Comparison of J-pouch and coloplasty pouch for low rectal cancers: a randomized, controlled trial investigating functional results and comparative anastomotic leak rates
- PMID: 12131085
- PMCID: PMC1422548
- DOI: 10.1097/00000658-200207000-00009
Comparison of J-pouch and coloplasty pouch for low rectal cancers: a randomized, controlled trial investigating functional results and comparative anastomotic leak rates
Abstract
Objective: To assess the efficacy of a novel coloplasty colonic pouch design in optimizing bowel function after ultralow anterior resection.
Summary background data: A colonic J-pouch may reduce excessive stool frequency and incontinence after anterior resection, but at the risk of evacuation problems. Experimental surgery on pigs has suggested that a coloplasty pouch (CP) may be a useful alternative. Although CP has recently been shown to be feasible in patients, there is no randomized controlled trial comparing bowel function with the J-pouch.
Methods: After anterior resection for cancer, patients were allocated to either J-pouch or CP-anal anastomoses. Continence scoring, anorectal manometry, and endoanal ultrasound assessments were made before surgery. All complications were recorded, and these preoperative assessments were repeated at 4 months. The assessments were repeated again at 1 year, and a quality of life questionnaire was added.
Results: Eighty-eight patients were recruited from October 1998 to April 2000. Both groups were well matched for age, gender, staging, adjuvant therapy, and mean follow-up. There were no differences in the intraoperative time and hospital stay. CP resulted in more anastomotic leaks. At 4 months, J-pouch patients had 10.3% less stool fragmentation but poorer stool deferment and more nocturnal leakage. However, there were no differences in the bowel function, continence score, and quality of life at 1 year. There were no differences in the anorectal manometry and endoanal ultrasound findings.
Conclusions: Coloplasty pouches resulted in more anastomotic leaks and minimal differences in bowel function. At present, the J-pouch remains the benchmark for routine clinical practice, and due care (including defunctioning stoma) should be exercised in situations requiring CP.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Multimedia article. Laparoscopic ultralow anterior resection with colonic J-pouch-anal anastomosis.Dis Colon Rectum. 2008 Nov;51(11):1710-1. doi: 10.1007/s10350-008-9322-4. Epub 2008 Aug 5. Dis Colon Rectum. 2008. PMID: 18679748
-
Colonic J-pouch vs. coloplasty following resection of distal rectal cancer: early results of a prospective, randomized, pilot study.Dis Colon Rectum. 2003 Sep;46(9):1161-6. doi: 10.1007/s10350-004-6707-x. Dis Colon Rectum. 2003. PMID: 12972958 Clinical Trial.
-
Transverse coloplasty pouch and colonic J-pouch for rectal cancer--a comparative study.Colorectal Dis. 2003 Sep;5(5):465-70. doi: 10.1046/j.1463-1318.2003.00524.x. Colorectal Dis. 2003. PMID: 12925082 Clinical Trial.
-
The functional outcomes of coloanal and low colorectal anastomoses with reservoirs after low rectal cancer resections.Am Surg. 2014 Dec;80(12):1222-9. Am Surg. 2014. PMID: 25513921 Review.
-
Techniques for restoring bowel continuity and function after rectal cancer surgery.World J Gastroenterol. 2006 Oct 21;12(39):6252-60. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v12.i39.6252. World J Gastroenterol. 2006. PMID: 17072945 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Reconstruction techniques after proctectomy: what's the best?Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2007 Aug;20(3):221-30. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-984866. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2007. PMID: 20011203 Free PMC article.
-
Risk factors for anastomotic leakage following intersphincteric resection for very low rectal adenocarcinoma.J Gastrointest Surg. 2010 Jan;14(1):104-11. doi: 10.1007/s11605-009-1067-4. Epub 2009 Oct 20. J Gastrointest Surg. 2010. PMID: 19841989
-
Digital rectal examination compares favourably with conventional water-soluble contrast enema in the assessment of anastomotic healing after low rectal excision: a cohort study.Int J Colorectal Dis. 2005 May;20(3):262-6. doi: 10.1007/s00384-004-0652-y. Epub 2004 Sep 29. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2005. PMID: 15455246
-
Comparison of the colonic J-pouch versus straight (end-to-end) anastomosis following low anterior resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Int J Colorectal Dis. 2022 Apr;37(4):919-938. doi: 10.1007/s00384-022-04130-w. Epub 2022 Mar 19. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2022. PMID: 35306586
-
Ileocecal reservoir reconstruction after total mesorectal excision: functional results of the long-term follow-up.Int J Colorectal Dis. 2004 Nov;19(6):574-9. doi: 10.1007/s00384-004-0608-2. Epub 2004 May 27. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2004. PMID: 15168046
References
-
- Ho Y-H, Low D, Goh HS. Bowel function survey after segmental colorectal resection. Dis Colon Rectum 1996; 38: 307–310. - PubMed
-
- Williamson ME, Lewis WG, Holdsworth PJ, et al. Decrease in anorectal pressure gradient after low anterior resection of the rectum: a study using continuous ambulatory manometry. Dis Colon Rectum 1994; 37: 1228–1231. - PubMed
-
- Ho Y-H, Wong J, Goh HS. Level of anastomosis and anorectal manometry in predicting function following anterior resection for adenocarcinoma. Int J Colorect Dis 1993; 8: 170–174. - PubMed
-
- Ho Y-H, Tsang C, Tang CL, et al. Anal sphincter injuries from stapling instruments introduced transanally. Randomized, controlled study with endoanal ultrasound and anorectal manometry. Dis Colon Rectum 2000; 43: 169–173. - PubMed
-
- Ho Y-H, Tan M, Leong A, et al. Anal pressures impaired by stapler insertion during colorectal anastomosis: a randomized, controlled trial. Dis Colon Rectum 1999; 42: 89–95. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous