World journal of surgery · 2014
Effectiveness of a transanal tube for the prevention of anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Nishigori Hideaki, Ito Masaaki, Nishizawa Yuji, Nishizawa Yusuke, Kobayashi Akihiro, Sugito Masanori, Saito Norio
Аннотация
AIM: We evaluated the effectiveness and safety of a transanal tube placed for the prevention of anastomotic leakage after rectal surgery.
METHODS: Between 2007 and 2011, a total of 243 patients underwent anterior resection using the double stapling technique for rectal cancer at our institution. We excluded 67 patients with diverting stoma and divided the remaining patients into two groups: patients who did not receive a transanal tube and diverting stoma (n = 140; control group) and those who received a transanal tube (n = 36). We compared the rate of anastomotic leakage, evaluated the complications associated with the transanal tube, and analyzed the risk factors for anastomotic leakage.
RESULTS: The following perioperative parameters were significantly different between the two groups as follows (control group vs. transanal tube group): diabetes mellitus (8 [22 %] vs. 12 [8.5 %] patients, respectively; p = 0.03), surgical duration (262 ± 54.1 min [171-457] vs. 233 ± 61.7 min [126-430], respectively; p < 0.01). The postoperative anastomosis leakage appeared significantly different between the two groups (1 [2.7 %] vs. 22 [15.7 %] patients, respectively; p = 0.04). Anastomotic leakage was significantly associated with the distance between the anastomosis line and the anal verge (odds ratio [OR] 8.58; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.53-48.0; p = 0.01) and non-use of a transanal tube (OR 11.1; 95 % CI 1.04-118; p = 0.04) in both univariate and multivariate analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: Placement of a transanal tube is effective in decreasing the rate of anastomotic leakage after anterior resection using the double stapling technique. However, complications associated with a transanal tube should be carefully considered.
METHODS: Between 2007 and 2011, a total of 243 patients underwent anterior resection using the double stapling technique for rectal cancer at our institution. We excluded 67 patients with diverting stoma and divided the remaining patients into two groups: patients who did not receive a transanal tube and diverting stoma (n = 140; control group) and those who received a transanal tube (n = 36). We compared the rate of anastomotic leakage, evaluated the complications associated with the transanal tube, and analyzed the risk factors for anastomotic leakage.
RESULTS: The following perioperative parameters were significantly different between the two groups as follows (control group vs. transanal tube group): diabetes mellitus (8 [22 %] vs. 12 [8.5 %] patients, respectively; p = 0.03), surgical duration (262 ± 54.1 min [171-457] vs. 233 ± 61.7 min [126-430], respectively; p < 0.01). The postoperative anastomosis leakage appeared significantly different between the two groups (1 [2.7 %] vs. 22 [15.7 %] patients, respectively; p = 0.04). Anastomotic leakage was significantly associated with the distance between the anastomosis line and the anal verge (odds ratio [OR] 8.58; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.53-48.0; p = 0.01) and non-use of a transanal tube (OR 11.1; 95 % CI 1.04-118; p = 0.04) in both univariate and multivariate analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: Placement of a transanal tube is effective in decreasing the rate of anastomotic leakage after anterior resection using the double stapling technique. However, complications associated with a transanal tube should be carefully considered.