Regenerated oxidized cellulose reinforcement of low rectal anastomosis: do we still need diversion?
- PMID: 20485002
- DOI: 10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181d3206e
Regenerated oxidized cellulose reinforcement of low rectal anastomosis: do we still need diversion?
Retraction in
-
Regenerated oxidized cellulose reinforcement of low rectal anastomosis: do we still need diversion?: Retraction.Dis Colon Rectum. 2011 May;54(5):656. doi: 10.1007/DCR.0b013e31821a95ce. Dis Colon Rectum. 2011. PMID: 21471772 No abstract available.
Abstract
Purpose: The leak rate after low anterior resection is in the region of 10% to 15%. The highest risks of anastomotic leak are in anastomoses less than 5 cm from the anal verge. We evaluated the outcome of oxidized regenerated cellulose reinforcement of low rectal anastomosis.
Methods: The study group consisted of 108 patients with rectal cancer. Patients with low rectal cancer had low anterior resection with stapled straight low colorectal or coloanal anastomosis without proximal diversion. They were prospectively randomized to either oxidized regenerated cellulose reinforcement or no reinforcement. Data collected included age, sex, hemoglobin percentage, albumin level, histopathologic type of the tumor, anastomotic leak, and stricture.
Results: The mean age of patients was 56 years, and sex was matched in both groups. Clinical leak occurred in 6 of 38 cases (15.7%) in the group that did not undergo reinforcement versus 2 of 33 (6.1%) in the oxidized regenerated cellulose reinforcement group (P < .01). In the case of a leak, diversion was needed in 3 of 6 patients in the group that did not undergo reinforcement vs no patients in the oxidized regenerated cellulose reinforcement group (P = .05). Generalized peritonitis occurred in 3 patients in the group that did not undergo reinforcement versus no patients in the oxidized regenerated cellulose reinforcement group (P < .01). Length of stay was 4.8 days in the oxidized regenerated cellulose reinforcement group versus 5.9 days in the group that did not undergo reinforcement (P = .047), with no mortalities in either group.
Conclusion: Oxidized regenerated cellulose reinforcement of low rectal anastomosis significantly decreases the risk of postoperative leak in low rectal anastomosis and may reduce the requirement for proximal diversion. Potential benefits include avoidance of a stoma, lower morbidity, shorter hospital stay, and a lower cost of care.
Comment in
-
Anastomotic leak: should we continue to accept the risks?Dis Colon Rectum. 2010 Jun;53(6):859-60. doi: 10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181dcee11. Dis Colon Rectum. 2010. PMID: 20484997 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Outcomes of low anterior resection anastomotic leak after preoperative chemoradiation therapy for rectal cancer.Am Surg. 2010 Jul;76(7):747-51. Am Surg. 2010. PMID: 20698384
-
Standardized pelvic drainage of anastomotic leaks following anterior resection without diversional stomas.Am J Surg. 2010 Jun;199(6):753-8. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.03.026. Epub 2009 Oct 17. Am J Surg. 2010. PMID: 19837397
-
Neoadjuvant therapy and anastomotic leak after tumor-specific mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.Dis Colon Rectum. 2008 Aug;51(8):1195-201. doi: 10.1007/s10350-008-9368-3. Epub 2008 Jun 4. Dis Colon Rectum. 2008. PMID: 18523823
-
Preoperative chemoradiation and coloanal J pouch reconstruction for low rectal cancer.Am Surg. 2000 Apr;66(4):387-93. Am Surg. 2000. PMID: 10776877 Review.
-
[Anastomosis techniques in deep rectal resection].Langenbecks Arch Chir Suppl II Verh Dtsch Ges Chir. 1989:679-84. Langenbecks Arch Chir Suppl II Verh Dtsch Ges Chir. 1989. PMID: 2577620 Review. German.
Cited by
-
Management and outcome of colorectal anastomotic leaks.Int J Colorectal Dis. 2011 Mar;26(3):313-20. doi: 10.1007/s00384-010-1094-3. Epub 2010 Nov 25. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2011. PMID: 21107847
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical