our institution.Our study suggests that 1) after radiation, the gross ulcer cannot be used to determine the sole area of potential residual tumor, 2) cancer cells may be found up to 3 cm distally from the gross ulcer, so the traditional 2-cm margin may not be adequate, and 3) local excision of the ulcer or no excision after apparent complete response appears to be insufficient treatment for rectal cancer.

To evaluate the evidence concerning the quality of surgical resection in laparoscopic (LapTME), robotic (RobTME) and transanal (TaTME) total mesorectal excision for mid-/low rectal cancer.

Previous studies have demonstrated the advantages of short-term histopathological outcomes and complications associated with transanal total mesorectal excision (TME) compared with laparoscopic TME. However, the long-term oncological outcomes of transanal TME remain ambiguous. This study aims to compare 3-year disease-free survival of transanal TME with laparoscopic TME.

To reduce local recurrence risk, rectal washout (RW) is integrated in the total mesorectal excision (TME) technique when performing anterior resection (AR) for rectal cancer. Although RW is considered a safe practice, data on the complication risk are scarce. Our aim was to examine the association between RW and 30-day postoperative complications after AR for rectal cancer.Patients from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry who underwent AR between 2007 and 2013 were analysed using multivariable methods.A total of 4821 patients were included (4317 RW, 504 no RW). The RW group had lower rates of overall complications (1578/4317 (37%) vs. 208/504 (41%), p = 0.039), surgical complications (879/4317 (20%) vs. 140/504 (28%), p < 0.001) and 30-day mortality (50/4317 (1.2%) vs. 12/504 (2.4%), p = 0.020). In multivariable analysis, RW was a risk factor neither for overall complications (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.60-0.90, p = 0.002) nor for surgical complications (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.50-0.78, p < 0.001).RW is a safe technique that does not increase the 30-day postoperative complication risk after AR with TME technique for rectal cancer.

To determine the effectiveness of rectal washout in preventing local recurrence of distal colorectal cancer following curative resection.A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed after a literature search was conducted on MEDLINE, EMBASE, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, and the ISRCTN registry. The study was reported using PRISMA guidelines. The primary endpoint was incidence of local recurrence of cancer after distal colonic and rectal cancer surgery.After screening, 8 studies with a total sample size of 6739 patients were identified. At 5-year follow-up, local recurrence in the washout group (WO) was 6.08% compared to 9.48% in the no-washout group (NWO) group (OR 0.63, 95% CI = 0.51-0.78, Chi = 6.76, df = 7, p = 0.45). The relative risk reduction was 36.9%. To exclude a 36.9% relative risk reduction from 9.48 to 6.08% with a 5% significance level and 80% power a randomized control trial would require a total sample size of 1946 participants distributed equally between the two treatment arms.It is safe to recommend the use of rectal washout for left sided and rectal tumour resections. It is a simple and safe step during colorectal surgery that appears to improve long-term oncological outcomes and was not reported to be associated with any complications.© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Colorectal cancer is the fourth most diffuse cause of death in the world and local recurrence is associated with a reduced long-term life expectancy, with a reduced quality of life. Rectal washout at the anastomosis site leads to a statistically significant reduction of local recurrences.We developed the idea of a new laparoscopic stapler with an integrated washout system that could decontaminate the rectal stump before resection, without the need to enlarge the standard surgical incision or even to distort the incision site, closing the rectal stump just below the inferior part of the cancer, and then proceeding with the resection and stapling of the distal part of the tumor. Combined with these canonical functionalities, the new device, equipped with a patented washout system (patent number EP 3103401A1) will also allow to inject in the closed bowel a physiologic saline liquid.In force of the mechanical action of the liquid injected, carcinogenic exfoliated cells eventually floating in the affected region of the colonic lumen will be expelled through the anal orifice. The intraoperative rectal washout, both in minimally invasive and in traditional open surgery, thus becomes a simple, effective, and reproducible procedure.We describe the technical features and the possible clinical applications of a potentially new surgical laparoscopic stapler coupled with an integrated irrigation system. We have patented the system and we are developing a prototype with the aim to start an experimental pilot study.

The aim of this randomized multicenter trial was to assess the rate of symptomatic anastomotic leakage in patients operated on with low anterior resection for rectal cancer and who were intraoperatively randomized to a defunctioning stoma or not.The introduction of total mesorectal excision surgery as the surgical technique of choice for carcinoma in the lower and mid rectum has led to decreased local recurrence and improved oncological results. Despite these advances, perioperative morbidity remains a major issue, and the most feared complication is symptomatic anastomotic leakage. The role of the defunctioning stoma in regard to anastomotic leakage is controversial and has not been assessed in any randomized trial of sufficient size.From December 1999 to June 2005, a total of 234 patients were randomized to a defunctioning loop stoma or no loop stoma. Loop ileostomy or loop transverse colostomy was at the choice of the surgeon. Inclusion criteria for randomization were expected survival >6 months, informed consent, anastomosis < or =7 cm above the anal verge, negative air leakage test, intact anastomotic rings, and absence of major intraoperative adverse events.The overall rate of symptomatic leakage was 19.2% (45 of 234). Patients randomized to a defunctioning stoma (n = 116) had leakage in 10.3% (12 of 116) and those without stoma (n = 118) in 28.0% (33 of 118) (odds ratio = 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-6.9; P < 0.001). The need for urgent abdominal reoperation was 8.6% (10 of 116) in those randomized to stoma and 25.4% (30 of 118) in those without (P < 0.001). After a follow-up of median 42 months (range, 6-72 months), 13.8% (16 of 116) of the initially defunctioned patients still had a stoma of any kind, compared with 16.9% (20 of 118) those not defunctioned (not significant). The 30-day mortality after anterior resection was 0.4% (1 of 234) and after elective reversal a defunctioning stoma 0.9% (1 of 111). Median age was 68 years (range, 32-86 years), 45.3% (106 of 234) were females, 79.1% (185 of 234) had preoperative radiotherapy, the level of anastomosis was median 5 cm, and intraoperative blood loss 550 mL, without differences between the groups.Defunctioning loop stoma decreased the rate of symptomatic anastomotic leakage and is therefore recommended in low anterior resection for rectal cancer.

Anastomotic leakage after restorative surgery for rectal cancer shows high morbidity and related mortality. Identification of risk factors could change operative planning, with indications for stoma construction. This retrospective multicentre study aims to assess the anastomotic leak rate, identify the independent risk factors and develop a clinical prediction model to calculate the probability of leakage.

Anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer is more common after total mesorectal excision compared to partial mesorectal excision but might be mitigated by a defunctioning stoma.The aim is to assess how anastomotic leakage is affected by type of mesorectal excision and defunctioning stoma use.This is a retrospective multicenter cohort study evaluating anastomotic leakage after anterior resection. Multivariable Cox regression with HRs and 95% CIs was used to contrast mesorectal excision types and defunctioning stoma use with respect to anastomotic leakage, with adjustment for confounding.This multicenter study included patients from 11 Swedish hospitals between 2014 and 2018.Patients who underwent anterior resection for rectal cancer were included.Anastomotic leakage rates within and after 30 days of surgery are described up to 1 year after surgery.Anastomotic leakage occurred in 24.2% and 9.0% of 1126 patients operated with total and partial mesorectal excision, respectively. Partial compared to total mesorectal excision was associated with a reduction in leakage, with an adjusted HR of 0.46 (95% CI, 0.29-0.74). Early leak rates within 30 days were 14.9% with and 12.5% without a stoma, whereas late leak rates after 30 days were 7.5% with and 1.9% without a stoma. After adjustment, defunctioning stoma was associated with a lower early leak rate (HR 0.47; 95% CI, 0.28-0.77). However, the late leak rate was nonsignificantly higher in patients with defunctioning stomas (HR 1.69; 95% CI, 0.59-4.85).This study was limited by its retrospective observational study design.Anastomotic leakage is common up to 1 year after anterior resection for rectal cancer, where partial mesorectal excision is associated with a lower leak rate. Defunctioning stomas seem to decrease the occurrence of leakage, although partially by only delaying the diagnosis. See Video Abstract.ANTECEDENTES:La fuga anastomótica después de una resección anterior por cáncer de recto es más frecuente después de la excisión total del mesorrecto comparada con la excisión parcial del mismo, pero podría mitigarse con la confección de ostomías de protección.OBJETIVO:El objetivo es evaluar cómo la fuga anastomótica se ve afectada según el tipo de excisión mesorrectal y la confección de una ostomía de protección.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohortes multicéntrico y retrospectivo que evalúa la fuga anastomótica después de la resección anterior. Se aplicó la regresión multivariada de Cox con los índices de riesgo (HR) y los intervalos de confianza (IC) al 95% para contrastar los tipos de excisión mesorrectal y el uso de otomías de protección con respecto a la fuga anastomótica, realizando ajustes respecto a las variables de confusión.AJUSTES:El presente estudio multicéntrico incluyó pacientes de 11 hospitales suecos entre 2014 y 2018.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron todos aquellos sometidos a resección anterior por cáncer de recto.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADOS:Las tasas de fuga anastomótica dentro y después de los 30 días de la cirugía fueron descritos hasta un año mas tarde al acto quirúrgico.RESULTADOS:La fuga anastomótica ocurrió en el 24,2% y el 9,0% de 1126 pacientes operados por excisión total y parcial del mesorrecto respectivamente.La excisión parcial del mesorrecto en comparación con la total se asoció con una reducción de la fuga, HR ajustado de 0,46 (IC del 95 %: 0,29 a 0,74). Las tasas de fuga temprana dentro de los 30 días fueron del 14,9 % con y el 12,5 % sin estoma, mientras que las tasas de fuga tardía después de 30 días fueron del 7,5 % con y el 1,9 % sin estoma.Después del ajuste de variables de confusión, las ostomías de protección se asociaron con una tasa de fuga temprana más baja (HR 0,47; IC 95 %: 0,28-0,77). Sin embargo, la tasa de fuga tardía no fue significativamente mayor en pacientes ostomizados (HR 1,69; IC 95%: 0,59-4,85).LIMITACIONES:Las limitaciones del presente estudio estuvieron vinculadas con el diseño de tipo observacional y retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:La fuga anastomótica es común hasta un año después de la resección anterior por cáncer de recto, donde la excisión parcial del mesorrecto se asocia con una menor tasa de fuga. La confección de ostomías de protección parece disminuir la aparición de fuga anastomótica, aunque en parte sólo retrasen el diagnóstico. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo ).Copyright © The ASCRS 2023.

Guidelines for resectable locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) advocate for neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NRT) followed by surgery as the standard approach. However, recent trials have reported no oncological benefits of NRT-based therapy for middle or lower rectal cancer, raising the question of whether NRT followed by surgery remains the optimal treatment approach for resectable LARC overall.

