Aim To evaluate risk factors that may cause anastomotic leakage (AL) in patients who underwent resection and anastomosis due to colorectal cancer. Methods Patients who underwent resection and anastomosis due to colorectal cancer between January 2014 and July 2018 in our clinic were included into the study. The patients were divided into two groups as ones with AL being Group 1, ones without AL being Group 2. Parameters related to the clinical characteristics, surgical and pathologic results in both groups were evaluated with univariate and multivariate analyses. Results A total of 302 patients were included in the study. The AL was observed in 24 (7.9%) patients. Mortality was observed in five (20.8%) and six (2.2%) patients in Group 1 and Group 2, respectively (p=0.001). Significant risk factors for AL in the univariate analysis were coronary artery disease (CAD), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, high American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, emergency surgical intervention, absence of preoperative intestine preparation, performed perioperative blood transfusion, tumour T stage, and neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy application. Only CAD and neoadjuvant CRT were determined as the independent risk factors for AL in the multivariate analysis. Conclusion The AL developing after colorectal surgery continues to be an important problem thereby increasing mortality and morbidity along with its negative effect on hospitalization time and functional and oncologic results. Despite several studies on the topic, it is still very difficult to estimate the AL possibility in advance. Therefore, avoiding anastomosis in high risk patients may perhaps be the best option.
Rickert A, Willeke F, Kienle P, Post S. Management and outcome of anastomotic leakage after colonic surgery. Colorectal Dis. 2010. p. 216–23.
2.
Park J, Huh J, Park Y, Cho Y, Yun S, Kim H, et al. Risk factors of anastomotic leak age and long-term survival after colorectal surgery. 2016. p. 2890.
3.
Buchs N, Gervaz P, Secic M, Bucher P, Mugnier-Konrad B, Morel P. Incidence, consequences, and risk factors for anastomotic dehiscence after colorectal surgery: a prospective monocentric study. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2008. p. 265–70.
4.
Hyman N, Manchester T, Osler T, Burns B, Cataldo P. Anastomotic leaks after intestinal anastomosis: it’s later than you think. Ann Surg. 2007. p. 254–8.
5.
Alberts J, Parvaiz A, Moran B. Predicting risk and diminishing the consequences of anastomotic dehiscence following rectal resection. Colorectal Dis. 2003. p. 478–82.
6.
Platell C, Barwood N, Dorfmann G, Makin G. The incidence of anastomotic leaks in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Colorectal Dis. 2007. p. 71–9.
7.
Choi H, Law W, Ho J. Leakage after resection and intraperitoneal anastomosis for colorectal malignancy: analysis of risk factors. Dis Colon Rectum. 2006. p. 1719–25.
8.
Gündes E, Cetin D, Aday U, Ciyiltepe H, Bozdağ E, Uzun O, et al. Risk factors in anastomotic leaks after low anterior resection for rectal cancer and the effects of diverting stoma on clinical results. Turk J Colorectal Dis. 2018. p. 114–20.
9.
Owens W, Felts J, Spitznagel E, Jr. ASA physical status classifications: a study of consistency of ratings. Anesthesiology. 1978. p. 239–43.
10.
Edge S, Byrd D, Compton C, Fritz A, Greene F, Trotti A. AJCC Cancer Staging Handbook. Springer; 2010. p. 165–73.
11.
Park J, Choi G, Kim S, Kim H, Kim N, Lee K, 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. p. 665–71.
12.
Kaya S, Altin O, Altuntas Y, Kement M, Kaptanoglu L, Seker A, et al. Are the singlestep resection and primary anastomosis suitable for obstructıve colorectal patients in older cases? Med Glas (Zenica). 2019. p. 83–7.
13.
Gessler B, Eriksson O, Angenete E. Diagnosis, treatment, and consequences of anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2017. p. 549–56.
14.
Ureyen O, Ilhan E, Dadalı E, Gökcelli U, Alay D, Altıntaş S, et al. Evaluation of Factors Associated with Anastomotic Leakage in Colorectal Surgery. Turk J Colorectal Dis. 2018. p. 129–35.
15.
Kaya S, Seker A, Altın O, Altuntas Y, Kaptanoglu L, Kement M, et al. Evaluation of current therapeutic approach to obstructive and perforated colorectal cancers. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2019.
16.
Park J, Huh J, Park Y, Cho Y, Yun S, Kim H, et al. Risk factors of anastomotic leak age and long-term survival after colorectal surgery. 2016. p. 2890.
17.
Schrock T, Deveney C, Dunphy J. Factor contributing to leakage of colonic anastomoses. Ann Surg. 1973. p. 513–8.
18.
Marijnen C, Kapiteijn E, Van De Velde C, Martijn H, Steup W, Wiggers T, et al. Cooperative Investigators of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group. Acute side effects and complications after short-term preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision in primary rectal cancer: report of a multicenter randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 2002. p. 817–25.
19.
Kobayashi M, Mohri Y, Ohi M, Inoue Y, Araki T, Okita Y, et al. Risk factors for anastomotic leakage and favorable antimicrobial treatment as empirical therapy for intraabdominal infection in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Surg Today. 2014. p. 487–93.
20.
Zhu Q, Feng B, Lu A, Wang M, Hu W, Li J, et al. Laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal carcinoma: complications and management in 132 consecutive patients. World J Gastroenterol. 2010. p. 4605–10.
21.
Tadros T, Wobbes T, Hendriks T. Blood transfusion impairs the healing of experimental intestinal anastomoses. Ann Surg. 1992. p. 276–81.
22.
Cao F, Li J, Li F. Mechanical bowel preparation for elective colorectal surgery: updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2012. p. 803–10.
23.
Dolejs S, Guzman M, Fajardo A, Robb B, Holcomb B, Zarzaur B, et al. Bowel preparation is associated with reduced morbidity in elderly patients undergoing elective colectomy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2017. p. 372–9.
24.
Kiran R, Murray A, Chiuzan C, Estrada D, Forde K. Combined preoperative mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics significantly reduces surgical site infection and ileus after colorectal surgery. Ann Surg. 2015. p. 416–21.
25.
Kaya S, Altın O, Altuntas Y, Seker A, Bildik N, Kucuk H. Comparison of histopathological and oncological results of patients who underwent laparoscopic or open resection for sigmoid cancer. South Clin Ist Euras. 2018. p. 75–9.
26.
Bissolati M, Orsenigo E, Staudacher C. Minimally invasive approach to colorectal cancer: an evidencebased analysis. Updates Surg. 2016. p. 37–46.
27.
Arezzo A, Passera R, Scozzari G, Verra M, Morino M. Laparoscopy for rectal cancer reduces shortterm mortality and morbidity: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc. 2013. p. 1485–502.
28.
Abraham N, Young J, Solomon M. Metaanalysis of shortterm outcomes after laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2004. p. 1111–24.
29.
Macrae H, Mcleod R. Handsewn vs. stapled anastomoses in colon and rectal surgery: a metaanalysis. Dis Colon Rectum. 1998. p. 180–9.
30.
Brisinda G, Vanella S, Cadeddu F, Civello I, Brandara F, Nigro C, et al. End-to-end versus end-to-side stapled anastomoses after anterior resection for rectal cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2009. p. 75–9.
31.
Liu Z, Wang G, Yang M, Chen Y, Miao D, Muhammad S, et al. Ileocolonic anastomosis after right hemicolectomy for colon cancer: functional end-to-end or end-to-side? World J Surg Oncol. 2014. p. 306.
32.
Rahbari N, Weitz J, Hohenberger W, Heald R, Moran B, Ulrich A, 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. p. 339–51.
33.
Weidenhagen R, Gruetzner K, Wiecken T, Spelsberg F, Jauch K. Endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure of anastomotic leakage following anterior resection of the rectum: a new method. Surg Endosc. 2008. p. 1818–25.
34.
Tassiopoulas A, Baum G, Halverson J. Small bowel fistulas. Surg Clin North Am. 1996. p. 1175–83.
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
,
