1. Su1605 Anastomotic Leak Following Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer: Does the Presence of a Defunctioning Stoma Reduce the Burden of a Leak ?
- Author
-
Wissam J. Halabi, Vinh Q. Nguyen, Mehraneh D. Jafari, Steven Mills, Alessio Pigazzi, Michael J. Stamos, and Joseph C. Carmichael
- Subjects
medicine.medical_specialty ,Hepatology ,Ileus ,business.industry ,Urinary retention ,organic chemicals ,Gastroenterology ,Postoperative complication ,Sigmoid colon ,Anastomosis ,medicine.disease ,biological factors ,Surgery ,body regions ,Rectal prolapse ,medicine.anatomical_structure ,embryonic structures ,Medicine ,Fecal incontinence ,medicine.symptom ,business ,Complication ,neoplasms - Abstract
Purpose : Our experience in robotic-assisted rectopexy with sigmoid colon resection (RAR+SR) or without sigmoid colon resection (RAR) was reviewed to determine if there was a significant difference in intra-operative or postoperative outcomes. Methods : We retrospectively reviewed 26 patients that underwent robotic-assisted rectopexy for rectal prolapse from 2006 to 2012. Rectopexy is performed with primary suture pexy and without mesh. Continuous variables were analyzed by t-test, while Fisher's exact test was applied for categorical data. Results : Twenty-two patients underwent RAR and 4 patients underwent RAR+SR. The average age for study participants was 56 years (range 21-78 years) and consisted of 4 men and 22 women. Recurrent rectal prolapse occurred in 2 patients at 3 and 30 months after surgery in the RAR group and no recurrence occurred in the RAR+SR group (p=1.00). The duration of surgery for RAR was 211 minutes versus 309 minutes for RAR+SR (p,0.001, CI 60.8 135.4). Intra-operative blood loss for RAR was 97.8mL compared to 87.5mL for RAR+SR (p=0.924, CI -77.4 89.7). Conversion to open procedure occurred twice with RAR and once with RAR+SR (p=0.407). Length of hospitalization averaged 3 days for RAR and 4 days for RAR+SR (p=0.196, CI -0.2 2.2). The mean follow up was 127 days (range 1-72 months). Eight of 10 patients with preoperative constipation subjectively noted improvement with RAR versus 1 of 2 patients with RAR+SR (p=0.455). Six of 10 patients with preoperative fecal incontinence had subjectively improved symptoms with RAR versus 1 of 2 patients with RAR+SR (p=1.00). Six patients in the RAR group experienced a postoperative complication (over-sedation, corneal abrasion, atrial flutter, pulmonary edema, pelvic hematoma, ileus) versus 1 complication (urinary retention) after RAR+SR (p=0.924). There were no mortalities and no complications requiring operative intervention. Conclusions : The majority of patients underwent RAR and outcomes for RAR versus RAR+SR were not significantly different in this series with the exception of increased operative time for RAR+SR. The recurrence rate was 8% and the complication rate was 27% with the majority of complications being minor complications.
- Published
- 2013
- Full Text
- View/download PDF