The treatment for extraperitoneal locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) followed by total mesorectal excision (TME). Robust evidence on the optimal time interval between NAT completion and surgery is lacking.To assess the association of time interval between NAT completion and TME with short- and long-term outcomes. It was hypothesized that longer intervals increase the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate without increasing perioperative morbidity.This cohort study included patients with LARC from 6 referral centers who completed NAT and underwent TME between January 2005 and December 2020. The cohort was divided into 3 groups depending on the time interval between NAT completion and surgery: short (≤8 weeks), intermediate (>8 and ≤12 weeks), and long (>12 weeks). The median follow-up duration was 33 months. Data analyses were conducted from May 1, 2021, to May 31, 2022. The inverse probability of treatment weighting method was used to homogenize the analysis groups.Long-course chemoradiotherapy or short-course radiotherapy with delayed surgery.The primary outcome was pCR. Other histopathologic results, perioperative events, and survival outcomes constituted the secondary outcomes.Among the 1506 patients, 908 were male (60.3%), and the median (IQR) age was 68.8 (59.4-76.5) years. The short-, intermediate-, and long-interval groups included 511 patients (33.9%), 797 patients (52.9%), and 198 patients (13.1%), respectively. The overall pCR was 17.2% (259 of 1506 patients; 95% CI, 15.4%-19.2%). When compared with the intermediate-interval group, no association was observed between time intervals and pCR in short-interval (odds ratio [OR], 0.74; 95% CI, 0.55-1.01) and long-interval (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.73-1.61) groups. The long-interval group was significantly associated with lower risk of bad response (tumor regression grade [TRG] 2-3; OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.24-0.91), systemic recurrence (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.36-0.96), higher conversion risk (OR, 3.14; 95% CI, 1.62-6.07), minor postoperative complications (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.04-1.97), and incomplete mesorectum (OR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.02-3.50) when compared with the intermediate-interval group.Time intervals longer than 12 weeks were associated with improved TRG and systemic recurrence but may increase surgical complexity and minor morbidity.

The benefit of radiotherapy for rectal cancer is largely based on a balance between decrease in local recurrence and increase in bowel dysfunction. Predicting postoperative disability is helpful for recovery plans and early intervention. We aimed to develop and validate a risk model to improve the prediction of major bowel dysfunction after restorative rectal cancer resection with neoadjuvant radiotherapy using perioperative features.Eligible patients more than one year after restorative resection following radiotherapy were invited to complete the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score in three national hospitals of China. Clinical characteristics and imaging parameters were assessed with machine learning algorithms. The post-radiotherapy LARS prediction model (PORTLARS) was constructed by logistic regression on the basis of key factors with proportional weighs. The accuracy of model for major LARS prediction was internally and externally validated.A total of 868 patients reported mean LARS score of 28.4 after average time of 4.7 years since surgery. Key predictors for major LARS included the length of distal rectum, anastomotic leakage, proximal colon of neorectum, and pathological nodal-stage. PORTLARS had a favorable area under the curve for predicting major LARS in the internal dataset (0.835, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.800-0.870, n=521) and external dataset (0.884, 95% CI 0.848-0.921, n=347). The model achieved both sensitivity and specificity over 0.83 in the external validation. Additionally, PORTLARS outperformed the pre-operative LARS score for prediction of major events.PORTLARS could predict major bowel dysfunction after rectal cancer resection following radiotherapy with high accuracy and robustness. It may serve as a useful tool to highlight patients who need additional support for long-term dysfunction in the early stage.Copyright © 2023 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

The aim of the present randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the superiority of indocyanine green fluorescence imaging (ICG-FI) in reducing the rate of anastomotic leakage in minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery.The role of ICG-FI in anastomotic leakage in minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery is controversial according to the published literature.This randomized, open-label, phase 3, trial was performed at 41 hospitals in Japan. Patients with clinically stage 0-III rectal carcinoma less than 12 cm from the anal verge, scheduled for minimally invasive sphincter-preserving surgery were preoperatively randomly assigned to receive a blood flow evaluation by ICG-FI (ICG+ group) or no blood flow evaluation by ICG-FI (ICG- group). The primary endpoint was the anastomotic leakage rate (Grade A+B+C, expected reduction rate of 6%) analyzed in the modified intention-to-treat population.Between December 2018 and February 2021, A total of 850 patients were enrolled and randomized. After exclusion of 11 patients, 839 were subject to the modified intention-to-treat population (422 in the ICG+ group and 417 in the ICG- group). The rate of anastomotic leakage (Grade A+B+C) was significantly lower in the ICG+ group (7.6%) than in the ICG- group (11.8%) (relative risk, 0.645; 95% confidence interval 0.422-0.987; P=0.041). The rate of anastomotic leakage (Grade B+C) was 4.7% in the ICG+ group and 8.2% in the ICG- group (P=0.044), and the respective reoperation rates were 0.5% and 2.4% (P=0.021).Although the actual reduction rate of anastomotic leakage in the ICG+ group was lower than the expected reduction rate and ICG-FI was not superior to white light, ICG-FI significantly reduced the anastomotic leakage rate by 4.2%.Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

The transanal drainage tube (TDT) is thought to reduce the incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL) in patients with low anterior resection (LAR). However, results from different clinical trials are inconsistent, although nearly all meta-analyses agree on the efficacy. In contrast to results of many previous studies, 2 recent independent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) suggest that the use of TDT does not prevent AL. We performed a meta-analysis including only RCTs to compare patients with TDTs vs. those without TDTs in terms of AL rate.A systematic literature search was performed in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library databases, Clinicaltrials.gov and WHO/ICTRP from inception until February 14, 2022. RCTs that evaluated the role of TDTs in AL prevention in patients who underwent LAR for rectal cancer were included. A meta-analysis was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. Data were extracted by two authors independently, and random-effects models were implemented. The main outcome was AL, and the secondary outcome was the grade of AL.Three RCTs were included involving a total of 1115 participants (559 patients in the TDT group and 556 in the non-TDT group). No significant difference in the AL rate was detected (RR = 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42-1.15, p = 0.15, I = 21%, very low certainty evidence). The incidence of grade C AL was possibly lower in the TDT group (RR = 0.33, 95% CI 0.11-1.01, p = 0.05, very low certainty evidence), while the rate of grade B AL was similar between the two groups (RR = 1.17, 95% CI 0.66-2.08, p = 0.59, very low certainty evidence).The present meta-analysis suggests that TDTs are not effective in reducing the overall incidence of AL, but possibly have a potential benefit in reducing the occurrence of grade C AL in patients with LAR. Based on the current limited data and existing heterogeneity, the inclusion of larger populations and the identification of more uniform indications for TDT need to be addressed in future studies.© 2022. Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

