Ostomy function after abdominoperineal resection—a clinical and patient evaluation
- First Online:
Abdominoperineal resection (APR) for rectal cancer results in a permanent colostomy. As a consequence of a recent change in operative technique from standard (S-APR) to extralevator resection (E-APR), the perineal part of the procedure is now performed with the patient in a prone jackknife position. The impact of this change on stoma function is unknown. The aim was to determine stoma-related complications and the individual patient experience of a stoma.
Consecutive patients with rectal cancer operated on with APR in one institution in 2004 to 2009 were included. Recurrent cancer, palliative procedures, pre-existing stoma and patients not alive at the start of the study were excluded. Data were collected from hospital records and the national colorectal cancer registry. A questionnaire was sent out to patients. The median follow-up was 44 months (13–84) after primary surgery.
Ninety-six patients were alive in February 2011. Seventy seven agreed to participate. Sixty-nine patients (90 %) returned the questionnaire. Stoma necrosis was more common for E-APR, 34 % vs. 10 %, but bandaging problems and low stoma height were more common for S-APR. There were no differences in the patients' experience of stoma function. In all, 35 % of the patients felt dirty and unclean, but 90 % felt that they had a full life and could engage in leisure activities of their choice.
This exploratory study indicates no difference in stoma function after 1 year between S-APR and E-APR. Over 90 % of the patients accept their stoma, but our study indicates that more information and support for patients are warranted.
KeywordsOstomy Rectal cancer Abdominoperineal excision Quality of life
- 2.Valentini V, Aristei C, Glimelius B, Minsky BD, Beets-Tan R, Borras JM, Haustermans K, Maingon P, Overgaard J, Pahlman L, Quirke P, Schmoll HJ, Sebag-Montefiore D, Taylor I, Van Cutsem E, Van de Velde C, Cellini N, Latini P (2009) Multidisciplinary rectal cancer management: 2nd European Rectal Cancer Consensus Conference (EURECA-CC2). Radiother Oncol 92(2):148–163. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2009.06.027 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Peeters KC, Marijnen CA, Nagtegaal ID, Kranenbarg EK, Putter H, Wiggers T, Rutten H, Pahlman L, Glimelius B, Leer JW, van de Velde CJ (2007) The TME trial after a median follow-up of 6 years: increased local control but no survival benefit in irradiated patients with resectable rectal carcinoma. Ann Surg 246(5):693–701PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.den Dulk M, Putter H, Collette L, Marijnen CA, Folkesson J, Bosset JF, Rodel C, Bujko K, Pahlman L, van de Velde CJ (2009) The abdominoperineal resection itself is associated with an adverse outcome: the European experience based on a pooled analysis of five European randomised clinical trials on rectal cancer. Eur J Cancer 45:1175–1183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Stelzner S, Koehler C, Stelzer J, Sims A, Witzigmann H (2011) Extended abdominoperineal excision vs. standard abdominoperineal excision in rectal cancer—a systematic overview. Int J Colorectal Dis. doi:10.1007/s00384-011-1235-3
- 10.Nastro P, Knowles CH, McGrath A, Heyman B, Porrett TR, Lunniss PJ (2010) Complications of intestinal stomas. Br J Surg. doi:10.1002/bjs.7259
- 15.Lian L, Wu XR, He XS, Zou YF, Wu XJ, Lan P, Wang JP (2011) Extraperitoneal vs. intraperitoneal route for permanent colostomy: a meta-analysis of 1,071 patients. Int J Colorectal Dis. doi:10.1007/s00384-011-1293-6
- 27.Kasparek MS, Hassan I, Cima RR, Larson DR, Gullerud RE, Wolff BG (2010) Quality of life after rectal excision and coloanal anastomosis for distal rectal cancers: sphincter preservation versus quality of life. Colorectal Dis. doi:10.1111/j.1463-1318.2010.02347.x
- 28.Asplund D, Haglind E, Angenete E (2012) Outcome of extralevator abdominoperineal excision compared with standard surgery. Results from a single centre. Colorectal Dis. doi:10.1111/j.1463-1318.2012.02930.x