These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Usefulness of self-made gasbag double-cannula stool drainage device for prevention of anastomotic leakage following anterior resection].
    Author: Zhang D, He K, Qiu H, Zhuang Z, Liufu Y, Zhang J, Zeng X.
    Journal: Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2017 Aug 25; 20(8):914-918. PubMed ID: 28836254.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of self-made gasbag double-cannula stool drainage device for prevention of anastomotic leakage following anterior resection. METHODS: Clinical data of 169 rectal cancer patients in the 8th Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University between October 2010 and October 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, a self-made gasbag double-cannula stool drainage device was placed in 71 patients(stool drainage group), and the remaining 98 patients were taken as control. After an anastomosis, the drainage device was transanally placed by the assistant and the distal tube of drainage device was stretched more than 15 cm from anastomosis. The gasbag was inflated to fully expand the intestine. The main tube was fixed on perianal skin with 7-0 suture, kept more than 3-5 cm outside the anus, and connected to the drainage bag. The incidence of anastomotic leakage was compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The baseline data were similar between the two groups (all P>0.05). The differences in operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and time to bowel function recovery were not statistically significant (all P>0.05), however, time to oral intake and postoperative stay were shorter in stool drainage group as compared to the control group (both P<0.05). There was no perioperative death in both groups. In stool drainage group, there were 6 cases whose drainage device was pulled out within 48 hours due to intolerance. The ruptured gasbag was replaced 5 times and the tube was clogged by fecal material 21 times. After flushing, the tube did not recanalized and was pulled out in 3 cases. The incidence of anastomotic leakage in stool drainage group was significantly lower than that in the control group (2.8% vs. 11.2%, P=0.043). As for the low anastomosis (the distance to anal verge less than 5 cm), the incidence of anastomotic leakage in stool drainage group was also significantly lower than that in the control group (2.3% vs. 15.4%, P=0.028), while as for the high anastomosis, the difference was not statistically significant (3.6% vs. 3.0%, P=0.906). Logistic regression analysis revealed that the presence of a stool drainage device was an independent protective factor for anastomotic leakage (OR=0.316, 95%CI:0.114 ~ 0.769, P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The self-made gasbag double-cannula stool drainage device effectively prevents anastomotic leakage after anterior resection of rectal cancer. However it is not suitable for those patients with high anastomosis.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]