Intersphincteric resection (ISR) surgery increases the rate of anal sphincter preservation in patients with ultra-low rectal cancers. However, the anastomotic site of ISR surgery is at risk for structural healing complications such as anastomotic leakage, anastomotic dehiscence, secondary anastomotic stenosis, chronic presacral sinus, rectovaginal fistula, and rectourethral fistula, which can lead to a persistent defunctioning ostomy or a secondary permanent colostomy. This article systematically describes the preoperative high-risk factors and characteristics of anastomotic site structural healing complications after ISR surgery, as well as the management of the anastomotic site during various stages including hospitalization, from discharge to one month after surgery, from one month after surgery to before stoma reversal, and after stoma reversal. This is to provide a clearer understanding of the risks associated with the anastomotic site at different stages of the healing process and to timely detect and actively manage related complications, thereby reducing the rate of permanent colostomy and truly achieving the dual goals of "survival benefit" and "quality of life improvement" in ISR surgery.
Female ; Humans ; Anal Canal/surgery* ; Quality of Life ; Anastomosis, Surgical/adverse effects* ; Anastomotic Leak/etiology* ; Rectal Neoplasms/complications* ; Retrospective Studies

Objective: To assess the effectiveness of transanal drainage tube (TDT) in reducing the incidence of anastomotic leak following anterior resection in patients with rectal cancer. Methods: We conducted a systematic search for relevant studies published from inception to October 2022 across multiple databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4 software. The primary outcomes included total incidence of anastomotic leak, grade B and C anastomotic leak rates, reoperation rate, anastomotic bleeding rate, and overall complication rate. Results: Three randomized controlled trials involving 1115 patients (559 patients in the TDT group and 556 in the non-TDT group) were included. Meta-analysis showed that the total incidences of anastomotic leak and of grade B anastomotic leak were 5.5% (31/559) and 4.5% (25/559), respectively, in the TDT group and 7.9% (44/556) and 3.8% (21/556), respectively, in the non-TDT group. These differences are not statistically significant (P=0.120, P=0.560, respectively). Compared with the non-TDT group, the TDT group had a lower incidence of grade C anastomotic leak (1.6% [7/559] vs. 4.5% [25/556]) and reoperation rate (0.9% [5/559] vs. 4.3% [24/556]), but a higher incidence of anastomotic bleeding (8.2% [23/279] vs. 3.6% [10/276]). These differences were statistically significant (P=0.003, P=0.001, P=0.030, respectively). The overall complication rate was 26.5%(74/279) in the TDT group and 27.2% (75/276) in the non-TDT group. These differences are not statistically significant (P=0.860). Conclusions: TDT did not significantly reduce the total incidence of anastomotic leak but may have potential clinical benefits in preventing grade C anastomotic leak. Notably, placement of TDT may increase the anastomotic bleeding rate.
Humans ; Anastomotic Leak/etiology* ; Rectal Neoplasms/complications* ; Drainage ; Anastomosis, Surgical/adverse effects* ; Reoperation/adverse effects* ; Hemorrhage ; Retrospective Studies

Kidney Transplantation/adverse effects* ; Magnetics ; Anastomosis, Surgical ; Magnetic Phenomena

Objective: To retrospectively analyze the risk factors of anastomotic leakage in the neck after esophageal cancer and establish a nomogram prediction model that can accurately predict the occurrence of anastomotic leakage in the neck of the patient. Methods: The study retrospectively analyzed 702 patients who underwent radical esophageal cancer surgery between January 2010 and May 2015 at Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to determine the risk factors for neck anastomotic leak, and a nomogram model was constructed, internal validation methods were used to evaluate and verify the predictive effectiveness of the nomogram. Results: There were 702 patients in the whole group, 492 in the training group and 210 in the validation group. The incidence of postoperative cervical anastomotic leak was 16.1% (79/492) in 492 patients with esophageal cancer in the training group. Multifactorial analysis revealed calcification of the descending aorta (OR=2.12, 95% CI: 1.14, 3.94, P=0.018), calcification of the celiac artery (OR=2.29, 95% CI: 1.13, 4.64, P=0.022), peripheral vascular disease (OR=5.50, 95% CI: 1.64, 18.40, P=0.006), postoperative ventilator-assisted breathing (OR=5.33, 95% CI: 1.83, 15.56, P=0.002), pleural effusion or septic chest (OR=3.08, 95% CI: 1.11, 8.55, P=0.031), incisional fat liquefaction and infection (OR=3.49, 95% CI: 1.68, 7.27, P=0.001) were independent risk factors for the development of cervical anastomotic leak after esophageal cancer surgery. The results of the nomogram prediction model showed that the consistency indices of the training and external validation groups were 0.73 and 0.74, respectively (P<0.001), suggesting that the prediction model has good predictive efficacy. Conclusion: The nomogram prediction model can intuitively predict the incidence of postoperative cervical anastomotic leakage in patients with high prediction accuracy, which can help provide a clinical basis for preventing cervical anastomotic leak and individualized treatment of patients.
Humans ; Anastomotic Leak/etiology* ; Nomograms ; Retrospective Studies ; Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery* ; Esophagectomy/methods* ; Risk Factors ; Anastomosis, Surgical/adverse effects*

Objective: To retrospectively analyze the risk factors of anastomotic leakage in the neck after esophageal cancer and establish a nomogram prediction model that can accurately predict the occurrence of anastomotic leakage in the neck of the patient. Methods: The study retrospectively analyzed 702 patients who underwent radical esophageal cancer surgery between January 2010 and May 2015 at Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to determine the risk factors for neck anastomotic leak, and a nomogram model was constructed, internal validation methods were used to evaluate and verify the predictive effectiveness of the nomogram. Results: There were 702 patients in the whole group, 492 in the training group and 210 in the validation group. The incidence of postoperative cervical anastomotic leak was 16.1% (79/492) in 492 patients with esophageal cancer in the training group. Multifactorial analysis revealed calcification of the descending aorta (OR=2.12, 95% CI: 1.14, 3.94, P=0.018), calcification of the celiac artery (OR=2.29, 95% CI: 1.13, 4.64, P=0.022), peripheral vascular disease (OR=5.50, 95% CI: 1.64, 18.40, P=0.006), postoperative ventilator-assisted breathing (OR=5.33, 95% CI: 1.83, 15.56, P=0.002), pleural effusion or septic chest (OR=3.08, 95% CI: 1.11, 8.55, P=0.031), incisional fat liquefaction and infection (OR=3.49, 95% CI: 1.68, 7.27, P=0.001) were independent risk factors for the development of cervical anastomotic leak after esophageal cancer surgery. The results of the nomogram prediction model showed that the consistency indices of the training and external validation groups were 0.73 and 0.74, respectively (P<0.001), suggesting that the prediction model has good predictive efficacy. Conclusion: The nomogram prediction model can intuitively predict the incidence of postoperative cervical anastomotic leakage in patients with high prediction accuracy, which can help provide a clinical basis for preventing cervical anastomotic leak and individualized treatment of patients.
Humans ; Anastomotic Leak/etiology* ; Nomograms ; Retrospective Studies ; Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery* ; Esophagectomy/methods* ; Risk Factors ; Anastomosis, Surgical/adverse effects*

In order to prevent and reduce the severity of anastomotic leakage after low rectal cancer surgery, prophylactic ileostomy is often performed by the clinician simultaneously. There are many controversies about prophylactic ileostomy in medicine, such as ileostomy indications, ileostomy complications, ileostomy reversal time, ileostomy reversal method and technique. Based on relevant literature and our own experience, we discussed the timing, method and complications of ileostomy reversal in this article to improve the diagnosis and treatment of ileostomy reversal as well as the life quality of the patients after ileostomy reversal.
Humans ; Ileostomy/methods* ; Anastomosis, Surgical/adverse effects* ; Anastomotic Leak/etiology* ; Rectal Neoplasms/complications* ; Rectum/surgery*

Anastomotic leakage (AL) has always been a persistent issue for colorectal surgeons. It is still difficult to reduce the incidence of AL despite the advances in technology and equipment. With the development of evidence-based medicine, increasing high-risk factors for AL have been identified. How to efficiently and systematically combine and quantify these isolated risk factors to provide a scientific early warning of AL in clinical practices and help surgeons in choosing the optimal prophylactic strategies, is of great significance for reducing the incidence of AL. There are generally two types of AL prediction models in colorectal surgery, including prognostic models (for preoperative and intraoperative AL prediction) and diagnostic models (for early warning and improving the early diagnosis rate of AL). Prophylactic strategies for AL include stabilizing the underlying diseases, improving anemia and hypoalbuminemia, choosing an appropriate operative time window, and emphasizing and improving anastomotic techniques (including choosing an appropriate size of stapler). However, a prophylactic ostomy is still the most common method for surgeons. However, how to reduce the morbidity of complications following prophylactic ostomy and how to avoid the conversion of the prophylactic stoma to permanent stoma need further study.
Humans ; Anastomotic Leak/etiology* ; Colorectal Surgery/adverse effects* ; Digestive System Surgical Procedures/adverse effects* ; Anastomosis, Surgical/methods* ; Risk Factors

The incidence of anastomotic leakage, a common and serious postoperative complication of low rectal cancer, remains high. Clarifying the risk factors for anastomotic leakage in patients with low rectal cancer after surgery can help guide clinical treatment and help patients improve their prognosis. The current literature suggests that the risk factors affecting the occurrence of anastomotic leakage after low rectal cancer include three aspects: (1) individual factors: male gender, high body mass index, malnutrition, smoking, alcoholism, and metabolic diseases; (2) tumor factors: the lower margin of tumor <5 cm from the anal verge, tumor diameter >2.5 cm, late tumor stage, high level of tumor markers and preoperative intestinal obstruction; (3) surgical factors: long operative time (>180 min), intraoperative bleeding (≥70 ml), more than 2 cartridges of stapling for anastomosis, contamination of the operative field, epidural analgesia and intraoperative hypothermia. Notably, the surgical approach (laparoscopic, open and hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery) was not a factor influencing the occurrence of postoperative anastomotic leakage in low rectal cancer. The findings on the effects of receiving neoadjuvant therapy, gut microbiota,intestinal bowel preparation, insufficient time for preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis, left colonic artery dissection, intraoperative blood transfusion, pelvic drainage, transanal drainage and combined organ resection, and postoperative diarrhea on postoperative anastomotic leakage in low rectal cancer are controversial. However, clinical workers can still take measures to reduce the risk of anastomotic leakage according to the above risk factors by making a good assessment before surgery, actively avoiding them during and after surgery, and taking measures for each step, so as to bring maximum benefits to patients.
Humans ; Male ; Anastomotic Leak/prevention & control* ; Rectum/surgery* ; Rectal Neoplasms/complications* ; Anastomosis, Surgical/adverse effects* ; Laparoscopy/adverse effects*

The rate of sphincter-preserving surgery for mid-low rectal cancer is increasing, but anastomotic leakage remains to be one of the common serious complications after operation. How to reduce the morbility and mortality of anastomotic leakage is always a hot and difficult point in colorectal surgery. Protective ostomy is a common method to deal with the above problems in clinical practice. However, some problems such as inappropriate stoma and stoma-related complications etc. become the current clinical challenges. The purpose of this consensus focusing on indication of ostomy, clinical value, ostomy skills, prevention of stoma complications, reversion of stoma and stoma nursing aims to provide guidance for the clinical practice of protective ostomy in the operation of mid-low rectal cancer in China.
Anastomosis, Surgical/adverse effects* ; Anastomotic Leak/etiology* ; Consensus ; Humans ; Ostomy/adverse effects* ; Rectal Neoplasms/surgery* ; Risk Factors ; Surgical Stomas

Advances in surgical techniques and treatment concept have allowed more patients with low rectal cancer to preserve sphincter without sacrificing survival benefit. However, postoperative dysfunctions such as fecal incontinence, frequency, urgency, and clustering often occur in patients with low rectal cancer. The main surgical procedures for low rectal cancer include low anterior rectum resection (LAR), intersphincteric resection (ISR), coloanal anastomosis (Parks) and so on. The incidence of major LARS after LAR is up to 84.6%. The postoperative function of ISR is even worse than LAR. Moreover, the greater the extent of resection ISR surgery, the worse the postoperative function. There are few studies on the function of Parks procedure. Current evidence suggests that the short-term function of Parks procedure is inferior to LAR, but function can gradually recovered over time. Colorectal surgeons have attempted to improve postoperative defecation by modifying bowel reconstructions. Current evidence suggests that J pouch or end-to-side anastomosis during LAR does not reduce the incidence of defecation disorders. Pouch reconstruction during ISR cannot reduce the incidence of severe LARS either. In general, the protection of postoperative defecation function in patients with low rectal cancer still has a long way to go.
Anal Canal/surgery* ; Anastomosis, Surgical/adverse effects* ; Defecation ; Fecal Incontinence/etiology* ; Humans ; Postoperative Complications/epidemiology* ; Rectal Neoplasms/surgery*