Anterior resection of rectal cancer without bowel preparation and diverting stoma

Purpose. Since the introduction of total mesorectal excision (TME) as the standard operation technique for rectal cancer, anastomotic leakage percentages of up to 18% have been reported. To prevent such leakage, the use of mechanical bowel preparation and also the construction of a diverting ileostoma or colostomy have been standard procedures for years. In our institute, however, all patients undergoing colorectal surgery are operated upon without these measures. The present study was undertaken to investigate the results of this strategy in terms of the occurrence of postoperative anastomotic leakage. Methods. All patients who underwent an elective (low) anterior resection between January 1996 and December 2001 (n = 144) entered the study. The clinical and pathological records of these patients were reviewed retrospectively. The exclusion criteria were patients with fixed rectal carcinoma who received preoperative radiotherapy and/or a stoma only at operation, emergency operations, abdominoperoneal resections, and Hartmann's procedures. Results. Anastomotic leakage occurred in 7 out of 144 patients (4.9%). There was a trend toward a higher leakage frequency in men, in patients with a distal anastomosis, in patients with a stapled anastomosis, and in patients with a T3-T4 tumor or with positive lymph nodes. None of these factors, however, had a significant prognostic value based on a univariate or multivariate analysis. Those who died after leakage tended to be older than those who did not (P <0.05). Conclusion. A (low) anterior resection can be performed safely without mechanical bowel preparation or a diverting stoma, and results in an anastomotic leakage percentage of less than 5%. Appropriate selection of patients may be important, but none of the investigated patient- or tumor-related factors could be identified as decisive

Antecolic Versus Retrocolic Route of the Gastroenteric Anastomosis After Pancreatoduodenectomy A Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective: To investigate the relationship between the route of gastroenteric (GE) reconstruction after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and the postoperative incidence of delayed gastric emptying (DGE). Background: DGE is one of the most common complications after PD. Recent studies suggest that an antecolic route of the GE reconstruction leads to a lower incidence of DGE, compared to a retrocolic route. In a nonrandomized comparison within our trial center, we found no difference in DGE after antecolic or retrocolic GE reconstruction. Methods: Ten middle- to high-volume centers participated in the patient inclusion. Patients scheduled for PD who gave written informed consent were included and randomized during surgery after resection. Standard operation was a pylorus-preserving PD. Primary endpoint was DGE. Secondary endpoints included other complications and length of hospital stay. Results: There were 125 patients in the retrocolic group, and 121 patients in the antecolic group. Baseline and treatment characteristics did not differ between the study groups. In the retrocolic group, 45 patients (36%) developed clinically relevant DGE compared with 41 (34%) in the antecolic group (absolute risk difference: 2.1%; 95% confidence interval: -9.8% to 14.0%). There were no differences in need for postoperative (par)enteral nutritional support, other complications, hospital mortality, and median length of hospital stay. Conclusions: The route of GE reconstruction after PD does not influence the postoperative incidence of DGE or other complications. The etiology and treatment of DGE, which occurs frequently after both procedures, need further investigation. The GE reconstruction after PD should be routed according to the surgeon's preference

Therapeutic Delay and Survival After Surgery for Cancer of the Pancreatic Head With or Without Preoperative Biliary Drainage

Objective: To evaluate the relation between delay in surgery because of preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) and survival in patients scheduled for surgery for pancreatic head cancer. Background: Patients with obstructive jaundice due to pancreatic head cancer can undergo PBD. The associated delay of surgery can lead to more advanced cancer stages at surgical exploration, affecting resection rate and survival. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial to compare PBD with early surgery (ES) for pancreatic head cancer for complications. We obtained Kaplan-Meier estimates of overall survival for patients with pathology-proven malignancy and compared survival functions of ES and PBD groups using log-rank test statistics. Multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed to evaluate the prognostic role of time to surgery for overall survival. Results: Mean times from randomization to surgery were 1.2 (0.9-1.5) and 5.1 (4.8-5.5) weeks in the ES and PBD groups, respectively (P < 0.001). In the ES group, 60 (67%) of 89 patients underwent resection, versus 53 (58%) of 91 patients in the PBD group (P = 0.20). Median survival after randomization was 12.2 (9.1-15.4) months in the ES group versus 12.7 (8.9-16.6) months in the PBD group (P = 0.91). A longer time to surgery was significantly associated with slightly lower mortality rate after surgery (hazard ratio = 0.90, 95% CI, 0.83-0.97), when taking into account resection, bilirubin, complications, pancreatic adenocarcinoma, tumor-positive lymph nodes, and microscopically residual disease. Conclusions: In patients with pancreatic head cancer, the delay in surgery associated with PBD does not impair or benefit survival rate. (Ann Surg 2010;252:840-849