12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Surgical Resection of Anastomotic Stenosis after Rectal Cancer Surgery Using a Circular Stapler and Colostomy with Double Orifice

      case-report

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The double stapling technique has greatly facilitated intestinal reconstruction, particularly for anastomosis after anterior resection. However, anastomotic stenosis may occur, which sometimes requires surgical treatment. Redo surgery with reresection and reanastomosis presents a high risk of complications. Treatment methods need to be selected depending on the degree and location of stenosis. In an effort to propose a new resolution, reporting new cases and sharing valid experiences are necessary. An 82-year-old man diagnosed with rectal cancer had undergone laparoscopic anterior resection. Endoscopic balloon dilation performed for anastomotic stenosis had failed. Therefore, colostomy with double orifice was constructed on the oral side at 10 cm from the stenosis. Approaching from the anal and stoma side, the anastomotic stenosis was resected using a circular stapler. The colostomy was closed 1 month after surgery. Stenosis resection using a circular stapler requires the following steps: (1) passing the center shaft through the stenosis, (2) inserting the anvil head into the oral side of the stenosis, and (3) attaching the anvil head to the center shaft. This method can resect the stenosis using a circular stapler without being affected by postoperative adhesion in the pelvis. Compared to endoscopic balloon dilation, resection of the stricture by the circular stapler is thought to be reliable. This technique is particularly effective for localized stenosis, including anastomotic stenosis. It is considered that this method is minimally invasive and is low risk for complications. This method can contribute to the useful surgical option for refractory anastomotic stenosis after anterior resection.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative risk factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic low anterior resection with double stapling technique anastomosis.

          Anastomotic leakage (AL) is one of the most devastating complications after rectal cancer surgery. The double stapling technique has greatly facilitated intestinal reconstruction especially for anastomosis after low anterior resection (LAR). Risk factor analyses for AL after open LAR have been widely reported. However, a few studies have analyzed the risk factors for AL after laparoscopic LAR. Laparoscopic rectal surgery provides an excellent operative field in a narrow pelvic space, and enables total mesorectal excision surgery and preservation of the autonomic nervous system with greater precision. However, rectal transection using a laparoscopic linear stapler is relatively difficult compared with open surgery because of the width and limited performance of the linear stapler. Moreover, laparoscopic LAR exhibits a different postoperative course compared with open LAR, which suggests that the risk factors for AL after laparoscopic LAR may also differ from those after open LAR. In this review, we will discuss the risk factors for AL after laparoscopic LAR.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The double stapling technique for low anterior resection. Results, modifications, and observations.

            Since the introduction of the end-to-end anastomosis (EEA) stapler for rectal reconstruction, we have used a modification of the conventional technique in which the lower rectal segment is closed with the linear stapler (TA-55) and the anastomosis is performed using the EEA instrument across the linear staple line (double stapling technique). Our experience with this procedure includes stapled colorectal anastomoses in 75 patients and is the basis for the report. This review presents the details and advantages of the technique and the results. Complications include two patients with anastomotic leak (2.7%), and two with stenosis that required treatment (2.7%). Protective colostomy was not done in this series. There were no deaths. Our experience and that of others suggests that this modification of the EEA technique can allow a lower anastomosis in some patients, and that it can be done with greater safety and facility.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Redo surgery for failed colorectal or coloanal anastomosis: a valuable surgical challenge.

              Redo surgery (RS) in patients with failed anastomosis is a rare procedure, and data about this surgery are lacking. The aim of this study was to examine the operative results and long-term outcomes of RS. All patients who underwent RS between 1999 and 2008 were included. Data were analyzed from a prospective colorectal database. Failure of the procedure was defined as the inability to perform the RS or the inability to close the defunctioning stoma. Thirty-three patients (22 men) underwent the first surgery at a mean age of 53.4 years. Twenty-four had a colorectal anastomosis (CRA) and nine a coloanal anastomosis (CAA). The reasons for performing RS were stricture (n = 17), prior Hartmann procedure for complication on initial anastomosis (n = 6), chronic fistula (n = 5) or miscellaneous (n = 5). RS was impossible for 2 patients due to extensive adhesions. The mean operating time was 279 min (133-480) and the overall postoperative morbidity rate was 55%. The rate of anastomotic leakage and/or isolated pelvic abscess was 27%. After a mean delay of 3.9 months (0.3-16), 26 patients (79%) had a stoma closure. The mean number of stools per day was 3.2. The failure rates after new handsewn CAA and new stapled CRA were 33% (4/12) and 5% (1/19), respectively (P = .0385). The type of the former anastomosis influenced the success rate of restoring the intestinal continuity: failure rate after prior CAA was 56% and 8% after prior CRA (P = .0031). Redo surgery for failure of previous CRA or CAA is feasible but requires a demanding surgical procedure with high short-term morbidity. Copyright © 2011 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Case Rep Surg
                Case Rep Surg
                CRIS
                Case Reports in Surgery
                Hindawi
                2090-6900
                2090-6919
                2019
                12 May 2019
                : 2019
                : 2898691
                Affiliations
                Department of Surgery, Nagoya Tokushukai General Hospital, 2-52 Kouzouji-cho kita, Kasugai-City, Aichi 487-0016, Japan
                Author notes

                Academic Editor: Paola De Nardi

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1404-5587
                Article
                10.1155/2019/2898691
                6535867
                31214375
                024a1fc3-3ceb-4cc1-baaa-d4d07cf62c4b
                Copyright © 2019 Toru Imagami et al.

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 23 December 2018
                : 10 April 2019
                Categories
                Case Report

                Surgery
                Surgery

                Comments

                Comment on this article