Protective ileostomy creation after anterior resection of the rectum: Shared decision-making or still subjective?

Aim: The choice of whether to perform protective ileostomy (PI) after anterior resection (AR) is mainly guided by risk factors (RFs) responsible for the development of anastomotic leakage (AL). However, clear guidelines about PI creation are still lacking in the literature and this is often decided according to the surgeon's preferences, experiences or feelings. This qualitative study aims to investigate, by an open-ended question survey, the individual surgeon's decision-making process regarding PI creation after elective AR. Method: Fifty four colorectal surgeons took part in an electronic survey to answer the questions and describe what usually led their decision to perform PI. A content analysis was used to code the answers. To classify answers, five dichotomous categories (In favour/Against PI, Listed/Unlisted RFs, Typical/Atypical, Emotions/Non-emotions, Personal experience/No personal experience) have been developed. Results: Overall, 76% of surgeons were in favour of PI creation and 88% considered listed RFs in the question of whether to perform PI. Atypical answers were reported in 10% of cases. Emotions and personal experience influenced surgeons' decision-making process in 22% and 49% of cases, respectively. The most frequently considered RFs were the distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge (96%), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (88%), a positive intraoperative leak test (65%), blood loss (37%) and immunosuppression therapy (35%). Conclusion: The indications to perform PI following rectal cancer surgery lack standardization and evidence-based guidelines are required to inform practice. Until then, expert opinion can be helpful to assist the decision-making process in patients who have undergone AR for adenocarcinoma

Carbon Dioxide Embolism Associated with Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision Surgery: A Report From the International Registries

BACKGROUND: Carbon dioxide embolus has been reported as a rare but clinically important risk associated with transanal total mesorectal excision surgery. To date, there exists limited data describing the incidence, risk factors, and management of carbon dioxide embolus in transanal total mesorectal excision. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to obtain data from the transanal total mesorectal excision registries to identify trends and potential risk factors for carbon dioxide embolus specific to this surgical technique. DESIGN: Contributors to both the LOREC and OSTRiCh transanal total mesorectal excision registries were invited to report their incidence of carbon dioxide embolus. Case report forms were collected detailing the patient-specific and technical factors of each event. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at the collaborating centers from the international transanal total mesorectal excision registries. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Characteristics and outcomes of patients with carbon dioxide embolus associated with transanal mesorectal excision were measured. RESULTS: Twenty-five cases were reported. The incidence of carbon dioxide embolus during transanal total mesorectal excision is estimated to be 480.4% (25/6375 cases). A fall in end tidal carbon dioxide was noted as the initial feature in 22 cases, with 13 (52%) developing signs of hemodynamic compromise. All of the events occurred in the transanal component of dissection, with mean (range) insufflation pressures of 15mm Hg (12\u201320mm Hg). Patients were predominantly (68%) in a Trendelenburg position, between 30\ub0 and 45\ub0. Venous bleeding was reported in 20 cases at the time of carbon dioxide embolus, with periprostatic veins documented as the most common site (40%). After carbon dioxide embolus, 84% of cases were completed after hemodynamic stabilization. Two patients required cardiopulmonary resuscitation because of cardiovascular collapse. There were no deaths. LIMITATIONS: This is a retrospective study surveying reported outcomes by surgeons and anesthetists. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons undertaking transanal total mesorectal excision must be aware of the possibility of carbon dioxide embolus and its potential risk factors, including venous bleeding (wrong plane surgery), high insufflation pressures, and patient positioning. Prompt recognition and management can limit the clinical impact of such events. See Video Abstract at http://links. lww.com/DCR/A961