Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The impact of transanal tube design for preventing anastomotic leak in anterior resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Techniques in Coloproctology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Placement of a transanal tube (TAT) into the rectum is a strategy used to attempt to prevent anastomotic leak (AL) in anterior resection surgery. There is a wide variation in materials and tube design in devices used as TATs and previous meta-analyses have not considered TAT design in their analyses. This study reviews the impact that design of TAT has on AL rates.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature was performed with the aim of identifying studies evaluating the use of TATs for preventing AL and then defining the design of TATs. Studies were then compared in groups based on TAT design in a meta-analysis to evaluate whether design is an important variable in outcomes.

Results

Thirty-three studies were included. There was a wide variety of tubes used as TATs. On meta-analysis, catheter-type TATs were associated with a substantially lower rate of AL (OR: 0.46; 95% CI 0.30, 0.68). By contrast, stent-type TATs were not associated with any reduction in the incidence of AL (OR: 1.06, 95% CI 0.50, 2.22). Catheter-type TATs were also associated with substantial reductions in the rate of reoperation (OR: 0.32; 95% CI 0.20, 0.50), whereas stent-type TATs showed no benefit in the rate of reoperation (OR: 0.79; 95% CI 0.37, 1.65).

Conclusions

Off-the-shelf catheter-type transanal tubes appeared effective in preventing AL, whereas custom-designed stent-type TATs were not demonstrated to be effective; although high quality evidence is limited. TAT design should be an important consideration in further research of the use of TATs in anterior resection surgery.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data retrieved from studies outlined in the article.

References

  1. den Dulk M, Noter SL, Hendriks ER et al (2009) Improved diagnosis and treatment of anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery. Eur J Surg Oncol J Eur Soc Surg Oncol Br Assoc Surg Oncol 35:420–426

    Google Scholar 

  2. Parthasarathy M, Greensmith M, Bowers D, Groot-Wassink T (2017) Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after colorectal resection: a retrospective analysis of 17 518 patients. Colorectal Dis 19:288–298

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Shogan BD, Carlisle EM, Alverdy JC, Umanskiy K (2013) Do we really know why colorectal anastomoses leak? J Gastrointest Surg N Y 17:1698–1707

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Cong Z-J, Hu L-H, Zhong M, Chen L (2015) Diverting stoma with anterior resection for rectal cancer: does it reduce overall anastomotic leakage and leaks requiring laparotomy? Int J Clin Exp Med 8:13045–13055

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Pisarska M, Gajewska N, Małczak P et al (2018) Defunctioning ileostomy reduces leakage rate in rectal cancer surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget 9:20816–20825

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Hüser N, Michalski CW, Erkan M et al (2008) Systematic review and meta-analysis of the role of defunctioning stoma in low rectal cancer surgery. Ann Surg 248:52–60

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ihnát P, Guňková P, Peteja M et al (2016) Diverting ileostomy in laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: high price of protection. Surg Endosc 30:4809–4816

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Morks AN, Havenga K, Ploeg RJ (2011) Can intraluminal devices prevent or reduce colorectal anastomotic leakage: a review. World J Gastroenterol 17:4461–4469

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Wang F-G, Yan W-M, Yan M, Song M-M (2018) Outcomes of transanal tube placement in anterior resection: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Int J Surg 59:1–10

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ha GW, Kim JH, Lee MR (2017) Oncologic impact of anastomotic leakage following colorectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 24:3289–3299

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Zhao W, Li N, He D, Feng J (2017) Transanal tube for the prevention of anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg Lupsingen 41:267–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gurjar SV, Forshaw MJ, Ahktar N et al (2007) Indwelling trans-anastomotic rectal tubes in colorectal surgery: a survey of usage in UK and Ireland. Colorectal Dis 9:47–51

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Brandl A, Czipin S, Mittermair R et al (2016) Transanal drainage tube reduces rate and severity of anastomotic leakage in patients with colorectal anastomosis: a case controlled study. Ann Med Surg 6:12–16

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Matsuda M, Tsuruta M, Hasegawa H et al (2016) Transanal drainage tube placement to prevent anastomotic leakage following colorectal cancer surgery with double stapling reconstruction. Surg Today 46:613–620

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hidaka E, Ishida F, Mukai S et al (2015) Efficacy of transanal tube for prevention of anastomotic leakage following laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancers: a retrospective cohort study in a single institution. Surg Endosc 29:863–867

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ito T, Obama K, Sato T et al (2017) Usefulness of transanal tube placement for prevention of anastomotic leakage following laparoscopic low anterior resection. Asian J Endosc Surg 10:17–22

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kawada K, Takahashi R, Hida K, Sakai Y (2018) Impact of transanal drainage tube on anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic low anterior resection. Int J Colorectal Dis 33:337–340

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Amin AI, Ramalingam T, Sexton R et al (2003) Comparison of transanal stent with defunctioning stoma in low anterior resection for rectal cancer. Br J Surg 90:581–582

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Montemurro S, Luca RD, Caliandro C et al (2012) Transanal tube NO COIL® after rectal cancer proctectomy. The “G. Paolo II” Cancer Centre experience. Tumori 98:607–614

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG (2010) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Int J Surg 8:336–341

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Higgins J, Thomas J (2019) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, version 6.0 (updated July 2019). In: Cochrane Collab. training.cochrane.org/handbook/current. https://training.cochrane.org/handbook/current. Accessed 5 Nov 2019

  22. Wells G, Shea B, O’Connell D, et al (2019) The Newcastle Ottowa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of non-randomised studies in meta-analyses. https://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp. Accessed 5 Nov 2019

  23. Kim M-K, Won D-Y, Lee J-K et al (2015) 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 88:260–268

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Rack RJ (1966) Advantages of an indwelling rectal tube in anterior resection and anastomosis for lesions involving the terminal portion of the colon. Dis Colon Rectum 9:42–48

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Balz J, Samson RB, Stewart WRC (1978) Rectal-tube decompression in left colectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 21:94–97

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Knoop M, Vorwerk T (2003) Protection of rectal anastomoses by transanal decompressive tubing. Tech Coloproctology 7:122

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Bülow S, Bulut O, Christensen IJ et al (2006) Transanal stent in anterior resection does not prevent anastomotic leakage. Colorectal Dis 8:494–496

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Cong Z, Fu C, Wang H et al (2009) Influencing factors of symptomatic anastomotic leakage after anterior resection of the rectum for cancer. World J Surg 33:1292–1297

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Okuda J, Tanaka K, Kondo K et al (2011) Safe anastomosis in laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer. Asian J Endosc Surg 4:68–72

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Xiao L, Zhang W, Jiang P et al (2011) Can transanal tube placement after anterior resection for rectal carcinoma reduce anastomotic leakage rate? A single-institution prospective randomized study. World J Surg 35:1367–1377

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Zhao W-T, Hu F-L, Li Y-Y et al (2013) Use of a transanal drainage tube for prevention of anastomotic leakage and bleeding after anterior resection for rectal cancer. World J Surg 37:227–232

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Adamova Z (2014) Transanal tube as a means of prevention of anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery. Viszeralmedizin 30:422–426

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Nishigori H, Ito M, Nishizawa YY et al (2014) Effectiveness of a transanal tube for the prevention of anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery. World J Surg 38:1843–1851

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Yang Q, Tang C, Qi X et al (2015) Mitigating the consequences of anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic rectal cancer resection: is it achievable by a simple method? Surg Innov 22:348–354

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Tanaka J, Nishikawa T, Tanaka T et al (2015) Analysis of anastomotic leakage after rectal surgery: a case-control study. Ann Med Surg 4:183–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Lee SY, Kim CH, Kim YJ, Kim HR (2015) Impact of anal decompression on anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a propensity score matching analysis. Langenbecks Arch Surg 400:791–796

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Yang C-S, Choi G-S, Park JS et al (2016) Rectal tube drainage reduces major anastomotic leakage after minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery. Colorectal Dis Off J Assoc Coloproctology G B Irel 18:O445–O452

    Google Scholar 

  38. Goto S, Hida K, Kawada K et al (2017) Multicenter analysis of transanal tube placement for prevention of anastomotic leak after low anterior resection. J Surg Oncol 116:989–995

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Hamabe A, Ito M, Nishigori H et al (2017) Preventive effect of diverting stoma on anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic low anterior resection with double stapling technique reconstruction applied based on risk stratification. Asian J Endosc Surg 11(3):220–226

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Tanaka K, Okuda J, Yamamoto S et al (2017) Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic surgery with the double stapling technique for stage 0/I rectal carcinoma: a subgroup analysis of a multicenter, single-arm phase II trial. Surg Today 47(10):1215–1222

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Talaiezadeh A, Shoushtary M-HS, Salmasi A-A, Afkhami MA (2018) Applying protective rectal tube in intestinal anastomosis. Przeglad Gastroenterol 13:99–101

    Google Scholar 

  42. Ye X, Deng Z, Duan Z, Liu H (2019) Effects of low negative pressure suction rectal drainage on postoperative intestinal function recovery and postoperative complications of rectal cancer. Int J Clin Exp Med 12:11723–11728

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Ye W, Zhu Z, Liu G et al (2019) Application of the cuff rectum drainage tube in total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer: a retrospective case-controlled study. Med (Baltim) 98:e15939

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Carboni F, Valle M, Levi Sandri GB et al (2020) Transanal drainage tube: alternative option to defunctioning stoma in rectal cancer surgery?. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol 5:6

  45. Challine A, Cazelles A, Frontali A, Maggiori L, Panis Y (2020) Does a transanal drainage tube reduce anastomotic leakage? A matched cohort study in 144 patients undergoing laparoscopic sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. Tech Coloproctol 24(10):1047–1053

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Wang Z, Liang J, Chen J et al (2020) Effectiveness of a transanal drainage tube for the prevention of anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 21:1441–1444

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Luo Y, Zhu C-K, Wu D-Q et al (2020) Effect comparison of three different types of transanal drainage tubes after anterior resection for rectal cancer. BMC Surg 20:166

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Li Y, Gu F (2020) Effectiveness of a large-calibre transanal drainage tube on the prevention of anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer. J BUON Off J Balk Union Oncol 25:933–938

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, University of Auckland, Auckland Hospital Clinical Support Block, 2 Park Rd, Grafton, Auckland, 1023, New Zealand

    C. Dumble, T. Morgan, C. I. Wells, I. Bissett & G. O’Grady

Authors
  1. C. Dumble
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. T. Morgan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. C. I. Wells
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. I. Bissett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. G. O’Grady
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. Morgan.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

All data was retrieved from the results of published studies in which the study subjects had provided informed consent.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dumble, C., Morgan, T., Wells, C.I. et al. The impact of transanal tube design for preventing anastomotic leak in anterior resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Tech Coloproctol 25, 59–68 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-020-02354-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-020-02354-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation