To drain or not to drain extraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Aim Anastomotic leakage is the one of the most serious complications in rectal cancer surgery and is associated with high mortality, morbidity and an increased incidence of local recurrence. Although many studies have compared drained and undrained colorectal anastomoses, to date the role of pelvic...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Colorectal disease 2014-02, Vol.16 (2), p.O35-O42
Hauptverfasser: Rondelli, F., Bugiantella, W., Vedovati, M. C., Balzarotti, R., Avenia, N., Mariani, E., Agnelli, G., Becattini, C.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page O42
container_issue 2
container_start_page O35
container_title Colorectal disease
container_volume 16
creator Rondelli, F.
Bugiantella, W.
Vedovati, M. C.
Balzarotti, R.
Avenia, N.
Mariani, E.
Agnelli, G.
Becattini, C.
description Aim Anastomotic leakage is the one of the most serious complications in rectal cancer surgery and is associated with high mortality, morbidity and an increased incidence of local recurrence. Although many studies have compared drained and undrained colorectal anastomoses, to date the role of pelvic drainage in extraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis remains undefined. Method We carried out a systematic review of the literature, performing an unrestricted search in MEDLINE and Embase up to 30 October 2012. Reference lists of retrieved articles and review articles were manually searched for other relevant studies. We performed a meta‐analysis of the data currently available on the incidence of extraperitoneal anastomotic leakage, according to the presence or absence of pelvic drainage. Results Overall, eight studies – three randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and five non‐RCTs, comprising a total of 2277 patients – were included in the meta‐analysis. Pelvic drainage was demonstrated to reduce both the leak rate and the rate of reintervention in patients who underwent anterior rectal resection with extraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis (OR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.36–0.73; and OR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.18–0.46, respectively) compared with patients without drainage. Overall mortality and infection rates were also evaluated, but a nonsignificant correlation was found with the presence of drainage. Conclusion The meta‐analysis shows that the presence of a pelvic drain reduces the incidence of extraperitoneal colorectal anastomotic leakage and the rate of reintervention after anterior rectal resection.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/codi.12491
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1492672071</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1492672071</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3671-a8a8b4d82f67ab6f5339c2a8c60fbd9963628c186aca8057c24b73f9247b8b653</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kF1L7DAQhoMc8fvGH3DI5UGoNkmbpFeiq67CouAHijdhmqaQY9usSdZ1_73Rdb10bmYGnnkZHoT2SX5IUh1p19hDQouKrKEtUnCWEUbkn6-ZZrIi-SbaDuF_nhMuiNxAm7SgRSkp2ULtvcONBztg5_HgIo6r3bxHD1PjbXSDgQ5r1zlvdEwjDBCi612w4Rif4LAI0fQQrcbevFkzT0CDexMhS2S3SNguWm-hC2bvu--gh4vz-9FlNrkZX41OJplm6bUMJMi6aCRtuYCatyVjlaYgNc_buqkqzjiVmkgOGmReCk2LWrC2ooWoZc1LtoP-LXOn3r3OTIiqt0GbroPBuFlQpKgoFzQXJKEHS1R7F4I3rZp624NfKJKrT6_q06v68prgv9-5s7o3zQ-6EpkAsgTmtjOLX6LU6ObsahWaLW9s8vf-cwP-RXHBRKker8fqaXIrT-_GI_XMPgD17JMA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1492672071</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>To drain or not to drain extraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Rondelli, F. ; Bugiantella, W. ; Vedovati, M. C. ; Balzarotti, R. ; Avenia, N. ; Mariani, E. ; Agnelli, G. ; Becattini, C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Rondelli, F. ; Bugiantella, W. ; Vedovati, M. C. ; Balzarotti, R. ; Avenia, N. ; Mariani, E. ; Agnelli, G. ; Becattini, C.</creatorcontrib><description>Aim Anastomotic leakage is the one of the most serious complications in rectal cancer surgery and is associated with high mortality, morbidity and an increased incidence of local recurrence. Although many studies have compared drained and undrained colorectal anastomoses, to date the role of pelvic drainage in extraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis remains undefined. Method We carried out a systematic review of the literature, performing an unrestricted search in MEDLINE and Embase up to 30 October 2012. Reference lists of retrieved articles and review articles were manually searched for other relevant studies. We performed a meta‐analysis of the data currently available on the incidence of extraperitoneal anastomotic leakage, according to the presence or absence of pelvic drainage. Results Overall, eight studies – three randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and five non‐RCTs, comprising a total of 2277 patients – were included in the meta‐analysis. Pelvic drainage was demonstrated to reduce both the leak rate and the rate of reintervention in patients who underwent anterior rectal resection with extraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis (OR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.36–0.73; and OR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.18–0.46, respectively) compared with patients without drainage. Overall mortality and infection rates were also evaluated, but a nonsignificant correlation was found with the presence of drainage. Conclusion The meta‐analysis shows that the presence of a pelvic drain reduces the incidence of extraperitoneal colorectal anastomotic leakage and the rate of reintervention after anterior rectal resection.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1462-8910</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1463-1318</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/codi.12491</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24245821</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Anastomosis, Surgical ; Anastomotic Leak - prevention &amp; control ; Colon - surgery ; colorectal anastomosis ; Drainage ; Drainage - methods ; extraperitoneal ; Humans ; leakage ; Rectal Neoplasms - surgery ; Rectum - surgery ; surgery ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Colorectal disease, 2014-02, Vol.16 (2), p.O35-O42</ispartof><rights>Colorectal Disease © 2013 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland</rights><rights>Colorectal Disease © 2013 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3671-a8a8b4d82f67ab6f5339c2a8c60fbd9963628c186aca8057c24b73f9247b8b653</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3671-a8a8b4d82f67ab6f5339c2a8c60fbd9963628c186aca8057c24b73f9247b8b653</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fcodi.12491$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fcodi.12491$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,1412,27905,27906,45555,45556</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24245821$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Rondelli, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bugiantella, W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vedovati, M. C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Balzarotti, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Avenia, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mariani, E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Agnelli, G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Becattini, C.</creatorcontrib><title>To drain or not to drain extraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis</title><title>Colorectal disease</title><addtitle>Colorectal Dis</addtitle><description>Aim Anastomotic leakage is the one of the most serious complications in rectal cancer surgery and is associated with high mortality, morbidity and an increased incidence of local recurrence. Although many studies have compared drained and undrained colorectal anastomoses, to date the role of pelvic drainage in extraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis remains undefined. Method We carried out a systematic review of the literature, performing an unrestricted search in MEDLINE and Embase up to 30 October 2012. Reference lists of retrieved articles and review articles were manually searched for other relevant studies. We performed a meta‐analysis of the data currently available on the incidence of extraperitoneal anastomotic leakage, according to the presence or absence of pelvic drainage. Results Overall, eight studies – three randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and five non‐RCTs, comprising a total of 2277 patients – were included in the meta‐analysis. Pelvic drainage was demonstrated to reduce both the leak rate and the rate of reintervention in patients who underwent anterior rectal resection with extraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis (OR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.36–0.73; and OR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.18–0.46, respectively) compared with patients without drainage. Overall mortality and infection rates were also evaluated, but a nonsignificant correlation was found with the presence of drainage. Conclusion The meta‐analysis shows that the presence of a pelvic drain reduces the incidence of extraperitoneal colorectal anastomotic leakage and the rate of reintervention after anterior rectal resection.</description><subject>Anastomosis, Surgical</subject><subject>Anastomotic Leak - prevention &amp; control</subject><subject>Colon - surgery</subject><subject>colorectal anastomosis</subject><subject>Drainage</subject><subject>Drainage - methods</subject><subject>extraperitoneal</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>leakage</subject><subject>Rectal Neoplasms - surgery</subject><subject>Rectum - surgery</subject><subject>surgery</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1462-8910</issn><issn>1463-1318</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kF1L7DAQhoMc8fvGH3DI5UGoNkmbpFeiq67CouAHijdhmqaQY9usSdZ1_73Rdb10bmYGnnkZHoT2SX5IUh1p19hDQouKrKEtUnCWEUbkn6-ZZrIi-SbaDuF_nhMuiNxAm7SgRSkp2ULtvcONBztg5_HgIo6r3bxHD1PjbXSDgQ5r1zlvdEwjDBCi612w4Rif4LAI0fQQrcbevFkzT0CDexMhS2S3SNguWm-hC2bvu--gh4vz-9FlNrkZX41OJplm6bUMJMi6aCRtuYCatyVjlaYgNc_buqkqzjiVmkgOGmReCk2LWrC2ooWoZc1LtoP-LXOn3r3OTIiqt0GbroPBuFlQpKgoFzQXJKEHS1R7F4I3rZp624NfKJKrT6_q06v68prgv9-5s7o3zQ-6EpkAsgTmtjOLX6LU6ObsahWaLW9s8vf-cwP-RXHBRKker8fqaXIrT-_GI_XMPgD17JMA</recordid><startdate>201402</startdate><enddate>201402</enddate><creator>Rondelli, F.</creator><creator>Bugiantella, W.</creator><creator>Vedovati, M. C.</creator><creator>Balzarotti, R.</creator><creator>Avenia, N.</creator><creator>Mariani, E.</creator><creator>Agnelli, G.</creator><creator>Becattini, C.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201402</creationdate><title>To drain or not to drain extraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis</title><author>Rondelli, F. ; Bugiantella, W. ; Vedovati, M. C. ; Balzarotti, R. ; Avenia, N. ; Mariani, E. ; Agnelli, G. ; Becattini, C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3671-a8a8b4d82f67ab6f5339c2a8c60fbd9963628c186aca8057c24b73f9247b8b653</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Anastomosis, Surgical</topic><topic>Anastomotic Leak - prevention &amp; control</topic><topic>Colon - surgery</topic><topic>colorectal anastomosis</topic><topic>Drainage</topic><topic>Drainage - methods</topic><topic>extraperitoneal</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>leakage</topic><topic>Rectal Neoplasms - surgery</topic><topic>Rectum - surgery</topic><topic>surgery</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rondelli, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bugiantella, W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vedovati, M. C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Balzarotti, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Avenia, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mariani, E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Agnelli, G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Becattini, C.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Colorectal disease</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rondelli, F.</au><au>Bugiantella, W.</au><au>Vedovati, M. C.</au><au>Balzarotti, R.</au><au>Avenia, N.</au><au>Mariani, E.</au><au>Agnelli, G.</au><au>Becattini, C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>To drain or not to drain extraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>Colorectal disease</jtitle><addtitle>Colorectal Dis</addtitle><date>2014-02</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>O35</spage><epage>O42</epage><pages>O35-O42</pages><issn>1462-8910</issn><eissn>1463-1318</eissn><abstract>Aim Anastomotic leakage is the one of the most serious complications in rectal cancer surgery and is associated with high mortality, morbidity and an increased incidence of local recurrence. Although many studies have compared drained and undrained colorectal anastomoses, to date the role of pelvic drainage in extraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis remains undefined. Method We carried out a systematic review of the literature, performing an unrestricted search in MEDLINE and Embase up to 30 October 2012. Reference lists of retrieved articles and review articles were manually searched for other relevant studies. We performed a meta‐analysis of the data currently available on the incidence of extraperitoneal anastomotic leakage, according to the presence or absence of pelvic drainage. Results Overall, eight studies – three randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and five non‐RCTs, comprising a total of 2277 patients – were included in the meta‐analysis. Pelvic drainage was demonstrated to reduce both the leak rate and the rate of reintervention in patients who underwent anterior rectal resection with extraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis (OR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.36–0.73; and OR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.18–0.46, respectively) compared with patients without drainage. Overall mortality and infection rates were also evaluated, but a nonsignificant correlation was found with the presence of drainage. Conclusion The meta‐analysis shows that the presence of a pelvic drain reduces the incidence of extraperitoneal colorectal anastomotic leakage and the rate of reintervention after anterior rectal resection.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>24245821</pmid><doi>10.1111/codi.12491</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1462-8910
ispartof Colorectal disease, 2014-02, Vol.16 (2), p.O35-O42
issn 1462-8910
1463-1318
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1492672071
source MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects Anastomosis, Surgical
Anastomotic Leak - prevention & control
Colon - surgery
colorectal anastomosis
Drainage
Drainage - methods
extraperitoneal
Humans
leakage
Rectal Neoplasms - surgery
Rectum - surgery
surgery
Treatment Outcome
title To drain or not to drain extraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-20T17%3A51%3A43IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=To%20drain%20or%20not%20to%20drain%20extraperitoneal%20colorectal%20anastomosis?%20A%20systematic%20review%20and%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=Colorectal%20disease&rft.au=Rondelli,%20F.&rft.date=2014-02&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=O35&rft.epage=O42&rft.pages=O35-O42&rft.issn=1462-8910&rft.eissn=1463-1318&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/codi.12491&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1492672071%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1492672071&rft_id=info:pmid/24245821&rfr_iscdi=true