Early postoperative endoscopic evaluation of rectal anastomoses: a prospective cross-sectional study.
Anastomotic leakage
Colorectal anastomosis
Colorectal surgery
Flexible endoscopy
Postoperative management
Journal
Surgical endoscopy
ISSN: 1432-2218
Titre abrégé: Surg Endosc
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8806653
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2022
12 2022
Historique:
received:
29
10
2021
accepted:
01
05
2022
pubmed:
24
5
2022
medline:
16
11
2022
entrez:
23
5
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Reported incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL) of rectal anastomoses is up to 29% with an overall mortality up to 12%. Nevertheless, there is no uniform evidence-based diagnostic procedure for early detection of AL. The objective of this prospective clinical trial was to demonstrate the diagnostic value of early postoperative flexible endoscopy for rectal anastomosis evaluation. Flexible endoscopy between 5 and 8th postoperative day was performed consecutively in 90 asymptomatic patients. Sample size calculation was made using the two-stage Simon design. Diagnostic value was measured by management change after endoscopic evaluation. Anastomoses were categorized according to a new classification. Study is registered in German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00019217). Of the 90 anastomoses, 59 (65.6%) were unsuspicious. 20 (22.2%) were suspicious with partial fibrin plaques (n = 15), intramural hematoma and/or local blood coagulum (n = 4) and ischemic area in one. 17 of these anastomoses were treated conservatively under monitoring. In three a further endoscopic re-evaluation was performed and as consequence one patient underwent endoscopic vacuum therapy. 11 (12.2%) AL were detected. Here, two could be treated conservatively under monitoring, four with endoscopic vacuum therapy and five needed revision surgery. No intervention-related adverse events occurred. A change in postoperative management was made in 31 (34.4%) patients what caused a significant improvement of diagnosis of AL (p < 0.001). Early postoperative endoscopic evaluation of rectal anastomoses is a safe procedure thus allows early detection of AL. Early treatment for suspicious anastomoses or AL could be adapted to avoid severe morbidity and mortality.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Reported incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL) of rectal anastomoses is up to 29% with an overall mortality up to 12%. Nevertheless, there is no uniform evidence-based diagnostic procedure for early detection of AL. The objective of this prospective clinical trial was to demonstrate the diagnostic value of early postoperative flexible endoscopy for rectal anastomosis evaluation.
METHODS
Flexible endoscopy between 5 and 8th postoperative day was performed consecutively in 90 asymptomatic patients. Sample size calculation was made using the two-stage Simon design. Diagnostic value was measured by management change after endoscopic evaluation. Anastomoses were categorized according to a new classification. Study is registered in German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00019217).
RESULTS
Of the 90 anastomoses, 59 (65.6%) were unsuspicious. 20 (22.2%) were suspicious with partial fibrin plaques (n = 15), intramural hematoma and/or local blood coagulum (n = 4) and ischemic area in one. 17 of these anastomoses were treated conservatively under monitoring. In three a further endoscopic re-evaluation was performed and as consequence one patient underwent endoscopic vacuum therapy. 11 (12.2%) AL were detected. Here, two could be treated conservatively under monitoring, four with endoscopic vacuum therapy and five needed revision surgery. No intervention-related adverse events occurred. A change in postoperative management was made in 31 (34.4%) patients what caused a significant improvement of diagnosis of AL (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
Early postoperative endoscopic evaluation of rectal anastomoses is a safe procedure thus allows early detection of AL. Early treatment for suspicious anastomoses or AL could be adapted to avoid severe morbidity and mortality.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35606545
doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09323-6
pii: 10.1007/s00464-022-09323-6
pmc: PMC9652211
doi:
Banques de données
DRKS
['DRKS00019217']
Types de publication
Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
8881-8892Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Rahbari NN, Weitz J, Hohenberger W, Heald RJ, Moran B, Ulrich A, Holm T, Wong WD, Tiret E, Moriya Y, Laurberg S, den Dulk M, van de Velde C, Buchler MW (2010) Definition and grading of anastomotic leakage following anterior resection of the rectum: a proposal by the International Study Group of Rectal Cancer. Surgery 147:339–351
doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2009.10.012
pubmed: 20004450
Paun BC, Cassie S, MacLean AR, Dixon E, Buie WD (2010) Postoperative complications following surgery for rectal cancer. Ann Surg 251:807–818
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181dae4ed
pubmed: 20395841
Karim A, Cubas V, Zaman S, Khan S, Patel H, Waterland P (2020) Anastomotic leak and cancer-specific outcomes after curative rectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Tech Coloproctol 24:513–525
doi: 10.1007/s10151-020-02153-5
pubmed: 32206962
Baum PDJ, Lichthardt S, Kastner C, Schlegel N, Germer CT, Wiegering A (2019) Mortality and complications following visceral surgery—a nationwide analysis based on the diagnostic categories used in Germany hospital invoicing data. Dtsch Arztebl Int 116:739–146
pubmed: 31774053
pmcid: 6912125
Marres CCM, van de Ven AWH, Leijssen LGJ, Verbeek PCM, Bemelman WA, Buskens CJ (2017) Colorectal anastomotic leak: delay in reintervention after false-negative computed tomography scan is a reason for concern. Tech Coloproctol 21:709–714
doi: 10.1007/s10151-017-1689-6
pubmed: 28929306
pmcid: 5640761
McDermott FD, Heeney A, Kelly ME, Steele RJ, Carlson GL, Winter DC (2015) Systematic review of preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative risk factors for colorectal anastomotic leaks. Br J Surg 102:462–479
doi: 10.1002/bjs.9697
pubmed: 25703524
Chadi SA, Fingerhut A, Berho M, DeMeester SR, Fleshman JW, Hyman NH, Margolin DA, Martz JE, McLemore EC, Molena D, Newman MI, Rafferty JF, Safar B, Senagore AJ, Zmora O, Wexner SD (2016) Emerging trends in the etiology, prevention, and treatment of gastrointestinal anastomotic leakage. J Gastrointest Surg 20:2035–2051
doi: 10.1007/s11605-016-3255-3
pubmed: 27638764
Gessler B, Eriksson O, Angenete E (2017) Diagnosis, treatment, and consequences of anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis 32:549–556
doi: 10.1007/s00384-016-2744-x
pubmed: 28070659
pmcid: 5355508
Sciuto A, Merola G, De Palma GD, Sodo M, Pirozzi F, Bracale UM, Bracale U (2018) Predictive factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. World J Gastroenterol 24:2247–2260
doi: 10.3748/wjg.v24.i21.2247
pubmed: 29881234
pmcid: 5989239
Sparreboom CL, van Groningen JT, Lingsma HF, Wouters M, Menon AG, Kleinrensink GJ, Jeekel J, Lange JF, Dutch ColoRectal Audit G (2018) Different risk factors for early and late colorectal anastomotic leakage in a nationwide audit. Dis Colon Rectum 61:1258–1266
doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001202
pubmed: 30239395
Tsai YY, Chen WT (2019) Management of anastomotic leakage after rectal surgery: a review article. J Gastrointest Oncol 10:1229–1237
doi: 10.21037/jgo.2019.07.07
pubmed: 31949944
pmcid: 6955017
Singh PP, Zeng IS, Srinivasa S, Lemanu DP, Connolly AB, Hill AG (2014) Systematic review and meta-analysis of use of serum C-reactive protein levels to predict anastomotic leak after colorectal surgery. Br J Surg 101:339–346
doi: 10.1002/bjs.9354
pubmed: 24311257
Kauv P, Benadjaoud S, Curis E, Boulay-Coletta I, Loriau J, Zins M (2015) Anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery: diagnostic accuracy of CT. Eur Radiol 25:3543–3551
doi: 10.1007/s00330-015-3795-z
pubmed: 25925357
Kornmann VN, Treskes N, Hoonhout LH, Bollen TL, van Ramshorst B, Boerma D (2013) Systematic review on the value of CT scanning in the diagnosis of anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis 28:437–445
doi: 10.1007/s00384-012-1623-3
pubmed: 23239374
Aly M, O’Brien JW, Clark F, Kapur S, Stearns AT, Shaikh I (2019) Does intra-operative flexible endoscopy reduce anastomotic complications following left-sided colonic resections? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Colorectal Dis 21:1354–1363
doi: 10.1111/codi.14740
pubmed: 31243879
Podda M, Di Saverio S, Davies RJ, Atzeni J, Balestra F, Virdis F, Reccia I, Jayant K, Agresta F, Pisanu A (2020) Prophylactic intra-abdominal drainage following colorectal anastomoses. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Surg 219:164–174
doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2019.05.006
pubmed: 31138400
Al-Mazrou AM, Suradkar K, Mauro CM, Kiran RP (2017) Characterization of readmission by day of rehospitalization after colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 60:202–212
doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000734
pubmed: 28059917
Hyman N, Manchester TL, Osler T, Burns B, Cataldo PA (2007) Anastomotic leaks after intestinal anastomosis: it’s later than you think. Ann Surg 245:254–258
doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000225083.27182.85
pubmed: 17245179
pmcid: 1876987
Morks AN, Ploeg RJ, Sijbrand Hofker H, Wiggers T, Havenga K (2013) Late anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery: a significant problem. Colorectal Dis 15:e271-275
doi: 10.1111/codi.12167
pubmed: 23398601
Simon R (1989) Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 10:1–10
doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(89)90015-9
pubmed: 2702835
von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, Initiative S (2007) The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Ann Intern Med 147:573–577
doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-147-8-200710160-00010
Karliczek A, Harlaar NJ, Zeebregts CJ, Wiggers T, Baas PC, van Dam GM (2009) Surgeons lack predictive accuracy for anastomotic leakage in gastrointestinal surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis 24:569–576
doi: 10.1007/s00384-009-0658-6
pubmed: 19221768
Wu Z, van de Haar RC, Sparreboom CL, Boersema GS, Li Z, Ji J, Jeekel J, Lange JF (2016) Is the intraoperative air leak test effective in the prevention of colorectal anastomotic leakage? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis 31:1409–1417
doi: 10.1007/s00384-016-2616-4
pubmed: 27294661
pmcid: 4947486
Li YW, Lian P, Huang B, Zheng HT, Wang MH, Gu WL, Li XX, Xu Y, Cai SJ (2017) Very early colorectal anastomotic leakage within 5 post-operative days: a more severe subtype needs relaparatomy. Sci Rep 7:39936
doi: 10.1038/srep39936
pubmed: 28084305
pmcid: 5233968
Lim SB, Yu CS, Kim CW, Yoon YS, Park IJ, Kim JC (2016) Late anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection in rectal cancer patients: clinical characteristics and predisposing factors. Colorectal Dis 18:O135-140
doi: 10.1111/codi.13300
pubmed: 26888300
Maeda H, Okamoto K, Namikawa T, Akimori T, Kamioka N, Shiga M, Dabanaka K, Hanazaki K, Kobayashi M (2015) Rarity of late anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection of the rectum. Int J Colorectal Dis 30:831–834
doi: 10.1007/s00384-015-2207-9
pubmed: 25862318
Matthiessen P, Lindgren R, Hallbook O, Rutegard J, Sjodahl R, Rectal Cancer Trial on Defunctioning Stoma Study G (2010) Symptomatic anastomotic leakage diagnosed after hospital discharge following low anterior resection for rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 12:e82-87
pubmed: 19594606
Shin US, Kim CW, Yu CS, Kim JC (2010) Delayed anastomotic leakage following sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis 25:843–849
doi: 10.1007/s00384-010-0938-1
pubmed: 20387070
Ha GW, Kim JH, Lee MR (2017) Oncologic impact of anastomotic leakage following colorectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 24:3289–3299
doi: 10.1245/s10434-017-5881-8
pubmed: 28608118
Krarup PM, Nordholm-Carstensen A, Jorgensen LN, Harling H (2014) Anastomotic leak increases distant recurrence and long-term mortality after curative resection for colonic cancer: a nationwide cohort study. Ann Surg 259:930–938
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182a6f2fc
pubmed: 24045445
Qu H, Liu Y, Bi DS (2015) Clinical risk factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 29:3608–3617
doi: 10.1007/s00464-015-4117-x
pubmed: 25743996
Garcia-Granero A, Frasson M, Flor-Lorente B, Blanco F, Puga R, Carratala A, Garcia-Granero E (2013) Procalcitonin and C-reactive protein as early predictors of anastomotic leak in colorectal surgery: a prospective observational study. Dis Colon Rectum 56:475–483
doi: 10.1097/DCR.0b013e31826ce825
pubmed: 23478615
Warschkow R, Beutner U, Steffen T, Muller SA, Schmied BM, Guller U, Tarantino I (2012) Safe and early discharge after colorectal surgery due to C-reactive protein: a diagnostic meta-analysis of 1832 patients. Ann Surg 256:245–250
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31825b60f0
pubmed: 22735714
Vallicelli C, Pirrera B, Alagna V, Fantini E, Palini GM, Zanini N, Garulli G (2020) Intraoperative endoscopy with immediate suture reinforcement of the defect in colorectal anastomosis: a pilot study. Updates Surg 72:999–1004
doi: 10.1007/s13304-020-00746-1
pubmed: 32185679
Sato S, Shiozawa M, Uchiyama M, Sugano N, Rino Y, Masuda M (2019) Correlation between endoscopic features of the anastomosis after low anterior resection and postsurgical anorectal function. J Gastrointest Oncol 10:188–193
doi: 10.21037/jgo.2018.11.09
pubmed: 31032084
pmcid: 6465501
Placer C, Vega J, Aguirre I, Rose S, Saralegui Y, Enriquez-Navascues JM (2019) Late anastomotic leakages in rectal surgery: a wake-up call about their impact on long-term results. Cir Cir 87:611–618
pubmed: 31631180
Borstlap WAA, Westerduin E, Aukema TS, Bemelman WA, Tanis PJ (2017) Anastomotic leakage and chronic presacral sinus formation after low anterior resection: results from a large cross-sectional Study. Ann Surg 266:870–877
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002429
pubmed: 28746154