Anastomotic leak after laparoscopic total mesorectal excision
Main Article Content
Keywords
Abstract
Objective: To experience and some factors related to anastomotic leak in rectal cancer surgery. Subject and method: This was a retrospective study. A total of 120 patients with rectal cancer have undergone laparoscopic total mesorectal excision at 108 Military Central Hospital from January 2019 to November 2020. Result: 65.0% patients with laparoscopic total mesorectal excision and 35.0% with intersphincteric resection. The average age was 62.9 (range 20 - 84), rectal tumor location: The upper third, middle third, and lower third was 27.5%, 48.3%, and 24.2%, respectively. The rate of anastomotic leak was 8.3% patients, in which grade A, B, and C was 1.7%, 0.8%, and 5.8%, respectively. Anastomotic leak that required re-operation was 5.8%. Anastomotic leak was significantly associated with intraoperative loss blood (p=0.022), operative time (p=0.03), the distance of anastomosis from the anal verge (p=0.042), and surgical procedure (p=0.015). Anastomotic leak was not significantly associated with preoperative factor such as: Age, sex, tumor length, tumor invasion, lymph node metastases, combined disease, and preoperative chemoradiotherapy (p>0.05) as well as an intraoperative factor: Anastomotic technique, stoma diverting ileostomy, and anal drainage tube (p>0.05). Conclusion: In this study, intraoperative loss blood, operative time, the distance of anastomosis from the anal verge, and surgical procedure (to were associated with anastomotic leak in rectal surgery. Early detection and classification of anastomotic leak play an important role in the treatment of colorectal anastomotic leaks.
Article Details
References
2. REAL Score Collaborators, Arezzo A, Migliore M et al (2019) The REAL (REctal Anastomotic Leak) score for prediction of anastomotic leak after rectal cancer surgery. Tech Coloproctology 23(7): 649-663.
3. Ha GW, Kim JH, and Lee MR (2017) Oncologic impact of anastomotic leakage following colorectal cancer surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 24(11): 3289-3299.
4. Sherman B, Arnold M, and Husain S (2018) Transanal drainage of coloanal anastomotic leaks. Case Rep Surg: 1-3.
5. Cong ZJ, Hu LH, Bian ZQ et al (2013) Systematic review of anastomotic leakage rate according to an international grading system following anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer. PLoS ONE 8(9): 75519.
6. McDermott FD, Heeney A, Kelly ME et al (2015) Systematic review of preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative risk factors for colorectal anastomotic leaks. Br J Surg 102(5): 462-479.
7. Choudhuri AH, Uppal R, and Kumar M (2013) Influence of non-surgical risk factors on anastomotic leakage after major gastrointestinal surgery: Audit from a tertiary care teaching institute. Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci 3(4): 246–249.
8. Fukada M, Matsuhashi N, Takahashi T et al (2019) Risk and early predictive factors of anastomotic leakage in laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer. World J Surg Oncol 17(1).
9. Neutzling CB, Lustosa SAS, Proenca IM et al (2012). Stapled versus handsewn methods for colorectal anastomosis surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2): 003144.
10. Wu SW, Ma CC, and Yang Y (2014) Role of protective stoma in low anterior resection for rectal cancer: A meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 20(47): 18031-18037.