Ersin GÜNDOĞAN, Cüneyt KAYAALP

Can rectal tube be used instead of ileostomy in patients undergoing rectal resection after neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy?

Aim: Neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision have become the standard treatment for locally advancedmiddle and distal rectal cancers. These types of patients carry a serious risk of anastomosis leakage. While the commonly techniqueis diverting ileostomy; rectal tube placement, with lower morbidity, has also been used in recent years. The aim of this study was tocompare the results of ileostomy and rectal tube administration following rectal resection after neoadjuvant therapy.Material and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the data from 25 patients with rectal cancer who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy between 2013 and 2019. Patients were evaluated in two groups: ileostomy and rectal tube. Demographic data, operativefindings, pathological results, and follow-up information were evaluated.Results: Twelve were in the rectal tube group and 13 were in the ileostomy group. There was no difference between the two groupsin terms of tumor location in preoperative data. Patients with hepatic metastasis were found in the ileostomy group, while therewere no such patients in the rectal tube group. The operation time (452±128 vs. 295±102 min, p=0.002) and blood loss (485±264vs 105±80 ml, p=0.0001) were higher in the ileostomy group. The intraoperative complications of the patients were similar in thetwo groups, whereas the postoperative complications were higher in the ileostomy group (69%-25%, p=0.04). The mean follow-upperiod was 23.2±18.5 months. The total complication rate due to ileostomy was 20% and the stomata of 15% of the patients were notclosed. The cosmetic scores of the patients were better in the rectal tube group (9.8±0.3 vs. 6.3±1.7, p=0.0001).Conclusion: The results of the rectal tube technique were not worse than those of the ileostomy technique in rectal cancers receivingneoadjuvant therapy and this technique may be preferred in appropriate cases.

PDF

___

1. Kim MK, Won DY, Lee JK et al. Comparative study between transanal tube and loop ileostomy in low anterior resection for mid rectal cancer: a retrospective single center trial. Ann Surg Treat Res 2015;88:260-8.
2. Xiao L, Zhang WB, Jiang PC et al. Can transanal tube placement after anterior resection for rectal carcinoma reduce anastomotic leakage rate? A single-institution prospective randomized study. World J Surg 2011;35:1367-77.
3. Kayaalp C, Yagci MA, Soyer V. Laparoscopic and natural orifice transluminal restorative proctocolectomy: no abdominal incision for specimen extraction or ileostomy. Videosurgery Miniinv 2016;11:115-20.
4. Rule W, Meyer J. Current status of radiation therapy for the management of rectal cancer. Crit Rev Oncog 2012;17:331-43.
5. Yang CS, Choi GS, Park JS et al. Rectal tube drainage reduces major anastomotic leakage after minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery. Colorectal Dis 2016;18:445-52.
6. Hallbook O, Sjodahl R. Anastomotic leakage and functional outcome after anterior resection of the rectum. Br J Surg 1996;83:60-2.
7. Wong NY, Eu KW. A defunctioning ileostomy does not prevent clinical anastomotic leak after a low anterior resection: a prospective, comparative study. Dis Colon Rectum 2005;48:2076-9.
8. Shalaby M, Thabet W, Buonomo O et al. Transanal Tube Drainage as a Conservative Treatment for Anastomotic Leakage Following a Rectal Resection. Ann Coloproctol 2018;34:317-21.
9. Telem DA, Chin EH, Nguyen SQ et al. Risk factors for anastomotic leak following colorectal surgery: a casecontrol study. Arch Surg 2010;145:371-6.
10. Harris DA, Egbeare D, Jones S, et al. Complications and mortality following stoma formation. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2005;87:427-31.
11. Rullier E, Le Toux N, Laurent C et al. Loop ileostomy versus loop colostomy for defunctioning low anastomoses during rectal cancer surgery. World J Surg 2001;25:274-7.
12. Tan WS, Tang CL, Shi L et al. Meta-analysis of defunctioning stomas in low anterior resection for rectal cancer. Br J Surg 2009;96:462-72.
13. Funahashi K, Suzuki T, Nagashima Y, et al. Risk factors for parastomal hernia in Japanese patients with permanent colostomy. Surg Today 2014;44:1465-9.