Advertisement

Comprehensive literature review of the outcome, modifications, and alternatives to double-stapled low pelvic colorectal anastomosis

Published:April 04, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2022.02.019

      Abstract

      Background

      The double-stapled technique is widely used for creation of colorectal anastomosis after anterior resection of the rectum. Anastomotic leak has been recognized as one of the serious complications of low pelvic colorectal anastomosis. The present review aimed to illustrate the collective outcome of double-stapled technique, risk factors for anastomotic leak, and the modifications and alternatives of double-stapled technique.

      Methods

      A comprehensive review of PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted to search articles that entailed patients who underwent low anterior resection with double-stapled low pelvic anastomosis. The main outcome measures were anastomotic leak and complication rates of double-stapled technique and its technical modifications.

      Results

      Overall, the median anastomotic leak rate across 25 studies was 7.3% (range: 0.7%–24.5%). The most commonly reported predictors of anastomotic leak after double-stapled technique were low tumor location, multiple stapler firings, male sex, longer operation time, and perioperative blood transfusion. Several modifications of the double-stapled technique were described and include hand-sewn colonic J-pouch, vertical division of the rectum, transanal reinforcement of anastomosis, transanal pull-through with single stapling technique, elimination of dog-ears using sutures, the natural orifice intracorporeal anastomosis with extraction of specimen procedure, and transanal transection and single-stapled.

      Conclusion

      The median rate of anastomotic leak after double-stapled technique was less than 8%; however, it showed a wide range from less than 1% to approximately 25%. This wide variation might be related to additional risk factors of anastomotic leak, namely low tumor location and multiple stapler firings. Several techniques were described to modify the double-stapled technique to try to reduce the incidence of anastomotic leak.
      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

        • Chadi S.A.
        • Fingerhut A.
        • Berho M.
        • et al.
        Emerging trends in the etiology, prevention, and treatment of gastrointestinal anastomotic leakage.
        J Gastrointest Surg. 2016; 20: 2035-2051
        • McDermott F.D.
        • Heeney A.
        • Kelly M.E.
        • Steele R.J.
        • Carlson G.L.
        • Winter D.C.
        Systematic review of preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative risk factors for colorectal anastomotic leaks.
        Br J Surg. 2015; 102: 462-479
        • Slieker J.C.
        • Daams F.
        • Mulder I.M.
        • Jeekel J.
        • Lange J.F.
        Systematic review of the technique of colorectal anastomosis.
        JAMA Surg. 2013; 148: 190-201
        • Sciuto A.
        • Merola G.
        • De Palma G.D.
        • Sodo M.
        • Pirozzi F.
        • Bracale U.M.
        • Bracale U.
        Predictive factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic colorectal surgery.
        World J Gastroenterol. 2018; 24: 2247-2260
        • Knight C.D.
        • Griffen F.D.
        An improved technique for low anterior resection of the rectum using the EEA stapler.
        Surgery. 1980; 88: 710-714
        • 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
        • Varma J.S.
        • Chan A.C.
        • Li M.K.
        • Li A.K.
        Low anterior resection of the rectum using a double stapling technique.
        Br J Surg. 1990; 77: 888-890
        • Redmond H.P.
        • Austin O.M.
        • Clery A.P.
        • Deasy J.M.
        Safety of double-stapled anastomosis in low anterior resection.
        Br J Surg. 1993; 80: 924-927
        • Johnston D.
        • Holdsworth P.J.
        • Nasmyth D.G.
        • et al.
        Preservation of the entire anal canal in conservative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis; a pilot study comparing end-to-end ileoanal anastomosis without mucosal resection with mucosal proctectomy and endo-anal anastomosis.
        Br J Surg. 1987; 74: 940-944
        • Wexner S.D.
        • James K.
        • Jagelman D.G.
        The double-stapled ileal reservoir and ileoanal anastomosis.
        Dis Colon Rectum. 1991; 34: 487-494
        • Kmiot W.A.
        • Keighley M.R.
        Totally stapled abdominal restorative proctocolectomy.
        Br J Surg. 1989; 76: 961-964
        • Laxamana A.
        • Solomon M.J.
        • Cohen Z.
        • Feinberg S.M.
        • Stern H.S.
        • McLeod R.S.
        Long-term results of anterior resection using the double-stapling technique.
        Dis Colon Rectum. 1995; 38: 1246-1250
        • Averbach A.M.
        • Chang D.
        • Koslowe P.
        • Sugarbaker P.H.
        Anastomotic leak after double-stapled low colorectal resection.
        Dis Colon Rectum. 1996; 39: 780-787
        • Villanueva-Sáenz E.
        • Sierra-Montenegro E.
        • Rojas-Illanes M.
        • Peña-Ruiz Esparza J.P.
        • Martínez Hernández-Magro P.
        • Bolaños-Badillo L.E.
        Double stapler technique in colorectal surgery.
        Cir Cir. 2008; 76: 49-53
        • Moritz E.
        • Achleitner D.
        • Hölbling N.
        • et al.
        Single vs double stapling technique in colorectal surgery.
        Dis Colon Rectum. 1991; 34: 495-497
        • Graf W.
        • Glimelius B.
        • Bergström R.
        • Påhlman L.
        Complications after double and single stapling in rectal surgery.
        Eur J Surg. 1991; 157: 543-547
        • Bozzetti F.
        • Bertario L.
        • Bombelli L.
        • Fissi S.
        • Bellomi M.
        • Rossetti C.
        • Doci R.
        • Gennari L.
        Double versus single stapling technique in rectal anastomosis.
        Int J Colorectal Dis. 1992; 7: 31-34
        • Chiarugi M.
        • Buccianti P.
        • Sidoti F.
        • Franceschi M.
        • Goletti O.
        • Cavina E.
        Single and double stapled anastomoses in rectal cancer surgery: a retrospective study on the safety of the technique and its indication.
        Acta Chirurgica Belgica. 1996; 1: 31-36
        • Moore J.W.1
        • Chapuis P.H.
        • Bokey E.L.
        Morbidity and mortality after single- and double-stapled colorectal anastomoses in patients with carcinoma of the rectum.
        Aust N Z J Surg. 1996; 66: 820-823
        • Shrikhande S.V.
        • Saoji R.R.
        • Barreto S.G.
        • et al.
        Outcomes of resection for rectal cancer in India: The impact of the double stapling technique.
        World Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2007; 5: 35
        • Bie M.
        • Wei Z.Q.
        A new colorectal/coloanal anastomotic technique in sphincter-preserving operation for lower rectal carcinoma using transanal pull-through combined with single stapling technique.
        Int J Colorectal Dis. 2013; 28: 1517-1522
        • Radovanovic Z.
        • Petrovic T.
        • Radovanovic D.
        • Breberina M.
        • Golubovic A.
        • Lukic D.
        Single versus double stapling anastomotic technique in rectal cancer surgery.
        Surg Today. 2014; 44: 1026-1031
        • Spinelli A.
        • Foppa C.
        • Carvello M.
        • et al.
        Transanal transection and single-stapled anastomosis (TTSS): A comparison of anastomotic leak rates with the double-stapled technique and with transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer.
        Eur J Surg Oncol. 2021; S0748-7983: 00671-00675
        • Tanaka K.
        • Okuda J.
        • Yamamoto S.
        • et al.
        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. 2017; 47: 1215-1222
        • García-Granero E.
        • Navarro F.
        • Cerdán Santacruz C.
        • et al.
        Individual surgeon is an independent risk factor for leak after double-stapled colorectal anastomosis: an institutional analysis of 800 patients.
        Surgery. 2017; 162: 1006-1016
        • 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 Laparoscop Endoscop Percutan Tech. 2017; 27: 273-281
        • Yao H.H.
        • Shao F.
        • Huang Q.
        • Wu Y.
        • Qiang Zhu Z.
        • Liang W.
        Nomogram to predict anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic anterior resection with intracorporeal rectal transection and double-stapling technique anastomosis for rectal cancer.
        Hepatogastroenterology. 2014; 61: 1257-1261
        • 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: 2988-2995
        • Park J.S.1
        • Choi G.S.
        • Kim S.H.
        • 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
        • Kim J.S.
        • Cho S.Y.
        • Min B.S.
        • Kim N.K.
        Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic intracorporeal colorectal anastomosis with a double stapling technique.
        J Am Coll Surg. 2009; 209: 694-701
        • Ito M.1
        • Sugito M.
        • Kobayashi A.
        • Nishizawa Y.
        • Tsunoda Y.
        • Saito N.
        Relationship between multiple numbers of stapler firings during rectal division and anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic rectal resection.
        Int J Colorectal Dis. 2008; 23: 703-707
        • Degiuli M.
        • Elmore U.
        • De Luca R.
        • et al.
        Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer (RALAR study): a nationwide retrospective study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology – Colorectal Cancer Network Collaborative Group.
        Colorectal Dis. 2021 Nov 24; https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.15997
        • Person B.
        • Vivas D.A.
        • Wexner S.D.
        Totally laparoscopic low anterior resection with transperineal handsewn colonic J-pouch anal anastomosis for low rectal cancer.
        Surg Endosc. 2006; 20: 700-702
        • Sato H.
        • Maeda K.
        • Hanai T.
        • et al.
        Colorectal anastomosis using a novel double-stapling technique for lower rectal carcinoma.
        Int J Colorectal Dis. 2007; 22: 1249
        • Tsubaki M.
        • Suzuki Y.
        • Adachi M.
        • et al.
        Anastomotic leakage rate following modified double staple technique of anterior resection with vertical division of the rectum for rectal cancer surgery.
        Gastroenterol Hepatol Endosc. 2017; 2
        • Baek S.J.
        • Kim J.
        • Kwak J.
        • Kim S.H.
        Can trans-anal reinforcing sutures after double stapling in lower anterior resection reduce the need for a temporary diverting ostomy?.
        World J Gastroenterol. 2013; 19: 5309-5313
        • Illuminati G.
        • Carboni F.
        • Ceccanei G.
        • et al.
        Long-term evaluation of a modified double staple technique for low anterior resection.
        Acta Chir Belg. 2014; 114: 338-343
        • Illuminati G.
        • Pasqua R.
        • Perotti B.
        • et al.
        Standard versus eversion-modified double-staple technique for low colorectal anastomoses after resection of rectal cancer.
        Surg Today. 2021; 51: 785-791
        • Roumen R.M.
        • Rahusen F.T.
        • Wijnen M.H.
        • Croiset van Uchelen F.A.
        “Dog ear” formation after double-stapled low anterior resection as a risk factor for anastomotic disruption.
        Dis Colon Rectum. 2000; 43: 522-525
        • Asao T.
        • Kuwano H.
        • Nakamura J.
        • et al.
        Use of a mattress suture to eliminate dog ears in double-stapled and triple-stapled anastomoses.
        Dis Colon Rectum. 2002; 45: 137-139
        • Crafa F.
        • Megevand J.
        • Romano G.
        • et al.
        New double-stapled anastomotic technique to avoid crossing staple lines.
        Tech Coloproctol. 2015; 19: 319-320
        • Chen Z.F.
        • Liu X.
        • Jiang W.Z.
        • et al.
        Laparoscopic double-stapled colorectal anastomosis without “dog-ears.
        Tech Coloproctol. 2016; 20: 243
        • Minjares-Granillo R.O.
        • Dimas B.A.
        • LeFave J.J.
        • Haas E.M.
        Robotic left-sided colorectal resection with natural orifice intracorporeal anastomosis with extraction of specimen: the NICE procedure: a pilot study of consecutive cases.
        Am J Surg. 2019; 217: 670-676
        • Wu S.W.
        • Ma C.C.
        • Yang Y.
        Role of protective stoma in low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis.
        World J Gastroenterol. 2014; 20: 18031-18037
        • Hu M.H.
        • Huang R.K.
        • Zhao R.S.
        • Yang K.L.
        • Wang H.
        Does neoadjuvant therapy increase the incidence of anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for mid and low rectal cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Colorectal Dis. 2017; 19: 16-26