Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 20, Issue 8, pp 2641–2646 | Cite as

Anastomotic Leak Following Low Anterior Resection in Stage IV Rectal Cancer is Associated with Poor Survival

  • James D. Smith
  • Jean M. Butte
  • Martin R. Weiser
  • Michael I. D’Angelica
  • Philip B. Paty
  • Larissa K. Temple
  • José G. Guillem
  • William R. Jarnagin
  • Garrett M. Nash
Gastrointestinal Oncology

Abstract

Background

Anastomotic leak is a serious complication of low anterior resection (LAR). The risk of leak in stage IV rectal cancer patients treated with synchronous or staged resection of the primary tumour and metastatic sites has not been reported. We measured the incidence of anastomotic leak and its association with clinical outcome.

Methods

With institutional review board approval, patients undergoing LAR and resection of metastatic disease were analyzed from a prospectively collected colorectal database between 1992 and 2010. Data for use of ileostomy, clinical anastomotic leak, and clinical risk score (for liver metastases, n = 86) were collected. Categorical variables were compared with the χ2 test. Estimated overall survival was compared using log-rank method and Cox regression analysis.

Results

A total of 184 patients with LAR and stage IV disease were identified. Of those, 123 had curative resection for disease at distant sites. 72 % underwent simultaneous resection, 28 % staged resection. Median follow-up was 2.9 years for survivors. Anastomotic leak occurred in 6.5 %. There was one perioperative death (not attributable to leak). Overall 3-year survival following a leak was significantly worse compared with patients without a leak (35 vs. 73 %, P = 0.01). Clinical leak was associated with worse survival when controlled for use of diverting stoma, operative year, clinical risk score, and timing of resection of metastatic disease.

Conclusions

In this series of patients with stage IV rectal cancer, anastomotic leak was uncommon. However, patients who developed a clinical leak following surgery had worse survival. This finding was independent of use of diverting stoma or staged resection.

Keywords

Local Recurrence Rectal Cancer Liver Metastasis Anastomotic Leak Rectal Resection 

Notes

Conflict of interest

None.

Funding sources

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Jemal A, et al. Cancer statistics, 2010. CA Cancer J Clin. 2010;60:277–300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Law WL, Chu KW. Outcomes of resection of stage IV rectal cancer with mesorectal excision. J Surg Oncol. 2006;93:523–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Martin R, et al. Simultaneous liver and colorectal resections are safe for synchronous colorectal liver metastasis. J Am Coll Surg. 2003;197:233–41; discussion 241–2.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    House MG, et al. Survival after hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal cancer: trends in outcomes for 1,600 patients during two decades at a single institution. J Am Coll Surg. 2010;210:744–52, 752–5.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Long-term results of lung metastasectomy: prognostic analyses based on 5206 cases. The International Registry of Lung Metastases. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1997;113(1):37–49.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rizk NP, Downey RJ. Resection of pulmonary metastases from colorectal cancer. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2002;14:29–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Branagan G, Finnis D. Prognosis after anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum. 2005;48:1021–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Huser N, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the role of defunctioning stoma in low rectal cancer surgery. Ann Surg. 2008;248:52–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Smith JD, Paty PB, Guillem JG, Temple LK, Weiser MR, Nash GM. Anastomotic leak is not associated with oncologic outcome in patients undergoing low anterior resection for rectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2012;256:1034–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fong Y, et al. Clinical score for predicting recurrence after hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal cancer: analysis of 1001 consecutive cases. Ann Surg. 1999;230:309–18; discussion 318–21.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    den Dulk M, et al. Multicentre analysis of oncological and survival outcomes following anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery. Br J Surg. 2009;96:1066–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mirnezami A, Mirnezami R, Chandrakumaran K, Sasapu K, Sagar P, Finan P. Increased local recurrence and reduced survival from colorectal cancer following anastomotic leak: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2011;253:890–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • James D. Smith
    • 1
  • Jean M. Butte
    • 2
  • Martin R. Weiser
    • 1
  • Michael I. D’Angelica
    • 2
  • Philip B. Paty
    • 1
  • Larissa K. Temple
    • 1
  • José G. Guillem
    • 1
  • William R. Jarnagin
    • 2
  • Garrett M. Nash
    • 1
  1. 1.Colorectal Service, Department of SurgeryMemorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Hepatopancreatobiliary Service, Department of SurgeryMemorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations