Skip to main content
Log in

Efficacy of dilatations for anastomotic colorectal stenoses: prognostic factors

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
International Journal of Colorectal Disease Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The authors report their experience of 30 patients with colorectal anastomotic stenosis treated by 62 dilatation sessions in order to evaluate which anastomotic characteristics could influence the success of dilatation therapy. Patients were subdivided into group A (dilatation successful) and group B (dilatation unsuccessful). Overall, dilatation was successful in 73.3% of cases, with only one important complication. The prognostic factors considered were anastomotic dehiscence, adjuvant radiotherapy, presence of colostomy at dilatation, site, morphology and length of the stenosis, presence of neoplastic recurrence, type of anastomosis and type of dilatation. Radiotherapy, local neoplastic recurrence and large anastomotic dehiscence were the more important independent prognostic factors. If present together, they were associated with an almost 100% probability of failure and, vice versa, if they were absent this probability was 5%.

Résumé

Les auteurs rapportent l'expérience sur 30 patients porteurs de sténose anastomotique colo-rectale traités par 62 séances de dilatation et tentent de préciser quelles sont les caractéristiques anastomotiques qui peuvent influencer sur le succès de la dilatation. Les patients ont été divisés en deux groupes: le groupe A chez lequel la dilatation a été réalisée avec succès et le groupe B chez lequel la dilatation a été infructueuse. Dans l'ensemble, la dilatation a été efficace chez 73,3% des cas avec seulement une complication importante. Les facteurs pronostiques considérés furent la déhiscence anastomotique, la radiothérapie adjuvante, la présence d'une colostomie lors de la dilatation, l'emplacement, la morphologie, la longuer de la sténose, la présence d'une récidive tumorale, le type d'anastomose et le type de dilatation. La radiothérapie, la récidive néoplasique locale et une large déhiscence anastomotique constituent les facteurs pronostiques et indépendants les plus importants. Si ces facteurs sont présents ensemble, ils sont associés avec une probabilité d'échec de la dilatation de près de 100% alors que s'ils sont absents les trois, la probabilité d'échec n'est que de 5%.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Luchtefeld MA, Milsom JW, Senagore A, Surrell JA, Mazier WP (1989) Colorectal anastomotic stenosis. Results of survey of the ASCRS Membership. Dis Colon Rectum 32:733–736

    Google Scholar 

  2. Dixon WJ, Brown MB, Engelman L, Jennrich RI (1990) BMDP statistical software manual. UCLA, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  3. Gordon HP, Vasilevsky CA (1984) Experience with stapling in rectal surgery. Surg Clin North Am 64:555–566

    Google Scholar 

  4. Fasth S, Hedlund H, Svaninger G, Hulten L (1982) Autosuture of low colorectal anastomosis. Acta Chir Scand 148:535–539

    Google Scholar 

  5. Jex RK, VanHeerden JA, Wolff BG, Ready RL, Ilstrup DM (1987) Gastrointestinal anastomoses: factors affecting early complications. Ann Surg 206:138–141

    Google Scholar 

  6. Fegiz G, Angelini L, Bezzi M (1983) Rectal cancer: restorative surgery with EEA stapling device. Int Surg 68:13–18

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kozarek R (1986) Hydrostatic balloon dilation of gastrointestinal stenoses: a national survey. Gastrointest Endosc 32:15–19

    Google Scholar 

  8. Fregonese D, Di Falco G, Di Toma F (1990) Balloon dilatation of anastomotic intestinal stenoses: long-term results. Endoscopy 22:249–253

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bedogni G, Ricci E, Pedrazzoli C, Conigliaro R, Barbieri I, Bertoni G, Contini S, Serafini G (1987) Endoscopic dilation of anastomotic colonic stenosis by different techniques: an alternative to surgery? Gastrointest Endosc 33:21–26

    Google Scholar 

  10. Antonsen HK, Kronborg O (1987) Early complications after low anterior resection for rectal cancer using the EEA stapling device. A prospective trial. Dis Colon Rectum 30:579–583

    Google Scholar 

  11. Tuson JRD, Everett WG (1990) A retrospective study of colostomies, leaks and strictures after colorectal anastomosis. Int J Colorect Dis 5:44–48

    Google Scholar 

  12. Venkatesh KS, Ramanujam PS, McGee S (1992) Hydrostatic balloon dilatation of benign colonic anastomotic strictures. Dis Colon Rectum 35:789–791

    Google Scholar 

  13. Graffner H, Fredlund P, Olsson SA, Oscarson J, Petersson BG (1983) Protective colostomy in low anterior resection of the rectum using the EEA stapling instrument. A randomised study. Dis Colon Rectum 26:87–90

    Google Scholar 

  14. Yamane T, Takahashi T, Okuzumi J, Fujita Y (1992) Anastomotic stricture with the EEA stapler after colorectal operation in the dog. Surg Gynecol Obstet 174:41–45

    Google Scholar 

  15. Goligher J (1984) Surgery of the anus rectum and colon. 5th edn. Bailliére Tindall, London, pp 708–709

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pucciarelli, S., Toppan, P., Pilati, P.L. et al. Efficacy of dilatations for anastomotic colorectal stenoses: prognostic factors. Int J Colorect Dis 9, 149–152 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00290192

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00290192

Keywords

Navigation