Anastomotic leakage (AL) following rectal cancer surgery is an important cause of mortality and recurrence. Although transanal drainage tubes (TDTs) are expected to reduce the rate of AL, their preventive effects are controversial.To reveal the effect of TDT in patients with symptomatic AL after rectal cancer surgery.A systematic literature search was performed using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies (PCSs) in which patients were assigned to two groups depending on the use or non-use of TDT and in which AL was evaluated. The results of the studies were synthesized using the Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model, and a two-tailed value > 0.05 was considered statistically significant.Three RCTs and two PCSs were included in this study. Symptomatic AL was examined in all 1417 patients (712 with TDT), and TDTs did not reduce the symptomatic AL rate. In a subgroup analysis of 955 patients without a diverting stoma, TDT reduced the symptomatic AL rate (odds ratio = 0.50, 95% confidence interval: 0.29-0.86, = 0.012).TDT may not reduce AL overall among patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery. However, patients without a diverting stoma may benefit from TDT placement.©The Author(s) 2023. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.

Placement of an indwelling transanal drainage tube (TDT) to prevent anastomotic leakage (AL) after anterior rectal cancer surgery has become a routine choice for surgeons in the recent years. However, the specific indwelling time of the TDT has not been explored. We performed this meta-analysis and considered the indwelling time a critical factor in re-analyzing the effectiveness of TDT placement in prevention of AL after anterior rectal cancer surgery.

This study aimed to examine the economic and clinical benefits of a new powered circular stapler for left-sided colorectal construction in China.

Interpretation of water-soluble contrast enema following laparoscopic low anterior resection can be very challenging for both radiologists and colorectal surgeons. Discriminating the radiological appearances secondary to anastomotic configuration from those caused by actual anastomotic dehiscence is a common problem and may be made worse with the advent of laparoscopic surgery. The aim of this study is to identify potential novel appearances of the water-soluble contrast enema (WSCE) images of rectal anastomosis following laparoscopic low anterior resection to radiologists and surgeons.We enrolled 45 patients who underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection with proximal de-functioning loop ileostomy within a specialized colorectal unit. The water-soluble contrast enema reports were reviewed. Two blinded colorectal radiologists independently reviewed the images of patients suspected of anastomotic leak. All of these patients also underwent a flexible sigmoidoscopy to confirm or exclude anastomotic leak before reversal of loop ileostomy. Inter-observer concordance was calculated.Seven out of eighteen patients (38.9%) were found to have true anastomotic leaks on flexible sigmoidoscopy (15% overall leak rate). In the remaining eleven patients the image appearances were attributed to the appearance of the anastomotic 'dog-ear effect', created by the anastomotic configuration due to multiple firing of the intra-corporeal laparoscopic stapling device. Radiologist inter-observer concordance was 83%. Sensitivity was 100%, specificity 71%, positive-predictive value (38.9%) and negative-predictive value (100%).The novel appearances of laparoscopic-stapled rectal anastomoses in WSCE can be mistaken for anastomotic leak. To avoid delay in reversal of ileostomy, a flexible sigmoidoscopy can be used to confirm or exclude a leak.

The International Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision Registry group showed that transanal total mesorectal excision included clinical issues regarding anastomosis-related complications.

We aimed to evaluate whether a short distal resection margin (< 1 cm) was associated with local recurrence in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Patients with rectal cancer who underwent preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by curative surgery were divided into two groups based on the distal resection margin (≥ 1 cm and < 1 cm). In total, 507 patients were analyzed. The median follow-up duration was 48.9 months. The 3-year local recurrence rates were 2% and 8% in the ≥ 1 cm and < 1 cm groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis revealed that a distal resection margin of < 1 cm was a significant risk factor for local recurrence (P = 0.008). Subgroup analysis revealed that a distal resection margin of < 1 cm was not an independent risk factor for local recurrence in the ypT0-1 group. However, among patients with tumor stages ypT2-4, the cumulative 3-year incidences of local recurrence were 2.3% and 9.8% in the ≥ 1 cm and < 1 cm groups, respectively (P = 0.01). A distal resection margin of < 1 cm might influence local recurrence rates in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer undergoing preoperative chemoradiotherapy, especially in patients with tumor stages ypT2-4.© 2021. The Author(s).

AL remains one of the most threatening complications in colorectal surgery. Significant efforts are put to understand the pathophysiological mechanisms involved in the development of leakage and to create the strategies to prevent it. We aimed to determine whether intraoperative testing of mechanical integrity and perfusion of colorectal anastomosis could reduce the incidence of AL.

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a serious complication of anterior resection for rectal cancer. The use of transanal drainage tubes (TDT) during surgery to prevent AL remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the efficacy of TDT in reducing AL.

