Can Transanal Tube Placement after Anterior Resection for Rectal Carcinoma Reduce Anastomotic Leakage Rate? A Single-institution Prospective Randomized Study
Background Anastomotic leakage is the most significant complication after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal carcinoma, and it is the major cause of postoperative mortality and morbidity. The objective of the present study was to investigate whether the use of a transanal tube as an alternative...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Xiao, Liang [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2011 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Anmerkung: |
© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2011 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: World Journal of Surgery - Springer-Verlag, 1996, 35(2011), 6 vom: 25. März |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:35 ; year:2011 ; number:6 ; day:25 ; month:03 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
SPR003433323 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | SPR003433323 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230328140046.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 201001s2011 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)SPR003433323 | ||
| 035 | |a (SPR)s00268-011-1053-3-e | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Xiao, Liang |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Can Transanal Tube Placement after Anterior Resection for Rectal Carcinoma Reduce Anastomotic Leakage Rate? A Single-institution Prospective Randomized Study |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2011 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2011 | ||
| 520 | |a Background Anastomotic leakage is the most significant complication after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal carcinoma, and it is the major cause of postoperative mortality and morbidity. The objective of the present study was to investigate whether the use of a transanal tube as an alternative endoluminal diversion technique for rectal carcinoma can reduce the 30-day leakage rate after LAR. Methods From June 2003 to December 2009, a total of 398 patients were randomized to a transanal tube or not after LAR. Inclusion criteria for randomization were biopsy-proven carcinoma of the rectum located ≤15 cm above the anal verge, measured with a rigid rectoscope; age ≥ 18 years; informed consent; ability to understand the study information; estimated survival of >6 months; anterior resection for the lesion; final negative air leakage test; intact anastomotic stapler rings; and the absence of major intraoperative adverse events. Results Patient demographics, tumor size and location, Duke’s stage, preoperative co-morbidity, and operative details were comparable between the two groups in general analysis and subgroup analysis (double-staple technique and handsewn technique). The overall rate of symptomatic leakage was 6.78% (27 of 398 patients). Patients randomized to a transanal tube (n = 200) had leakage in 4.0% (8 of 200 patients) and those without a tube (n = 198) in 9.6% (19 of 198 patients) (p = 0.026). With regard to the double-staple technique subgroup, 3.7% (7 of 188) patients with a tube presented with a symptomatic anastomotic leakage, compared with 9.3% (17 of 182) of those without a tube (p = 0.028). Of the patients with anastomotic leakage in the double-staple technique subgroup, the need for urgent abdominal reoperation was 28.6% (two of seven patients) in those randomized to a transanal tube and 82.4% (14 of 17) in those without (p = 0.021). The 30-day mortality after LAR was nil. In the double-staple technique subgroup, a quicker resumption of gastrointestinal motility manifested by a smaller ratio of patients with flatus > postoperative day (POD) 3 (p = 0.019) and a smaller ratio of poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 (p < 0.001) was associated with use of a transanal tube. Additionally, patients with a tube appeared to have a lower rectal resting pressure by POD 3 (4.0 ± 2.2 vs. 5.0 ± 2.2 kPa; p < 0.001) or POD 5 (4.3 ± 2.3 vs. 5.6 ± 2.3 kPa; p < 0.001), compared to the resting pressures patients without the device, respectively. A shorter length of hospital stay was associated with use of a transanal tube both in the double-staple technique subgroup (p < 0.001) and the handsewn technique subgroup (p = 0.011). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that body mass index > 25 kg/$ m^{2} $ and a poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 were found to be independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in the low anastomosis subgroup. Conclusions The presence of a transanal tube is effective and safe in decreasing the rate of clinically significant anastomotic leaks and in mitigating the clinical consequences of leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer with the technique of total mesorectal excision and double-staple anastomosis. The potential benefits of transanal tube placement are multifactorial, including drainage, reduction of endoluminal pressure, and promotion of gastrointestinal motility. Obesity and poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 are independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in patients with low anastomosis. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Anastomotic Leakage |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Total Mesorectal Excision |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Gastrointestinal Motility |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Handsewn Anastomosis |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Handsewn Technique |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Zhang, Wen-bo |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Jiang, Peng-cheng |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Bu, Xue-feng |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Yan, Qun |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Li, Hua |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Zhang, Yong-jun |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Yu, Feng |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t World Journal of Surgery |d Springer-Verlag, 1996 |g 35(2011), 6 vom: 25. März |w (DE-627)SPR003391159 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:35 |g year:2011 |g number:6 |g day:25 |g month:03 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3 |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 35 |j 2011 |e 6 |b 25 |c 03 | ||
| author_variant |
l x lx w b z wbz p c j pcj x f b xfb q y qy h l hl y j z yjz f y fy |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
xiaoliangzhangwenbojiangpengchengbuxuefe:2011----:atasnluelcmnatrneireetofretlacnmrdcaatmtcekgrtaigen |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2011 |
| publishDate |
2011 |
| allfields |
10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3 doi (DE-627)SPR003433323 (SPR)s00268-011-1053-3-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Xiao, Liang verfasserin aut Can Transanal Tube Placement after Anterior Resection for Rectal Carcinoma Reduce Anastomotic Leakage Rate? A Single-institution Prospective Randomized Study 2011 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2011 Background Anastomotic leakage is the most significant complication after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal carcinoma, and it is the major cause of postoperative mortality and morbidity. The objective of the present study was to investigate whether the use of a transanal tube as an alternative endoluminal diversion technique for rectal carcinoma can reduce the 30-day leakage rate after LAR. Methods From June 2003 to December 2009, a total of 398 patients were randomized to a transanal tube or not after LAR. Inclusion criteria for randomization were biopsy-proven carcinoma of the rectum located ≤15 cm above the anal verge, measured with a rigid rectoscope; age ≥ 18 years; informed consent; ability to understand the study information; estimated survival of >6 months; anterior resection for the lesion; final negative air leakage test; intact anastomotic stapler rings; and the absence of major intraoperative adverse events. Results Patient demographics, tumor size and location, Duke’s stage, preoperative co-morbidity, and operative details were comparable between the two groups in general analysis and subgroup analysis (double-staple technique and handsewn technique). The overall rate of symptomatic leakage was 6.78% (27 of 398 patients). Patients randomized to a transanal tube (n = 200) had leakage in 4.0% (8 of 200 patients) and those without a tube (n = 198) in 9.6% (19 of 198 patients) (p = 0.026). With regard to the double-staple technique subgroup, 3.7% (7 of 188) patients with a tube presented with a symptomatic anastomotic leakage, compared with 9.3% (17 of 182) of those without a tube (p = 0.028). Of the patients with anastomotic leakage in the double-staple technique subgroup, the need for urgent abdominal reoperation was 28.6% (two of seven patients) in those randomized to a transanal tube and 82.4% (14 of 17) in those without (p = 0.021). The 30-day mortality after LAR was nil. In the double-staple technique subgroup, a quicker resumption of gastrointestinal motility manifested by a smaller ratio of patients with flatus > postoperative day (POD) 3 (p = 0.019) and a smaller ratio of poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 (p < 0.001) was associated with use of a transanal tube. Additionally, patients with a tube appeared to have a lower rectal resting pressure by POD 3 (4.0 ± 2.2 vs. 5.0 ± 2.2 kPa; p < 0.001) or POD 5 (4.3 ± 2.3 vs. 5.6 ± 2.3 kPa; p < 0.001), compared to the resting pressures patients without the device, respectively. A shorter length of hospital stay was associated with use of a transanal tube both in the double-staple technique subgroup (p < 0.001) and the handsewn technique subgroup (p = 0.011). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that body mass index > 25 kg/$ m^{2} $ and a poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 were found to be independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in the low anastomosis subgroup. Conclusions The presence of a transanal tube is effective and safe in decreasing the rate of clinically significant anastomotic leaks and in mitigating the clinical consequences of leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer with the technique of total mesorectal excision and double-staple anastomosis. The potential benefits of transanal tube placement are multifactorial, including drainage, reduction of endoluminal pressure, and promotion of gastrointestinal motility. Obesity and poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 are independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in patients with low anastomosis. Anastomotic Leakage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Total Mesorectal Excision (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gastrointestinal Motility (dpeaa)DE-He213 Handsewn Anastomosis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Handsewn Technique (dpeaa)DE-He213 Zhang, Wen-bo aut Jiang, Peng-cheng aut Bu, Xue-feng aut Yan, Qun aut Li, Hua aut Zhang, Yong-jun aut Yu, Feng aut Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery Springer-Verlag, 1996 35(2011), 6 vom: 25. März (DE-627)SPR003391159 nnns volume:35 year:2011 number:6 day:25 month:03 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 35 2011 6 25 03 |
| spelling |
10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3 doi (DE-627)SPR003433323 (SPR)s00268-011-1053-3-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Xiao, Liang verfasserin aut Can Transanal Tube Placement after Anterior Resection for Rectal Carcinoma Reduce Anastomotic Leakage Rate? A Single-institution Prospective Randomized Study 2011 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2011 Background Anastomotic leakage is the most significant complication after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal carcinoma, and it is the major cause of postoperative mortality and morbidity. The objective of the present study was to investigate whether the use of a transanal tube as an alternative endoluminal diversion technique for rectal carcinoma can reduce the 30-day leakage rate after LAR. Methods From June 2003 to December 2009, a total of 398 patients were randomized to a transanal tube or not after LAR. Inclusion criteria for randomization were biopsy-proven carcinoma of the rectum located ≤15 cm above the anal verge, measured with a rigid rectoscope; age ≥ 18 years; informed consent; ability to understand the study information; estimated survival of >6 months; anterior resection for the lesion; final negative air leakage test; intact anastomotic stapler rings; and the absence of major intraoperative adverse events. Results Patient demographics, tumor size and location, Duke’s stage, preoperative co-morbidity, and operative details were comparable between the two groups in general analysis and subgroup analysis (double-staple technique and handsewn technique). The overall rate of symptomatic leakage was 6.78% (27 of 398 patients). Patients randomized to a transanal tube (n = 200) had leakage in 4.0% (8 of 200 patients) and those without a tube (n = 198) in 9.6% (19 of 198 patients) (p = 0.026). With regard to the double-staple technique subgroup, 3.7% (7 of 188) patients with a tube presented with a symptomatic anastomotic leakage, compared with 9.3% (17 of 182) of those without a tube (p = 0.028). Of the patients with anastomotic leakage in the double-staple technique subgroup, the need for urgent abdominal reoperation was 28.6% (two of seven patients) in those randomized to a transanal tube and 82.4% (14 of 17) in those without (p = 0.021). The 30-day mortality after LAR was nil. In the double-staple technique subgroup, a quicker resumption of gastrointestinal motility manifested by a smaller ratio of patients with flatus > postoperative day (POD) 3 (p = 0.019) and a smaller ratio of poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 (p < 0.001) was associated with use of a transanal tube. Additionally, patients with a tube appeared to have a lower rectal resting pressure by POD 3 (4.0 ± 2.2 vs. 5.0 ± 2.2 kPa; p < 0.001) or POD 5 (4.3 ± 2.3 vs. 5.6 ± 2.3 kPa; p < 0.001), compared to the resting pressures patients without the device, respectively. A shorter length of hospital stay was associated with use of a transanal tube both in the double-staple technique subgroup (p < 0.001) and the handsewn technique subgroup (p = 0.011). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that body mass index > 25 kg/$ m^{2} $ and a poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 were found to be independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in the low anastomosis subgroup. Conclusions The presence of a transanal tube is effective and safe in decreasing the rate of clinically significant anastomotic leaks and in mitigating the clinical consequences of leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer with the technique of total mesorectal excision and double-staple anastomosis. The potential benefits of transanal tube placement are multifactorial, including drainage, reduction of endoluminal pressure, and promotion of gastrointestinal motility. Obesity and poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 are independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in patients with low anastomosis. Anastomotic Leakage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Total Mesorectal Excision (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gastrointestinal Motility (dpeaa)DE-He213 Handsewn Anastomosis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Handsewn Technique (dpeaa)DE-He213 Zhang, Wen-bo aut Jiang, Peng-cheng aut Bu, Xue-feng aut Yan, Qun aut Li, Hua aut Zhang, Yong-jun aut Yu, Feng aut Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery Springer-Verlag, 1996 35(2011), 6 vom: 25. März (DE-627)SPR003391159 nnns volume:35 year:2011 number:6 day:25 month:03 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 35 2011 6 25 03 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3 doi (DE-627)SPR003433323 (SPR)s00268-011-1053-3-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Xiao, Liang verfasserin aut Can Transanal Tube Placement after Anterior Resection for Rectal Carcinoma Reduce Anastomotic Leakage Rate? A Single-institution Prospective Randomized Study 2011 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2011 Background Anastomotic leakage is the most significant complication after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal carcinoma, and it is the major cause of postoperative mortality and morbidity. The objective of the present study was to investigate whether the use of a transanal tube as an alternative endoluminal diversion technique for rectal carcinoma can reduce the 30-day leakage rate after LAR. Methods From June 2003 to December 2009, a total of 398 patients were randomized to a transanal tube or not after LAR. Inclusion criteria for randomization were biopsy-proven carcinoma of the rectum located ≤15 cm above the anal verge, measured with a rigid rectoscope; age ≥ 18 years; informed consent; ability to understand the study information; estimated survival of >6 months; anterior resection for the lesion; final negative air leakage test; intact anastomotic stapler rings; and the absence of major intraoperative adverse events. Results Patient demographics, tumor size and location, Duke’s stage, preoperative co-morbidity, and operative details were comparable between the two groups in general analysis and subgroup analysis (double-staple technique and handsewn technique). The overall rate of symptomatic leakage was 6.78% (27 of 398 patients). Patients randomized to a transanal tube (n = 200) had leakage in 4.0% (8 of 200 patients) and those without a tube (n = 198) in 9.6% (19 of 198 patients) (p = 0.026). With regard to the double-staple technique subgroup, 3.7% (7 of 188) patients with a tube presented with a symptomatic anastomotic leakage, compared with 9.3% (17 of 182) of those without a tube (p = 0.028). Of the patients with anastomotic leakage in the double-staple technique subgroup, the need for urgent abdominal reoperation was 28.6% (two of seven patients) in those randomized to a transanal tube and 82.4% (14 of 17) in those without (p = 0.021). The 30-day mortality after LAR was nil. In the double-staple technique subgroup, a quicker resumption of gastrointestinal motility manifested by a smaller ratio of patients with flatus > postoperative day (POD) 3 (p = 0.019) and a smaller ratio of poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 (p < 0.001) was associated with use of a transanal tube. Additionally, patients with a tube appeared to have a lower rectal resting pressure by POD 3 (4.0 ± 2.2 vs. 5.0 ± 2.2 kPa; p < 0.001) or POD 5 (4.3 ± 2.3 vs. 5.6 ± 2.3 kPa; p < 0.001), compared to the resting pressures patients without the device, respectively. A shorter length of hospital stay was associated with use of a transanal tube both in the double-staple technique subgroup (p < 0.001) and the handsewn technique subgroup (p = 0.011). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that body mass index > 25 kg/$ m^{2} $ and a poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 were found to be independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in the low anastomosis subgroup. Conclusions The presence of a transanal tube is effective and safe in decreasing the rate of clinically significant anastomotic leaks and in mitigating the clinical consequences of leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer with the technique of total mesorectal excision and double-staple anastomosis. The potential benefits of transanal tube placement are multifactorial, including drainage, reduction of endoluminal pressure, and promotion of gastrointestinal motility. Obesity and poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 are independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in patients with low anastomosis. Anastomotic Leakage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Total Mesorectal Excision (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gastrointestinal Motility (dpeaa)DE-He213 Handsewn Anastomosis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Handsewn Technique (dpeaa)DE-He213 Zhang, Wen-bo aut Jiang, Peng-cheng aut Bu, Xue-feng aut Yan, Qun aut Li, Hua aut Zhang, Yong-jun aut Yu, Feng aut Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery Springer-Verlag, 1996 35(2011), 6 vom: 25. März (DE-627)SPR003391159 nnns volume:35 year:2011 number:6 day:25 month:03 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 35 2011 6 25 03 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3 doi (DE-627)SPR003433323 (SPR)s00268-011-1053-3-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Xiao, Liang verfasserin aut Can Transanal Tube Placement after Anterior Resection for Rectal Carcinoma Reduce Anastomotic Leakage Rate? A Single-institution Prospective Randomized Study 2011 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2011 Background Anastomotic leakage is the most significant complication after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal carcinoma, and it is the major cause of postoperative mortality and morbidity. The objective of the present study was to investigate whether the use of a transanal tube as an alternative endoluminal diversion technique for rectal carcinoma can reduce the 30-day leakage rate after LAR. Methods From June 2003 to December 2009, a total of 398 patients were randomized to a transanal tube or not after LAR. Inclusion criteria for randomization were biopsy-proven carcinoma of the rectum located ≤15 cm above the anal verge, measured with a rigid rectoscope; age ≥ 18 years; informed consent; ability to understand the study information; estimated survival of >6 months; anterior resection for the lesion; final negative air leakage test; intact anastomotic stapler rings; and the absence of major intraoperative adverse events. Results Patient demographics, tumor size and location, Duke’s stage, preoperative co-morbidity, and operative details were comparable between the two groups in general analysis and subgroup analysis (double-staple technique and handsewn technique). The overall rate of symptomatic leakage was 6.78% (27 of 398 patients). Patients randomized to a transanal tube (n = 200) had leakage in 4.0% (8 of 200 patients) and those without a tube (n = 198) in 9.6% (19 of 198 patients) (p = 0.026). With regard to the double-staple technique subgroup, 3.7% (7 of 188) patients with a tube presented with a symptomatic anastomotic leakage, compared with 9.3% (17 of 182) of those without a tube (p = 0.028). Of the patients with anastomotic leakage in the double-staple technique subgroup, the need for urgent abdominal reoperation was 28.6% (two of seven patients) in those randomized to a transanal tube and 82.4% (14 of 17) in those without (p = 0.021). The 30-day mortality after LAR was nil. In the double-staple technique subgroup, a quicker resumption of gastrointestinal motility manifested by a smaller ratio of patients with flatus > postoperative day (POD) 3 (p = 0.019) and a smaller ratio of poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 (p < 0.001) was associated with use of a transanal tube. Additionally, patients with a tube appeared to have a lower rectal resting pressure by POD 3 (4.0 ± 2.2 vs. 5.0 ± 2.2 kPa; p < 0.001) or POD 5 (4.3 ± 2.3 vs. 5.6 ± 2.3 kPa; p < 0.001), compared to the resting pressures patients without the device, respectively. A shorter length of hospital stay was associated with use of a transanal tube both in the double-staple technique subgroup (p < 0.001) and the handsewn technique subgroup (p = 0.011). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that body mass index > 25 kg/$ m^{2} $ and a poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 were found to be independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in the low anastomosis subgroup. Conclusions The presence of a transanal tube is effective and safe in decreasing the rate of clinically significant anastomotic leaks and in mitigating the clinical consequences of leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer with the technique of total mesorectal excision and double-staple anastomosis. The potential benefits of transanal tube placement are multifactorial, including drainage, reduction of endoluminal pressure, and promotion of gastrointestinal motility. Obesity and poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 are independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in patients with low anastomosis. Anastomotic Leakage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Total Mesorectal Excision (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gastrointestinal Motility (dpeaa)DE-He213 Handsewn Anastomosis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Handsewn Technique (dpeaa)DE-He213 Zhang, Wen-bo aut Jiang, Peng-cheng aut Bu, Xue-feng aut Yan, Qun aut Li, Hua aut Zhang, Yong-jun aut Yu, Feng aut Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery Springer-Verlag, 1996 35(2011), 6 vom: 25. März (DE-627)SPR003391159 nnns volume:35 year:2011 number:6 day:25 month:03 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 35 2011 6 25 03 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3 doi (DE-627)SPR003433323 (SPR)s00268-011-1053-3-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Xiao, Liang verfasserin aut Can Transanal Tube Placement after Anterior Resection for Rectal Carcinoma Reduce Anastomotic Leakage Rate? A Single-institution Prospective Randomized Study 2011 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2011 Background Anastomotic leakage is the most significant complication after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal carcinoma, and it is the major cause of postoperative mortality and morbidity. The objective of the present study was to investigate whether the use of a transanal tube as an alternative endoluminal diversion technique for rectal carcinoma can reduce the 30-day leakage rate after LAR. Methods From June 2003 to December 2009, a total of 398 patients were randomized to a transanal tube or not after LAR. Inclusion criteria for randomization were biopsy-proven carcinoma of the rectum located ≤15 cm above the anal verge, measured with a rigid rectoscope; age ≥ 18 years; informed consent; ability to understand the study information; estimated survival of >6 months; anterior resection for the lesion; final negative air leakage test; intact anastomotic stapler rings; and the absence of major intraoperative adverse events. Results Patient demographics, tumor size and location, Duke’s stage, preoperative co-morbidity, and operative details were comparable between the two groups in general analysis and subgroup analysis (double-staple technique and handsewn technique). The overall rate of symptomatic leakage was 6.78% (27 of 398 patients). Patients randomized to a transanal tube (n = 200) had leakage in 4.0% (8 of 200 patients) and those without a tube (n = 198) in 9.6% (19 of 198 patients) (p = 0.026). With regard to the double-staple technique subgroup, 3.7% (7 of 188) patients with a tube presented with a symptomatic anastomotic leakage, compared with 9.3% (17 of 182) of those without a tube (p = 0.028). Of the patients with anastomotic leakage in the double-staple technique subgroup, the need for urgent abdominal reoperation was 28.6% (two of seven patients) in those randomized to a transanal tube and 82.4% (14 of 17) in those without (p = 0.021). The 30-day mortality after LAR was nil. In the double-staple technique subgroup, a quicker resumption of gastrointestinal motility manifested by a smaller ratio of patients with flatus > postoperative day (POD) 3 (p = 0.019) and a smaller ratio of poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 (p < 0.001) was associated with use of a transanal tube. Additionally, patients with a tube appeared to have a lower rectal resting pressure by POD 3 (4.0 ± 2.2 vs. 5.0 ± 2.2 kPa; p < 0.001) or POD 5 (4.3 ± 2.3 vs. 5.6 ± 2.3 kPa; p < 0.001), compared to the resting pressures patients without the device, respectively. A shorter length of hospital stay was associated with use of a transanal tube both in the double-staple technique subgroup (p < 0.001) and the handsewn technique subgroup (p = 0.011). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that body mass index > 25 kg/$ m^{2} $ and a poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 were found to be independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in the low anastomosis subgroup. Conclusions The presence of a transanal tube is effective and safe in decreasing the rate of clinically significant anastomotic leaks and in mitigating the clinical consequences of leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer with the technique of total mesorectal excision and double-staple anastomosis. The potential benefits of transanal tube placement are multifactorial, including drainage, reduction of endoluminal pressure, and promotion of gastrointestinal motility. Obesity and poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 are independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in patients with low anastomosis. Anastomotic Leakage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Total Mesorectal Excision (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gastrointestinal Motility (dpeaa)DE-He213 Handsewn Anastomosis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Handsewn Technique (dpeaa)DE-He213 Zhang, Wen-bo aut Jiang, Peng-cheng aut Bu, Xue-feng aut Yan, Qun aut Li, Hua aut Zhang, Yong-jun aut Yu, Feng aut Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery Springer-Verlag, 1996 35(2011), 6 vom: 25. März (DE-627)SPR003391159 nnns volume:35 year:2011 number:6 day:25 month:03 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 35 2011 6 25 03 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery 35(2011), 6 vom: 25. März volume:35 year:2011 number:6 day:25 month:03 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery 35(2011), 6 vom: 25. März volume:35 year:2011 number:6 day:25 month:03 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Anastomotic Leakage Total Mesorectal Excision Gastrointestinal Motility Handsewn Anastomosis Handsewn Technique |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
World Journal of Surgery |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Xiao, Liang @@aut@@ Zhang, Wen-bo @@aut@@ Jiang, Peng-cheng @@aut@@ Bu, Xue-feng @@aut@@ Yan, Qun @@aut@@ Li, Hua @@aut@@ Zhang, Yong-jun @@aut@@ Yu, Feng @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2011-03-25T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
SPR003391159 |
| id |
SPR003433323 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR003433323</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230328140046.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201001s2011 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR003433323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s00268-011-1053-3-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Xiao, Liang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Can Transanal Tube Placement after Anterior Resection for Rectal Carcinoma Reduce Anastomotic Leakage Rate? A Single-institution Prospective Randomized Study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Anastomotic leakage is the most significant complication after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal carcinoma, and it is the major cause of postoperative mortality and morbidity. The objective of the present study was to investigate whether the use of a transanal tube as an alternative endoluminal diversion technique for rectal carcinoma can reduce the 30-day leakage rate after LAR. Methods From June 2003 to December 2009, a total of 398 patients were randomized to a transanal tube or not after LAR. Inclusion criteria for randomization were biopsy-proven carcinoma of the rectum located ≤15 cm above the anal verge, measured with a rigid rectoscope; age ≥ 18 years; informed consent; ability to understand the study information; estimated survival of >6 months; anterior resection for the lesion; final negative air leakage test; intact anastomotic stapler rings; and the absence of major intraoperative adverse events. Results Patient demographics, tumor size and location, Duke’s stage, preoperative co-morbidity, and operative details were comparable between the two groups in general analysis and subgroup analysis (double-staple technique and handsewn technique). The overall rate of symptomatic leakage was 6.78% (27 of 398 patients). Patients randomized to a transanal tube (n = 200) had leakage in 4.0% (8 of 200 patients) and those without a tube (n = 198) in 9.6% (19 of 198 patients) (p = 0.026). With regard to the double-staple technique subgroup, 3.7% (7 of 188) patients with a tube presented with a symptomatic anastomotic leakage, compared with 9.3% (17 of 182) of those without a tube (p = 0.028). Of the patients with anastomotic leakage in the double-staple technique subgroup, the need for urgent abdominal reoperation was 28.6% (two of seven patients) in those randomized to a transanal tube and 82.4% (14 of 17) in those without (p = 0.021). The 30-day mortality after LAR was nil. In the double-staple technique subgroup, a quicker resumption of gastrointestinal motility manifested by a smaller ratio of patients with flatus > postoperative day (POD) 3 (p = 0.019) and a smaller ratio of poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 (p < 0.001) was associated with use of a transanal tube. Additionally, patients with a tube appeared to have a lower rectal resting pressure by POD 3 (4.0 ± 2.2 vs. 5.0 ± 2.2 kPa; p < 0.001) or POD 5 (4.3 ± 2.3 vs. 5.6 ± 2.3 kPa; p < 0.001), compared to the resting pressures patients without the device, respectively. A shorter length of hospital stay was associated with use of a transanal tube both in the double-staple technique subgroup (p < 0.001) and the handsewn technique subgroup (p = 0.011). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that body mass index > 25 kg/$ m^{2} $ and a poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 were found to be independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in the low anastomosis subgroup. Conclusions The presence of a transanal tube is effective and safe in decreasing the rate of clinically significant anastomotic leaks and in mitigating the clinical consequences of leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer with the technique of total mesorectal excision and double-staple anastomosis. The potential benefits of transanal tube placement are multifactorial, including drainage, reduction of endoluminal pressure, and promotion of gastrointestinal motility. Obesity and poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 are independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in patients with low anastomosis.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Anastomotic Leakage</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Total Mesorectal Excision</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Gastrointestinal Motility</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Handsewn Anastomosis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Handsewn Technique</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zhang, Wen-bo</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jiang, Peng-cheng</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bu, Xue-feng</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yan, Qun</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li, Hua</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zhang, Yong-jun</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yu, Feng</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">World Journal of Surgery</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer-Verlag, 1996</subfield><subfield code="g">35(2011), 6 vom: 25. März</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)SPR003391159</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:35</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2011</subfield><subfield code="g">number:6</subfield><subfield code="g">day:25</subfield><subfield code="g">month:03</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">35</subfield><subfield code="j">2011</subfield><subfield code="e">6</subfield><subfield code="b">25</subfield><subfield code="c">03</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Xiao, Liang |
| spellingShingle |
Xiao, Liang misc Anastomotic Leakage misc Total Mesorectal Excision misc Gastrointestinal Motility misc Handsewn Anastomosis misc Handsewn Technique Can Transanal Tube Placement after Anterior Resection for Rectal Carcinoma Reduce Anastomotic Leakage Rate? A Single-institution Prospective Randomized Study |
| authorStr |
Xiao, Liang |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)SPR003391159 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut |
| collection |
springer |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| topic_title |
Can Transanal Tube Placement after Anterior Resection for Rectal Carcinoma Reduce Anastomotic Leakage Rate? A Single-institution Prospective Randomized Study Anastomotic Leakage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Total Mesorectal Excision (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gastrointestinal Motility (dpeaa)DE-He213 Handsewn Anastomosis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Handsewn Technique (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
| topic |
misc Anastomotic Leakage misc Total Mesorectal Excision misc Gastrointestinal Motility misc Handsewn Anastomosis misc Handsewn Technique |
| topic_unstemmed |
misc Anastomotic Leakage misc Total Mesorectal Excision misc Gastrointestinal Motility misc Handsewn Anastomosis misc Handsewn Technique |
| topic_browse |
misc Anastomotic Leakage misc Total Mesorectal Excision misc Gastrointestinal Motility misc Handsewn Anastomosis misc Handsewn Technique |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
World Journal of Surgery |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
SPR003391159 |
| hierarchy_top_title |
World Journal of Surgery |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)SPR003391159 |
| title |
Can Transanal Tube Placement after Anterior Resection for Rectal Carcinoma Reduce Anastomotic Leakage Rate? A Single-institution Prospective Randomized Study |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR003433323 (SPR)s00268-011-1053-3-e |
| title_full |
Can Transanal Tube Placement after Anterior Resection for Rectal Carcinoma Reduce Anastomotic Leakage Rate? A Single-institution Prospective Randomized Study |
| author_sort |
Xiao, Liang |
| journal |
World Journal of Surgery |
| journalStr |
World Journal of Surgery |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2011 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| author_browse |
Xiao, Liang Zhang, Wen-bo Jiang, Peng-cheng Bu, Xue-feng Yan, Qun Li, Hua Zhang, Yong-jun Yu, Feng |
| container_volume |
35 |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Xiao, Liang |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3 |
| title_sort |
can transanal tube placement after anterior resection for rectal carcinoma reduce anastomotic leakage rate? a single-institution prospective randomized study |
| title_auth |
Can Transanal Tube Placement after Anterior Resection for Rectal Carcinoma Reduce Anastomotic Leakage Rate? A Single-institution Prospective Randomized Study |
| abstract |
Background Anastomotic leakage is the most significant complication after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal carcinoma, and it is the major cause of postoperative mortality and morbidity. The objective of the present study was to investigate whether the use of a transanal tube as an alternative endoluminal diversion technique for rectal carcinoma can reduce the 30-day leakage rate after LAR. Methods From June 2003 to December 2009, a total of 398 patients were randomized to a transanal tube or not after LAR. Inclusion criteria for randomization were biopsy-proven carcinoma of the rectum located ≤15 cm above the anal verge, measured with a rigid rectoscope; age ≥ 18 years; informed consent; ability to understand the study information; estimated survival of >6 months; anterior resection for the lesion; final negative air leakage test; intact anastomotic stapler rings; and the absence of major intraoperative adverse events. Results Patient demographics, tumor size and location, Duke’s stage, preoperative co-morbidity, and operative details were comparable between the two groups in general analysis and subgroup analysis (double-staple technique and handsewn technique). The overall rate of symptomatic leakage was 6.78% (27 of 398 patients). Patients randomized to a transanal tube (n = 200) had leakage in 4.0% (8 of 200 patients) and those without a tube (n = 198) in 9.6% (19 of 198 patients) (p = 0.026). With regard to the double-staple technique subgroup, 3.7% (7 of 188) patients with a tube presented with a symptomatic anastomotic leakage, compared with 9.3% (17 of 182) of those without a tube (p = 0.028). Of the patients with anastomotic leakage in the double-staple technique subgroup, the need for urgent abdominal reoperation was 28.6% (two of seven patients) in those randomized to a transanal tube and 82.4% (14 of 17) in those without (p = 0.021). The 30-day mortality after LAR was nil. In the double-staple technique subgroup, a quicker resumption of gastrointestinal motility manifested by a smaller ratio of patients with flatus > postoperative day (POD) 3 (p = 0.019) and a smaller ratio of poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 (p < 0.001) was associated with use of a transanal tube. Additionally, patients with a tube appeared to have a lower rectal resting pressure by POD 3 (4.0 ± 2.2 vs. 5.0 ± 2.2 kPa; p < 0.001) or POD 5 (4.3 ± 2.3 vs. 5.6 ± 2.3 kPa; p < 0.001), compared to the resting pressures patients without the device, respectively. A shorter length of hospital stay was associated with use of a transanal tube both in the double-staple technique subgroup (p < 0.001) and the handsewn technique subgroup (p = 0.011). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that body mass index > 25 kg/$ m^{2} $ and a poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 were found to be independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in the low anastomosis subgroup. Conclusions The presence of a transanal tube is effective and safe in decreasing the rate of clinically significant anastomotic leaks and in mitigating the clinical consequences of leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer with the technique of total mesorectal excision and double-staple anastomosis. The potential benefits of transanal tube placement are multifactorial, including drainage, reduction of endoluminal pressure, and promotion of gastrointestinal motility. Obesity and poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 are independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in patients with low anastomosis. © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2011 |
| abstractGer |
Background Anastomotic leakage is the most significant complication after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal carcinoma, and it is the major cause of postoperative mortality and morbidity. The objective of the present study was to investigate whether the use of a transanal tube as an alternative endoluminal diversion technique for rectal carcinoma can reduce the 30-day leakage rate after LAR. Methods From June 2003 to December 2009, a total of 398 patients were randomized to a transanal tube or not after LAR. Inclusion criteria for randomization were biopsy-proven carcinoma of the rectum located ≤15 cm above the anal verge, measured with a rigid rectoscope; age ≥ 18 years; informed consent; ability to understand the study information; estimated survival of >6 months; anterior resection for the lesion; final negative air leakage test; intact anastomotic stapler rings; and the absence of major intraoperative adverse events. Results Patient demographics, tumor size and location, Duke’s stage, preoperative co-morbidity, and operative details were comparable between the two groups in general analysis and subgroup analysis (double-staple technique and handsewn technique). The overall rate of symptomatic leakage was 6.78% (27 of 398 patients). Patients randomized to a transanal tube (n = 200) had leakage in 4.0% (8 of 200 patients) and those without a tube (n = 198) in 9.6% (19 of 198 patients) (p = 0.026). With regard to the double-staple technique subgroup, 3.7% (7 of 188) patients with a tube presented with a symptomatic anastomotic leakage, compared with 9.3% (17 of 182) of those without a tube (p = 0.028). Of the patients with anastomotic leakage in the double-staple technique subgroup, the need for urgent abdominal reoperation was 28.6% (two of seven patients) in those randomized to a transanal tube and 82.4% (14 of 17) in those without (p = 0.021). The 30-day mortality after LAR was nil. In the double-staple technique subgroup, a quicker resumption of gastrointestinal motility manifested by a smaller ratio of patients with flatus > postoperative day (POD) 3 (p = 0.019) and a smaller ratio of poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 (p < 0.001) was associated with use of a transanal tube. Additionally, patients with a tube appeared to have a lower rectal resting pressure by POD 3 (4.0 ± 2.2 vs. 5.0 ± 2.2 kPa; p < 0.001) or POD 5 (4.3 ± 2.3 vs. 5.6 ± 2.3 kPa; p < 0.001), compared to the resting pressures patients without the device, respectively. A shorter length of hospital stay was associated with use of a transanal tube both in the double-staple technique subgroup (p < 0.001) and the handsewn technique subgroup (p = 0.011). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that body mass index > 25 kg/$ m^{2} $ and a poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 were found to be independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in the low anastomosis subgroup. Conclusions The presence of a transanal tube is effective and safe in decreasing the rate of clinically significant anastomotic leaks and in mitigating the clinical consequences of leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer with the technique of total mesorectal excision and double-staple anastomosis. The potential benefits of transanal tube placement are multifactorial, including drainage, reduction of endoluminal pressure, and promotion of gastrointestinal motility. Obesity and poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 are independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in patients with low anastomosis. © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2011 |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Background Anastomotic leakage is the most significant complication after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal carcinoma, and it is the major cause of postoperative mortality and morbidity. The objective of the present study was to investigate whether the use of a transanal tube as an alternative endoluminal diversion technique for rectal carcinoma can reduce the 30-day leakage rate after LAR. Methods From June 2003 to December 2009, a total of 398 patients were randomized to a transanal tube or not after LAR. Inclusion criteria for randomization were biopsy-proven carcinoma of the rectum located ≤15 cm above the anal verge, measured with a rigid rectoscope; age ≥ 18 years; informed consent; ability to understand the study information; estimated survival of >6 months; anterior resection for the lesion; final negative air leakage test; intact anastomotic stapler rings; and the absence of major intraoperative adverse events. Results Patient demographics, tumor size and location, Duke’s stage, preoperative co-morbidity, and operative details were comparable between the two groups in general analysis and subgroup analysis (double-staple technique and handsewn technique). The overall rate of symptomatic leakage was 6.78% (27 of 398 patients). Patients randomized to a transanal tube (n = 200) had leakage in 4.0% (8 of 200 patients) and those without a tube (n = 198) in 9.6% (19 of 198 patients) (p = 0.026). With regard to the double-staple technique subgroup, 3.7% (7 of 188) patients with a tube presented with a symptomatic anastomotic leakage, compared with 9.3% (17 of 182) of those without a tube (p = 0.028). Of the patients with anastomotic leakage in the double-staple technique subgroup, the need for urgent abdominal reoperation was 28.6% (two of seven patients) in those randomized to a transanal tube and 82.4% (14 of 17) in those without (p = 0.021). The 30-day mortality after LAR was nil. In the double-staple technique subgroup, a quicker resumption of gastrointestinal motility manifested by a smaller ratio of patients with flatus > postoperative day (POD) 3 (p = 0.019) and a smaller ratio of poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 (p < 0.001) was associated with use of a transanal tube. Additionally, patients with a tube appeared to have a lower rectal resting pressure by POD 3 (4.0 ± 2.2 vs. 5.0 ± 2.2 kPa; p < 0.001) or POD 5 (4.3 ± 2.3 vs. 5.6 ± 2.3 kPa; p < 0.001), compared to the resting pressures patients without the device, respectively. A shorter length of hospital stay was associated with use of a transanal tube both in the double-staple technique subgroup (p < 0.001) and the handsewn technique subgroup (p = 0.011). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that body mass index > 25 kg/$ m^{2} $ and a poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 were found to be independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in the low anastomosis subgroup. Conclusions The presence of a transanal tube is effective and safe in decreasing the rate of clinically significant anastomotic leaks and in mitigating the clinical consequences of leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer with the technique of total mesorectal excision and double-staple anastomosis. The potential benefits of transanal tube placement are multifactorial, including drainage, reduction of endoluminal pressure, and promotion of gastrointestinal motility. Obesity and poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 are independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in patients with low anastomosis. © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2011 |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER |
| container_issue |
6 |
| title_short |
Can Transanal Tube Placement after Anterior Resection for Rectal Carcinoma Reduce Anastomotic Leakage Rate? A Single-institution Prospective Randomized Study |
| url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Zhang, Wen-bo Jiang, Peng-cheng Bu, Xue-feng Yan, Qun Li, Hua Zhang, Yong-jun Yu, Feng |
| author2Str |
Zhang, Wen-bo Jiang, Peng-cheng Bu, Xue-feng Yan, Qun Li, Hua Zhang, Yong-jun Yu, Feng |
| ppnlink |
SPR003391159 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
c |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3 |
| up_date |
2024-07-03T19:28:06.808Z |
| _version_ |
1803587301476925440 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR003433323</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230328140046.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201001s2011 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR003433323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s00268-011-1053-3-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Xiao, Liang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Can Transanal Tube Placement after Anterior Resection for Rectal Carcinoma Reduce Anastomotic Leakage Rate? A Single-institution Prospective Randomized Study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Anastomotic leakage is the most significant complication after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal carcinoma, and it is the major cause of postoperative mortality and morbidity. The objective of the present study was to investigate whether the use of a transanal tube as an alternative endoluminal diversion technique for rectal carcinoma can reduce the 30-day leakage rate after LAR. Methods From June 2003 to December 2009, a total of 398 patients were randomized to a transanal tube or not after LAR. Inclusion criteria for randomization were biopsy-proven carcinoma of the rectum located ≤15 cm above the anal verge, measured with a rigid rectoscope; age ≥ 18 years; informed consent; ability to understand the study information; estimated survival of >6 months; anterior resection for the lesion; final negative air leakage test; intact anastomotic stapler rings; and the absence of major intraoperative adverse events. Results Patient demographics, tumor size and location, Duke’s stage, preoperative co-morbidity, and operative details were comparable between the two groups in general analysis and subgroup analysis (double-staple technique and handsewn technique). The overall rate of symptomatic leakage was 6.78% (27 of 398 patients). Patients randomized to a transanal tube (n = 200) had leakage in 4.0% (8 of 200 patients) and those without a tube (n = 198) in 9.6% (19 of 198 patients) (p = 0.026). With regard to the double-staple technique subgroup, 3.7% (7 of 188) patients with a tube presented with a symptomatic anastomotic leakage, compared with 9.3% (17 of 182) of those without a tube (p = 0.028). Of the patients with anastomotic leakage in the double-staple technique subgroup, the need for urgent abdominal reoperation was 28.6% (two of seven patients) in those randomized to a transanal tube and 82.4% (14 of 17) in those without (p = 0.021). The 30-day mortality after LAR was nil. In the double-staple technique subgroup, a quicker resumption of gastrointestinal motility manifested by a smaller ratio of patients with flatus > postoperative day (POD) 3 (p = 0.019) and a smaller ratio of poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 (p < 0.001) was associated with use of a transanal tube. Additionally, patients with a tube appeared to have a lower rectal resting pressure by POD 3 (4.0 ± 2.2 vs. 5.0 ± 2.2 kPa; p < 0.001) or POD 5 (4.3 ± 2.3 vs. 5.6 ± 2.3 kPa; p < 0.001), compared to the resting pressures patients without the device, respectively. A shorter length of hospital stay was associated with use of a transanal tube both in the double-staple technique subgroup (p < 0.001) and the handsewn technique subgroup (p = 0.011). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that body mass index > 25 kg/$ m^{2} $ and a poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 were found to be independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in the low anastomosis subgroup. Conclusions The presence of a transanal tube is effective and safe in decreasing the rate of clinically significant anastomotic leaks and in mitigating the clinical consequences of leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer with the technique of total mesorectal excision and double-staple anastomosis. The potential benefits of transanal tube placement are multifactorial, including drainage, reduction of endoluminal pressure, and promotion of gastrointestinal motility. Obesity and poor gastrointestinal electromyogram on POD 3 are independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage in patients with low anastomosis.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Anastomotic Leakage</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Total Mesorectal Excision</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Gastrointestinal Motility</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Handsewn Anastomosis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Handsewn Technique</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zhang, Wen-bo</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jiang, Peng-cheng</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bu, Xue-feng</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yan, Qun</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li, Hua</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zhang, Yong-jun</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yu, Feng</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">World Journal of Surgery</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer-Verlag, 1996</subfield><subfield code="g">35(2011), 6 vom: 25. März</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)SPR003391159</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:35</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2011</subfield><subfield code="g">number:6</subfield><subfield code="g">day:25</subfield><subfield code="g">month:03</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1053-3</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">35</subfield><subfield code="j">2011</subfield><subfield code="e">6</subfield><subfield code="b">25</subfield><subfield code="c">03</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.399728 |