Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Surgery
Published in: BMC Surgery 1/2022

Open Access 01-12-2022 | Rectal Cancer | Research

Advantages of ligating the rectum with gauze pad band in laparoscopic anterior resection of rectal cancer: a propensity score matched analysis

Authors: Yang Liu, Hengduo Qi, Chun Deng, Zhenyu Zhang, Zhi Guo, Xiaojun Li

Published in: BMC Surgery | Issue 1/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

It is difficult to maintain sufficient tension throughout laparoscopic anterior resection with total mesorectal excision, which causes a decline in surgical quality. We used a soft, inexpensive gauze pad band pulling the rectal tube to analyze the effect of surgery.

Methods

A gauze pad band was positioned at the proximal of the tumor, followed by fastening the rectal tube and ligating the rectum. 233 patients undergoing laparoscopic anterior resection for mid to low rectal cancer were enrolled between January 2018 and December 2020. After propensity score matching, 63 cases were selected in gauze pad band group and 126 cases were selected in traditional group. The two groups were compared in preoperative, intraoperative, and pathological characteristics.

Results

Compared to traditional group, the median operation duration (203 min vs. 233 min, p < 0.001) and the median intraoperative bleeding (48 ml vs. 67 ml, p < 0.001) were lesser in gauze pad band group. A higher percentage of one cartridge transection of rectum (36/63 vs. 51/126, p = 0.030), shorter length of cartridges used (6.88 ± 1.27 cm vs. 7.28 ± 1.25 cm, p = 0.040), and longer distal resection margin (2.74 ± 0.76 cm vs. 2.16 + 0.68 cm, p < 0.001) were found in the gauze pad band group. The completeness of total mesorectal excision (61/63 vs. 109/126, p = 0.022), harvested lymph nodes (19 vs. 17, p < 0.001) and positive lymph nodes (1 vs. 0, p = 0.046) were higher in gauze pad band group.

Conclusion

Ligation of the rectum with a gauze pad band allows for a reduction in operative time and intraoperative bleeding while increasing the rate of one cartridge transection. It also protected the quality of total mesorectal excision and membrane anatomy.
Trial registration: Not applicable.
Literature
1.
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209–49.CrossRefPubMed
2.
3.
Heald RJHE, Ryall RD. The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery—the clue to pelvic recurrence? Br J Surg. 1982;69(10):613–6.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Fleshman J, Branda ME, Sargent DJ, et al. Disease-free survival and local recurrence for laparoscopic resection compared with open resection of stage II to III rectal cancer: follow-up results of the ACOSOG Z6051 randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2019;269(4):589–95.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Gong JP. Rise and mix of membrane anatomy. Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2020;23(7):629–33.PubMed
6.
Rouanet P, Mourregot A, Azar CC, et al. Transanal endoscopic proctectomy: an innovative procedure for difficult resection of rectal tumors in men with narrow pelvis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2013;56(4):408–15.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Bulut O. Ligation of the rectum with an extracorporeal sliding knot facilitating laparoscopic cross-stapling: a procedure revisited. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2013;23(11):938–41.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Park SJ, Choi SI, Lee SH, et al. Endo-satinsky clamp for rectal transection during laparoscopic total mesorectal excision. Dis Colon Rectum. 2010;53(3):355–9.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Chung CCKS, Leung KL, Lau WY, Li AK. Use of a cotton tape tie in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Aust N Z J Surg. 1997;67(5):293–4.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Matsumoto A, Arita K. Laparoscopic-assisted rectal surgery for rectal cancer using the simple rectum catcher device with an intraoperative colonoscopy: results of our hospital study in 203 patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(12):3941–7.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Bi L, Deng X, Meng X, et al. Ligating the rectum with cable tie facilitates rectum transection in laparoscopic anterior resection of rectal cancer. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2020;405(2):233–9.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Lim SW, Kim HR, Kim YJ. Intracorporeal traction of the rectum with a beaded plastic urinary drainage bag hanger: comparison with conventional laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. World J Surg. 2018;42(1):239–45.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, et al. The Clavien–Dindo classification of surgical complications. Ann Surg. 2009;250(2):187–96.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Glynne-Jones R, Wyrwicz L, Tiret E, et al. Rectal cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2017;28(suppl4):iv22–40.PubMedCrossRef
15.
The Journal of the American Medical Association. AJCC cancer staging manual. JAMA. 2010;304(15):1726–7.CrossRef
16.
Heinze G, Juni P. An overview of the objectives of and the approaches to propensity score analyses. Eur Heart J. 2011;32(14):1704–8.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Bege T, Lelong B, Esterni B, et al. The learning curve for the laparoscopic approach to conservative mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: lessons drawn from a single institution’s experience. Ann Surg. 2010;251(2):249–53.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Nagtegaal ID, van de Velde CJ, van der Worp E, Kapiteijn E, Quirke P, van Krieken JH, Cooperative Clinical Investigators of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group. Macroscopic evaluation of rectal cancer resection specimen: clinical significance of the pathologist in quality control. J Clin Oncol. 2002; 20 (7): 1729–34.
19.
Cheng H, Chen BP, Soleas IM, et al. Prolonged operative duration increases risk of surgical site infections: a systematic review. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2017;18(6):722–35.CrossRef
20.
van Rooijen SJ, Huisman D, Stuijvenberg M, et al. Intraoperative modifiable risk factors of colorectal anastomotic leakage: why surgeons and anesthesiologists should act together. Int J Surg. 2016;36(Pt A):183–200.PubMedCrossRef
21.
22.
Tsukamoto S, Nishizawa Y, Ochiai H, et al. Surgical outcomes of robot-assisted rectal cancer surgery using the da Vinci Surgical System: a multi-center pilot Phase II study. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2017;47(12):1135–40.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Penninckx F, Kartheuser A, Van de Stadt J, et al. Outcome following laparoscopic and open total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2013;100(10):1368–75.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Mihaljevic AL, Muller TC, Kehl V, et al. Wound edge protectors in open abdominal surgery to reduce surgical site infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(3): e0121187.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
25.
Park JS, Choi GS, Kim SH, et al. Multicenter analysis of risk factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic rectal cancer excision: the Korean laparoscopic colorectal surgery study group. Ann Surg. 2013;257(4):665–71.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Braunschmid T, Hartig N, Baumann L, et al. Influence of multiple stapler firings used for rectal division on colorectal anastomotic leak rate. Surg Endosc. 2017;31(12):5318–26.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
27.
Balciscueta Z, Uribe N, Caubet L, et al. Impact of the number of stapler firings on anastomotic leakage in laparoscopic rectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Tech Coloproctol. 2020;24(9):919–25.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Lee S, Ahn B, Lee S. The relationship between the number of intersections of staple lines and anastomotic leakage after the use of a double stapling technique in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2017;27(4):273-81.
29.
Kawada K, Hasegawa S, Hida K, et al. Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic low anterior resection with DST anastomosis. Surg Endosc. 2014;28(10):2988–95.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
30.
Kawada K, Sakai Y. Preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative risk factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic low anterior resection with double stapling technique anastomosis. World J Gastroenterol. 2016;22(25):5718–27.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
31.
Takahashi H, Haraguchi N, Nishimura J, et al. The severity of anastomotic leakage may negatively impact the long-term prognosis of colorectal cancer. Anticancer Res. 2018;38(1):533–9.PubMed
32.
Kaser SA, Mattiello D, Maurer CA. Distant metastasis in colorectal cancer is a risk factor for anastomotic leakage. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(3):888–93.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Kim CW, Baek SJ, Hur H, et al. Anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection for rectal cancer is different between minimally invasive surgery and open surgery. Ann Surg. 2016;263(1):130–7.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Kang CY, Halabi WJ, Chaudhry OO, et al. A nationwide analysis of laparoscopy in high-risk colorectal surgery patients. J Gastrointest Surg. 2013;17(2):382–91.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Zheng H, Wu Z, Wu Y, et al. Laparoscopic surgery may decrease the risk of clinical anastomotic leakage and a nomogram to predict anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2019;34(2):319–28.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Sciuto A, Merola G, De Palma GD, et al. Predictive factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. World J Gastroenterol. 2018;24(21):2247–60.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
37.
Trencheva K, Morrissey KP, Wells M, et al. Identifying important predictors for anastomotic leak after colon and rectal resection. Ann Surg. 2013;257(1):108–13.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Boyce SA, Harris C, Stevenson A, et al. Management of low colorectal anastomotic leakage in the laparoscopic era: more than a decade of experience. Dis Colon Rectum. 2017;60(8):807–14.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Rahbari NN, Weitz J, Hohenberger W, et al. Definition and grading of anastomotic leakage following anterior resection of the rectum: a proposal by the International Study Group of Rectal Cancer. Surgery. 2010;147(3):339–51.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum. Japanese Classification of Colorectal, Appendiceal, and Anal Carcinoma: the 3d English Edition [Secondary Publication]. J Anus Rectum Colon. 2019; 3 (4): 175–95.
41.
Maykel JA. Laparoscopic transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) for rectal cancer. J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;19(10):1880–8.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Targarona EM, Balague C, Pernas JC, et al. Can we predict immediate outcome after laparoscopic rectal surgery? Multivariate analysis of clinical, anatomic, and pathologic features after 3-dimensional reconstruction of the pelvic anatomy. Ann Surg. 2008;247(4):642–9.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Manegold P, Taukert J, Neeff H, et al. The minimum distal resection margin in rectal cancer surgery and its impact on local recurrence—a retrospective cohort analysis. Int J Surg. 2019;69:77–83.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Song SH, Park JS, Choi GS, et al. Impact of the distal resection margin on local recurrence after neoadjuvant chemoradiation and rectal excision for locally advanced rectal cancer. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):22943.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
45.
Matsumoto A, Arita K, Tashiro M, et al. Laparoscopic-assisted low and ultralow anterior resection for lower rectal cancer using the simple “Rectum Catcher” device and an intra-operative colonoscopy. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2012;27(2):243–7.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Wang X, Cao G, Mao W, et al. Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cancer Res Ther. 2020;16(5):979–89.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Simillis C, Lal N, Thoukididou SN, et al. Open versus laparoscopic versus robotic versus transanal mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2019;270(1):59–68.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Blaker H, Hildebrandt B, Riess H, et al. Lymph node count and prognosis in colorectal cancer: the influence of examination quality. Int J Cancer. 2015;136(8):1957–66.PubMedCrossRef
49.
Nedrebo BS, Soreide K, Nesbakken A, et al. Risk factors associated with poor lymph node harvest after colon cancer surgery in a national cohort. Colorectal Dis. 2013;15(6):e301–8.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Weiss JM, Schumacher J, Allen GO, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II right-sided and left-sided colon cancer: analysis of SEER-medicare data. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(6):1781–91.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Advantages of ligating the rectum with gauze pad band in laparoscopic anterior resection of rectal cancer: a propensity score matched analysis
Authors
Yang Liu
Hengduo Qi
Chun Deng
Zhenyu Zhang
Zhi Guo
Xiaojun Li
Publication date
01-12-2022
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Surgery / Issue 1/2022
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2482
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-022-01822-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

BMC Surgery 1/2022 Go to the issue

Research

Management of acute appendicitis during the COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective cohort study

Case report

Giant ovarian tumor with colorectal cancer: suggestion concerning the need for colonoscopy screening in cases with large ovarian tumor—a report of three cases

Research

Development of a nomogram to predict surgical site infection after closed comminuted calcaneal fracture

Research

Long-term postoperative pneumonia in elderly patients with early gastric cancer

Research

Which style of duodenojejunostomy is better after resection of distal duodenum

Research

Discharge teaching, patient-reported discharge readiness and postsurgical outcomes in gynecologic patients undergoing day surgery: a generalized estimating equation