Our aim was to perform a propensity score-matched study to compare the long-term functional outcomes and quality of life following intersphincteric resection vs. low anterior resection (LAR) with very low anastomosis.Patients who underwent intersphincteric resection or low anterior resection with low anastomosis (≤ 4 cm from the anal verge) for rectal cancer between January 2017 and June 2020 were retrospectively included. A propensity score-matching process was performed. Functional outcomes and quality of life were assessed using the European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions 3 Level Version (EQ-5D-3L), EORC-QLQ C30, EORC-QLQ CR29, Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS), Wexner, and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) questionnaires. The primary outcome was the presence of LARS at least 12 months after surgery. The second outcome was the postoperative quality of life of included patients.After propensity matching, 128 patients were included, including 58 males and 70 females with a median age of 59.5. Patients in the intersphincteric resection group showed a higher incidence of incontinence to flatus (32.8% versus 14.0%, p = 0.043) and stools (42.2% versus 21.9%, p = 0.046), pain/discomfort (25.0% versus 7.8%, p = 0.001), and bowel dysfunction, while the LARS scores (15.0 versus 13.2, p = 0.461) and major LARS rates (26.6% versus 14.1%, p = 0.078) were comparable in both groups.ISR leads to increased bowel incontinence rate and increased anal pain, without affecting the grade of low anterior resection syndrome, fecal urgency, and clustering. LAR might be the preferred sphincteric-preserving approach when negative resection margins and a safe anastomosis are guaranteed. Patients should be fully informed about potential functional impairment after sphincter-preservation procedures.© 2023. Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

There is increasing evidence that either a transanal stent (TAS) or rectal tube (RT) can decrease the risk of anastomotic leakage (AL) after anterior resection for rectal cancer, in which a diverting stoma may not be required.The aim of this review was to investigate the efficacy and safety of RT/TAS in preventing AL after anterior resections.An up-to-date systematic review was performed on the available literature between 2000 and 2020 on PubMed, EMBASE, Medline and Cochrane Library databases.All studies reporting on anterior resections in adults, comparing transanal tube/stent versus non-tube/stent, were analysed.The primary outcome was rates of AL, whereas secondary outcomes compared associated unplanned re-operation for AL and hospital length of stay (LOS).Two randomized controlled trials and 13 observational studies were included, with 1714 patients receiving RT/TAS and 1741 patients without. There were 119 (7%) patients with AL in the RT/TAS group compared to 216 (12.3%) patients in the non-RT/TAS group (OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.38-0.62, p < 0.001). There were 47 (2.9%) patients with AL complications requiring surgery in the RT/TAS group compared to 132 (8%) patients in the non-RT/TAS group (OR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.20-0.42, p < 0.001) and no significant difference identified with the standardized mean difference (SMD) favouring the RT/TAS group for hospital LOS (SMD: -0.23, 95% CI: -0.51 to 0.06, p = 0.115).The use of RT/TAS post restorative anterior resection for rectal cancer should be considered, given the benefits shown from this meta-analysis.

Conformal sphincter preservation operation (CSPO) is a sphincter preservation operation for very low rectal cancers. Compared to intersphincteric resection (ISR), CSPO retains more dentate line and distal rectal wall, and also avoids damaging the nerves in the intersphincteric space. This study aimed to compare the postoperative anal function and quality of life between the CSPO and ISR.

Patient-reported outcomes associated with different bowel reconstruction techniques following anterior resection for rectal cancer are still a matter of debate.This study aimed to assess quality of life and bowel function in patients who underwent colonic J-pouch or straight colorectal anastomosis reconstruction after low anterior resection.Bowel function and quality of life were assessed within a multicenter randomized trial. Questionnaires were administered before the surgery (baseline) and at 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery.Patients were enrolled by 19 centers. The enrollment started in October 2009 and was stopped in February 2016. The study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier: NCT01110798).Patients who underwent low anterior resection for primary mid-low rectal cancer and who were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either stapled colonic J-pouch or straight colorectal anastomosis were selected.The primary outcomes measured were quality of life and bowel function.Of the 379 patients who were evaluable, 312 (82.3%) completed the baseline, 259 (68.3%) the 6-month, 242 (63.9%) the 12-month, and 199 (52.5%) the 24-month assessment. Bowel functioning and quality of life did not significantly differ between arms for almost all domains. The total bowel function score, the urgency, and the stool fractionation scores significantly worsened after surgery and remained impaired over time in both arms (p < 0.0032), whereas constipation improved after surgery but recovered to baseline levels from 1 year onward (p < 0.0036). All patients showed a significant and continuous improvement in emotional functioning (p < 0.0013) and future perspective (p < 0.0001) from baseline to the end of the study.Limitations of the study include missing data, which increased over time; the possibility that some treatments have slightly changed since the study was conducted; and investigators not blind to treatment allocation.The findings of this study do not support the routine use of colonic J-pouch reconstruction in patients with rectal cancer who undergo a low anterior resection. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B328. BOLSA J COLÓNICA O RECONSTRUCCIÓN COLORRECTAL RECTA DESPUÉS DE RESECCIÓN ANTERIOR BAJA PARA CÁNCER RECTAL: IMPACTO EN LA CALIDAD DE VIDA Y LA FUNCIÓN INTESTINAL: UN ESTUDIO ALEATORIZADO PROSPECTIVO MULTICÉNTRICO: Los resultados informados por el paciente asociados con diferentes técnicas de reconstrucción intestinal después de la resección anterior para el cáncer de recto aún son tema de debate.Evaluar la calidad de vida y la función intestinal en pacientes que se sometieron a una bolsa en J colónica o reconstrucción de anastomosis colorrectal recta después de una resección anterior baja.La función intestinal y la calidad de vida se evaluaron en un ensayo aleatorizado multicéntrico. Los cuestionarios se administraron antes de la cirugía (basal) y a los 6, 12 y 24 meses después de la cirugía.Los pacientes fueron incluidos en 19 centros. La inscripción comenzó en Octubre de 2009 y se detuvo en Febrero de 2016. El estudio se registró en www.clinicaltrials.gov (Identificador: NCT01110798).Pacientes que se sometieron a resección anterior baja por cáncer rectal primario medio-bajo y que fueron aleatorizados en una proporción de 1: 1 para recibir bolsa J colónica con grapas o anastomosis colorrectal recta.calidad de vida y función intestinal.De los 379 pacientes que fueron evaluables, 312 (82.3%) completaron la evaluación inicial, 259 (68.3%) a los 6 meses, 242 (63.9%) a los 12 meses y 199 (52.5%) a los 24 meses.. El funcionamiento intestinal y la calidad de vida no difirieron significativamente entre los dos grupos en casi todos los dominios. La puntuación total de la función intestinal, la urgencia y las puntuaciones de fraccionamiento de las heces empeoraron significativamente después de la cirugía y continuaron con el tiempo extra en ambos grupos (p <0.0032), mientras que el estreñimiento mejoró después de la cirugía pero se recuperó a los niveles basales a partir de 1 año en adelante (p <0.0036). Todos los pacientes mostraron una mejora significativa y continua en el funcionamiento emocional (p <0.0013) y la perspectiva futura (<0.0001) desde el inicio hasta el final del estudio.Datos faltantes, que aumentaron con el tiempo; la posibilidad de que algunos tratamientos hayan cambiado ligeramente desde que se realizó el estudio; investigadores no cegados a la asignación del tratamiento.Los hallazgos de este estudio no respaldan el uso rutinario de la reconstrucción de la bolsa J colónica en pacientes con cáncer rectal que se someten a una resección anterior baja. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B328. (Traducción-Dr. Yesenia Rojas-Khalil).

The colonic J-pouch technique of reconstruction optimizes functional outcome after proctectomy with coloanal anastomosis. However, the impact of adjuvant chemoradiation therapy on pouch function in rectal cancer patients has not been investigated.From January 1994 to December 1999, 74 patients with midrectal or low rectal tumors (less than 10 cm from the anal verge) underwent a proctectomy with coloanal anastomosis with colonic J-pouch reconstruction. Chemoradiation was offered in patients with Stage II and III disease. Radiation therapy was administered using a four-field technique including the anal canal, for a total dose of 50.4 Gy (1.8 Gy/fraction/day). Fifteen patients (20 percent) died with metastatic disease, five (6.8 percent) died of other causes without evidence of recurrence, and five (6.8 percent) were lost to follow-up. In addition, two patients had local recurrence (2.7 percent) at the time of follow-up. Forty-five of 47 eligible patients (96 percent) responded to a questionnaire designed to evaluate specifically the degree of continence and pouch evacuation.The mean age of patients was 68.9 (range, 42-88) years and the mean duration of follow-up was 28.8 (range, 1-69) months. There were 28 patients in the surgery alone group and 17 patients who received either preoperative (13) or postoperative (4) adjuvant chemoradiation therapy. Patients in the surgery alone group had a significantly better degree of continence (mean +/- standard deviation continence score: 18.1 +/- 2.9 vs. 13.3 +/- 4.1, P < 0.001) and were less likely to experience evacuatory problems (mean +/- standard deviation evacuation score: 21.3 +/- 3.7 vs. 16.4 +/- 3.5, P < 0.001). Use of a pad was more frequent in the chemoradiation therapy than in the surgery alone group (53 vs. 18 percent, P = 0.02). The incidence after functional disorders was also more frequent in the irradiated group of patients: incontinence to gas (76 vs. 43 percent, P = 0.03), to liquid stool (64 vs. 25 percent, P = 0.01), and to solid stool (47 vs. 11 percent, P = 0.01). Moreover, irradiated patients reported more frequent pouch-related specific problems, such as clustering (82 vs. 32 percent, P = 0.001), and sensation of incomplete evacuation (82 vs. 32 percent, P = 0.001). Finally, regression analysis demonstrated that radiation-induced sphincter dysfunction was progressive over time.Both preoperative and postoperative chemoradiation therapy adversely affects continence and evacuation in patients with colonic J-pouch. Because radiation-induced damage to the normal tissues is known to be cumulative over time, long-term progressive dysfunction of the anal sphincter and neorectum are causes of concern. Consideration should be given to excluding the anal canal from the field of irradiation in patients with Stage II and III rectal cancer, whenever a sphincter-preserving procedure is planned.

In patients operated on for low rectal cancer, 2-stage Turnbull-Cutait pull-through hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis provides benefits in terms of postoperative morbidity compared with standard hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis associated with diverting ileostomy and further ileostomy reversal.

Fashioning a defunctioning stoma is common when performing an anterior resection for rectal cancer in order to avoid and mitigate the consequences of an anastomotic leakage. We investigated the permanent stoma prevalence, factors influencing stoma outcome and complication rates following stoma reversal surgery.Patients who had undergone an anterior resection for rectal cancer between 2007 and 2013 in the northern healthcare region were identified using the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry and were followed until the end of 2014 regarding stoma outcome. Data were retrieved by a review of medical records. Multiple logistic regression was used to evaluate predefined risk factors for stoma permanence. Risk factors for non-reversal of a defunctioning stoma were also analysed, using Cox proportional-hazards regression.A total of 316 patients who underwent anterior resection were included, of whom 274 (87%) were defunctioned primarily. At the end of the follow-up period 24% had a permanent stoma, and 9% of patients who underwent reversal of a stoma experienced major complications requiring a return to theatre, need for intensive care or mortality. Anastomotic leakage and tumour Stage IV were significant risk factors for stoma permanence. In this series, partial mesorectal excision correlated with a stoma-free outcome. Non-reversal was considerably more prevalent among patients with leakage and Stage IV; Stage III patients at first had a decreased reversal rate, which increased after the initial year of surgery.Stoma permanence is common after anterior resection, while anastomotic leakage and advanced tumour stage decrease the chances of a stoma-free outcome. Stoma reversal surgery entails a significant risk of major complications.Colorectal Disease © 2017 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.

The optimum timing for temporary ileostomy closure after low anterior resection is still open.

We aimed to compare outcomes of early and standard closure of diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) after proctectomy and determine risk factors for anastomotic leak (AL) and complications.

With increasing rates of sphincter preservation because of advances in preoperative chemoradiation, restoration of bowel continuity has become a main goal of rectal cancer treatment. However, in many patients, postoperative bowel dysfunction negatively affects the quality of life.

