Loop ileostomy versus loop colostomy for defunctioning low anastomoses during rectal cancer surgery.

Several studies have compared loop ileostomy with loop colostomy to defunction colorectal anastomoses. The discordant results may be due to the heterogeneity of the indications. We therefore performed a retrospective study to compare the two procedures in a homogeneous group of patients operated on electively for rectal cancer. Among 462 consecutive patients undergoing rectal resection for cancer during 1986-1998, 60 had a loop colostomy and 107 a loop ileostomy to defunction a low anastomosis. The two groups were similar with respect to age, gender, obesity, tumor stage, and duration before closure (109 vs. 104 days; p = 0.28). All the stoma-related complications that occurred after construction and after closure of the stoma were recorded. There were no stoma-related deaths in the two groups. After stoma construction, the morbidity rate was significantly higher following loop colostomy than after loop ileostomy (35% vs. 19%; p = 0.02). After stoma closure the complication rate was significantly higher in the colostomy group than in the ileostomy group (34% vs. 12%; p = 0.004). The risk of surgical reintervention related to the morbidity of both construction and closure of the stoma was twice as high after loop colostomy than after loop ileostomy (22% vs. 9%; p = 0.03). The results of this study showed that, in our experience, the overall stoma-related morbidity and risk of reoperation were significantly lower after loop ileostomy than after loop colostomy. This suggests that loop ileostomy is the best procedure for defunctioning colorectal anastomoses electively. We therefore recommend using a loop ileostomy during rectal cancer surgery.

Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after resection of rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The most important surgical complication following rectal resection with anastomosis is symptomatic anastomotic leakage, which is associated with a 6-22 per cent mortality rate. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the risk factors for clinical anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for cancer of the rectum. METHODS: From 1980 to 1995, 272 consecutive anterior resections for rectal cancer were performed by the same surgical team; 131 anastomoses were situated 5 cm or less from the anal verge. The associations between clinical anastomotic leakage and 19 patient-, tumour-, surgical-, and treatment-related variables were studied by univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: The rate of clinical anastomotic leakage was 12 per cent (32 of 272). Multivariate analysis of the overall population showed that only male sex and level of anastomosis were independent factors for development of anastomotic leakage. The risk of leakage was 6.5 times higher for anastomoses situated less than 5 cm from the anal verge than for those situated above 5 cm; it was 2.7 times higher for men than for women. In a second analysis of low anastomoses (5 cm or less from the anal verge; n = 131), obesity was statistically associated with leakage. CONCLUSION: A protective stoma is suitable after sphincter-saving resection for rectal cancer for anastomoses situated at or less than 5 cm from the anal verge, particularly for men and obese patients.

[Anorectal reconstruction by coloperineal anastomosis and dynamic double graciloplasty after abdomino-perineal resection]. / Reconstruction anorectale par anastomose colo-périnéale et double graciloplastie dynamique après amputation abdomino-périnéale.

UNLABELLED: The aim of this study was to assess the technical and functional results of total anorectal reconstruction with double dynamic graciloplasty after abdominoperineal resection (APR). PATIENTS AND METHODS: From May 1995 to December 1996. 10 patients (6 males and 4 females), with a mean age of 54 years (range 39-74), underwent anorectal reconstruction for low rectal adenocarcinoma. All patients had preoperative radiotherapy and six had postoperative chemotherapy. The surgical procedure was performed in three stages: 1) APR, coloperineal anastomosis, double graciloplasty and ileostomy; 2) three months later, implantation of stimulator and leads; 3) after a two-months training period, the stoma was closed. RESULTS: There was no postoperative mortality. Early and late morbidity occurred in 5 patients: 2 colonic fistulas, 1 necrosis of colon, 1 ileostomy prolapse, 1 neosphincter stenosis, 1 sepsis of stimulator. No patient had recurrence of the disease (mean follow-up 16 months), but two patients died at 3 and 8 months, respectively from anorexia and pulmonary embolism. Seven patients were available for evaluation (2 fistula, 1 death). Before training, the resting pressure and the squeeze pressure were 30 and 175 cm H2O respectively. At the time of evaluation, the electrical stimulated pressure was 95 cm H2O. Six of these 7 patients were continent (5 with spontaneous defecation, 1 with enemas) and 1 was incontinent. CONCLUSIONS: Anorectal reconstruction with dynamic graciloplasty can be an alternative to permanent colostomy for selected patients after APR. However, there is a high morbidity and the quality of life of the patients must be evaluated.