Indications and results of mucosal proctectomy with colo-anal anastomosis in villous disease of the rectum]

The objective of this study was to define the indication for proctectomy and colo-anal anastomosis in large rectal villous adenomas. The study population consisted of 20 patients (12 men and 8 women; mean age 63.6) who underwent rectal excision and colo-anal anastomosis from 1990 to 1997. The average size of tumors was 59.8 mm; 18 tumors were located in the lower third of the rectal ampulla; 8 patients had prior treatment (surgical or medical) before proctectomy. There were 13 straight colo-anal anastomoses and 7 constructed with colonic J pouch. Eighty percent of the anastomoses were defunctioned by a temporary stoma. The overall morbidity included one case of pelvic sepsis, two anastomotic strictures and one colonic trans-anal prolapse. One patient experienced persistent mild fecal incontinence and two others developed urogenital. The mean hospital stay was 14.4 days and 8.5 days for stoma closure. 8 tumors contained malignancy: 3 Tis, 4 T1 and 1 T2. In our opinion the extension, natural history or potential of occult malignancy of large rectal villous adenomas may requires rectal excision with colo-anal anastomosis with low morbidity and good functional results.     

Preoperative Radiochemotherapy and Sphincter-Saving Resection for T3 Carcinomas of the Lower Third of the Rectum

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the complications and oncologic and functional results of preoperative radiochemotherapy and sphincter-saving resection for T3 cancers of the lower third of the rectum. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Carcinomas of the lower third of the rectum (i.e., located at or below 6 cm from the anal verge) are usually treated by abdominoperineal resection, especially for T3 lesions. Few data are available evaluating concomitant chemotherapy with preoperative radiotherapy for increasing sphincter-saving resection in low rectal cancer. METHODS: Between 1995 and 1999, 43 patients underwent preoperative radiochemotherapy with conservative surgery for a low rectal tumor located a mean of 4.5 cm from the anal verge (range 2-6); 70% of the lesions were less than 2 cm from the anal sphincter. There were 40 T3 and 3 T4 tumors. Patients received preoperative radiotherapy with a mean dose of 50 Gy (range 40-54) and concomitant chemotherapy with 5-FU in continuous infusion (n = 36) or bolus (n = 7). Sphincter- saving resection was performed 6 weeks after treatment, in 25 patients by using intersphincteric resection. Coloanal anastomoses were associated with a colonic pouch in 86% of the patients, and all patients had a protecting stoma. RESULTS: There were no deaths related to preoperative radiochemotherapy and surgery. Acute toxicity was mainly due to diarrhea, with 54% of grade 1 to 2. Four anastomotic fistulas and two pelvic hematomas occurred; all patients but one had closure of the stoma. Distal and radial surgical margins were respectively 23 +/- 8 mm (range 10-40) and 8 +/- 4 mm (range 1-20) and were negative in 98% of the patients. Downstaging (pT0-2N0) was observed in 42% of the patients (18/43) and was associated with a greater radial margin (10 vs. 6 mm; P =.02). After a median follow-up of 30 months, the rate of local recurrence was 2% (1/43), and four patients had distal metastases. Overall and disease-free survival rates were both 85% at 3 years. Functional results were good (Kirwan continence I, II) in 79% of the available patients (n = 37). They were slightly altered by intersphincteric resection (57 vs. 75% of perfect continence; NS) but were significantly improved by a colonic pouch (74 vs. 16%; P =.01). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that preoperative radiochemotherapy allowed sphincter-saving resection to be performed with good local control and good functional results in patients with T3 low rectal cancers that would have required abdominoperineal resection in most instances.     

COLONIC J-POUCH AS A NEORECTUM: FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT

Background : Sphincter-saving procedures are now commonly used for low rectal cancer but straight colo-anal anastomosis seemed to produce poor functional outcome. The present study was therefore carried out to compare and contrast the functional outcome of colonic J-pouch and straight colo-anal anastomosis. Methods : The clinical and functional outcome of 17 patients having a colonic J-pouch-anal anastomosis and 10 patients having a straight colo-anal anastomosis were compared. They were compared in terms of age, sex, distal resection margin, Dukes stage, histological grade, morbidity/mortality and postoperative anal function. Results : There was better bowel function in patients having J-pouch-anal anastomosis, especially in the early period after closure of the covering stoma. Bowel frequency in those patients who had a J-pouch anastomosis was much less compared to those patients in the straight colo-anal group in the 1st and possibly the 2nd year. There was a period of adaptation for the straight colo-anal group which led to a bowel frequency approaching that of the J-pouch group over 1–2 years. Differences in urgency, faecal continence, evacuation function, the use of drugs to slow bowel frequency and ability to discriminate between flatus and faeces were found to favour the J-pouch group in the first postoperative year. The difference between the two groups diminished after that because the straight group improved, especially by the end of the 2nd year. During the study period, there were no constipation problems in the J-pouch group, as noted in some other studies. This was probably associated with the 6-cm length chosen for the pouch. Conclusions : The use of colonic J-pouch resulted in a significant decrease in stool frequency and more satisfactory anal function for the first postoperative year. This difference lessened during the second postoperative year. There was no demonstrable difficulty with rectal evacuation in the pouch patients.     

Colonic pouchography is not routinely required prior to stoma closure

Background Colonic pouch formation with pouch‐anal anastomosis is now regarded as the procedure of choice for restoration of intestinal continuity following anterior resection for low rectal cancers. The aim of this study was to review the necessity for routine colonic pouchography prior to closure of a diverting loop stoma. Methods This was a prospective study of 52 consecutive patients who underwent colonic pouch formation between 1 June 1999 and 31 May 2002, four of whom have subsequently died. Each pouch was assessed clinically and radiologically prior to stoma closure. Results There were no clinical anastomotic leaks. Forty‐six of 48 surviving patients have had a colonic pouchogram and in no case was either a pouch or pouch‐anal anastomotic defect identified. To date 40 patients have undergone stoma closure without an anastomosis‐related complication. Conclusion Following successful colonic pouch formation, routine study of the pouch by contrast radiology does not add to clinical assessment. As a consequence radiological imaging is unnecessary and can be omitted.     

Colonic pouch and other procedures to improve the continence after low anterior rectal resection with TME

In 75 to 90 % of patients with rectal cancer, a sphincter-preserving resection can be performed without violating oncological principles. However, almost 50 % of the patients suffer from an anterior resection syndrome after total or subtotal rectal resection with a straight colorectal or coloanal anastomosis. This syndrome describes the characteristic complaints of minor or major incontinence. The anastomosis with the colonic pouch has been proved to result in better continence in the short- and long-terms compared to the straight anastomosis. Based on grade 1 evidence, the colonic pouch should be recommended as a standard procedure after low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision (TME). Both the colonic J pouch of 6-cm length and the coloplasty have been shown to be of equal value in respect to function and morbidity. With regard to the complicated procedure and the poorer functional outcome, the ileocecal pouch should only be applied in cases without the option of an alternative pouch design. The temporary loss of the rectoanal inhibitory reflex, the sphincter lesion caused by the instrumental dilatation in stapling or peranal hand-sutured anastomosis and the disturbed function of the internal sphincter due to the autonomous nerve damage additionally contribute to the anterior resection syndrome. In the intersphincteric resection, the loss of the transitional zone and the hemorrhoidal cushion as well as the removal of the upper part of the internal sphincter aggravate the incontinence. For better continence, two operative procedures should be recommended: By applying the inverse double stapling technique in anastomizing the colonic J pouch, the sphincter lesion as a consequence of the dilatation can be avoided. The nerve-sparing mesorectal excision helps to preserve the function of the internal sphincter.     

肛门内括约肌切除术治疗T1～2期超低位直肠癌的疗效评价

目的评价在全直肠系膜切除术（TME）的基础上采取肛门内括约肌切除术（ISR）治疗T1和T2期超低位直肠癌患者的临床疗效和生存结果。方法对2000年3月至2007年3月间实施ISR的40例超低位直肠癌患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析。结果40例患者术前的肿瘤分期为T1-2N0-1M0。实施完全ISR者5例,部分ISR者23例,改良的部分ISR（保留部分齿状线）12例。术后3例患者出现并发症,其中吻合口瘘1例,伤口感染2例：无围手术期死亡。全组术后5年生存率97％,5年无瘤生存率86％。术后12个月时,接受部分ISR者和改良的部分ISR者的肛门功能优于完全ISR者（分别P=0．008和P=0．004）;接受预防性造口患者的肛门功能优于未接受造口者（P=0．043）。结论ISR选择性治疗超低位直肠癌安全可行。在保证根治的前提下尽可能保留齿状线和部分内括约肌以及行预防性造口可能有助于改善术后肛门功能。     

Rectum resection with colonic J reservoir and coloanal anastomosis for rectal cancer

A low anterior resection of the rectum followed by a colo-rectal or a straight colo-anal anastomosis often leads to poor functional results (increased frequency and urgency of defecation) due to the loss of the reservoir function of the rectum. In order to improve the functional results the authors performed in 7 patients colo-anal anastomosis with a J shaped colonic pouch. In all the cases a temporary diverting loop ileostomy was performed. This ileostomy was closed 4-5 weeks after the first operation. There was no operative mortality. After stoma closure, the functional results were improved during the first week. A colo-anal anastomosis with a colonic reservoir appears to be an optimal solution comparing with a very low colorectal or a straight colon-anal anastomosis.     

Ultralow anterior resection with intersphincteric dissection –what is the limit of safe sphincter preservation?

Introduction In the treatment of low rectal cancer, the possibility of sphincter preserving surgery is increased by partial sphincteric resection which may allow an oncologically safe resection margin in some patients who would traditionally have been treated by abdominoperineal resection. The aim of this study is to evaluate the morbidity, mortality and the oncological and functional results of intersphincteric resection to determine whether the technique may be considered a safe means of sphincter preservation. Methods Between May 1992 and December 1999, 26 patients (mean age 55 years, range 28–82) with adenocarcinoma of the rectum had partial sphincteric resection by an abdominal approach with a colonic J‐pouch anal anastomosis. The mean distance between the tumour and the anal verge 4.25 (range 3.1–5.25) cm. Four tumours were T1, 14 T2 (3 N+), 7 T3 (3 N+), and 1 T4 (N+). Neoadjuvant radiotherapy was used in 10 patients. The distal resection margin was positive in one patient who then proceeded to safe abdominoperineal resection (APR). In the remaining patient the mean distal resection margin on the fixed specimen was 1.6 (range 0.3–3.5) cm. Results There were no deaths. Morbidity was 30% with an anastomotic leak rate of 11%. At mean follow‐up of 39 (range 11–93) months the local recurrence rate was 3.4%. Functional results were evaluated in 25 patients at mean follow‐up of 27 (8–66) months: 65% had 0–2 bowel motions per 24 h, 31% had 3–5 and 4% between 6 and 9. Nine patients (36%) had nocturnal defecation. Continence was normal in 50% with 23% reporting incontinence to gas and 27% reporting minor episodes of incontinence. None had major incontinence and 85% considered their outcome satisfactory. Conclusion This study supports the current literature indicating that partial sphincteric resection is an oncologically and functionally safe alternative to abdominoperineal resection for some selected low rectal tumours.     

Conservative surgery for low rectal carcinoma after high-dose radiation. Functional and oncologic results.

OBJECTIVE: Using a prospective, nonrandomized study, the authors evaluated the morbidity and functional and oncologic results of conservative surgery for cancer of the lower third of the rectum after high-dose radiation. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Colo-anal anastomosis has made sphincter conservation for low rectal carcinoma technically feasible. The limits to conservative surgery currently are oncologic rather than technical. Adjuvant radiotherapy has proven its benefit in terms of regional control, with a dose relationship. METHODS: Since June 1990, 27 patients with distal rectal adenocarcinoma were treated by preoperative radiotherapy (40 + 20 Gy delivered with three fields) and curative surgery. The mean distance from the anal verge was 47 mm (27-57 mm), and none of the tumors were fixed (15 T2, 12 T3). RESULTS: Mortality and morbidity were not increased by high-dose preoperative radiation. Twenty-one patients underwent conservative surgery (78%-17 total proctectomies and colo-anal anastomoses, 4 trans-anal resections). After colo-anal anastomosis, all patients with colonic pouch had good results; two patients had moderate results and one patient had poor results after straight colo-anal anastomosis. With a mean follow-up of 24 months, the authors noted 1 postoperative death, 2 disease-linked deaths, 1 controlled regional recurrence, 2 evolutive patients with pulmonary metastases, and 21 disease-free patients. CONCLUSIONS: These first results confirm the possibility of conservative surgery for low rectal carcinoma after high-dose radiation. A prospective, randomized trial could be induced to determine the real role of the 20 Gy boost on the sphincter-saving decision.     

Conservative treatment of adenocarcinomas of the anorectal junction by preoperative radiotherapy and intersphincteral resection

AIM: Adenocarcinomas of the anorectal junction, especially T3 lesions, are usually treated by abdominoperineal resection. The aim of this study was to evaluate oncologic and functional results following conservative radiosurgical treatment of cancers of the anorectal junction. METHODS: From 1990 to 1999, among 395 patients with rectal carcinoma, 31 had sphincter-saving resection for a tumour located between 2 to 4.5 cm (mean 3.6) from the anal verge. There were 16 men and 15 women, mean age 62 years (range 30-86). There were 5 T2, 23 T3 and 3 T4 tumours; 17 were N1 and 3 were M1. Preoperative radiotherapy was performed in 26 patients (dose: 46 Gy, range: 36-54), with concomitant chemotherapy in 14 cases. Intersphincteric resection was performed six weeks after neoadjuvant treatment. Coloanal anastomoses were associated with a colonic pouch in 22 cases and with a protecting stoma in all cases. RESULTS: There was no postoperative mortality. Seven complications occurred: 3 anastomotic fistulas, 3 pelvic haemorrhages and 1 acute pancreatitis. Three patients had a definitive stoma. After preoperative radiotherapy, down-staging (pT0-2 N0) occurred in 46% of cases (12/26). Distal margin was 2.2 cm (range: 1-3) and was microscopically safe in all cases. Lateral margin was safe (> or = 1 mm) in 97% of cases. With a mean follow-up of 36 months, no local recurrence was suspected. Twenty-six patients (84%) were alive, 23 free of disease. Half of the patients had perfect continence, whereas the other half had occasional minor soiling. Functional results were better in patients with a colonic pouch. CONCLUSION: Conservative treatment of carcinomas of the anorectal junction is possible without compromising pelvic control and patient survival. Pelvic control was probably achieved by using preoperative radiotherapy with intersphincteric resection, ensuring safe distal and lateral margins.     

Similar outcome after colonic pouch and side-to-end anastomosis in low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a prospective randomized trial

OBJECTIVES: To compare a colonic J-pouch or a side-to-end anastomosis after low-anterior resection for rectal cancer with regard to functional and surgical outcome. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: A complication after restorative rectal surgery with a straight anastomosis is low-anterior resection syndrome with a postoperatively deteriorated anorectal function. The colonic J-reservoir is sometimes used with the purpose of reducing these symptoms. An alternative method is to use a simple side-to-end anastomosis. METHODS: One-hundred patients with rectal cancer undergoing total mesorectal excision and colo-anal anastomosis were randomized to receive either a colonic pouch or a side-to-end anastomosis using the descending colon. Surgical results and complications were recorded. Patients were followed with a functional evaluation at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Fifty patients were randomized to each group. Patient characteristics in both groups were very similar regarding age, gender, tumor level, and Dukes' stages. A large proportion of the patients received short-term preoperative radiotherapy (78%). There was no significant difference in surgical outcome between the 2 techniques with respect to anastomotic height (4 cm), perioperative blood loss (500 ml), hospital stay (11 days), postoperative complications, reoperations or pelvic sepsis rates. Comparing functional results in the 2 study groups, only the ability to evacuate the bowel in <15 minutes at 6 months reached a significant difference in favor of the pouch procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The data from this study show that either a colonic J-pouch or a side-to-end anastomosis performed on the descending colon in low-anterior resection with total mesorectal excision are methods that can be used with similar expected functional and surgical results.     

Coloanale Anastomose: Verbesserung der funktionellen Frühergebnisse durch Rekonstruktion mit Colonpouch

INTRODUCTION: Early functional outcome after ultra-low anterior resection with coloanal anastomosis (CAA) may be improved by construction of a colonic pouch. The aim of this prospective observational study was to compare results of colonic pouch-anal anastomosis (CPAA) with conventional CAA including the learning curve. METHODS: From February 1996 through May 1998, 45 consecutive patients underwent CAA or CPAA following radical rectal resection for cancer. The technique of resection was identical in both groups, and all patients received a diverting stoma. The colonic pouch was constructed using linear staplers. Three and 12 months following stoma closure subjective continence and bowel habits were assessed; anal manometry was performed at 3 months. RESULTS: 20 patients with CPAA (9 F, 11 M, age 62 +/- 9 years) were compared to 25 CAA patients (11 f, 14 m, age 64 +/- 10 years). There was no mortality, and morbidity was comparable between groups. Three months following stoma closure, in the CPAA group bowel frequency was significantly diminished (1.4 vs 5.8; P < 0.0001), fewer patients had liquid motions (0/20 vs 12/25 patients; P < 0.0001), and more were continent (20/20 vs 4/25; P < 0.001) and able to defer defaecation (20/20 vs 2/25; P < 0.0001). Functional anal canal length was significantly shorter in CPAA patients (2.9 vs 3.5 cm; P < 0.008). Although at 12 months follow-up continence had improved in patients with CAA, bowel frequency (2.5 vs 1.3; P < 0.002), and number of patients with liquid motions (10/25 vs 0/20; P < 0.007) and passive incontinence (12/25 vs 0/20; P < 0.0001) were still significantly higher than the CPAA group. CONCLUSION: Even including the learning curve, CPAA may yield superior functional results at 3 months and 1 year compared to conventional CAA without increasing morbidity.     

����������Լ���г������Ƴ���λֱ����51������

目的评价内括约肌切除术(ISR)治疗超低位直肠癌的并发症、生存结果和肛门功能预后。方法 2000年3月至2009年8月首都医科大学附属北京朝阳医院普通外科对51例超低位直肠癌实施了ISR,其中完全ISR6例,部分ISR23例,保留部分齿状线的部分ISR(改良的部分ISR)22例。结果术后9例出现术后并发症,其中伤口感染2例,吻合口漏2例,吻合口狭窄4例,盆腔脓肿1例,无围手术期死亡。术后5年存活率95%,5年无瘤存活率92%。术后随访12个月,接受部分ISR(P=0.008)和改良的部分ISR(P=0.000)病人肛门功能优于完全ISR;接受预防性造口病人的肛门功能优于未接受造口者(P=0.022)。结论 ISR选择性治疗超低位直肠癌安全可行。吻合口狭窄是ISR术后常见的并发症。预防性造口、采用改良的部分ISR手术有助于改善术后肛门功能。     

Anorectal function following low anterior resection

Introduction Rectal function following rectal resection for carcinoma was studied in 43 patients. Methods Sixteen women and 27 men with a median age of 66 years (range 41–79 years) were included. Twenty‐three patients had a diverting ileostomy at the time of resection. Eight patients had a 6‐cm colonic J‐pouch. Ten patients had anastomotic leakage including two patients without diverting ileostomy. One patient had pre‐operative radiation with 25 Gy. The patients were studied at a median 12 months (range 3–30) after rectal resection. Distance from anal verge to the anastomosis was a median 7 cm (range 3–12 cm). Clinical data, anal manometry and rectal compliance were analysed. Results Stool frequency was 3 per day (range 1–10). Twenty‐two (51%) patients were continent, 11 (26%) were incontinent for flatus, and 10 (23%) were incontinent for faeces (three for liquid and seven for solid stool). Fourteen (33%) patients had constipation, two of whom also had incontinence for solid or liquid stool. The level of the anastomosis for patients with postoperative constipation was 5 cm (range 3–12 cm), while it was 7 cm (range 3–10 cm) for nonconstipated patients (NS). Anal manometry was normal. Rectal compliance was lower in patients with incontinence for liquid or solid faeces than in patients with flatus incontinence only (P < 0.01), and rectal volume tolerability was lower in incontinent patients compared with continent patients (P < 0.05). The rectoanal reflex was present in 31 (72%) patients. There was a negative correlation between maximal rectal volume and stool frequency and between level of the anastomosis and degree of incontinence. Age did not affect functional outcome. Conclusion Many patients had a poor functional result following low anterior resection. One in four suffered from incontinence to liquid or solid faeces and one third of the patients experienced constipation. A low level of anastomosis tended to increase stool frequency and carried a higher risk of incontinence. Patients with faecal incontinence tended to have lower rectal compliance and volume tolerability than patients who were continent, while there was no difference in anal pressures.     

Clinical and Functional Comparison Between Stapled Colonic J-Pouch Low Rectal Anastomosis and Hand-Sewn Colonic J-Pouch Anal Anastomosis for Very Low Rectal Cancer

Purpose. We investigated intersphincteric resection with hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis, which may be an alternative to standard low anterior resection for very low rectal cancer when stapled anastomosis is technically impossible. Methods. The present study compared the clinical and functional results of 16 patients who underwent stapled colonic J-pouch low rectal anastomosis (CJLRA) with those of 15 patients who underwent intersphincteric excision and hand-sewn colonic J-pouch anal anastomosis (CJAA). Results. After a median follow-up period of 59 months, local recurrence was found in four patients from the CJAA group, three of whom subsequently underwent curative abdominoperineal resection. Defecatory function 6 and 12 months after surgery did not differ between the groups, although pads were used significantly more frequently in the CJAA group. Anorectal physiologic study before and 12 months after surgery revealed that the internal anal sphincter function was impaired to a larger extent after CJAA than after CJLRA, probably due to the partial or subtotal resection of the internal sphincter, and the anal dilatation during resection and anastomosis. Conclusion. Although the prevention of intraoperative tumor implantation and the early detection of local recurrence is of utmost importance, CJAA may be an acceptable sphincter-preserving procedure for selected patients in whom stapled anastomosis is impossible. Received: February 26, 2001 / Accepted: September 11, 2001     

Pouch operation for rectal cancer

Many retrospective studies have found that the functional outcome after a low anterior resection for rectal cancer is better with colonic J-pouch reconstruction than with conventional straight anastomosis. This advantage was demonstrated in prospective, randomized trials and meta-analyses. However, despite its increasing popularity there are several areas of controversy about the use of the colonic J-pouch reconstruction. These issues include anastomotic leaks, the part of the colon used for the pouch, the pouch size, causes of difficulty in evacuation, indications (the optimum level of anastomosis), appropriateness for the elderly, and long-term (2 years or more after surgery) functional outcome. All relevant articles identified from MEDLINE databases were reviewed. The incidence of anastomotic leaks is apparently reduced by colonic J-pouch reconstruction. A 5-cm colonic J-pouch using the sigmoid colon increases the reservoir function without compromising evacuation, and provides better functional outcome than straight anastomosis, even 2 years or more after surgery, in patients whose anastomosis is less than 8 cm from the anal verge. Patients with ultralow anastomoses, less than 4 cm from the verge, appear to benefit the most. At a time when the indications for abdominoperineal excision appear to be reduced for low rectal cancer, the demand for colonic J-pouch reconstruction (the best technique in pouch operations) is therefore likely to increase.     

Colonic pouch confers better bowel function and similar postoperative outcomes compared to straight anastomosis for low rectal cancer

BACKGROUNDWith advancements in laparoscopic technology and the wide application of linear staplers, sphincter-saving procedures are increasingly performed for low rectal cancer. However, sphincter-saving procedures have led to the emergence of a unique clinical disorder termed anterior rectal resection syndrome. Colonic pouch anastomosis improves the quality of life of patients with rectal cancer > 7 cm from the anal margin. But whether colonic pouch anastomosis can reduce the incidence of rectal resection syndrome in patients with low rectal cancer is unknown.AIMTo compare postoperative and oncological outcomes and bowel function of straight and colonic pouch anal anastomoses after resection of low rectal cancer.METHODSWe conducted a retrospective study of 72 patients with low rectal cancer who underwent sphincter-saving procedures with either straight or colonic pouch anastomoses. Functional evaluations were completed preoperatively and at 1, 6, and 12 mo postoperatively. We also compared perioperative and oncological outcomes between two groups that had undergone low or ultralow anterior rectal resection.RESULTSThere were no significant differences in mean operating time, blood loss, time to first passage of flatus and excrement, and duration of hospital stay between the colonic pouch and straight anastomosis groups. The incidence of anastomotic leakage following colonic pouch construction was lower (11.4% vs 16.2%) but not significantly different than that of straight anastomosis. Patients with colonic pouch construction had lower postoperative low anterior resection syndrome scores than the straight anastomosis group, suggesting better bowel function (preoperative: 4.71 vs 3.89, P = 0.43; 1 mo after surgery: 34.2 vs 34.7, P = 0.59; 6 mo after surgery: 22.70 vs 29.0, P < 0.05; 12 mo after surgery: 15.5 vs 19.5, P = 0.01). The overall recurrence and metastasis rates were similar (4.3% and 11.4%, respectively).CONCLUSIONColonic pouch anastomosis is a safe and effective procedure for colorectal reconstruction after low and ultralow rectal resections. Moreover, colonic pouch construction may provide better functional outcomes compared to straight anastomosis.     