Loop ileostomy (LI) formation is a common practice for patients undergoing low anterior resection or restorative ileo-anal pouch surgery. Ileostomy closure can be performed using a stapled or hand-sewn technique, with or without resection. If hand-sewn, the closure can be one or two layers. Randomized controlled trials have not demonstrated one technique to be superior, and meta-analyses are limited by the heterogeneity of published studies. Our primary aim is to compare stapled ileostomy closure with single- and two-layer hand-sewn closures.This retrospective, single-centre cohort study included patients undergoing LI closure between January 1999 and April 2016. Patient demographics, anastomotic technique, operative time and patient outcomes were collected.Our analysis included 244 patients (median age 67 years, 43.4% female). There were no significant differences in mean operative times (71.5, 73.1 and 88.5 min, for stapled, single- and two-layer hand-sewn closures, respectively, adjusted overall P = 0.262), or morbidity (21.5% versus 20.4% versus 17.6%, adjusted overall P = 0.934) between stapled or hand-sewn anastomoses, and no mortality. Once adjusting for age, sex, American College of Anaesthesiology grade, and consultant surgeon, the length of stay was different (overall P = 0.034), being similar between stapled and single-layer closures (4.2 versus 5.5 days, P = 0.105), but significantly different between stapled and two-layer closures (4.2 versus 8.3 days, P = 0.026).Stapled and single-layered hand-sewn closures are similar in length of procedure, length of stay and complication rates. A two-layer, hand-sewn technique is associated with a significant increase in stay compared to a stapled ileostomy closure.© 2020 Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.

There is no level 1a evidence regarding the best technique for skin closure at loop ileostomy reversal. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether purse-string skin closure (PSC) is associated with lower surgical site infection (SSI) rates as compared to linear skin closure (LC).EMBASE, MEDLINE, Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases were systematically searched. PSC was defined as a circumferential subcuticular suture leaving a small circular skin defect allowing for free drainage, granulation, and epithelialization. In LC, the wound edges were approximated side to side with or without drainage. The primary endpoint was SSI rate. Secondary endpoints included operating time, length of hospital stay, wound healing time, and incisional hernia rates.Inclusion criterion was any observational or experimental study comparing PSC to LC in patients undergoing ostomy reversal.Twenty studies (6 experimental and 14 observational) totaling 1812 patients (826 PSC and 986 LC) were included. SSI rates were significantly lower statistically and clinically in patients with PSC [OR (95% CI) = 0.14 (0.09, 0.21); p < 0.0001; NNT = 6] in the meta-analysis of all studies. The subgroup analysis of randomized trials [OR (95% CI) = 0.10 (0.04, 0.21); p < 0.0001; NNT = 6] as well as the analysis of randomized trials including patients with loop ileostomy only [OR (95% CI) = 0.12 (0.05, 0.28); p < 0.0001; NNT = 5] confirmed this finding.This meta-analysis found that PSC was associated with significantly decreased rates of SSI in patients undergoing loop ileostomy reversal.

Stoma reversal is associated with a high risk of wound infection. The gunsight and purse-string closure techniques are both effective alternatives for stoma reversal, but comparative studies are lacking.

Prophylactic mesh placement lowers incisional hernia risk, but the ideal mesh type and anatomical plane remain unclear. This study aims to determine which mesh and placement site are associated with the lowest rates of incisional hernia and surgical site infection after stoma closure.A systematic review of PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase was conducted to identify comparative studies evaluating the type of mesh and/or the anatomical plane of mesh placement in the abdominal wall following stoma closure for the prevention of incisional hernias. A network meta-analysis was performed to assess incisional hernia and surgical site infection.We included 11 included studies involving 2,148 patients. The use of prosthetic mesh (OR = 0.137, 95%CI 0.056-0.335), bioprosthetic mesh (OR = 0.171, 95%CI 0.061-0.473), and biological mesh (OR = 0.528, 95%CI 0.336-0.828) was associated with a lower risk of incisional hernia compared to no mesh use. Mesh placement in a retromuscular position (OR = 0.068, 95%CI 0.024-0.189), onlay position (OR = 0.224, 95%CI 0.095-0.524), and intraperitoneal position (OR = 0.564, 95%CI 0.366-0.869) was associated with a lower risk of incisional hernia compared to no mesh use. No statistically significant differences were observed in surgical site infection risk between the use of different mesh types or anatomical planes and no mesh placement.Prophylactic placement of prosthetic or bioprosthetic mesh in the retromuscular plane at the time of stoma closure is the most effective approach for reducing the incidence of incisional hernia and surgical site infection.© 2025. The Author(s).

Anastomotic leakage after colorectal cancer resection is a feared postoperative complication seen among up till 10-20% of patients, with a higher risk following rectal resection than colon resection. Recent studies suggest that the combined use of preoperative mechanical bowel preparation and oral antibiotics may have a preventive effect on anastomotic leakage. This systematic review aims to explore the association between preoperative mechanical bowel preparation combined with oral antibiotics and the risk of anastomotic leakage following restorative resection for primary rectal cancer.Three databases were systematically searched in February 2022. Studies reporting anastomotic leakage rate in patients, who received mechanical bowel preparation and oral antibiotics before elective restorative resection for primary rectal cancer, were included. A meta-analysis was conducted based on the risk ratios of anastomotic leakage.Among 839 studies, 5 studies met the eligibility criteria. The median number of patients were 6111 (80-29,739). The combination of preoperative mechanical bowel preparation and oral antibiotics was associated with a decreased risk of anastomotic leakage (risk ratio = 0.52 (95% confidence interval 0.39-0.69), p-value < 0.001). Limitations included a low number of studies, small sample sizes and the studies being rather heterogenous.This systematic review and meta-analysis found that the use of mechanical bowel preparation and oral antibiotics is associated with a decreased risk of anastomotic leakage among patients undergoing restorative resection for primary rectal cancer. The limitations of the review should be taken into consideration when interpreting the results.© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

This was a retrospective, matching-adjusted indirect comparison of clinical outcomes between patients from a single-arm trial of the ECHELON CIRCULAR™ Powered Stapler (ECP) and those from a historical cohort of patients who underwent left-sided colorectal resection using conventional manual circular staplers, extracted from the Premier Healthcare Database.

This NEUROmonitoring System (NEUROS) trial assessed whether pelvic intraoperative neuromonitoring (pIONM) could improve urogenital and ano-(neo-)rectal functional outcomes in patients who underwent total mesorectal excisions (TMEs) for rectal cancer.

There is increasing awareness of the poor functional outcome suffered by many patients after sphincter-preserving rectal resection, termed 'low anterior resection syndrome' (LARS). There is no consensus definition of LARS and varying instruments have been employed to measure functional outcome, complicating research into prevalence, contributing factors and potential therapies. We therefore aimed to describe the instruments and outcome measures used in studies of bowel dysfunction after low anterior resection and identify major themes used in the assessment of LARS.A systematic review of the literature was performed for studies published between 1986 and 2016. The instruments and outcome measures used to report bowel function after low anterior resection were extracted and their frequency of use calculated.The search revealed 128 eligible studies. These employed 18 instruments, over 30 symptoms, and follow-up time periods from 4 weeks to 14.6 years. The most frequent follow-up period was 12 months (48%). The most frequently reported outcomes were incontinence (97%), stool frequency (80%), urgency (67%), evacuatory dysfunction (47%), gas-stool discrimination (34%) and a measure of quality of life (80%). Faecal incontinence scoring systems were used frequently. The LARS score and the Bowel Function Instrument (BFI) were used in only nine studies.LARS is common, but there is substantial variation in the reporting of functional outcomes after low anterior resection. Most studies have focused on incontinence, omitting other symptoms that correlate with patients' quality of life. To improve and standardize research into LARS, a consensus definition should be developed, and these findings should inform this goal.Colorectal Disease © 2017 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.

Patients with rectal cancer may undergo surgical resection with or without a temporary stoma.This study primarily aimed to compare long-term functional outcomes between patients with and without a temporary stoma after surgery for rectal cancer. The secondary aim was to investigate the effect of time to stoma reversal on functional outcomes.This was a multicenter, cross-sectional study.This study was conducted at 7 Dutch hospitals.Included were patients who had undergone rectal cancer surgery (2009-2015). Excluded were deceased patients, who were deceased, had a permanent stoma, or had intellectual disability.Functional outcomes were measured using the Rome IV criteria for constipation and fecal incontinence and the low anterior resection syndrome score.Of 656 patients, 32% received a temporary ileostomy and 20% a temporary colostomy (86% response). Follow-up was at 56 (interquartile range, 38.5-79) months. Patients who had a temporary ileostomy experienced less constipation, more fecal incontinence, and more major low anterior resection syndrome than those without a temporary stoma. Patients who had a temporary colostomy experienced more major low anterior resection syndrome than those without a temporary stoma. A temporary ileostomy or colostomy was not associated with constipation or fecal incontinence after correction for confounding factors (eg, anastomotic height, anastomotic leakage, radiotherapy). Time to stoma reversal was not associated with constipation, fecal incontinence, or major low anterior resection syndrome.Cross-sectional design.Although patients with a temporary ileostomy or colostomy have worse functional outcomes in the long term, it seems that the reason for creating a temporary stoma, rather than the stoma itself, underlies this phenomenon. Time to reversal of a temporary stoma does not influence functional outcomes. See Video Abstract.ANTECEDENTES:Los pacientes con cáncer de recto pueden someterse a resección quirúrgica con o sin un estoma temporal.OBJETIVO:El objetivo principal de este estudio fue comparar los resultados funcionales a largo plazo entre pacientes con y sin estoma temporal después de cirugía por cáncer de recto. El objetivo secundario fue investigar el efecto del tiempo transcurrido hasta la reversión del estoma sobre los resultados funcionales.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio transversal multicéntrico.ESCENARIO:Este estudio se llevó a cabo en siete hospitales holandeses.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron pacientes sometidos a cirugía de cáncer de recto (2009-2015). Se excluyeron pacientes fallecidos, pacientes con estoma permanente o discapacidad intelectual.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los resultados funcionales se midieron utilizando los criterios de Roma IV para el estreñimiento y la incontinencia fecal y la puntuación del síndrome de resección anterior baja (LARS).RESULTADOS:De 656 pacientes, el 32% recibió una ileostomía temporal y el 20% una colostomía temporal (respuesta del 86%). El seguimiento fue de 56.0 (RIQ 38.5-79.0) meses. Los pacientes a los que se les realizó una ileostomía temporal experimentaron menos estreñimiento, más incontinencia fecal y más LARS mayor que los pacientes sin un estoma temporal. Los pacientes que tuvieron una colostomía temporal experimentaron más LARS mayor que los pacientes sin un estoma temporal. Una ileostomía o colostomía temporal no se asoció con estreñimiento o incontinencia fecal después de la corrección de factores de confusión (p. ej., altura anastomótica, fuga anastomótica, radioterapia). El tiempo hasta la reversión del estoma no se asoció con estreñimiento, incontinencia fecal o LARS mayor.LIMITACIONES:El presente estudio está limitado por su diseño transversal.CONCLUSIONES:Aunque los pacientes con una ileostomía o colostomía temporal tienen peores resultados funcionales a largo plazo, parece que la razón para crear un estoma temporal, más que el estoma en sí, se asocia a este fenómeno. El tiempo hasta la reversión de un estoma temporal no influye en los resultados funcionales. (Traducción-Dr. Jorge Silva Velazco ).Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons.