Asian journal of endoscopic surgery · 2016
Usefulness of transanal tube placement for prevention of anastomotic leakage following laparoscopic low anterior resection.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ito Tetsuo, Obama Kazutaka, Sato Teruyuki, Matsuo Koichi, Inoue Hidenobu, Kubota Keiko, Tamaki Nobuyuki, Kami Kazuhiro, Yoshimura Naoki, Shono Takahito, Yamamoto Eiji, Morimoto Taisuke
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a major complication of laparoscopic low anterior resection (LLAR) for rectal cancer. Although several recent reports have suggested that transanal tube placement can prevent AL, this practice is still controversial. Additionally, the mechanism by which a transanal tube prevents AL is unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of transanal tube placement for prevention of AL following LLAR.
METHODS: This was a retrospective study that included 69 patients who underwent LLAR between February 2012 and January 2016. After an anastomosis using a double stapling technique, a transanal tube was placed in 28 patients. A diverting stoma was created in 26 patients. Univariate and multivariate analyses of clinicopathological characteristics were performed.
RESULTS: The overall incidence of AL was 15.9% (11/69). Univariate analysis showed that transanal tube placement (P = 0.022) and early postoperative diarrhea (P < 0.001) were associated with AL. The duration of the postoperative hospital stay for patients with transanal tube placement (13.1 ± 4.1 days) was significantly shorter than for patients without a transanal tube (22.7 ± 12.3 days; P < 0.001). However, transanal tube placement did not reduce postoperative diarrhea. Creation of a diverting stoma did not affect the incidence of AL. Multivariate analysis revealed that the absence of a transanal tube (odds ratio = 33.5, P = 0.018) and the occurrence of postoperative diarrhea (odds ratio = 86.3, P = 0.001) were independent risk factors for AL.
CONCLUSION: Transanal tube placement prevents AL after LLAR. Furthermore, this protective effect may be due to a reduction in the unfavorable incidence of early postoperative diarrhea.
METHODS: This was a retrospective study that included 69 patients who underwent LLAR between February 2012 and January 2016. After an anastomosis using a double stapling technique, a transanal tube was placed in 28 patients. A diverting stoma was created in 26 patients. Univariate and multivariate analyses of clinicopathological characteristics were performed.
RESULTS: The overall incidence of AL was 15.9% (11/69). Univariate analysis showed that transanal tube placement (P = 0.022) and early postoperative diarrhea (P < 0.001) were associated with AL. The duration of the postoperative hospital stay for patients with transanal tube placement (13.1 ± 4.1 days) was significantly shorter than for patients without a transanal tube (22.7 ± 12.3 days; P < 0.001). However, transanal tube placement did not reduce postoperative diarrhea. Creation of a diverting stoma did not affect the incidence of AL. Multivariate analysis revealed that the absence of a transanal tube (odds ratio = 33.5, P = 0.018) and the occurrence of postoperative diarrhea (odds ratio = 86.3, P = 0.001) were independent risk factors for AL.
CONCLUSION: Transanal tube placement prevents AL after LLAR. Furthermore, this protective effect may be due to a reduction in the unfavorable incidence of early postoperative diarrhea.