Propensity Score Adjusted Comparison of Pelviperineal Morbidity With and Without Omentoplasty Following Abdominoperineal Resection for Primary Rectal Cancer.


Journal

Diseases of the colon and rectum
ISSN: 1530-0358
Titre abrégé: Dis Colon Rectum
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0372764

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
08 2019
Historique:
pubmed: 13 2 2019
medline: 14 11 2019
entrez: 13 2 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Abdominoperineal resection is associated with a high incidence of perineal complications, and whether this is reduced by an omentoplasty is still unclear. This study aimed to investigate the impact of omentoplasty on pelviperineal morbidity in patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer. This was a retrospective comparative cohort study using propensity score analyses to reduce potential confounding. The study was undertaken in 2 teaching hospitals and 1 university hospital. Patients who underwent abdominoperineal resection for primary rectal cancer between 2000 and 2017 were included. The main end points were primary perineal wound healing at 30 days and overall and specific pelviperineal morbidity until the end of the study period. Among 254 included patients, 106 had an omentoplasty. The primary perineal wound healing rate at 30 days was similar for omentoplasty and no omentoplasty (65% vs 60%; p = 0.422), also after adjusting for potential confounding by propensity score analysis (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.45-1.75). Being free from any pelviperineal complication at 6 months (75% vs 79%; p = 0.492), absence of any pelviperineal morbidity until 1 year (54% vs 49%; p = 0.484), and incidence of persistent perineal sinus (6% vs 10%; p = 0.256) were also similar in both groups. The unadjusted higher perineal hernia rate after omentoplasty (18% vs 7%; p = 0.011) did not remain statistically significant after regression analysis including the propensity score (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.46-3.88). Complications related to the omentoplasty itself were observed in 8 patients, of whom 6 required reoperation. This study was limited by the retrospective and nonrandomized design causing some heterogeneity between the 2 cohorts. In this multicenter study using propensity score analyses, the use of omentoplasty did not lower the incidence or the duration of pelviperineal morbidity in patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer, and omentoplasty itself was associated with a risk of reoperation. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A918.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Abdominoperineal resection is associated with a high incidence of perineal complications, and whether this is reduced by an omentoplasty is still unclear.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to investigate the impact of omentoplasty on pelviperineal morbidity in patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer.
DESIGN
This was a retrospective comparative cohort study using propensity score analyses to reduce potential confounding.
SETTING
The study was undertaken in 2 teaching hospitals and 1 university hospital.
PATIENTS
Patients who underwent abdominoperineal resection for primary rectal cancer between 2000 and 2017 were included.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
The main end points were primary perineal wound healing at 30 days and overall and specific pelviperineal morbidity until the end of the study period.
RESULTS
Among 254 included patients, 106 had an omentoplasty. The primary perineal wound healing rate at 30 days was similar for omentoplasty and no omentoplasty (65% vs 60%; p = 0.422), also after adjusting for potential confounding by propensity score analysis (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.45-1.75). Being free from any pelviperineal complication at 6 months (75% vs 79%; p = 0.492), absence of any pelviperineal morbidity until 1 year (54% vs 49%; p = 0.484), and incidence of persistent perineal sinus (6% vs 10%; p = 0.256) were also similar in both groups. The unadjusted higher perineal hernia rate after omentoplasty (18% vs 7%; p = 0.011) did not remain statistically significant after regression analysis including the propensity score (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.46-3.88). Complications related to the omentoplasty itself were observed in 8 patients, of whom 6 required reoperation.
LIMITATIONS
This study was limited by the retrospective and nonrandomized design causing some heterogeneity between the 2 cohorts.
CONCLUSION
In this multicenter study using propensity score analyses, the use of omentoplasty did not lower the incidence or the duration of pelviperineal morbidity in patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer, and omentoplasty itself was associated with a risk of reoperation. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A918.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30747743
doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001349
doi:

Types de publication

Comparative Study Journal Article Multicenter Study Observational Study Video-Audio Media

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

952-959

Auteurs

Robin D Blok (RD)

Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, LEXOR, Center for Experimental and Molecular Medicine, Oncode Institute, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Joske de Jonge (J)

Tergooi Hospital, Department of Surgery, Hilversum, the Netherlands.

Marlou A de Koning (MA)

Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Anthony W H van de Ven (AWH)

Flevo Hospital, Department of Surgery, Almere, the Netherlands.

Jarmila D W van der Bilt (JDW)

Flevo Hospital, Department of Surgery, Almere, the Netherlands.

Anna A W van Geloven (AAW)

Tergooi Hospital, Department of Surgery, Hilversum, the Netherlands.

Roel Hompes (R)

Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Wilhelmus A Bemelman (WA)

Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Pieter J Tanis (PJ)

Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH