Gastrointestinal leakage is one of the most serious post surgical complications and is a major source of mortality and morbidity. The insertion of a covered self-expandable metal stent could be a treatment option in selected cases. However, it is unclear how long the stent should be retained to achieve complete sealing, and membrane-covered stents have the problem of a high migration rate. We observed four cases of postsurgical leakage following the primary closure of a duodenal perforation, esophagojejunostomy, and esophagogastrostomy, each of which was successfully managed by the temporary placement of covered stents. In all cases, the optimal time of stent removal could be estimated by the markedly decreased amount of drainage, the lack of leakage observed on radiocontrast images, and the endoscopic findings. In this case series, all of the stents could be removed within 7 weeks. For those cases with a high risk of migration, stents with temporary fixations to earlobes and/or partially uncovered proximal flanges were used. These results suggest that the application of a covered stent could be a treatment option for various gastrointestinal leaks after surgery, particularly when the defect cannot be sealed by conservative care and the leakage has good external drainage.
Anastomotic Leak ; Drainage ; Stents

The double stapling technique has become an established reconstruction method for patients undergoing low anterior resection. We have used a modification of the conventional technique in which the lower rectal segment is closed with a linear stapler (TA-55) and the anastomosis is performed by using the circular EEA(CEEA) instrument across the linear staple line of the double stapling technique. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prophylactic effect of a loop ileostomy preventing anastomotic leakage. Stapled colorectal anastomosis and stapled coloanal anastomosis in 60 patients forms the basis for the report. The sixty patients were treated by using the double stapling technique either with or without a loop ileostomy. This review presents the advantages and disadvantages of a loop ileostomy for coloanal anastomosis. Postoperative anastomotic leakage in the double stapling technique group occurred in 5 (10.6%)cases of the total 31 cases while in the double stapling technique with loop ileostomy group, it allowed 1(3.4%) of the total 29 cases. This study suggests that the double stapling technique with a loop ileostomy is more effective than the double stapling technique without a loop ileostomy in preventing anastomotic leakage. The addition of a loop ileostomy to protect the low anastomosis might also be expected to influence anastomotic healing.
Anastomotic Leak ; Humans ; Ileostomy ; Rectal Neoplasms*

PURPOSE: This study is to compare the rate and pattern of anastomotic leakage (AL) for rectal cancer after laparoscopic vs. conventional open surgery at high and low rectal anastomosis and to evaluate whether the number of linear staples used for distal rectal resection is related to AL in laparoscopic group. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-seven patients who underwent a curative resection for rectal cancer between March 2002 and February 2006 were studied retrospectively (107 laparoscopic, 90 open). The proportions of patients with anastomosis above vs. below 5 cm from AV were not different between the laparoscopic and the open groups; (above/below: 54/53 and 41/49, respectively, P=0.57). The protective stoma rate, the overall rate of AL, the rate of AL according to the height of the anastomosis, and the number of distal linear staples were evaluated for both groups. RESULTS: Clinical AL occurred in 11 of 107 patients (10.3%) for the laparoscopic group and in 5 of 90 patients (5.6%) for the open group. The rates of AL in patients without protective stoma were not significantly different for high rectal anastomosis (6.0% for laparoscopic vs. 2.6% for open, P= 0.63) and for low rectal anastomosis (25.8% for laparoscopic vs. 12.1% for open, P=0.21). The risk of AL was 4.9 times higher when 3 linear staples were used than when 2 linear staples were used in the laparoscopic group. CONCLUSIONS: There was no statistical difference in AL between the laparoscopic group and the open group. The rate of AL could be reduced by using fewer linear staples for distal rectal resection in the laparoscopic group.
Anastomotic Leak* ; Humans ; Rectal Neoplasms* ; Retrospective Studies*

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the efficacy of a water-soluble contrast enema (WCE) in predicting anastomotic healing after a low anterior resection (LAR). METHODS: Between January 2000 and March 2012, 682 consecutive patients underwent a LAR or an ultra-low anterior resection (uLAR) and were followed up for leakage. Clinical leakage was established by using physical and laboratory findings. Radiologic leakage was identified by using retrograde WCE imaging. Abnormal radiologic features on WCE were categorized into four types based on morphology: namely, dendritic, horny, saccular, and serpentine. RESULTS: Of the 126 patients who received a concurrent diverting stoma, only two (1.6%) suffered clinical leakage due to pelvic abscess. However, 37 patients (6.7%) in the other group suffered clinical leakage following fecal diversion (P = 0.027). Among the 163 patients who received a fecal diversion, 20 showed radiologic leakage on the first WCE (eight with and 12 without a concurrent diversion); 16 had abnormal features continuously until the final WCE while four patients healed spontaneously. Eleven of the 16 patients (69%), by their surgeon's decision, underwent a stoma restoration based on clinical findings (2/3 dendritic, 3/4 horny, 5/7 saccular, 1/2 serpentine). After stoma reversal, only 2 of the 11 (19%) complained of complications related to the rectal anastomosis. CONCLUSION: WCE is helpful for detecting radiologic leakage before stoma restoration, especially in patients suffering clinical leakage after an uLAR. However, surgeons appear to opt for stoma restoration despite the persistent existence of radiologic leakage in cases with particular features on the WCE.
Abscess ; Anastomotic Leak ; Colorectal Surgery ; Enema* ; Humans ; Rectal Neoplasms*

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of anastomotic complication is related to anastomotic procedure or site in esophageal cancer operation. We studied the anastomotic leakage and stricture related to the anastomotic procedure &site in patients who received the esophageal resection and reconstruction for esophageal cancer. MATERIAL AND METHOD: The anastomotic procedure, site and complication of 321 patients who received the esophageal reconstruction from August 1993 to May 2003 were investigated. Mean age was 64.5+/-4.9 (37~94) years, 300 patients (93.5%) were male and 21 patients were female (6.5%). RESULT: There were 7 anastomotic leakages (2.2%) and no difference in anastomotic site (cervical anastomosis 4.1%, thoracic anastomosis 1.6%) and procedure (stapler technique 1.6%, semi-staple technique 9.1%, hand-sewn technique 0.0%). There were 52 anastomotic strictures (16.2%), differences in sites (cervical anastomosis 2.7%, thoracic anastomosis 20.2%) (p <0.001) and procedure (stapler technique 20.0%, semi-stapler technique 3.0%, hand-sewn technique 4.7%). And the stapler technique showed higher stricture rate (p <0.001). CONCLUSION: Anastomotic technique was less related to anastomotic leakage in esophageal reconstruction for esophageal cancer. However, stapler technique had higher stricture rate than other techniques. Therefore, we suggest that the anastomotic technique be improved to reduce anastomotic stricture.
Anastomotic Leak* ; Constriction, Pathologic* ; Esophageal Neoplasms* ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Prevalence

Anastomotic leakage following rectal resection is a serious and fearful complication, and may cause presacral abscess and/or peritonitis. To our knowledge, massive hematochezia secondary to presacral abscess caused by anastomotic leakage has not yet been reported in the literature. We observed this rare and life-threatening complication in three patients who were successfully treated with a simple but effective transanal gauze packing technique.
Abscess* ; Anastomotic Leak* ; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage ; Hemorrhage* ; Humans ; Peritonitis

It would be possible to manage the intestinal anastomotic failure with intraluminal stenting, but its reports are very rare. We experienced a effective and dramatic improvement of esophago-jejunal anastomotic leak in a esophageal and gastric double cancer patient with intraluminal stenting. The intraluminal stenting was tried at the 28th postoperative day and the anastomotic leak and inflammatory signs were disappeared about 3 weeks later. Postoperative 11th months now, the stent was moved about 1 cm downward but not changed further, and he enjoys regular diet without any problems. And we think the stenting would be helful with some limitations in the intestinal anastomotic leak patient.
Anastomotic Leak ; Diet ; Esophageal Neoplasms ; Fistula ; Humans ; Stents*

Gastrointestinal leaks and fistulae are grave conditions associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Expandable stents have shown significant success in the management of leaks and fistulae, providing an efficacious minimally invasive approach in patients who are frequently poor surgical candidates. Most reports, however, are limited by their small size or the pooling of different stents, techniques and locations of leaks and fistulae. Despite the numerous alterations in stent design, migration remains the pivotal drawback of this technique. In this article, we review the current status of expandable stents in the management of gastrointestinal leaks and fistulae, available anti-migration techniques and evolving innovations in stent design.
Anastomotic Leak ; Esophageal Fistula ; Fistula* ; Gastric Fistula ; Humans ; Mortality ; Stents*

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine the incidence and duration of postoperative pneumoperitoneum on plain radiographs and to identify the radiologic findings associated with anastomotic leakage. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on plain radiographs of 384 patients who underwent intra-abdominal anastomoses between March 2005 and December 2008. RESULTS: Of the 384 patients, 93 patients (24.2%) had postoperative pneumoperitoneums. Of the 93 patients, 86 patients (92.5%) had physiologic pneumoperitoneums and 7 patients (7.5%) had pneumoperitoneums associated with anastomotic leakage. The initial air height was significantly greater in the leakage group than the physiologic air group (12.16 +/- 7.65 mm vs. 7.71 +/- 5.08 mm, P = 0.04). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the initial height of free air for anastomotic leakage was 0.69 (95% confidence interval, 0.59 to 0.78). The best cut-off point was 11.7 mm. The height of the pneumoperitoneum increased with time in the leakage group. Ileus was significantly more prevalent in the leakage group than the physiologic air group (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Postoperative pneumoperitoneum is a common phenomenon after abdominal surgery. An initial air height >11.7 mm, increasing air height over time, and the presence of ileus on plain radiographs suggest a high likelihood of anastomotic leakage.
Anastomotic Leak ; Humans ; Ileus ; Incidence ; Pneumoperitoneum ; Retrospective Studies ; ROC Curve

PURPOSE: The study aimed to investigate the complications accompanying stoma take-down and to elucidate the significant factors associated with complications. METHODS: We recruited 341 patients who underwent stoma take-down in our hospital between January 2000 and December 2005. Data on various complications during this procedure, i.e., wound infection, prolonged ileus, and anastomotic leakage, were collected with respect to patient- and operation-associated parameters. RESULTS: Complications of stoma take-down developed in 72 (21.1%) patients: 53 (20.3%) patients in a loop ileosotmy, 10 (21.3%) patients in a loop colostomy, and 9 (27.3%) patients in a Hartmann colostomy, The overall complication rate was significantly associated with the urgency of the primary operation (elective vs. emergent, 17.8% vs. 29%, P=0.017), and with the operation time (< or =80 min vs. > 80 min, 16.5% vs. 29.3%, P=0.005). Among the complications, ileus developed in 46 (13.5%) patients, wound infection in 17 (5.0%) patients, and anastomotic leakage in 5 (1.5%) patients. Wound infection was related to the type of stoma between a loop ileostomy and a Hartmann colostomy (3.5% vs. 12.1%; P=0.014), but no other factors were associated with other complications. CONCLUSIONS: There were significant differences in overall complications in relation to urgency of the primary operation and the operation time, but there was no statistical difference in complications between a loop ileostomy and a loop colostomy take- down groups. The significance of these factors appears to be reduced with accurate surgical technique and patient care.
Anastomotic Leak ; Colostomy ; Humans ; Ileostomy ; Ileus ; Patient Care ; Wound Infection