Advertisement

Association between intraoperative application of microfibrillar collagen hemostat and anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer: A retrospective case-control study

Published:November 04, 2020DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2020.09.038

      Abstract

      Background

      The purpose of the study was to evaluate the association between microfibrillar collagen hemostat and anastomotic leakage after anterior resection.

      Method

      Between March 2015 and December 2019, a total of 203 consecutive rectal cancer patients who underwent elective anterior resection were included. Patient parameters were analyzed. The relevant risk factors were identified by univariate and multivariate analysis. Propensity score matching was performed to reduce the selection bias.

      Results

      In total, 26 (12.8%) of the 203 study patients developed clinical anastomotic leakage. The length of hospital stay was significantly prolonged by anastomotic leakage. In univariate analysis and multivariate analysis, male sex, low tumor location, and intraoperative application of microfibrillar collagen hemostat significantly increased the risk of anastomotic leakage. Furthermore, analysis after propensity score matching confirmed the independent role of microfibrillar collagen hemostat in anastomotic leakage. In addition, the median time of anastomotic leakage occurrence from the initial operation in patients with microfibrillar collagen hemostat was 9.00 days, which was significantly later than that in patients without microfibrillar collagen hemostat.

      Conclusion

      In addition to male sex and low tumor location, intraoperative application of microfibrillar collagen hemostat was demonstrated to be a significant risk factor for anastomotic leakage. This finding suggested that surgeons should be fully aware of this potential risk in anterior resection. Because of the limitation of retrospective study, however, randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm this association in the future.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Bray F.
        • Ferlay J.
        • Soerjomataram I.
        • Siegel R.L.
        • Torre L.A.
        • Jemal A.
        Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries.
        CA Cancer J Clin. 2018; 68: 394-424
        • Griffen F.D.
        • Knight Sr., C.D.
        • Whitaker J.M.
        • Knight Jr., C.D.
        The double stapling technique for low anterior resection. Results, modifications, and observations.
        Ann Surg. 1990; 211 (discussion 751-752): 745-751
        • Heald R.J.
        • Husband E.M.
        • Ryall R.D.
        The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery—The clue to pelvic recurrence?.
        Br J Surg. 1982; 69: 613-616
        • Engel A.F.
        • Oomen J.L.
        • Eijsbouts Q.A.
        • Cuesta M.A.
        • van de Velde C.J.
        Nationwide decline in annual numbers of abdomino-perineal resections: effect of a successful national trial?.
        Colorectal Dis. 2003; 5: 180-184
        • Tilney H.S.
        • Heriot A.G.
        • Purkayastha S.
        • et al.
        A national perspective on the decline of abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer.
        Ann Surg. 2008; 247: 77-84
        • Karanjia N.D.
        • Corder A.P.
        • Bearn P.
        • Heald R.J.
        Leakage from stapled low anastomosis after total mesorectal excision for carcinoma of the rectum.
        Br J Surg. 1994; 81: 1224-1226
        • Kim C.W.
        • Baek S.J.
        • Hur H.
        • Min B.S.
        • Baik S.H.
        • Kim N.K.
        anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection for rectal cancer is different between minimally invasive surgery and open surgery.
        Ann Surg. 2016; 263: 130-137
        • Parthasarathy M.
        • Greensmith M.
        • Bowers D.
        • Groot-Wassink T.
        Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after colorectal resection: a retrospective analysis of 17 518 patients.
        Colorectal Dis. 2017; 19: 288-298
        • Smith J.D.
        • Paty P.B.
        • Guillem J.G.
        • Temple L.K.
        • Weiser M.R.
        • Nash G.M.
        Anastomotic leak is not associated with oncologic outcome in patients undergoing low anterior resection for rectal cancer.
        Ann Surg. 2012; 256: 1034-1038
        • Lu Z.R.
        • Rajendran N.
        • Lynch A.C.
        • Heriot A.G.
        • Warrier S.K.
        Anastomotic leaks after restorative resections for rectal cancer compromise cancer outcomes and survival.
        Dis Colon Rectum. 2016; 59: 236-244
        • Hain E.
        • Maggiori L.
        • Manceau G.
        • Mongin C.
        • Prost AlDJ.
        • Panis Y.
        Oncological impact of anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic mesorectal excision.
        Br J Surg. 2017; 104: 288-295
        • Jang J.H.
        • Kim H.C.
        • Huh J.W.
        • et al.
        Anastomotic leak does not impact oncologic outcomes after preoperative chemoradiotherapy and resection for rectal cancer.
        Ann Surg. 2019; 269: 678-685
        • Zimmermann M.S.
        • Wellner U.
        • Laubert T.
        • et al.
        Influence of anastomotic leak after elective colorectal cancer resection on survival and local recurrence: a propensity score analysis.
        Dis Colon Rectum. 2019; 62: 286-293
        • Bertelsen C.A.
        • Andreasen A.H.
        • Jorgensen T.
        • Harling H.
        Danish Colorectal Cancer Group. Anastomotic leakage after curative anterior resection for rectal cancer: Short and long-term outcome.
        Colorectal Dis. 2010; 12: e76-e81
        • Khan A.A.
        • Wheeler J.M.
        • Cunningham C.
        • George B.
        • Kettlewell M.
        • Mortensen N.J.
        The management and outcome of anastomotic leaks in colorectal surgery.
        Colorectal Dis. 2008; 10: 587-592
        • Lee S.Y.
        • Jung M.R.
        • Kim C.H.
        • Kim Y.J.
        • Kim H.R.
        Nutritional risk screening score is an independent predictive factor of anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery.
        Eur J Clin Nutr. 2018; 72: 489-495
        • Sparreboom C.L.
        • van Groningen J.T.
        • Lingsma H.F.
        • et al.
        Different risk factors for early and late colorectal anastomotic leakage in a nationwide audit.
        Dis Colon Rectum. 2018; 61: 1258-1266
        • Park J.S.
        • Choi G.S.
        • Kim S.H.
        • Kim
        • 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: 665-671
        • Kang C.Y.
        • Halabi W.J.
        • Chaudhry O.O.
        • et al.
        Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer.
        JAMA Surg. 2013; 148: 65-71
        • Caulfield H.
        • Hyman N.H.
        Anastomotic leak after low anterior resection: a spectrum of clinical entities.
        JAMA Surg. 2013; 148: 177-182
        • Bonello V.A.
        • Bhangu A.
        • Fitzgerald J.E.
        • Rasheed S.
        • Tekkis P.
        Intraoperative bleeding and haemostasis during pelvic surgery for locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer: a prospective evaluation.
        Tech Coloproctol. 2014; 18: 887-893
        • Zhang C.H.
        • Song X.M.
        • He Y.L.
        • et al.
        Use of absorbable hemostatic gauze with medical adhesive is effective for achieving hemostasis in presacral hemorrhage.
        Am J Surg. 2012; 203: e5-e8
        • Qerimi B.
        • Baumann P.
        • Husing J.
        • Knaebel H.P.
        • Schumacher H.
        Collagen hemostat significantly reduces time to hemostasis compared with cellulose: COBBANA, a single-center, randomized trial.
        Am J Surg. 2013; 205: 636-641
        • Hill G.B.
        Enhancement of experimental anaerobic infections by blood, hemoglobin, and hemostatic agents.
        Infect Immun. 1978; 19: 443-449
        • Sparreboom C.L.
        • Wu Z.Q.
        • Ji J.F.
        • Lange J.F.
        Integrated approach to colorectal anastomotic leakage: communication, infection and healing disturbances.
        World J Gastroenterol. 2016; 22: 7226-7235
        • Rahbari N.N.
        • 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: 339-351
        • Bertelsen C.A.
        • Andreasen A.H.
        • Jorgensen T.
        • Harling H.
        Danish Colorectal Cancer Group. Anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer: risk factors.
        Colorectal Dis. 2010; 12: 37-43
        • Hait M.R.
        Microcrystalline collagen. A new hemostatic agent.
        Am J Surg. 1970; 120: 330
        • Zucker W.H.
        • Mason R.G.
        Ultrastructural aspects of interactions of platelets with microcrystalline collagen.
        Am J Pathol. 1976; 82: 129-142
        • Hatsuoka M.
        • Seiki M.
        • Sasaki K.
        • Kashii A.
        Hemostatic effects of microfibrillar collagen hemostat (MCH) in experimental coagulopathy model and its mechanism of hemostasis.
        Thromb Res. 1986; 42: 407-412
        • Wagner W.R.
        • Pachence J.M.
        • Ristich J.
        • Johnson P.C.
        Comparative in vitro analysis of topical hemostatic agents.
        J Surg Res. 1996; 66: 100-108
        • Tompeck A.J.
        • Gajdhar A.U.R.
        • Dowling M.
        • et al.
        A comprehensive review of topical hemostatic agents: the good, the bad, and the novel.
        J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2020; 88: e1-e21
        • Sileshi B.
        • Achneck H.E.
        • Lawson J.H.
        Management of surgical hemostasis: Topical agents.
        Vascular. 2008; 16: S22-S28
        • Nakajima M.
        • Kamei T.
        • Tomimatu K.
        • Manabe T.
        An intraperitoneal tumorous mass caused by granulomas of microfibrillar collagen hemostat (Avitene).
        Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1995; 119: 1161-1163
        • O'Shaughnessy B.A.
        • Schafernak K.T.
        • DiPatri Jr., A.J.
        • Goldman S.
        • Tomita T.
        A granulomatous reaction to Avitene mimicking recurrence of a medulloblastoma. Case report.
        J Neurosurg. 2006; 104: 33-36
        • DeLustro F.
        • Condell R.A.
        • Nguyen M.A.
        • McPherson J.M.
        A comparative study of the biologic and immunologic response to medical devices derived from dermal collagen.
        J Biomed Mater Res. 1986; 20: 109-120
        • Scher K.S.
        • Coil Jr., J.A.
        Effects of oxidized cellulose and microfibrillar collagen on infection.
        Surgery. 1982; 91: 301-304
        • McDonald T.O.
        • Britton B.
        • Brogmann A.R.
        • Robb C.A.
        Biocompatibility and bioabsorption of microfibrillar collagen hemostat in experimental animals.
        Toxicology. 1977; 7: 37-44