Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2007 Jul 21;13(27):3721-5.
doi: 10.3748/wjg.v13.i27.3721.

Factors determining delay in relaparotomy for anastomotic leakage after colorectal resection

A Doeksen  1 , P J Tanis, B C Vrouenraets, J J B Lanschot van, W F Tets van
Affiliations

Factors determining delay in relaparotomy for anastomotic leakage after colorectal resection

A Doeksen et al. World J Gastroenterol. .

Abstract

Aim: To analyze the time interval ('delay') between the first occurrence of clinical parameters associated with anastomotic leakage after colorectal resection and subsequent relaparotomy.

Methods: In 36 out of 289 consecutive patients with colorectal anastomosis, leakage was confirmed at relaparotomy. The medical records of these patients were retrospectively analysed and type and time of appearance of clinical parameters suggestive of anastomotic leakage were recorded. These parameters included heart rate, body temperature, local or generalized peritoneal reaction, leucocytosis, ileus and delayed gastric emptying. Factors influencing delay of relaparotomy and consequences of delayed recognition and treatment were determined.

Results: First documentation of at least one of the predefined parameters for anastomotic leakage was after a median interval of 4 +/- 1.7 d after the operation. The median number of days between first parameter(s) associated with leakage and relaparotomy was 3.5 +/- 5.7 d. The time interval between the first signs of leakage and relaparotomy was significantly longer when a weekend was included (4.2 d vs 2.4 d, P = 0.021) or radiological evaluation proved to be false-negative (8.1 d vs 3.5 d, P = 0.007). No significant association between delay and number of additional relaparotomies, hospital stay or mortality could be demonstrated.

Conclusion: An intervening weekend and negative diagnostic imaging reports may contribute to a delay in diagnosis and relaparotomy for anastomotic leakage. That delay was more than two days in two-thirds of the patients.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Efron EF, Vernava III AM. Reoperative surgery for acute colorectal anastomotic dehiscence and persistent abdominal sepsis. In: Longo WE, Northover JMA, editors. Reoperative colon and rectal surgery. London: Martin Dunitz Ltd; 2003. pp. 1–26.
    1. Golub R, Golub RW, Cantu R, Stein HD. A multivariate analysis of factors contributing to leakage of intestinal anastomoses. J Am Coll Surg. 1997;184:364–372. - PubMed
    1. McArdle CS, McMillan DC, Hole DJ. Impact of anastomotic leakage on long-term survival of patients undergoing curative resection for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2005;92:1150–1154. - PubMed
    1. Rullier E, Laurent C, Garrelon JL, Michel P, Saric J, Parneix M. Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after resection of rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 1998;85:355–358. - PubMed
    1. Sørensen LT, Jørgensen T, Kirkeby LT, Skovdal J, Vennits B, Wille-Jørgensen P. Smoking and alcohol abuse are major risk factors for anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery. Br J Surg. 1999;86:927–931. - PubMed

MeSH terms