In:
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science (PLoS), Vol. 17, No. 8 ( 2022-8-29), p. e0271496-
Abstract:
It has recently been reported that the placement of a transanal drainage tube after rectal cancer surgery reduces the rate of anastomotic leakage. However, transanal drainage tube cannot completely prevent anastomotic leakage and the management of transanal drainage tube needs to devise. We investigated the information obtained during transanal drainage tube placement and evaluated the relationship between these factors and anastomotic leakage. Patients and methods Fifty-one patients who underwent anterior resection of rectal cancer was retrospectively reviewed. transanal drainage tube was placed for more than 5 days after surgery. The daily fecal volume from transanal drainage tube was measured on postoperative day 1–5, and the defecation during transanal drainage tube placement was investigated. Results Anastomotic leakage during transanal drainage tube placement occurred in 4 patients. The anastomotic leakage rate during transanal drainage tube placement in patients whose maximum daily fecal volume or total fecal volume from the transanal drainage tube during postoperative days 1–5 was large was significantly higher than that in patients whose fecal volume was small. The anastomotic leakage rate of the patients with intentional defecation during transanal drainage tube placement was significantly higher than that of the patients without intentional defecation during transanal drainage tube placement. The maximum daily fecal volume and the total fecal volume from the transanal drainage tube during postoperative days 1–5 in patients who experienced intentional defecation during transanal drainage tube placement was significantly higher than that of patients without intentional defecation during transanal drainage tube placement. Conclusion A large fecal volume from transanal drainage tube after anterior rectal resection or intentional defecation in patients with transanal drainage tube placement were suggested to be risk factors for anastomotic leakage.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
1932-6203
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.g001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.g002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.t001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.t002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.t003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.t004
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.t005
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.t006
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.t007
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.s001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.s002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.s003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.s004
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.s005
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.s006
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.s007
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.r001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.r002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.r003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0271496.r004
Language:
English
Publisher:
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Publication Date:
2022
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2267670-3