Septic complications after restorative proctocolectomy do not impair functional outcome: long-term follow-up from a specialty center.

PURPOSE: After restorative proctocolectomy, 7 to 8 percent of patients may have a pouch leak. Concern exists that pouch leak may be associated with impaired functional outcome. We evaluated patients who underwent restorative proctocolectomy to determine whether pouch leak adversely affected long-term functional outcome and quality of life. METHODS: We queried our prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent restorative proctocolectomy for demographic and clinical data. We sent a long-term outcome questionnaire to patients, including the validated Fecal Incontinence Severity Index and Cleveland Global Quality of Life scores. Pouch leak was identified by clinical or radiographic evidence of leak. Patients with leak were compared with those without to determine the impact on long-term functional outcome or quality of life. RESULTS: A total of 817 patients were available for follow-up and 374 patients (46 percent) completed questionnaires. The group with (n = 60; 16 percent) and without (n = 314; 84 percent) leak had similar demographics. The median Fecal Incontinence Severity Index score (15.3 vs. 14.7, P = 0.77), Cleveland Global Quality of Life score (0.79 vs. 0.81, P = 0.48), and bowel movements per 24 hours (7.92 vs. 7.88, P = 0.92) were similar. The pouch loss/permanent ileostomy rate was higher in those who leaked (13.3 vs. 0.9 percent, P \u3c 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Anastomotic leak after restorative proctocolectomy does not adversely affect long-term quality of life or functional outcome. However, pouch loss/permanent ileostomy is significantly more likely in patients who have had an anastomotic leak

Evaluation of one-stage laparoscopic-assisted restorative proctocolectomy at a specialty center: comparison with the open approach.

PURPOSE: This study compared outcomes after laparoscopically assisted and open restorative proctocolectomy performed as a one-stage procedure, including anorectal mucosectomy and omission of ileal diversion. METHODS: We reviewed our prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent restorative proctocolectomy between 1998 and 2006. Demographic data, surgical indications, and intraoperative and postoperative complications were evaluated. Anastomotic leaks were identified by radiologic, endoscopic, or intraoperative evidence. The primary outcome variables were complications, duration of operation, blood loss, intraoperative spillage of enteric contents, and the ability to complete the procedure in one stage. RESULTS: One-stage laparoscopically assisted restorative proctocolectomy was performed in 50 patients and open restorative proctocolectomy was performed in 155 patients. The mean operative time was longer for the laparoscopically assisted group (198.7 vs. 159.1 minutes; P = 0.006). The mean estimated blood loss was less among the patients in the laparoscopically assisted group (287.5 vs. 386.4 ml; P = 0.006). There were no significant differences in intraoperative or postoperative complications between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopically assisted one stage restorative proctocolectomy is a safe and technically feasible procedure. There seems to be no increase in the rate of postoperative complications compared with the open approach. Laparoscopically assisted restorative proctocolectomy should be considered in the surgical management of patients who require this procedure

A Prospective Pathologic Analysis Using Whole-Mount Sections of Rectal Cancer Following Preoperative Combined Modality Therapy: Implications for Sphincter Preservation

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to use a comprehensive whole-mount pathologic analysis to characterize microscopic patterns of residual disease, as well as circumferential and distal resection margins, in rectal cancer treated with preoperative CMT; and to identify clinicopathologic factors associated with residual disease. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Recent studies have shown that preoperative combined modality therapy (CMT) for rectal cancer enhances rates of sphincter preservation. However, the efficacy of preoperative CMT in conjunction with a total mesorectal excision (TME)-based resection, in terms of resection margins using whole-mount sections, has not been reported. Furthermore, since patterns of residual disease and extent of distal spread following preoperative CMT are largely unknown, intraoperative determination of distal rectal transection remains a surgical challenge. METHODS: We prospectively accrued 109 patients with endorectal ultrasound (ERUS)-staged, locally advanced rectal cancer (T2–T4 and/or N1), located a median distance of 7 cm from the anal verge, requiring preoperative CMT, and undergoing a TME-based resection. Comprehensive whole-mount pathologic analysis was performed, with particular emphasis on extent of residual disease, margin status, and intramural tumor extension. Clinicopathologic factors associated with residual disease were identified. RESULTS: A sphincter-preserving resection was feasible in 87 patients (80%), and in all 109 patients, distal margins were negative (median, 2.1 cm; range, 0.4–10 cm). Intramural extension beyond the gross mucosal edge of residual tumor was observed in only 2 patients (1.8%), both ≤0.95 cm. There were no positive circumferential margins (median, 10 mm; range, 1–28 mm), although 6 were less than or equal to 1 mm. On multivariate analysis, residual disease was observed more frequently in distally located tumors (distance from anal verge <5 cm) (P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Our comprehensive pathologic analysis suggests that, following preoperative CMT and a TME-based resection, distal margins of 1 cm may provide for complete removal of locally advanced rectal cancer. Although residual cancer following preoperative CMT was more likely in the setting of distally located tumors, occult tumor beneath the mucosal edge was rare and, when present, limited to less than 1 cm. Our results extend the indications for sphincter preservation, as distal resection margins of only 1 cm may be acceptable for rectal cancer treated with preoperative CMT