Oncologic Impact of Conservative Treatment Compared with Surgical Treatment of Anastomotic Leakage Following Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Retrospective Study
Objectives: Differences in oncological outcomes between conservative and surgical treatments for anastomotic leakage (AL) in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery remain unclear. Methods: From July 2011 to June 2020, 385 patients underwent curative resection with double-stapling anastomosis...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
The Japan Society of Coloproctology
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | Journal of the Anus, Rectum and Colon |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jarc/9/1/9_2024-005/_pdf/-char/en |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Objectives: Differences in oncological outcomes between conservative and surgical treatments for anastomotic leakage (AL) in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery remain unclear.
Methods: From July 2011 to June 2020, 385 patients underwent curative resection with double-stapling anastomosis for left-sided colon and rectal cancers. Among them, 33 patients who experienced AL were retrospectively evaluated and categorized into two groups: conservative (n = 20) and surgical (n = 13). In the surgical group, abdominal lavage using a sufficient amount of normal saline was performed during reoperation. The primary endpoint was the 3-year cumulative incidence of local recurrence (LR).
Results: Seven (21.2%) patients in the conservative group experienced LR, while none in the surgical group. Survival analysis indicated no differences in overall and recurrent-free survival. However, the 3-year cumulative incidence of LR was significantly lower in the surgical group than in the conservative group (0% versus 31.3%, p=0.045).
Conclusions: Differences in AL management were associated with oncological outcomes, specifically a decreased LR. Therefore, surgeons should consider our findings when determining the most appropriate AL treatment to improve oncological outcomes. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2432-3853 |