Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Risk Factors for Persistent Anal Incontinence After Restorative Proctectomy in Rectal Cancer Patients with Anal Incontinence: Prospective Cohort Study

  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

This study evaluated the notion that preoperative anal incontinence might be a potent predictive factor for anal incontinence (AI) after restorative proctectomy in rectal cancer patients. The principal objective of this study was to determine the risk factors for persistent anal incontinence following restorative proctectomy.

Methods

This study was designed as a single-center, prospective cohort study of a single group of 93 patients who had AI before restorative proctectomy for rectal cancer. The study group was re-evaluated for the presence of AI 12 months after restorative proctectomy or ileostomy takedown. Incontinence severity was determined using the Fecal Incontinence Severity Index (FISI). Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the clinicopathologic factors associated with persistent AI.

Results

Fifteen patients were excluded from analysis due to death within the 12 months after surgery (n = 7), no ileostomy repair (n = 5), loss to follow-up (n = 2), or previous treatment for anal incontinence (n = 1). At 12 months, 53 of 78 patients (67.9%) had persistent AI and 25 patients (32.1 %) had recovered. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that preoperative FISI scores higher than 30 (OR = 11.61, 95% CI 1.43-94.01, p = 0.022) and lower tumor location 5 cm or less from the anal verge (OR = 84.46, 95% CI 3.91-1822.85, p = 0.005) were independent factors for persistent AI.

Conclusions

Anal incontinence may persist after restorative proctectomy in rectal cancer patients with high preoperative incontinence scores and lower tumor location. Therefore, this information should be provided when restorative proctectomy is offered for rectal cancer patients.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Engel J, Kerr J, Schlesinger-Raab A, Sauer H, Hölzel D (2003) Quality of life in rectal cancer patients: a four-year prospective study. Ann Surg 238:203–213

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Pachler J, Wille-Jørgensen P (2005) Quality of life after rectal resection for cancer, with or without permanent colostomy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2:CD004323

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rauch P, Miny J, Conroy T, Neyton L, Guillemin F (2004) Quality of life among disease-free survivors of rectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 22:354–604

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Guillem JG, Chessin DB, Shia J et al (2007) A prospective pathologic analysis using whole-mount sections of rectal cancer following preoperative combined modality therapy: implications for sphincter preservation. Ann Surg 245:88–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ridgway PF, Darzi AW (2003) The role of total mesorectal excision in the management of rectal cancer. Cancer Control 10:205–211

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sauer R, Becker H, Hohenberger W et al (2004) Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 351:1731–1740

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Ito M, Saito N, Sugito M, Kobayashi A, Nishizawa Y, Tsunoda Y (2009) Analysis of clinical factors associated with anal function after intersphincteric resection for very low rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 52:64–70

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Shibata D, Guillem JG, Lanouette N et al (2000) Functional and quality-of-life outcomes in patients with rectal cancer after combined modality therapy, intraoperative radiation therapy, and sphincter preservation. Dis Colon Rectum 43:752–758

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Lewis WG, Martin IG, Williamson ME et al (1995) Why do some patients experience poor functional results after anterior resection of the rectum for carcinoma? Dis Colon Rectum 38:259–263

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Yamada K, Ogata S, Saiki Y, Fukunaga M, Tsuji Y, Takano M (2009) Long-term results of intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 52:1065–1071

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fazio VW, Zutshi M, Remzi FH et al (2007) A randomized multicenter trial to compare long-term functional outcome, quality of life, and complications of surgical procedures for low rectal cancers. Ann Surg 246:481–488

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lange MM, den Dulk M, Bossema ER et al (2007) Risk factors for faecal incontinence after rectal cancer treatment. Br J Surg 94:1278–1284

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Bretagnol F, Rullier E, Laurent C, Zerbib F, Gontier R, Saric J (2004) Comparison of functional results and quality of life between intersphincteric resection and conventional coloanal anastomosis for low rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 47:832–838

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Nesbakken A, Nygaard K, Lunde OC (2001) Outcome and late functional results after anastomotic leakage following mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Br J Surg 88:400–404

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Matzel KE, Stadelmaier U, