Dataset Information

The problem of colorectal anastomosis safety.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Anastomotic leakage (AL) remains one of the most threatening complications in colorectal surgery with the incidence of up to 20%. The aim of the study is to evaluate the safety and feasibility of novel - trimodal intraoperative colorectal anastomosis testing technique. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:This multi-center prospective cohort pilot study will include patients undergoing colorectal anastomosis formation below 15?cm from the anal verge. Trimodal anastomosis testing will include testing for blood supply by ICG fluorescence trans-abdominally and trans-anally, testing of mechanical integrity of anastomosis by air-leak and methylene blue leak tests and testing for tension. The primary outcome of the study will be AL rate at day 60. The secondary outcomes will include: the frequency of changed location of bowel resection; ileostomy rate; the rate of intraoperative AL; time, taken to perform trimodal anastomosis testing; postoperative morbidity and mortality; quality of life. DISCUSSION:Trimodal testing of colorectal anastomosis may be a novel and comprehensive way to investigate colorectal anastomosis and to reveal insufficient blood supply and integrity defects intraoperatively. Thus, prevention of these two most common causes of AL may lead to decreased rate of leakage. STUDY REGISTRATION:Clinicaltrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/): NCT03958500, May, 2019.

SUBMITTER: Kryzauskas M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6959889 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The problem of colorectal anastomosis safety.

Kryzauskas Marius M Poskus Eligijus E Dulskas Audrius A Bausys Augustinas A Jakubauskas Matas M Imbrasaite Ugne U Makunaite Gabija G Kuliavas Justas J Bausys Rimantas R Stratilatovas Eugenijus E Strupas Kestutis K Poskus Tomas T

Medicine 20200101 2

<h4>Introduction</h4>Anastomotic leakage (AL) remains one of the most threatening complications in colorectal surgery with the incidence of up to 20%. The aim of the study is to evaluate the safety and feasibility of novel - trimodal intraoperative colorectal anastomosis testing technique.<h4>Methods and analysis</h4>This multi-center prospective cohort pilot study will include patients undergoing colorectal anastomosis formation below 15 cm from the anal verge. Trimodal anastomosis testing will ...[more]

PMID: 31914032

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Currently, many surgeons place a prophylactic drain in the abdominal or pelvic cavity after colorectal anastomosis as a conventional treatment. However, some trials have demonstrated that this procedure may not be beneficial to the patients. OBJECTIVE:To determine whether prophylactic placement of a drain in colorectal anastomosis can reduce postoperative complications. METHODS:We systematically searched all the electronic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared routine use of drainage to non-drainage regimes after colorectal anastomosis, using the terms "colorectal" or "colon/colonic" or "rectum/rectal" and "anastomo*" and "drain or drainage." Reference lists of relevant articles, conference proceedings, and ongoing trial databases were also screened. Primary outcome measures were clinical and radiological anastomotic leakage. Secondary outcome measures included mortality, wound infection, re-operation, and respiratory complications. We assessed the eligible studies for risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Two authors independently extracted data. RESULTS:Eleven RCTs were included (1803 patients in total, 939 patients in the drain group and 864 patients in the no drain group). Meta-analysis showed that there was no statistically significant differences between the drain group and the no drain group in (1) overall anastomotic leakage (relative risk (RR)?=?1.14, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.80-1.62, P?=?0.47), (2) clinical anastomotic leakage (RR?=?1.39, 95 % CI 0.80-2.39, P?=?0.24), (3) radiologic anastomotic leakage (RR?=?0.92, 95 % CI 0.56-1.51, P?=?0.74), (4) mortality (RR?=?0.94, 95 % CI 0.57-1.55, P?=?0.81), (5) wound infection (RR?=?1.19, 95 % CI 0.84-1.69, P?=?0.34), (6) re-operation (RR?=?1.18, 95 % CI 0.75-1.85, P?=?0.47), and (7) respiratory complications (RR?=?0.82, 95 % CI 0.55-1.23, P?=?0.34). CONCLUSIONS:Routine use of prophylactic drainage in colorectal anastomosis does not benefit in decreasing postoperative complications.

Project description:BackgroundThe application of side-to-end anastomosis (SEA) in sphincter-preserving resection (SPR) is controversial. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the safety and efficacy of SEA with colonic J-pouch (CJP) anastomosis, which had been proven effective in improving postoperative bowel function.MethodsThe protocol was registered in PROSPERO under number CRD42020206764. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched. The inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the safety or efficacy of SEA in comparison with CJP anastomosis. The outcomes included the pooled risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous variables and weighted mean differences (WMDs) for continuous variables. All outcomes were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI) by STATA software (Stata 14, Stata Corporation, TX, USA).ResultsA total of 864 patients from 10 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. Patients undergoing SEA had a higher defecation frequency at 12 months after SPR (WMD = 0.20; 95% CI, 0.14-0.26; P < 0.01) than those undergoing CJP anastomosis with low heterogeneity (I2 = 0%, P = 0.54) and a lower incidence of incomplete defecation at 3 months after surgery (RR = 0.28; 95% CI, 0.09-0.86; P = 0.03). A shorter operating time (WMD = - 17.65; 95% CI, - 23.28 to - 12.02; P < 0.01) was also observed in the SEA group without significant heterogeneity (I2 = 0%, P = 0.54). A higher anorectal resting pressure (WMD = 6.25; 95% CI, 0.17-12.32; P = 0.04) was found in the SEA group but the heterogeneity was high (I2 = 84.5%, P = 0.84). No significant differences were observed between the groups in terms of efficacy outcomes including defecation frequency, the incidence of urgency, incomplete defecation, the use of pads, enema, medications, anorectal squeeze pressure and maximum rectal volume, or safety outcomes including operating time, blood loss, the use of protective stoma, postoperative complications, clinical outcomes, and oncological outcomes.ConclusionsThe present evidence suggests that SEA is an effective anastomotic strategy to achieve similar postoperative bowel function without increasing the risk of complications compared with CJP anastomosis. The advantages of SEA include a shorter operating time, a lower incidence of incomplete defecation at 3 months after surgery, and better sphincter function. However, close attention should be paid to the long-term defecation frequency after SPR.

Dataset Information

The problem of colorectal anastomosis safety.

Publications

The problem of colorectal anastomosis safety.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets