Low anterior resection syndrome: can it be prevented?

被引:0
作者
Alfredo Annicchiarico
Jacopo Martellucci
Stefano Solari
Maximilian Scheiterle
Carlo Bergamini
Paolo Prosperi
机构
[1] University of Parma,Department of Medicine and Surgery
[2] Careggi University Hospital,Emergency Surgery
[3] University of Ferrara,Department of Morphology, Surgery and Experimental Medicine
来源
International Journal of Colorectal Disease | 2021年 / 36卷
关键词
Colorectal cancer; Low anterior resection syndrome; LARS; Functional outcomes; Bowel dysfunction; Prevention;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Surgery remains the cardinal treatment in colorectal cancers but changes in bowel habits after rectal cancer surgery are common and disabling conditions that affect patients’ quality of life. Low anterior resection syndrome is a disorder of bowel function after rectal resection resulting in a lowering of the QoL and recently has been defined by an international working group not only by specified symptoms but also by their consequences. This review aims to explore an extensive bibliographic research on preventive strategies for LARS. All “modifiable variables,” quantified by the LARS Score, such as type of anastomosis, neoadjuvant therapy, surgical strategy, and diverting stoma, were evaluated, while “non-modifiable variables” such as age, sex, BMI, ASA, preoperative TMN, tumor height, and type of mesorectal excision were excluded from the comparative analysis. The role of defunctioning stoma, local excision, neoadjuvant radiotherapy, and non operative management seems to significantly affect risk of LARS, while type of anastomosis and surgical TME approach do not impact on LARS incidence or gravity in the long term period. Although it is established that some variables are associated with a greater onset of LARS, in clinical practice, technical difficulties and oncological limits often make difficult the application of some prevention plans. Transtomal irrigations, intraoperative neuromonitoring, pelvic floor rehabilitation before stoma closure, and early transanal irrigation represent new arguments of study in preventive strategies which could, if not eliminate the symptoms, at least mitigate them.
引用
收藏
页码:2535 / 2552
页数:17
相关论文
共 324 条
[31]  
Laurberg S(2021)The impact of surgical approach on short- and long-term outcomes after rectal cancer resection in elderly patients: a national cancer database propensity score matched comparison of robotic, laparoscopic, and open approaches Surg Endosc 16 11700-4933
[32]  
Juul T(2018)A quest for sphincter-saving surgery in ultralow rectal tumours-a single-centre cohort study World J Surg Oncol 21 4924-498
[33]  
Ahlberg M(2019)Urethral injury and other urologic injuries during transanal total mesorectal excision: an international collaborative study Ann Surg 30 489-1895
[34]  
Biondo S(2015)Transanal total mesorectal excision: A valid option for rectal cancer? World J Gastroenterol 107 1887-1600
[35]  
Ziv Y(2016)Potential sexual function improvement by using transanal mesorectal approach for laparoscopic low rectal cancer excision Surg Endosc 27 1594-2094
[36]  
Zbar A(2020)Functional complaints and quality of life after transanal total mesorectal excision: a meta-analysis Br J Surg 23 2082-1323
[37]  
Bar-Shavit Y(2021)Comparing functional outcomes between transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME) for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis Int J Colorectal Dis 34 196-251
[38]  
Hüttner FJ(2013)Total mesorectal excision: a comparison of oncological and functional outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer Surg Endosc 16 1317-199
[39]  
Tenckhoff S(2016)Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) for sphincter-saving surgery: is there any difference in the transanal TME rectal approach?: a single-center series of 120 consecutive patients Ann Surg Oncol 35 243-1017
[40]  
Jensen K(2020)Oncological and anorectal functional outcomes of robot-assisted intersphincteric resection in lower rectal cancer, particularly the extent of sphincter resection and sphincter saving Surg Endosc 267 193-1933