Mitigating the Consequences of Anastomotic Leakage After Laparoscopic Rectal Cancer Resection: Is It Achievable by a Simple Method?

BACKGROUND: With regard to laparoscopic low anterior resection, anastomotic leakage still remains a challenge and continues to account for approximately 30% of postoperative deaths. This study was designed to evaluate whether the intracolonic and perineal drainage is associated with a decreased risk for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery without stool diversion. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective data were collected from 337 patients with rectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic resection without defunctioning stoma. RESULTS: A total of 157 patients underwent laparoscopic rectal resection, followed by the placement of intracolonic and perineal drainage, while 180 underwent laparoscopic surgery routinely. No difference in clinically significant leakage was observed between the intracolonic and perineal drainage and the control groups (3.8% vs 8.3%, P = .0874). However, reoperation was underwent at a significantly lower rate after the placement of intracolonic and perineal drainage (intracolonic and perineal drainage: 1 of 6 [16.7%] vs control: 14 of 15 [93.3%]; P < .01). In multivariate analysis, extraperitoneal tumor location and operation duration ≥180 minutes were independently associated with anastomotic leakage. CONCLUSIONS: Significant risk factors of anastomotic leakage include extraperitoneal tumor location and operation duration ≥180 minutes. The placement of intracolonic and perineal drainage was not found to be significantly associated with anastomotic leakage, but this method could mitigate the clinical consequences of leakage and decrease the rate of reoperation and transverse colostomy after laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal cancer.

Surgical margins and short-term results of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The confines of the narrow bony pelvis make laparoscopic surgery more challenging in the treatment of low rectal cancer. Macroscopic evaluation of the completeness of the mesorectum provides detailed information about the quality of surgery. This study was performed to observe the short-term outcomes and evaluate the macroscopic quality of specimens acquired from laparoscopic total mesorectal excision versus open total mesorectal excision in patients with low rectal cancer. METHODS: A total of 177 patients with low rectal cancer underwent total mesorectal excision by either a laparoscopic (n = 87) or open (n = 90) approach. In all cases the surgical time, blood loss, intraoperative and postoperative complications, postoperative bowel opening, and hospital stay were assessed. Special attention was given to the macroscopic judgment concerning the cut edge of peritoneal reflection, Denonvilliers fascia, completeness of the mesorectum, and bowel wall below the mesorectum. RESULTS: The surgical time was 160 ± 40 minutes in the laparoscopic group. It was not significantly different from that in the open group (P = .782). The operative blood loss was 28 ± 5 mL in the group undergoing laparoscopic surgery and 80 ± 20 mL in the group undergoing open surgery (P < .01). Intraoperative injuries to the pelvic autonomic nervous system were recorded in 4 cases in the laparoscopic group compared with 12 cases in the open group (P < .05). The incidences of chest infection and anastomotic leakage were similar between the 2 approaches. The postoperative bowel opening time was 2.1 ± 1.5 days in the laparoscopic group and 3.5 ± 1.6 days in the open group (P < .01), whereas the hospital stay was 5.2 ± 1.8 days and 7.0 ± 2.1 days, respectively (P < .01). Intact Denonvilliers fascia and complete total mesorectal excision were more likely to be achieved by the laparoscopic approach than the open approach (P < .01). Colorectal anastomoses were located significantly lower in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (P < .01). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision has consistent advantages over open total mesorectal excision, including similar surgical time, less blood loss, reduced hospital stay, and shorter disability period. A complete macroscopic specimen is more likely to be acquired by laparoscopy because of the better pelvic view offered by the approach.

MiR-382 functions as tumor suppressor and chemosensitizer in colorectal cancer.

Increasing evidence suggests that microRNAs (miRNAs) play a critical role in tumorigenesis. Decreased expression of miR-382 has been observed in various types of cancers. However, the biological function of miR-382 in colorectal cancer (CRC) is still largely unknown. Here, we found that miR-382 was down-regulated in human colorectal cancer tissues and cell lines associated with it. MiR-382 inhibited colorectal cancer cell proliferation, migration, invasion, and enhance chemosensitivity. Furthermore, we identified Krüppel-like factor 12 (KLF12) and homeodomain-interacting protein kinase 3 (HIPK3) as the target of miR-382, and miR-382 rescued the promotion effect of KFL12 on migration and enhanced chemosensitivity in colorectal cancer cell lines. Collectively, these findings revealed that miR-382 inhibits migration and enhances chemosensitivity by targeting KLF12 and HIPK3 in colorectal cancer. These findings might serve as a tumor suppressor in CRC.