Randomized comparison of straight and colonic J pouch anastomosis after low anterior resection.

OBJECTIVE. The authors compared clinical bowel function and complications of a low anterior resection with either a straight or colonic J pouch anastomosis. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA. Urgency and frequent bowel movements after rectal resection with a low anastomosis have been related to the loss of rectal reservoir function. Reconstruction with a colonic J pouch possibly can obviate some of this dysfunction. Earlier reports have been favorable, but they must be verified in randomized trials. METHOD. One hundred patients with rectal cancer in whom a sphincter-saving procedure was appropriate were randomized to reconstruction with either a straight or a colonic J pouch anastomosis. RESULTS. The incidence of symptomatic anastomotic leakage was lower in the pouch group (2% vs. 15%, p = 0.03). Eighty-nine patients could be evaluated after 1 year. The pouch patients had significantly fewer bowel movements per 24 hours, and less nocturnal evacuations, urgency, and incontinence. Overall well-being owing to the bowel function was rated significantly higher by the pouch patients. CONCLUSION. Reconstruction with a colonic J pouch was associated with a lower incidence of anastomotic leakage and better clinical bowel function when compared with the traditional straight anastomosis. Functional superiority was especially evident during the first 2 months.     

Pouch reconstruction in the pelvis

ILEAL POUCH RECONSTRUCTION: Proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the procedure of choice in mucosal ulcerative colitis (MUC) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Because the disease is cured by surgical resection, functional results, pouch survival prognosis, and disease or dysplasia control are the major determinants of success. There is controversy as to whether the IPAA should be handsewn with mucosectomy or stapled, preserving the mucosa of the anal transitional zone. Crohn's disease is a contraindication for IPAA, but long-term outcome after IPAA is similar to that for MUC in patients with indeterminate colitis who do not develop Crohn's disease. As development of dysplasia and cancer in the ileal pouch have been reported, a standardized surveillance program is mandatory in cases of MUC, FAP, and chronic pouchitis. COLONIC POUCH RECONSTRUCTION: Construction of a colonic pouch is a widely accepted technique to improve functional outcome after low or intersphincteric resection for rectal cancer. Several randomized studies comparing colo-pouch-anal anastomosis (CPA) with straight coloanal anastomosis (CAA) have found the pouch functionally superior. Most controlled studies cover only 1-year follow-up, but randomized studies with 2-year follow-up show similar functional results of CPA and CAA. Evacuation difficulty as initially observed was related to pouch size, and the results with smaller pouches (5-6 cm) are more favorable, showing adequate reservoir function without compromising neorectal evacuation. The transverse coloplasty pouch may offer several advantages to J-pouch reconstruction. Current series question whether the neorectal reservoir is the physiological key of the pouch, but rather the decreased motility. The major advantage reported with colonic pouch reconstruction is the lower incidence of anastomotic complications.     

Transanal Inside-Out Rectal Resection for Ultra-Low Rectal Cancer

ABSTRACT

Two major issues encountered in the surgical resection of low rectal cancers (tumor located <6 cm from anal verge) are tumor-free surgical resection margin and adequate fields of colo-anal pull-through anastomosis. The clinical consequences of ensuring gross tumor-free surgical resection margin by transanal inside-out rectal resection technique were assessed for ultra-low rectal cancer patients. From February 2009 to September 2011, ultra-low anterior resection with a new method of eversion of the rectum through the anal canal after resecting the distal rectum and colo-anal anastomosis extracorporally performed in 30 patients (age range, 41–80 years) was reviewed. All patients received preoperative neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) before the surgical resection. The median operating time was 265 min (range, 220–400 min), and the median intraoperative blood loss was 325 ml (range, 80–855 ml). No in-hospital mortality was noted among these patients. R0 resection (tumor-free margin range, 0.9–2.5 cm) was confirmed in all patients by pathologic reports, except one patient with 0.5 cm tumor-free margin. The new surgical technique of transanal inside-out rectal resection and colo-anal pull-through anastomosis for selected patients with ultra-low rectal cancers seems to be a safe and alternative procedure.