[Risk factor and early diagnosis of anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery].

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is one of the most serious complications after sphincter- preserving surgery for rectal cancer, which can significantly prolong the length of stay of patients, increase perioperative mortality, cause dysfunction, shorten overall survival and recurrence-free survival of patients. In order to reduce the serious consequences caused by AL, prediction of AL through preoperative and intraoperative risk factors are of great importance. However, the influences of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, protective stoma, laparoscopic surgery and some intraoperative manipulations on AL are still controversial. Through the auxiliary judgment of anastomotic blood supply during operation, such as indocyanine green imaging, hemodynamic ultrasound, etc., it is expected to achieve the source control of AL. Early diagnosis of AL can be achieved by attention to clinical manifestations and drainage, examination of peripheral blood, drainage and intestinal flora, identification of high risk factors such as fever, diarrhea and increased infectious indicators, and timely administration of CT with contrast enema.

Less is more-the best test for anastomotic leaks in rectal cancer patients prior to ileostomy reversal.

PURPOSE: No clear consensus exists on how to routinely assess the integrity of the colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal. The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of contrast enema, endoscopic procedures, and digital rectal examination in rectal cancer patients in this setting. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed. Studies assessing at least one index test for which a 2 × 2 table was calculable were included. Hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated and used for test comparison. Paired data were used where parameters could not be calculated. Methodological quality was assessed with the QUADAS-2 tool. RESULTS: Two prospective and 11 retrospective studies comprising 1903 patients were eligible for inclusion. Paired data analysis showed equal or better results for sensitivity and specificity of both endoscopic procedures and digital rectal examination compared to contrast enema. Subgroup analysis of contrast enema according to methodological quality revealed that studies with higher methodological quality reported poorer sensitivity for equal specificity and vice versa. No case was described where a contrast enema revealed an anastomotic leak that was overseen in digital rectal examination or endoscopic procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopy and digital rectal examination appear to be the best diagnostic tests to assess the integrity of the colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal. Accuracy measures of contrast enema are overestimated by studies with lower methodological quality. Synopsis of existing evidence and risk-benefit considerations justifies omission of contrast enema in favor of endoscopic and clinical assessment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42019107771.

Flexible endoscopy is enough diagnostic prior to loop ileostomy reversal.

PURPOSE: This study investigates whether contrast enema (CE) and flexible endoscopy (FE) should be performed routinely after low anterior resection (LAR) before ileostomy reversal. Additionally, the impact of previous anastomotic leakage (AL) on diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) was assessed. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected tertiary care data of two centers. Consecutive rectal cancer patients undergoing LAR with loop ileostomy formation were included. Before ileostomy reversal, all patients were assessed by CE and FE. DTA of FE and CE for asymptomatic AL in patients who had previously suffered from clinically relevant AL (group 1) compared with those without apparent AL after LAR (group 0) were assessed separately. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-three patients were included in the analysis, 86 in group 1 and 207 in group 0. Overall sensitivity for detection of asymptomatic AL was 76% (FE) and 60% (CE). Specificity was 100% for both tests. DTA of FE was equal or superior to CE in all subgroups. Prevalence of asymptomatic AL at the time of testing was 1.4% in group 0 and 25.6% in group 1. CONCLUSION: Flexible endoscopy is the more accurate diagnostic test for the detection of asymptomatic anastomotic leaks prior to ileostomy reversal. Contrast enema showed no gain of information. In the group without complications after the initial rectal resection, 104 must be tested to find one leak prior to reversal. In those patients, routine diagnostic testing additional to digital rectal examination may be questioned.

How to reduce anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery-report from German expert meeting.

AIMS: Anastomotic leakage is one of the most worrisome complications in colorectal surgery. An expert meeting was organized to discuss and find a consensus on various aspects of the surgical management of colorectal disease with a possible impact on anastomotic leakage. METHODS: A three-step Delphi-method was used to find consensus recommendations. RESULTS: Strong consensus was achieved for the use of mechanical bowel preparation and oral antibiotics prior to colorectal resections, the abundance of non-selective NSAIDs, the preoperative treatment of severe iron deficiency anemia, and for attempting to improve the patients' general performance in the case of frailty. Concerning technical aspects of rectal resection, there was a strong consensus in regard to routinely mobilizing the splenic flexure, to dividing the inferior mesenteric vein, and to using air leak tests to check anastomotic integrity. There was also a strong consensus on not to oversew the stapled anastomoses routinely, to use protective ileostomies for low rectal and intersphincteric, but not for high-rectal anastomoses. Furthermore, a consensus was reached in regard to using CT-scans with rectal contrast enema to evaluate suspected anastomotic leakage as well as measuring C-reactive protein routinely to monitor the postoperative course after colorectal resections. No consensus was found concerning the indication and technique for testing bowel perfusion, the routine use of endoscopy to check the integrity of the anastomosis, the placement of transanal drains for rectal anastomoses and the management of anastomotic leakage with peritonitis. CONCLUSION: Consensus could be found for several practice details in the perioperative management in colorectal surgery that might have an influence on anastomotic leakage.

Mechanotechnical faults and particular issues of anastomotic complications following robot-assisted anterior resection in 968 rectal cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: As most risk factors for anastomotic complications (AC) in rectal cancer patients appear to be noncorrectable, it is needed to find the correctable causes. Additionally, the outcomes of indocyanine-green fluorescence imaging (IFI) and robot-stapled anastomosis have yet been undetermined. METHODS: This study retrospectively analyzed 968 consecutive patients with rectal cancer, who underwent curative robot-assisted anterior resections between 2010 and 2018. IFI parameters and stapling features in the surgical records were reviewed, and reconfirmed. RESULTS: AC occurred in 54 patients (5.6%), 34 (3.5%) with anastomotic leakage (AL) and 24 (2.5%) with anastomotic stenosis (AS). Mechanotechnical faults including defective stapling configurations, including angles lesser than or equal to 150° and outer deviation (more than half from the center of the circle) of linear staples, between the two linear staples were independently associated with AL (P < .001 each). IFI significantly reduced AL rate (2.5% vs 5.3%, P = .029) and AS rate (2% vs 18.8%, P = .006), respectively. Robot linear stapling enabled to maintain the obtuse angle during consecutive staplings and reduced console time. AL and AS were independent risk factors for disease-free survival (P = .02) and local recurrence (P = .03), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: AC were associated with some correctable causes, namely, mechanotechnical errors and lack of use of IFI.

Detection of early anastomotic leakage by intraperitoneal microdialysis after low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a prospective cohort study.

AIM: Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a common and serious complication following sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer. Early detection and intervention can improve clinical outcomes. The aim of this prospective cohort study was to compare intraperitoneal microdialysis with a clinical scoring system for early detection of AL. METHOD: A microdialysis catheter was anchored near the anastomosis at low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer. Peritoneal fluid samples were analysed (lactate, pyruvate, glucose and glycerol concentration) 4-hourly and compared with a daily clinical leak score (DULK = Dutch leakage). At day 7 a pelvic CT with rectal contrast enema was performed to establish if there had been a radiological leak. RESULTS: In this two-centre study, 129 patients [median age 65 (26-82) years; 60.5% male] underwent LAR. The leak rate was 27% (grade A, n = 11; grade B, n = 12; grade C, n = 12). Receiver operator characteristic analysis demonstrated a lactate cut-off value of 9.8 mm and had 77% sensitivity, 82% specificity, 78% accuracy, a positive predictive value (PPV) of 58, a negative predictive value (NPV) of 88 (CI 79-94) and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.9 for AL. This compared with a clinical score ≥ 4, which had 57% sensitivity, 79% specificity, 71% accuracy, a PPV of 46, a NPV of 82 and an AUC of 0.7 for AL. The mean day for a positive test when using delta lactate ≥ 6.3 mm was 1.6 days and for leak score ≥ 4 it was 3.3 days (NS). CONCLUSION: When AL occurs, intraperitoneal lactate concentration increases over time, and at a certain cut-off has a higher sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV and NPV than a clinical scoring system.

Contemporary management of anastomotic leak after colon surgery: assessing the need for reoperation.

BACKGROUND: We sought to investigate contemporary management of anastomosis leakage (AL) after colonic anastomosis. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database 2012 to 2013 was used to identify patients with AL. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to find predictors of the need for surgical intervention in management of AL. RESULTS: A total of 32,280 patients underwent colon resection surgery with 1,240 (3.8%) developing AL. Overall, 43.9% of patients with AL did not require reoperation. Colorectal anastomosis had significantly higher risk of AL compared with ileocolonic anastomosis (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.20; P = .04). However, the rate of need for reoperation was higher for AL in colocolonic anastomosis compared with ileocolonic anastomosis (AOR, 1.48; P = .04). White blood cell count (AOR, 1.07; P < .01), the presence of intra-abdominal infection with leakage (AOR, 1.47; P = .01), and protective stoma (AOR, .43, P = .02) were associated with reoperation after AL. CONCLUSIONS: Nonoperative treatment is possible in almost half of the patients with colonic AL. The anatomic location of the anastomosis impacts the risk of AL. Severity of leakage, the presence of a stoma, and general condition of patients determine the need for reoperation.

Endoscopic therapy in inflammatory bowel diseases (with videos).

Endoscopic therapies are important modalities in the treatment of IBD, adjunct to medical and surgical approaches. These therapeutic techniques are particularly useful in the management of IBD-associated or IBD surgery­associated strictures, fistulas, and sinuses and colitis-associated neoplasia. Although the main focus of endoscopic therapies in IBD has been on balloon stricture dilation and ablation of adenoma-like lesions, new endoscopic approaches are emerging, including needle-knife stricturotomy, needle-knife sinusotomy, endoscopic stent placement, and fistula tract injection. Risk management of endoscopy-associated adverse events is also evolving. The application of endoscopic techniques in novel ways in the treatment of IBD is just beginning and will likely expand rapidly in the near future.

Little consensus in either definition or diagnosis of a lower gastro-intestinal anastomotic leak amongst colorectal surgeons.

PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were to assess the working definition of a colorectal anastomotic leak among colorectal surgeons and to survey the current approach to investigation and management of a patient with a suspected anastomotic leak. METHODS: Online survey consisting of nine questions regarding the definition, assessment and investigation of anastomotic leaks was conducted. Of the 738 eligible ACP members contacted, 210 responded (28.4%). RESULTS: Results demonstrated that 94.2% of surgeons agreed 'extravasation of contrast on enema' and 91.8% agreed 'faecal material seen in drains/from the wound' constituted a clinical leak. Only 69.2% agreed that a leak was 'intra-abdominal sepsis requiring a laparotomy', and about half agreed that radiological collections constituted a leak when either treated with antibiotics (46.6%) or with percutaneous drainage (51.4%). Serial clinical examination was the perceived most sensitive clinical feature for a leak, with 75% of surgeons ranking this in their top three choices. Surgeons radiologically confirm a leak on average in 80.2% of cases. A CT with rectal contrast for a left-sided leak was selected by 42.9% of respondents. For a right-sided/small bowel anastomosis, 44.5% selected a CT with oral contrast and 43.4% a CT with IV contrast. CONCLUSIONS: There is still significant heterogeneity between surgeons in what they define as an anastomotic leak. Most surgeons valued clinical examination as the most sensitive initial tool for leak detection; however, radiology has a major role in the confirmation of clinical leaks in colorectal patients. There is an increasing need to be able to classify and grade anastomotic leaks, both to improve the care of patients and for audit purposes.

Rectoseminal vesicle fistula as a rare complication after low anterior resection: a report of three cases.

A rectoseminal vesicle fistula is a rare complication after a low anterior resection for rectal cancer, usually developing in the outpatient postoperative period with pneumaturia, fever, scrotal swelling or testicular pain. A diagnostic water-soluble contrast enema, cystography and computed tomography reveal a tract from the rectum to the seminal vesicle. Anastomotic leakage is thought to be partially responsible for the formation of such tracts. This report presents three cases of rectoseminal vesicle fistula, and the presumed course of the disease and optimal treatment options are discussed.

Detailed assessment of stomal incontinence after Malone antegrade continence enema: development of a new grading scale.

