Skip to main content
Log in

Combined repeat laparoscopy and transanal endolumenal repair (hybrid approach) in the early management of postoperative colorectal anastomotic leaks: technique and outcomes

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Few clear recommendations exist for the management of colorectal anastomotic leaks, often based on surgeon preferences or institutional protocols. The primary goal was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of the combined laparoscopic and transanal (hybrid) approach to treat postoperative colorectal anastomotic leaks. The secondary goals included comparison of outcomes following early (< 5 days after initial resection) versus late (≥ 5 days) detection of leaks.

Materials and methods

Sixteen hemodynamically stable patients, with anastomotic dehiscence < 50% of the circumference after laparoscopic anterior resection underwent repeat laparoscopy (lavage/drainage) and transanal endolumenal repair (7 low (< 5 cm from the anal verge) with an ordinary anoscope and 9 high (≥ 5 cm from the anal verge) with a transanal endoscopic operations (TEO®) platform).

Results

The median delay to detection and management was 4.5 days. The procedure was feasible in 13/16 patients (3 patients required conversion to laparotomy). Primary healing of the anastomosis was obtained in 14 patients (13 with the combined procedure, one after conversion). Two patients (1 early, 1 late) sustained persistent purulent discharge via their drain, but the repair healed secondarily. All patients requiring conversion to laparotomy (n = 3) or sustaining intra-operative complications (n = 3) were in the delayed group. No patients required further intervention or died. Protective stomas, created either at index surgery (n = 7) or at re-operation (n = 9), were closed in 14/16 patients within 6 months and no anastomotic sinus, persistent or recurrent fistula, was noted at 1-year follow-up.

Limitations

This is a single-center study consisting of small sample size.

Conclusions

Combined repeat laparoscopy and transanal endolumenal repair is feasible and safe, potentially reducing postoperative morbidity associated with repeat laparotomy and anastomotic leaks. Early detection and re-intervention are fundamental to success. Currently missing from the International Study Group of Rectal Cancer recommendations, laparoscopy and endolumenal repair could be added as a therapeutic option in Grade B.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. McDermott FD, Heeney A, Kelly ME, Steele RJ, Carlson GL, Winter DC (2015) Systematic review of pre-operative, intraoperative and postoperative risk factors for colorectal anastomotic leaks. Br J Surg 102:462–479

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Rullier E, Laurent C, Garrelon JL, Michel P, Saric J, Parneix M (1998) Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after resection of rectal cancer. Br J Surg 85:355–358

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kube R, Mroczkowski P, Granowski D et al (2010) Anastomotic leakage after colon cancer surgery: a predictor of significant morbidity and hospital mortality, and diminished tumour-free survival. Eur J Surg Oncol 36:120–124

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bertelsen CA, Andreasen AH, Jorgensen T et al (2010) Anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer: risk factors. Colorectal Dis 12:37–43

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Krarup PM, Jorgensen LN, Andreasen AH et al (2012) A nationwide study on anastomotic leakage after colonic cancer surgery. Colorectal Dis 14:661–667

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Lindgren R, Hallböök O, Rutegård J, Sjödahl R, Matthiessen P (2011) What is the risk for a permanent stoma after low anterior resection of the rectum for cancer? A six-year follow-up of a multicenter trial. Dis Colon Rectum 54:41–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Krarup PM, Jorgensen LN, Harling H (2014) Management of anastomotic leakage in a nationwide cohort of colonic cancer patients. J Am Coll Surg 218:940–949

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Rickert A, Willeke F, Kienle P, Post S (2010) Management of anastomotic leakage after colonic surgery. Colorectal Dis 12:216–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Krarup PM, Nordholm-Carstensen A, Jorgensen LN, Harling H (2015) Association of comorbidity with anastomotic leak, 30-day mortality, and length of stay in elective surgery for colonic cancer: a nationwide cohort study. Dis Colon Rectum 58:668–676

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Krarup PM, Nordholm-Carstensen A, Jorgensen LN, Harling H (2014) Anastomotic leak increases distant recurrence and long-term mortality after curative resection for colonic cancer: a nationwide cohort study. Ann Surg 259:930–938

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Marinatou A, Theodoropoulos GE, Karanika S, Karantanos T, Siakavellas S, Spyropoulos BG, Toutouzas K, Zografos G (2014) Do anastomotic leaks impair postoperative health-related quality of life after rectal cancer surgery? A case-matched study. Dis Colon Rectum 57:158–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Mirnezami A, Mirnezami R, Chandrakumaran K, Sasapu K, Sagar P, Finan P (2011) Increased local recurrence and reduced survival from colorectal cancer following anastomotic leak: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 253:890–899

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Eberhardt JM, Kiran RP, Lavery IC (2009) The impact of anastomotic leak and intra-abdominal abscess on cancer-related outcomes after resection for colorectal cancer: a case control study. Dis Colon Rectum 52:380–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Rahbari NN, Weitz J, Hohenberger W, Heald RJ, Moran B, Ulrich A, Holm T, Wong WD, Tiret E, Moriya Y, Laurberg S, den Dulk M, van de Velde C, Büchler MW (2010) Definition and grading of anastomotic leakage following anterior resection of the rectum: a proposal by the International Study Group of Rectal Cancer. Surgery 147:339–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kulu Y, Ulrich A, Bruckner T, Contin P, Welsch T, Rahbari NN, Büchler MW, Weitz J, International Study Group of Rectal Cancer, International Study Group of Rectal Cancer (2013) Validation of the International Study Group of Rectal Cancer definition and severity grading of anastomotic leakage. Surgery 153:753–761

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Wind J, Koopman AG, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Slors JF, Gouma DJ, Bemelman WA (2007) Laparoscopic reintervention for anastomotic leakage after primary laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Br J Surg 94:1562–1566

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Lee CM, Huh JW, Yun SH, Kim HC, Lee WY, Park YA, Cho YB, Chun HK (2015) Laparoscopic versus open reintervention for anastomotic leakage following minimally invasive colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc 29:931–936

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Vennix S, Abegg R, Bakker OJ, van den Boezem PB, Brokelman WJ, Sietses C, Bosscha K, Lips DJ, Prins HA (2013) Surgical re-interventions following colorectal surgery: open versus laparoscopic management of anastomotic leakage. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 23:739–744

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. McDermott FD, Collins D, Heeney A, Winter DC (2014) Minimally invasive and surgical management strategies tailored to the severity of acute diverticulitis. Br J Surg 101:90–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Swank HA, Mulder IM, Hoofwijk AG, Nienhuijs SW, Lange JF, Bemelman WA, Surg Endosc Dutch Diverticular Disease Collaborative Study Group (2013) Early experience with laparoscopic lavage for perforated diverticulitis. Br J Surg 100:704–710

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. O’Riordan JM, Larkin JO, Mehigan BJ, McCormick PH (2013) Re-laparoscopy in the diagnosis and treatment of postoperative complications following laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surgeon 11:183–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Sneider E, Maykel J (2012) Management of anastomotic leak after low anterior resection with transanal endoscopic microsurgical (TEM) debridement and repair. J Surg Case Rep 1:1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Cuccurullo D, Pirozzi F, Sciuto A, Bracale U, La Barbera C, Galante F, Corcione F (2015) Relaparoscopy for management of postoperative complications following colorectal surgery: ten years’ experience in a single center. Surg Endosc 29:1795–1803

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Rosin D, Zmora O, Khaikin M, Bar Zakai B, Ayalon A, Shabtai M (2004) Laparoscopic management of surgical complications after a recent laparotomy. Surg Endosc 18:994–996

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Baker RS, Foote J, Kemmeter P, Brady R, Vroegop T, Serveld M (2004) The science of stapling and leaks. Obes Surg 14:1290–1298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Agresta F, Ciardo LF, Mazzarolo G, Michelet I, Orsi G, Trentin G, Bedin N (2006) Peritonitis: laparoscopic approach. World J Emer Surg 1:9 https://doi.org/10.1186/1749-7922-1-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Van Koperen PJ, van der Zaag ES, Omloo JM, Slors JF, Bemelman WA (2011) The persisting presacral sinus after anastomotic leakage following anterior resection or restorative proctocolectomy. Colorectal Dis 13:26–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Sloothaak DA, Buskens CJ, Bemelman WA, Tanis PJ (2013) Treatment of chronic presacral sinus after low anterior resection. Colorectal Dis 15:727–732

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Davis B, Rivadeneira DE (2013) Complications of colorectal anastomoses: leaks, strictures, and bleeding. Surg Clin N Am 93:61–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Lamazza A, Fiori E, Schillaci A, Sterpetti AV, Lezoche E (2014) Treatment of anastomotic stenosis and leakage after colorectal resection for cancer with self-expandable metal stents. Am J Surg 208:465–469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Blumetti J, Chaudhry V, Prasad L, Abcarian H (2012) Delayed transanal repair of persistent coloanal anastomotic leak in diverted patients after resection for rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 14:1238–1241

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Wexner SD, Ruiz DE, Genua J, Nogueras JJ, Weiss EG, Zmora O (2008) Gracilis muscle interposition for the treatment of rectourethral, rectovaginal, and pouch-vaginal fistulas: results in 53 patients. Ann Surg 248:39–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Nurkin S, Kakarla VR, Ruiz DE, Cance WG, Tiszenkel HI (2013) The role of faecal diversion in low rectal cancer: a review of 1791 patients having rectal resection with anastomosis for cancer, with and without a proximal stoma. Colorectal Dis 15:309–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Hüser N, Michalski CW, Erkan M, Schuster T, Rosenberg R, Kleeff J, Friess H (2008) Systematic review and meta-analysis of the role of defunctioning stoma in low rectal cancer surgery. Ann Surg 248:52–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Brunner W, Rossetti A, Vines LC, Kalak N, Bischofberger SA (2015) Anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic single-port sigmoid resection: combined transanal and transabdominal minimal invasive management. Surg Endosc 29:3803–3805

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William Tzu-Liang Chen.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

William Tzu-Liang Chen, Saurabh Bansal, Tao-Wei Ke, Sheng-Chi Chang, Yu-Chun Huang, Takashi Kato, Hwei-Ming Wang, and Abe Fingerhut have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, W.TL., Bansal, S., Ke, TW. et al. Combined repeat laparoscopy and transanal endolumenal repair (hybrid approach) in the early management of postoperative colorectal anastomotic leaks: technique and outcomes. Surg Endosc 32, 4472–4480 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6193-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6193-1

Keywords

Navigation