Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The importance of intraluminal anastomotic fecal contact and peritonitis in colonic anastomotic leakages

An experimental study

  • Original Contributions
  • Published:
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum

Abstract

An experimental, randomized, prospective study was performed in 64 dogs to evaluate the effect of fecal loading, solely, or in combination with induced peritonitis, on colonic anastomosis. The animals, none of which had bowel preparations, were randomized into four groups. Group I underwent sigmoid resection and standard open end-to-end anastomosis; Group II underwent sigmoid resection and an intracolonic bypass procedure; Group III underwent experimentally induced fecal peritonitis, sigmoid resection, and anastomosis; Group IV underwent induction of fecal peritonitis, sigmoid resection and an intracolonic bypass procedure. Using Fisher's exact test, results indicate a more statistically significant increased leak rate in Group III than in Group III (P=.04), and Group III than in Group IV (P=.03), but no statistically significant anastomotic leak rate between the peritonitis (III and IV) and the nonperitonitis (I and II) groups. A very significant statistical increase in leak rate (P=.002) was observed when comparing the 25 percent leak rate of Groups I and III (anastomosis subjected to fecal contact) with the 0 percent leak rate of Groups II and IV (anastomosis excluded from fecal contact) regardless of the peritonitis. This study suggests that the intraluminal contact of fecal loading at the colonic anastomosis is a more significant factor in anastomotic complications due to dehiscences than peritonitisper se. It follows, therefore, that if feces can be excluded from intraluminal contact with an anastomotic site, an anastomosis can be safely performed even in the presence of treated peritonitis

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. Halsted WS. Circular suture of the intestine: an experimental study. Am J Med Sci 1887;94:436–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Irvin TT, Goligher JC. Aetiology of disruption of intestinal anastomoses. Br J Surg 1973;60:461–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hawley PR. Infection: the course of anastomotic breakdown—an experimental study. Proc R Soc Med 1970;63:752.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Cronin K, Jackson DS, Dunphy JE. Specific activity of hydroxy-proline-tritium in the healing colon. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1968;126:1061–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Dunphy JE. The cut gut. Am J Surg 1971;119:1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Yamakawa T, Patin CS, Sobel S, Morgenstern L. Healing of colonic anastomoses following resection for experimental “diverticulitis”. Arch Surg 1971;103:17–20.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Irvin TT. Collagen metabolism in infected colonic anastomoses. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1976;143:220–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Ravo B, Ger R. Intracolonic bypass by an intraluminal tube: an experimental study. Dis Colon Rectum 1984;27:360–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Ravo B, Ger R. The management of esophageal dehiscences by an intraluminal bypass tube: an experimental study. Am J Surg 1985;149:733–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Ravo B, Ger R. A preliminary report on the intracolonic bypass as an alternative to a temporary colostomy. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1984;159:541–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Ravo B, Ger R. Temporary colostomy—an outmoded procedure? A report on the intracolonic bypass. Dis Colon Rectum 1985;28: 904–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Ravo B. How I do it: the intracolonic bypass procedure. Int J Colorect Dis 1987;2:38–42.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Ravo B, Mishrick A, Addei K, et al. The treatment of perforated diverticulitis by one-stage intracolonic bypass procedure. Surgery 1987;102:771–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Hawley PR, Faulk WP, Hunt TK, Dunphy JE. Collagenase activity in the gastrointestinal tract. Br J Surg 1970;57:896–900.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Goligher JC, Graham NG, DeDombal FT. Anastomotic dehiscence after anterior resection of rectum and sigmoid. Br J Surg 1970;57:109–18.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

About this article

Cite this article

Ravo, B., Metwally, N., Castera, P. et al. The importance of intraluminal anastomotic fecal contact and peritonitis in colonic anastomotic leakages. Dis Colon Rectum 31, 868–871 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02554851

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02554851

Key words

Navigation