A multicentre confirmatory single-arm trial of the safety and efficacy of a transanal drain for prevention of anastomotic leakage after surgery for rectal cancer.

AIM: Recent reports have described the use and efficacy of several types of transanal tube (TAT) for preventing anastomotic leakage by reducing intraluminal pressure. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a newly developed TAT for the prevention of anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer. METHOD: A multicentre confirmatory single-arm trial was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a new TAT after LAR for rectal cancer. A total of 115 patients were registered in the trial at several cancer centres and other hospitals. All patients initially received reconstruction with a stapled anastomosis, but 18 then underwent creation of a diverting stoma. Of the remaining 97 patients, the first 96 were included in the protocol-defined primary analysis set. The primary outcome was the incidence of symptomatic leakage and the secondary endpoint was the incidence of complications associated with use of the TAT. The TAT was placed during LAR without creating a covering stoma and the drain was removed 4 or 5 days postoperatively. RESULTS: The rate of symptomatic leakage was 5.2% (95% confidence interval 1.7-11.7), which was significantly lower than the predetermined threshold value of 15.8% (one-sided p-value 0.0013). Only one patient had Grade 3 rectal bleeding that might have been related to use of the TAT. CONCLUSION: This nonrandomized study shows that the TAT appears to be safe and results in lower rates of anastomotic leakage in LAR compared with previous studies.

The impact of transanal tube design for preventing anastomotic leak in anterior resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Placement of a transanal tube (TAT) into the rectum is a strategy used to attempt to prevent anastomotic leak (AL) in anterior resection surgery. There is a wide variation in materials and tube design in devices used as TATs and previous meta-analyses have not considered TAT design in their analyses. This study reviews the impact that design of TAT has on AL rates. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed with the aim of identifying studies evaluating the use of TATs for preventing AL and then defining the design of TATs. Studies were then compared in groups based on TAT design in a meta-analysis to evaluate whether design is an important variable in outcomes. RESULTS: Thirty-three studies were included. There was a wide variety of tubes used as TATs. On meta-analysis, catheter-type TATs were associated with a substantially lower rate of AL (OR: 0.46; 95% CI 0.30, 0.68). By contrast, stent-type TATs were not associated with any reduction in the incidence of AL (OR: 1.06, 95% CI 0.50, 2.22). Catheter-type TATs were also associated with substantial reductions in the rate of reoperation (OR: 0.32; 95% CI 0.20, 0.50), whereas stent-type TATs showed no benefit in the rate of reoperation (OR: 0.79; 95% CI 0.37, 1.65). CONCLUSIONS: Off-the-shelf catheter-type transanal tubes appeared effective in preventing AL, whereas custom-designed stent-type TATs were not demonstrated to be effective; although high quality evidence is limited. TAT design should be an important consideration in further research of the use of TATs in anterior resection surgery.

Endoscopic decompression of acute intestinal distension is associated with reduced mortality in critically ill patients.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic placement of intestinal decompression tubes is a feasible technique for treatment of acute intestinal dilation. Given the heterogeneity of the underlying diseases leading to intestinal obstruction data on the significance of endoscopic procedures for treatment of these conditions are sparse. METHODS: In the study period from 2008 to 2019 all patients receiving a decompression tube were identified by retrospective chart review and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 59 decompression tubes were placed in 50 patients. Technical success was achieved in 98% (58/59 tubes). As major complication one small bowel perforation occurred (1/59; 1.7%). Causes for impaired intestinal transit comprised tumor stenoses 22% (11/50), infections 18% (9/50), post-operative paralysis 14% (7/50), neurological diseases 8% (4/50), trauma 2% (1/50) and others 36% (18/50). Most patients (74%; 37/50) were critically ill and treated on intensive care unit. Treatment response after tube insertion was documented in 76% of patients (38/50) whereas 24% (12/50) did not fulfill response criteria. Patients with treatment response showed a significantly better outcome compared to non-responders. Responders had a median survival of 113 days (95% CI 41-186) compared to 15 days (95% CI 6-24) in non-responders (p = 0.002). Analysis of laboratory parameters after stratification in responders and non-responders to endoscopic therapy showed that non-responders had significantly higher levels of CRP and lower platelet count at baseline (CRP 262 mg/L (IQR 101-307) vs. 94 mg/L (IQR 26-153): p = 0.027; platelets 69 thsd/µL (IQR 33-161) vs. 199 thsd/µL (IQR 138-289): p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic decompression is a safe procedure for acute management of impaired intestinal transit even in critically ill patients. Response to therapy is associated with improved outcome and markers of inflammation and organ function such as CRP, platelet count and serum lactate have to be taken into account for therapy monitoring and evaluation of prognosis.

The possibility of a transanal tube as an alternative to diverting stoma in terms of preventing severe postoperative anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic low anterior resection.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to reveal whether a transanal tube (TAT) could act as an alternative to a diverting stoma (DS) after laparoscopic low anterior resection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 89 consecutive rectal cancer patients whose tumors were located within 15 cm from the anal verge who underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection without a DS at our institution between May 12, 2015 and August 31, 2019 were included. All patients received a postoperative Gastrografin enema study (GES) through a TAT between the 3rd and 10th postoperative day. We planned two study protocols. From May 12, 2015 to March 31, 2017, we conducted a second operation including a DS construction immediately when radiological anastomotic leakage (rAL) was detected (Group A, n=46). From April 1, 2017 to August 31, 2019, we continued TAT drainage even if rAL was detected and repeated the GES weekly until the rAL was healed (Group B, n=43). RESULTS: In Group A (n=46), 14 cases of rAL were included, 11 of which underwent stoma construction. The remaining 3 patients who refused stoma construction were treated conservatively. In Group B (n=43) rAL was encountered in 10, and 7 of these patients were treated successfully by TAT continuous drainage. The rate of DS in Group B (7.0%) was significantly lower than that in Group A (23.9%) (p=0.028). CONCLUSIONS: A TAT could act as a DS to mitigate the symptoms of anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic low anterior resection.

Multicenter analysis of transanal tube placement for prevention of anastomotic leak after low anterior resection.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leak (AL) is a serious complication of low anterior resection (LAR). This study aimed to evaluate the effect of transanal tube placement for prevention of AL. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective cohort study enrolled 328 consecutive patients who underwent LAR for rectal cancer at participating hospitals from 2009 to 2014. Multivariate logistic regression was used to adjust for confounding factors. RESULTS: A transanal tube was placed in 205 patients (TA group) and not placed in 123 patients (non-TA group). Symptomatic AL occurred in 36 cases (11%), with significantly higher incidence of symptomatic AL in the non-TA group than in the TA group (15% vs 8.3%, odds ratio [OR] 2.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-4.06). After adjusting for confounding factors, multivariate analysis revealed that placement of a transanal tube could decrease the incidence of symptomatic AL (adjusted OR 0.37, 95%CI 0.15-0.91). There was no significant difference in postoperative morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stay, or local recurrence rate between the two groups. Local recurrence rate tended to be higher in patients with symptomatic AL (3/36) than in those without it (10/292). CONCLUSIONS: Transanal tube placement is effective for decreasing the incidence of symptomatic AL after LAR.

Fecal Volume after Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection Predicts Anastomotic Leakage.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a major complication after laparoscopic low anterior resection (Lap-LAR). Many surgeons encounter AL following severe postoperative diarrhea. However, little is known about the relationship between postoperative fecal volume and AL. This study determined whether postoperative fecal volume can predict AL. METHODS: A retrospective assessment was performed with data from 176 patients with rectal cancers who underwent Lap-LAR between April 2011 and August 2015. A transanal tube was routinely placed in all cases. The fecal volume from the transanal tube was measured daily. The total fecal volume for 3 days after surgery was compared between the AL and non-AL groups. RESULTS: AL occurred in 11 patients. There were 3 patients with a fecal volume ≥1,000 mL for 3 days after surgery. AL occurred in these 3 patients. In patients with a fecal volume <1,000 mL, the total fecal volume was significantly greater in the AL group than that in the non-AL group (p = 0.0003). The cut-off value of the total fecal volume in AL was 118 mL. CONCLUSIONS: The volume of fecal discharge for 3 days after surgery is associated with the incidence of AL, and a fecal volume ≥118 mL may be a reliable predictor for AL.

A novel transanal tube designed to prevent anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery: the WING DRAIN.

PURPOSE: We introduce a novel transanal tube (TAT), named the "WING DRAIN", designed to prevent anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery, and report the fundamental experiments that led to its development. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed the basic experiments to evaluate the effect of TATs on intestinal decompression, the changes they make in patterns of watery fluid drainage, the changes in their decompression effect when the extension tube connecting the TAT to the collection bag fills with watery drainage fluid, and the variations in intestinal contact and crushing pressure made by some types of TAT. RESULTS: Any type of TAT contributed to decompression in the intestinal tract. Watery drainage commenced from when the water level first rose to the hole in the tip of drain. The intestinal pressure increased with the length of the vertical twist in an extension tube. The crushing pressures of most types of TAT were high enough to cause injury to the intestine. CONCLUSIONS: We resolved the problems using an existing TAT for the purpose of intestinal decompression and by creating the first specialized TAT designed to prevent anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery in Japan.

A meta-analysis of the use of a transanal drainage tube to prevent anastomotic leakage after anterior resection by double-stapling technique for rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of transanal drainage tube (TDT) placement to decrease the risk of postoperative anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery has not been validated. The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the usefulness of a TDT for the prevention of anastomotic leakage after an anterior resection for rectal cancer. METHODS: The PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies comparing TDT and non-TDT. The endpoint utilized in this study was defined as the rates of anastomotic leakage and re-operation. The relative effects of these variables were synthesized using Review Manager 5.1 software. RESULTS: Four trials including 909 participants (401 TDT cases and 508 non-TDT cases) met our inclusion criteria. The weighted mean anastomotic leakage rate was 4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 1-6%], and a significantly lower risk of anastomotic leakage was identified in the TDT group compared with the non-TDT group [odds ratio (OR) 0.30; 95% CI 0.16-0.55; p = 0.0001]. Furthermore, there were significant differences between the TDT and non-TDT groups in terms of the re-operation rate (OR 0.18; 95% CI 0.07-0.44; p = 0.0002). No significant covariates related to anastomotic leakage or re-operation were identified in meta-regression analysis. Both the anastomotic leakage and re-operation rates for all studies lay inside the 95% confidence interval boundaries. No visible publication bias was found by visual assessment of the funnel plot (Egger's test; anastomotic leakage: p = 0.056, re-operation: p = 0.681). CONCLUSIONS: Placement of a TDT is an effective and safe procedure that can decrease the rate of anastomotic leakage and re-operation after an anterior resection.

Efficacy of transanal tube placement after anterior resection for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leakage is a serious complication that can occur after anterior resection of the rectum. There is a question regarding whether the placement of a transanal tube can decrease the rate of anastomotic leakage. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of transanal tube placement after anterior resection. METHODS: We searched three major databases (PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library) up until January 2015 for studies evaluating the benefit of transanal tubes after anterior resection for rectal cancer. The primary outcome measure was the rate of clinical anastomotic leakage. Secondary outcome was the rate of reoperation. Pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were obtained using random effects models. RESULTS: One randomized controlled trial and three observational studies involving 909 patients met inclusion criteria. Clinical anastomotic leakage occurred in 3.49% (14 of 401) of patients with transanal tubes and 12.01% (61 of 508) of patients without transanal tubes. Meta-analysis of the studies showed a lower risk of anastomotic leakage (RR, 0.32; 95% CI 0.18-0.58) and reoperation related to leakage (RR, 0.19; 95% CI 0.08-0.46) when the transanal tube was placed. CONCLUSIONS: While studies are few and mostly observational, the data to date indicate that placement of a transanal tube decreases the rate of clinical anastomotic leakage and reoperation related to leakage. More studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Clinical Efficacy of an Indwelling Transanal Tube for the Prevention of Anastomotic Leakage After Hirschsprung's Disease: A Single Center Experience with Chinese Patients.

Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical effectiveness of an indwelling transanal tube for the prevention of anastomotic leakage (AL) after a radical operation for Hirschsprung's disease (HD). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data from 158 patients who had undergone laparoscopic-assisted Soave procedures for HD at our hospital from May 2015 to May 2019. Patients were divided into two groups depending upon whether the anal drainage tube was retained or not retained: an indwelling group (group A, n = 86) and a no-indwelling group (group B, n = 72). Results: All 158 children had a successful operation by a laparoscopic technique. There was no significant difference in the duration of the operation, the length of the incision, the amount of bleeding, or the postoperative hospitalization time between the two groups. Compared with the no-indwelling group, maintaining the transanal tube had significant advantages for preventing incidences of AL (P < .05). The 4-year follow-up showed that the incidence of postoperative enterocolitis with the indwelling transanal tube was significantly lower than in the group without the drainage tube (P < .05). Conclusions: The laparoscopic-assisted Soave procedure with an indwelling transanal tube is a safe and feasible method for the treatment of HD in children. This method can not only drain intestinal contents but also reduce the occurrence of AL.

Could Stoma Be Avoided after Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer? Experience with Transanal Tube in 195 Cases.

Anastomotic leakage is the most-feared complication of rectal surgery. Transanal devices have been suggested for anastomotic protection as an alternative to defunctioning stoma, although evidence is conflicting, and no single device is widely used in clinical practice. The aim of this paper is to investigate the safety and efficacy of a transanal tube for the prevention of leakage following laparoscopic rectal cancer resection. A transanal tube was used in the cases of total mesorectal excision with low colorectal or coloanal anastomosis, undamaged doughnuts, and negative intraoperative air-leak test. The transanal tube was kept in place until the seventh postoperative day. A total of 195 consecutive patients were retrieved from a prospective surgical database and included in the study. Of these, 71.8% received preoperative chemoradiotherapy. The perioperative mortality rate was 1.0%. Anastomotic leakage occurred in 19 patients, accounting for an incidence rate of 9.7%. Among these, 13 patients underwent re-laparoscopy and ileostomy, while 6 patients were managed conservatively. Overall, the stoma rate was 6.7%. The use of a transanal tube may be a suitable strategy for anastomotic protection following restorative rectal cancer resection. This approach could avoid the burden of a stoma in selected patients with low anastomoses.

Laparoscopic anterior resection with or without transanal tube for rectal cancer patients - A multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In rectal cancer surgery, insertion of transanal tube has been shown to have efficacy to prevent anastomotic leakage. This randomized controlled study aims to clarify the incidence of anastomotic leakage with or without transanal tube in patients with rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients who underwent elective low anterior resection were randomly allocated to either have transanal tube insertion or not for five days after surgery. We examined the incidence of anastomotic leakage, postoperative 30-day morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: 157 patients were randomized to the transanal tube group or the no-transanal tube group. Symptomatic anastomotic leakage occurred in six patients (7.6%) of the former group and eight patients (10.3%) in the latter group, without significant difference (p = 0.559). There was also no significant difference in morbidity between groups (p = 0.633) and no mortality was detected. CONCLUSIONS: Transanal tube insertion had no significant benefit towards prevention of anastomotic leakage in rectal cancer surgery.

Colon perforation caused by transanal decompression tube after laparoscopic low anterior resection: A case report.

INTRODUCTION: The effectiveness of transanal decompression tube (TDT) to prevent anastomotic leakage after rectal surgery has been widely accepted in recent years. However, a rare complication of intestinal perforation due to TDT has been also reported. PRESENTATION OF CASE: A 88-year-old woman underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer. An abdominal drainage tube adjacent to the colorectal anastomosis and a TDT were placed. The patient experienced abdominal pain, nausea and elevated inflammatory markers on postoperative day 6. Enema and computed tomography demonstrated colonic perforation due to the TDT, and emergency laparotomy was performed. Perforation of the anterior sigmoid colon located at the proximal side of the colorectal anastomosis was seen, and the TDT was exposed to the abdominal cavity. Therefore, primary closure of the perforation site, peritoneal lavage, drainage tube placement and transverse colostomy was performed. DISCUSSION: In our case, TDT seemed to compress the anterior wall of the colon and lead to perforation. The looseness of the remaining oral intestinal tract depressed in the pelvis was compressed by the TDT. CONCLUSION: TDTs should be very carefully placed to avoid complication. The length and looseness of the oral intestine and the relationship between the TDT to be inserted might be important.

Transanal drainage tube: alternative option to defunctioning stoma in rectal cancer surgery?

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leakage (AL) remains the most dreaded complication after rectal cancer surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of transanal drainage tube in reducing the incidence, severity and hospital costs respect to defunctioning stoma (DS). METHODS: Considering 429 patients consecutively operated for rectal adenocarcinoma, the tube was placed in 275 (Group A) and not placed in 154 (Group B) patients. A DS was created in a subgroup of 54 patients among the latter. RESULTS: The incidence of AL was significantly higher in Group B (P=0.007). In patients with DS, the incidence was higher than Group A (P=NS). Grade C complications were significantly higher in Group B (P=0.006) and Grade B complications were significantly higher in patients with DS (P=0.03). Estimated economic benefit was 4,000 Euros for each patient. CONCLUSIONS: Transanal drainage tube may be a safe and effective alternative to DS in many cases. The incidence of leakage and Grade C complications are reduced albeit not significantly but Grade B complications are significantly lower. Although the AL incidence was similar in our experience, the tube allows to avoid a stoma-related consequence and the need for reversal procedure with economic benefit.

Comparison of anastomotic leakage rate and reoperation rate between transanal tube placement and defunctioning stoma after anterior resection: A network meta-analysis of clinical data.

OBJECTIVE: Defunctioning stoma (DS) and transanal tube (TT) placement have all been reported to be effective procedures to prevent anastomotic leakage after anterior resection. However, there are few studies that directly compare the 2 procedures, and those that do are unclear. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search from the databases of Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane library. We limited the publication date from 2008/01/01 to 2018/07/29. The bias risk of eligible randomized controlled trials and cohort studies were assessed by Cochrane Collaboration's tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, respectively. The direct meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.3 software. The network graph, inconsistency test and comparison-adjusted funnel plot were performed by the Stata 14.0 software. The indirect meta-analysis and rank probabilities were performed by GeMTC R package. RESULTS: 6 randomized controlled trials and 26 cohort studies were included in our meta-analysis. All eligible studies were assessed as low risk of bias. The anastomotic leakage rate and reoperation rate was lower in the patients receiving DS or TT placement than patients with non-protection. DS shared similar anastomotic leakage rate with TT. However, the reoperation rate was significantly lower in patients receiving DS than patients receiving TT. CONCLUSION: Both TT and DS were protective factors for anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer. DS reduced severity of anastomotic leakage in a more effective way than TT placement. However, we still suggested the routing use of TT for decreasing the risk of anastomotic leakage in anterior resection because it was cheaper and technically simpler.

Transanal Tube Drainage as a Conservative Treatment for Anastomotic Leakage Following a Rectal Resection.

PURPOSE: We evaluate the role of transanal tube drainage (TD) as a conservative treatment for patients with anastomotic leakage (AL). METHODS: Patients treated for AL who had undergone a low or an ultralow anterior resection with colorectal or coloanal anastomosis for the treatment of rectal cancer between January 2013 and January 2017 were enrolled in this study. The data were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively. The primary outcomes were the diagnosis and the management of AL. RESULTS: Two hundred thirteen consecutive patients, 122 males and 91 females, were included. The mean age was 66.91 ± 11.15 years, and the median body mass index was 24 kg/m2 (range, 20-35 kg/m2 ). The median tumor distance from the anal verge was 8 cm (range, 4-12 cm). Ninety-three patients (44%) received neoadjuvant therapy for nodal disease and/or locally advanced rectal cancer. Only 13 patients (6%) developed AL. Six patients developed subclinical AL as they had a defunctioning ileostomy at the time of the initial procedure. They were treated conservatively with TD under endoscopic guidance in the endoscopy unit and received intravenous antibiotics. Six weeks after discharge, these 6 patients underwent follow-up flexible sigmoidoscopy which showed a completely healed anastomotic defect with no residual stenosis. Seven patients developed a clinically significant AL and required reoperation with pelvic abscess drainage and Hartmann colostomy formation. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that TD for management of patients with AL is safe, cheap, and effective. Salvaging the anastomosis will help decrease the need for Hartmann colostomy formation. Proper patient selection is important.

Outcomes of transanal tube placement in anterior resection: A meta-analysis and systematic review.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, transanal tube placement was reported to be an effective procedure preventing anastomotic leakage after anterior resection of rectal cancer. However, this procedure is still controversial owing to inconsistent results found in previous studies. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed using Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane library from the databases inception up until June 21, 2018. The methodological quality of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies were evaluated by Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, respectively. Statistical analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.3 software. RESULTS: 1 randomized controlled trial and 9 cohort studies were included in our meta-analysis. The randomized controlled trial was proven to be low risk according to the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. All of the cohort studies proved a high quality according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Patients in transanal tube group had more disadvantageous preoperative demographic characteristics than patients in non-transanal tube group. The anastomotic leak rate was lower in the transanal tube group. Patients in the transanal tube group tended to have lower reoperation rates and shorter hospital stays compared with patients in the non-transanal tube group. CONCLUSION: Despite various unfavorable preoperative characteristics, anastomotic leakage after anterior resection was lower in patients who received transanal tube placement compared with the control group. Transanal tube placement may be an alternative procedure of defunctioning stoma. A large sample size, multicenter RCT was needed to prove our results.

Usefulness of transanal tube placement for prevention of anastomotic leakage following laparoscopic low anterior resection.

INTRODUCTION: Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a major complication of laparoscopic low anterior resection (LLAR) for rectal cancer. Although several recent reports have suggested that transanal tube placement can prevent AL, this practice is still controversial. Additionally, the mechanism by which a transanal tube prevents AL is unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of transanal tube placement for prevention of AL following LLAR. METHODS: This was a retrospective study that included 69 patients who underwent LLAR between February 2012 and January 2016. After an anastomosis using a double stapling technique, a transanal tube was placed in 28 patients. A diverting stoma was created in 26 patients. Univariate and multivariate analyses of clinicopathological characteristics were performed. RESULTS: The overall incidence of AL was 15.9% (11/69). Univariate analysis showed that transanal tube placement (P = 0.022) and early postoperative diarrhea (P < 0.001) were associated with AL. The duration of the postoperative hospital stay for patients with transanal tube placement (13.1 ± 4.1 days) was significantly shorter than for patients without a transanal tube (22.7 ± 12.3 days; P < 0.001). However, transanal tube placement did not reduce postoperative diarrhea. Creation of a diverting stoma did not affect the incidence of AL. Multivariate analysis revealed that the absence of a transanal tube (odds ratio = 33.5, P = 0.018) and the occurrence of postoperative diarrhea (odds ratio = 86.3, P = 0.001) were independent risk factors for AL. CONCLUSION: Transanal tube placement prevents AL after LLAR. Furthermore, this protective effect may be due to a reduction in the unfavorable incidence of early postoperative diarrhea.

Transanal drainage tube reduces rate and severity of anastomotic leakage in patients with colorectal anastomosis: A case controlled study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical usefulness of the placement of a transanal drainage tube to prevent anastomotic leakage in colorectal anastomoses. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This single-center retrospective trial included all patients treated with surgery for benign or malign colorectal disease between January 2009 and December 2012. The transanal drainage tube was immediately placed after colorectal anastomosis until day five and was routinely used since 2010. Patients treated with a transanal drainage tube were compared with the control group. Statistical analysis was performed using Fisher's exact or Chi-square tests for group comparison and a linear regression model for multivariate analysis. RESULTS: This study included 242 patients (46% female; median age 63 years; range 18-93); 34% of the patients underwent a laparoscopic procedure, and 57% of the patients received a placement of a transanal drainage tube. Anastomotic leakage occurred in 19 patients (7.9%). Univariate analysis showed a higher rate of anastomotic leakage in patients with an ASA score 4 (p = 0.02) and a lower rate in patients with transanal drainage placement (3.6% vs. 13.6%; p = 0.007). The grading of the complication of anastomotic leakage was reduced with transanal drainage (e.g., Dindo â‰§ 3b: 20.0% vs. 92.9%; p = 0.006), and the hospital stay was shortened (17.6 ± 12.5 vs. 22.1 ± 17.6 days; p = 0.02). Multivariate analysis revealed that transanal drainage was the only significant factor (HR = -2.90; -0.168 to -0.032; p = 0.007) affecting anastomotic leakage. CONCLUSIONS: Placement of a transanal drainage tube in patients with colorectal anastomoses is a safe and simple technique to perform and reduces anastomotic leakage, the severity of the complication and hospital stay.