[Laparoscopic subtotal colectomy with antiperistaltic cecorectal anastomosis versus laparoscopic total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis for slow transit constipation: a multicenter retrospective cohort study].

Objective: To compare postoperative anal function recovery between laparoscopic subtotal colectomy with antiperistaltic cecorectal anastomosis and laparoscopic total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis for slow transit constipation. Methods: This multicenter retrospective cohort study enrolled patients meeting the following criteria: (1) severe constipation symptoms (<2 bowel movements/week), absent or insignificant defecation urge, abdominal distension, requiring laxatives to maintain bowel movements or laxatives being ineffective; (2) constipation symptoms for over 5 years, ineffective after >2 years of medical treatment, with strong desire for surgery; (3) significantly prolonged colon transit time (>72 hours) without significant gastric or small intestinal transit dysfunction; (4) no organic colonic lesions confirmed by colonoscopy and abdominal CT. Exclusion criteria: (1) patients undergoing open surgery; (2) exclusion of outlet obstruction constipation (e.g., rectocele, rectal prolapse, puborectalis spasm) by functional defecation MRI; (3) comorbid psychiatric disorders; (4) missing clinical data or loss to follow-up (postoperative follow-up <24 months). Based on these criteria, clinical and follow-up data were collected from 220 patients who underwent either laparoscopic subtotal colectomy with antiperistaltic cecorectal anastomosis (LSC group, n = 115) or laparoscopic total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis (LTC group, n = 105) for slow transit constipation between January 2013 and December 2022. Subjective anal function (Constipation Severity Score and Wexner Fecal Incontinence Score) and objective anal function (positive rate of rectoanal inhibitory reflex [RAIR] and anorectal manometry) were observed preoperatively and at 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Results: No significant differences were found in baseline characteristics between the two groups (all P >0.05). All surgeries were completed successfully without major significant complications. Subjective anal function assessment: At 24 months postoperatively, Constipation Severity Scores decreased significantly compared to preoperative scores in both groups [LSC group: (25.2±2.8) vs. (2.9±1.8), P <0.001; LTC group: (25.8±2.9) vs. (2.8±1.9), P<0.001]. No significant differences were found between the groups at 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively (all P>0.05). Wexner Fecal Incontinence Scores at 24 months were significantly lower than those at 6 months in both groups [LSC group: (12.9±1.8) vs. (3.9±2.5), P<0.001; LTC group: (12.6±1.8) vs. (5.4±2.4), P<0.001]. Although no significant difference was found at 6 months (P = 0.190), the LSC group had significantly lower Wexner scores than the LTC group at 12 and 24 months postoperatively (both P < 0.001). Objective anal function assessment: (1) Positive RAIR rate: Preoperative positive RAIR rates were 33.0% (38/115) in the LSC group and 25.7% (27/105) in the LTC group (P > 0.05). At 24 months, positive rates increased significantly in both groups [LSC: 66.1% (76/115); LTC: 63.8% (67/105)] compared to preoperative rates (both P<0.001), but no significant differences were found between groups at 6, 12, and 24 months (all P>0.05). (2) Resting pressure (RP) and squeeze pressure (SP): No significant differences were found in preoperative RP and SP between groups (all P>0.05). The LSC group had significantly higher RP and SP than the LTC group at 6 and 12 months postoperatively (all P<0.05), but no significant differences were found at 24 months (P>0.05). Conclusion: Both laparoscopic subtotal colectomy with antiperistaltic cecorectal anastomosis and laparoscopic total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis are safe for patients with slow transit constipation. However, laparoscopic subtotal colectomy with antiperistaltic cecorectal anastomosis offers superior postoperative anal function recovery.