Sphincter-preserving surgery: per anal coloanal anastomosis

Since the introduction of the stapling technique, sphincter-preserving surgery for treatment of rectosigmoid and upper rectum carcinoma has been widely performed in the view of its radicality and postoperative quality of life. Sphincter preservation is still controversial in carcinoma of the lower rectum. Since we introduced per anal coloanal anastomosis (PAA) in 1980 and per anal intersphincteric dissection and coloanal anastomosis (PIDCA) in 1993 for the treatment of lower rectal carcinoma, the sphincter has been preserved in 78.7% of patients. There was no significant difference in the 5-year survival rate between patients in whom the sphincter was preserved and those who underwent abdominoperineal resection during the same period. PAA and PIDCA are safe when anastomosis must be performed at the dentate line. They are the best sphincter-preserving techniques for lower rectal carcinoma and do not result in serious postoperative dysfunction.     

Sphincter-saving resection for all rectal carcinomas: the end of the 2-cm distal rule

OBJECTIVE: To assess oncologic outcome of patients treated by conservative radical surgery for tumors below 5 cm from the anal verge. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Standard surgical treatment of low rectal cancer below 5 cm from the anal verge is abdominoperineal resection. METHODS: From 1990 to 2003, patients with a nonfixed rectal carcinoma at 4.5 cm or less from the anal verge and without external sphincter infiltration underwent conservative surgery. Surgery included total mesorectal excision with intersphincteric resection, that is, removal of the internal sphincter, to achieve adequate distal margin. Patients with T3 disease or internal sphincter infiltration received preoperative radiotherapy. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients with a tumor at 3 (range 1.5-4.5) cm from the anal verge underwent conservative surgery. There was no mortality and morbidity was 27%. The rate of complete microscopic resection (R0) was 89%, with 98% negative distal margin and 89% negative circumferential margin. In 58 patients with a follow-up of more than 24 months, the rate of local recurrence was 2% and the 5-year overall and disease-free survival were 81% and 70%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The technique of intersphincteric resection permits us to achieve conservative surgery in patients with a tumor close to or in the anal canal without compromising local control and survival. Tumor distance from the anal verge is no longer a limit for sphincter-saving resection.     

Preventive Turnbull ileostomy

Turnbull soprovozhdaetsia khoroshimi rezul'tatami. Preventive Turnbull ileostomy was made in 28 patients. There were 19 male and 9 female patients aged from 18 to 77 years (mean age -- 46 years). Fifteen patients underwent reconstructive proctocolectomy with anastomosis between anal canal and J-shape ileac reservoir. Ten of them had familial polyposis, 5 patients had ulcerative colitis 3 had rectal cancer. Total mesorectumectomy with anastomosis between anal canal and J-shape colic reservoir was performed in 7 patients with cancer of middle and lower part of the rectum. Partial mesorectumectomy was performed in 4 patients with cancer of upper part of the rectum. Low anterior resection of the rectum with anastomosis between anal canal and J-shape colic reservoir was performed in 2 patients with villous adenoma. There were no specific complications. Following ileostomy closure was carried out in 25 of 28 patients. Wound infection was seen in 1 patient. It is concluded that preventive Turnbull ileostomy performed after lower colorectal, coloanal and ileonal anastomosis produces good results.     

Low anterior resection of the rectum using a double stapling technique

Using a double stapling technique in 30 patients, anterior resection of the rectum was attempted for low rectal carcinoma (n = 28), giant rectal adenoma (n = 1) and radiation-induced rectal stricture (n = 1). There were three emergency operations. The rectum was stapled transversely more than 3 cm below the tumour using the adjustable-angle linear stapler (Roticulator). Colorectal or coloanal anastomoses were constructed using the EEA circular stapler introduced per anum through the anorectal stump staple line. Ten coloanal and 19 low rectal anastomoses were achieved. A protecting transverse loop colostomy was fashioned in one patient with coloanal anastomosis who developed a vaginal tear during the procedure. In one patient technical failure necessitated conversion to abdominoperineal excision of the rectum. All staple rings and resection margins were intact and free from tumour. There were two clinical anastomotic leaks, both treated successfully with a defunctioning transverse loop colostomy. One patient developed a small infective pelvic haematoma 2 weeks after surgery which required drainage. Hospital stay ranged from 6 to 15 days (mean 8 days). Continence was normal in all patients at 8 weeks. One soft coloanal anastomotic stricture required dilatation. No recurrences have been detected during a follow-up of between 10 and 22 months.     

�᳦�ع��Ǻ����ڵ�λֱ�����������е�Ӧ�ã���35��������

目的　探讨结肠肛管吻合术在低位直肠癌术中的保肛作用及一些相关问题。方法　回顾性分析北京协和医院外科 1991年 5月至 2004年 10月共 35例低位直肠癌行结肠肛管吻合术的临床资料。结果　全组手术进程顺利,术后发生吻合口漏和吻合口出血各 1例。按Parks制定的标准,术后肛门功能优良率为 84. 4%。肿瘤术后局部复发率为 5. 7%, 3年存活率为 87 .5%, 5年存活率为 65. 4%。结论　结肠肛管吻合术作为保肛手术的一种术式可用于普通手术时无法保留肛门的低位直肠癌病人。     

括约肌间切除术在超低位直肠癌保肛手术中的应用

目的评价超低位直肠癌行括约肌间切除手术(ISR)后的肛门功能及肿瘤根治效果。方法近7年间本院为1 6例超低位直肠癌患者施行ISR手术。经腹按照TME原则游离直肠至肛提肌平面后,经肛门于括约肌间沟处切开肛管皮肤,分离内括约肌直至将直肠及内括约肌全部切除,再行结肠肛管吻合。术后7 d天开始肛门收缩功能锻炼,4周开始生物反馈训练。对Dukes B,C期患者,术后2周开始化疗,术后4周进行放疗。结果全组无术后死亡,无吻合口瘘。2例术后发生结肠黏膜脱出,2例肛管狭窄,1例切口脂肪液化。随访3个月至7年,无盆腔或吻合口局部复发;2例分别于术后1 7个月和2 1个月死于肝转移,1例术后6个月死于肺转移。按W illiams的排便自制标准,术后3,6,12个月分别有6 2.5%,8 0.0%,8 4.6%的患者达到功能良好效果。结论ISR手术并发症少,安全性高,肿瘤根治效果与排便功能的恢复满意。     

Role of the rectum in the physiological and clinical results of coloanal and colorectal anastomosis after anterior resection for rectal carcinoma.

This study investigated the relationships between length of residual anorectum, anorectal physiological function and clinical outcome after anterior resection for rectal carcinoma. Thirty-four patients were studied a median of 13 (range 4-100) months after anterior resection. They were compared with a control group of ten patients who had undergone sigmoid colectomy for carcinoma without rectal excision. Resting anal pressure was found to be lower after coloanal than after colorectal anastomosis, and the capacity of the (neo)rectum was less after coloanal than after colorectal anastomosis. The (neo)rectoanal inhibitory reflex was found to be present in each patient, but maximum anal pressure during this 'sampling' reflex was significantly lower (P < 0.01) after coloanal than after colorectal anastomosis, and the volume required for maximal inhibition of the sphincter was also less (P < 0.01). At 1 year after operation, median bowel frequency was greater after coloanal (4 per day) than after colorectal (2 per day) anastomosis and the degree of urgency of defaecation was also greater (P < 0.01). Quality of life in terms of anorectal function after anterior resection is thus significantly influenced by the length of rectum that is left. This, in turn, influences the functional capacity of the neorectum and the degree of inhibition of the anal sphincter during the neorectoanal inhibitory reflex.     

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.     

Functional results after “high” coloanal anastomosis and “low” coloanal anastomosis with a colonic J-pouch for rectal carcinoma

The aim of this study was to determine the postoperative function of neorectoanal components using two different types of very low coloanal reconstruction. The two groups of patients assessed were 22 who underwent abdominal rectal resection and stapled “high” coloanal anastomosis without a pouch, being the HCAA-P group; and 34 who underwent anoabdominal rectal resection and “low” coloanal anastomosis with a colonic J-pouch, being the LCAA+P group. Manometric metric examination was performed 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively, and the patients were also assessed by a questionnaire. The LCAA+P group had remarkably less daily stool frequency and urgency, but there were no significant differences in the other functional parameters. Maximum resting pressure (MRP) was significantly less, while threshold volume (TV) and maximum tolerable volume (MTV) were greater in the LCAA+P group than in the HCAA-P group. The colonic J-pouch compensated for decreased MRP. Thus, when HCAA-P is performed, 3.0 cm of residual rectum with internal anal sphincter may be required, and construction of the pelvic pouch is desirable in low coloanal anastomosis.     

Sphincter-saving resection for low rectal cancer

R0 resection, preservation of the anal sphincter, and local control are considered to be the most important target criteria in rectal cancer surgery. Many efforts have been made in recent years to increase the rate of sphincter preservation by performing pull-through operations, ultra-low anterior resection (U-LAR), and intersphincteric resection (ISR). U-LAR is the standard surgery for patients with lower rectal cancer to preserve anal function. Reconstruction in U-LAR is mainly performed using stapled anastomosis. Although conventional coloanal anastomosis makes it possible to preserve the anal sphincter, the mechanical methods are difficult. In that case, almost all the internal sphincter is preserved. The final options for preserving the sphincter are ISR and external sphincter resection (ESR). Although the internal sphincter is sacrificed partially, subtotally, or totally in ISR, and the external sphincter is resected partially or extensively in ESR, complete or incomplete anal function is maintained. However, the literature is not clear regarding long-term oncologic outcome and anal function after these procedures. The application of these surgical techniques can reduce the rate of abdominoperineal resection in very low rectal cancer. The indications for these procedures must be carefully determined based on tumor site and stage as well as the patient's own preference.     

Coloanal anastomosis: indications and surgical technique

The coloanal anastomosis has evolved from the older "sleeve" pull through techniques and is used as a sphincter-saving procedure in those patients requiring excision of the rectum where adequate removal of all disease necessitates transection of the rectum close to the dentate line. For very low rectal carcinomas, however, abdominoperineal resection remains the procedure of choice for curative treatment. The appropriate choice of low anterior resection, coloanal pull through anastomosis, or abdominoperineal resection depends on many other variables besides the location of the tumor, and the correct choice may not be apparent until the rectum has been mobilized at surgery. The coloanal procedure requires wide excision of the lesion; full mobilization of the splenic flexure, distal transverse colon, and descending colon; precise transanal removal of the rectum; accurate suturing of the descending colon to the anus; and a temporary defunctioning colostomy. With careful technique, longterm results are good in most patients.     

Concept de conservation sphinct��rienne dans la chirurgie du bas et du moyen rectum

Objective

To assess oncologic outcome of patients treated by conservative radical surgery for tumors below 5 cm from the anal verge.

Summary background data

Standard surgical treatment of low rectal cancer below 5 cm from the anal verge is abdominoperineal resection.

Methods

From 1990 to 2003, patients with a nonfixed rectal carcinoma at 4.5 cm or less from the anal verge and without external sphincter infiltration underwent conservative surgery. Surgery included total mesorectal excision with intersphincteric resection, that is, removal of the internal sphincter, to achieve adequate distal margin. Patients with T3 disease or internal sphincter infiltration received preoperative radiotherapy.

Results

Ninety-two patients with a tumor at 3 cm (range 1.5?C4.5) from the anal verge underwent conservative surgery. There was no mortality and morbidity was 27%. The rate of complete microscopic resection (R0) was 89%, with 98% negative distal margin and 89% negative circumferential margin. In 58 patients with a follow-up of more than 24 months, the rate of local recurrence was 2%, and the 5-year overall survival and disease-free survival were 81% and 70%, respectively.

Conclusion

The technique of intersphincteric resection allows us to achieve conservative surgery in patients with a tumor close to or in the anal canal without compromising local control and survival. The distance of tumor from the anal verge is no longer a limit for sphincter-saving resection.     

Importance of rectal extirpation for the therapy concept of low rectal cancers]

INTRODUCTION: The main objective of surgery of rectal carcinomas is to avoid a permanent colostomy by sphincter-sparing surgical procedures. A variety of different abdominoperineal resection rates is described in the literature. MATERIAL/METHOD: The study was performed in 2000 within the framework of a multicentric study including 282 hospitals.The purpose of the study was to document the quality of diagnosis and therapy for colorectal carcinomas.A total of 9477 patients were included in this study: 3402 suffering from a rectal carcinoma and 6075 suffering from a colon carcinoma. RESULTS: A total of 866 abdominoperineal resections was performed. This corresponds to an abdominoperineal resection rate of 27.4%. In 30.4% of all men and in 23.0% of all women an abdominoperineal resection was performed.Of all tumor patients who underwent abdominoperineal resection, 8.3% had a pT4 carcinoma and 57.5% a pT3 carcinoma.Adapted to the localization of the tumor in the rectum, i.e., the distance of the aboral tumor margin to the anal verge, the following abdominoperineal resection rates were found: <4 cm from the anal verge 84.6%, 4-7.9 cm 43.9%, 8-11.9 cm 5.8%, and 12-16 cm 0.5%.Intraoperative complications occurred in 11.8%, specific postoperative complications in 33.1%, and general postoperative complications in 27.4% of the patients.The postoperative lethality was 2.8%. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 21.7 days.Logistic regression identified the body mass index, gender, the distance of the carcinoma from the anal verge, and the T category as independent factors influencing the abdominoperineal resection rate. DISCUSSION: Despite an overall decrease in use, abdominoperineal resection will continue to play an important role for the surgical treatment of low rectal cancers in routine clinical practice in Germany.It will remain an individual decision for each patient whether the tumor and the patient allow sphincter preservation or whether abdominoperineal resection seems to be necessary.According to the results of the present study,a general definition of an abdominoperineal resection rate in an unselected group of patients should be viewed critically.     

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     

Treatment of rectal cancer by low anterior resection with coloanal anastomosis.

OBJECTIVE: Our institution's experience with low anterior resection in combination with coloanal anastomosis (LAR/CAA) for primary rectal cancer was reviewed (1) to determine cancer treatment results, 2) to identify risk factors for pelvic recurrence, and 3) to assess the long-term success of sphincter preservation. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Use of sphincter-preserving resection for mid-rectal and selected distal-rectal cancers continues to increase. As surgical techniques and adjuvant therapy evolve, treatment results must be carefully assessed. METHODS: One hundred thirty-four patients treated for primary rectal cancer by LAR/CAA between 1977 and 1990 were studied retrospectively. All pathologic slides were reviewed. Median follow-up was 4 years. RESULTS: Actuarial 5-year survival for all patients was 73%. Among 36 patients who relapsed, distant metastatic disease had developed at the time of first clinical relapse in most (86%). Pelvic recurrence was detected in 13 patients, an actuarial rate of 11% at 5 years. Mesenteric implants, positive microscopic resection margin, T3 tumor, perineural invasion, blood vessel invasion, and high tumor grade were associated with increased risk for pelvic recurrence. Eleven patients ultimately required permanent colostomy, and in eight instances the cause was pelvic recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Low anterior resection combined with coloanal anastomosis provides good treatment for mid-rectal cancers and for some distal rectal cancers. Pelvic recurrence is not associated with short distal resection margins but is correlated with the presence of histopathologic markers of aggressive disease in the primary tumor. Long-term preservation of anal sphincter function depends primarily on control of pelvic tumor and can be achieved in more than 90% of patients.     

Functional results of delayed coloanal anastomosis after preoperative radiotherapy for lower third rectal cancer

Background: The aim of this study was to assess functional outcomes of patients who had a delayed coloanal anastomosis for a lower third rectal cancer after preoperative radiotherapy.

Study Design: From January 1988 to December 1997, 35 patients with an adenocarcinoma of the lower third of the rectum received preoperative radiotherapy (45 Gy) followed by a rectal resection, combining an abdominal and transanal approach. Colorectal resection was performed about 32 days after the end of the radiotherapy. The distal colon stump was pulled through the anal canal. On postoperative day 5 the colonic stump was resected and a direct coloanal anastomosis performed without colostomia diversion.

Results: There was no mortality. There was no leakage. One patient had a pelvic abscess. One patient had a necrosis of the left colon requiring reoperation. Another delayed coloanal anastomosis could be performed. Median followup was 43 months (range 6 to 113 months). Functional results were evaluated with a new scoring system including 13 items. Function was considered good in 59% and 70% at 1 and 2 years, respectively.

Conclusions: This new procedure is a safe and effective sphincter-preserving operation that avoids a diverting stoma for patients with rectal cancer of the lower third of the rectum. This technique is well adapted for patients receiving preoperative radiotherapy, with low local morbidity and good functional results. Further adaptation could be imagined for a coelioscopic approach.     

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.     

Technical and oncological feasibility of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with pouch coloanal anastomosis for rectal cancer

Aim The aim of this study was to evaluate the technical and oncological feasibility of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) with coloanal anastomosis for mid and low rectal cancer. Methods During a 2‐year period, 50 patients underwent laparoscopic TME with coloanal anastomosis for rectal carcinoma located at a median of 4.5 (range 2–11) cm from the anal verge. Pre‐operative radiotherapy was used in 46 patients. Intersphincteric dissection was combined with the laparoscopic procedure to achieve sphincter preservation. Results Conversion to a laparotomy was necessary in six patients. Postoperative mortality and morbidity were 2% and 28%, respectively. Morbidity was lower in patients operated on during the second part of the study, who had extraction of the rectal specimen through a small laparotomy incision, than in those operated on during the first part of the study when removal of the specimen was by transanal extraction. Oncological quality of excision was safe in 44 patients with intact or almost intact rectal fascia in 88% and R0 resection in 90%. At a median follow‐up of 18 months, there was no local or port‐site recurrence. Conclusion This study confirms our preliminary results of oncological feasibility of laparoscopic TME with sphincter preservation for mid and low rectal cancer, and showed that morbidity can be decreased by using a standardized surgical procedure.     

经肛门括约肌间直肠切除结肠肛管吻合术作为超低位直肠癌保肛术的初步报告

目的 探讨经肛门括约肌间直肠切除结肠肛管吻合术（PIDCA)联合术前后放疗和化疗对超低位直肠癌保肛手术的治疗效果。方法从2002年6月到2004年10月,对19例患者施行该手术。男性11例,女性8例,平均年龄56岁(41-74岁)。肿瘤分期T,4例、T2 10例、T14例、L1例,肿瘤距离肛缘平均4．4cm(3．5-5．0cm)。经肛门在直视下从距离肿瘤下缘2cm全层切断直肠或肛门内括约肌,通过肛门内外括约肌间隙向上方游离直肠并与经腹完成的直肠游离汇合切除直肠及其系膜,经肛门行结肠肛管吻合,全部患者均未行预防性结肠或回肠造口。结果无手术死亡,吻合口瘘2例(10．5%)。随访时间为3～29个月,平均随访16个月,1例盆腔复发,复发率5．3％。术后肛门括约肌功能比较满意。结论对经过选择的距离肛缘≤5cm的超低位直肠癌结合术前后的盆腔放疗和化疗,PIDCA术是保留肛门括约肌功能较理想、安全的术式,有较好根治性治疗效果,术后肛门括约肌功能比较满意。