PURPOSE: The Malone antegrade continence enema procedure improves quality of life for patients with bowel dysfunction. Stomal leakage has been reported, although no objective scale describes this type of incontinence. The value of cecal imbrication has not been fully elucidated on a large scale. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed pediatric patients who underwent Malone antegrade continence enema by a single surgeon between 2000 and 2010. Detailed information regarding degree and frequency of stomal incontinence was longitudinally recorded and analyzed. A classification system was developed, with grade 0 defined as no stomal incontinence, grade 1 a drop at the stoma or spotting on clothes 1 time or less per month, grade 2 spotting on clothing 2 to 4 times per month and grade 3 any leakage greater than 4 times per month. RESULTS: The Malone antegrade continence enema procedure was laparoscopic nonimbricated in 51 patients, open nonimbricated in 16 and open imbricated in 12. Mean followup was 3.5 years. Of cases where the appendix was not imbricated stomal incontinence was grade 0 in 69%, grade 1 in 19%, grade 2 in 7.5% and grade 3 in 4.5%. Two patients (3%) requested revision due to stomal incontinence. No patient who underwent Malone antegrade continence enema with imbrication had stomal leakage (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We reviewed the spectrum of stomal incontinence following Malone antegrade continence enema in 75 patients and developed a new grading scale to help standardize this complication. Imbrication provided stomal continence in all patients. Without imbrication almost 90% had no stomal incontinence or grade 1 leakage after long-term followup.

Management of leak from the tip of the "J" in ileal pouch-anal anastomosis.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis and management of leak from the tip of the J-pouch after IPAA has not been systematically studied. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to report our experience in the diagnosis and management of these leaks following primary IPAA. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective review of prospectively gathered data. SETTINGS: Data were obtained from a prospectively maintained single-institution pelvic pouch database. PATIENTS: Included in this study were patients with a leak from the tip of the J-pouch after primary IPAA. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main measures of outcomes after salvage surgery were pouch failure, pouch function, and quality of life. RESULTS: There were 27 (14 male) patients. Median age was 37 years (range, 20-73). Underlying disease in these patients was ulcerative colitis in 22 patients. Predominant symptoms were abdominal pain (n = 15) and fever (n = 5). Twenty patients had either a pelvic abscess detected by CT or MRI or a leak demonstrated at gastrografin enema or pouchoscopy. In 6 patients, the diagnosis was only made at salvage surgery. In 1 patient, the leak-associated abscess was detected during emergent laparotomy for acute peritonitis before salvage surgery. Of 27 patients, 1 had successful CT-guided drainage without the need for further surgery. Another patient had pouch resection with end ileostomy. Salvage surgery was performed in 25 patients by means of pouch repair (n = 23) and new pouch creation (n = 2); 8 patients had a repeat anastomosis. Median time from primary IPAA to salvage surgery was 0.9 years (0.13-9.8). Twenty-four patients with salvage surgery have a functioning pouch after a mean follow-up of 3.2 ± 1.9 years. LIMITATIONS: : The study was limited by its retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: Leak from the tip of the J-pouch is indolent and diagnosis can be difficult. Satisfactory outcomes in terms of pouch retention may be expected after appropriate surgical management.

The reversal of a protective stoma is feasible before the complete healing of a colorectal anastomotic leak.

A proximal diverting stoma is recommended in "high-risk" conditions after total mesorectal excision. The aim of the study is to assess whether, after checking the anastomosis by using a water-soluble contrast enema (WCE), the closure of the ileostomy is feasible and safe, even in the presence of a persistent radiological leak. From 2003 to 2010, 210 colorectal anastomoses were performed. Ileostomy was carried out in "high-risk" anastomosis. A radiological control was performed 2 weeks later. If a leakage was present, conservative therapy controlled by serial WCEs was prescribed. Ileostomy closure was performed in the absence of leakage or with persistent leakage without clinical signs of pelvic infections. Seventy patients (33.3%) had a protective ileostomy. Fifty-eight of these (82.9%) had an uneventful course, whereas 12 (17.1%) had clinical leakage. All 70 patients were submitted to WCE after 2 weeks. Nine of 58 patients (15.5%) and eight of 12 patients with clinical anastomotic leakage showed a leakage at radiology. All these patients were scheduled another WCE 2 months later. It showed that the anastomosis had been healed in seven patients, whereas the 10 patients with leaks remained with ostomy until the third enema 1 month later. For all these patients, closure of the ileostomy was planned despite persistent radiological and subclinical leakage. A radiological study using WCE before closure of the stoma is essential and stoma closure, in the presence of a persistent leakage, is possible in selected patients.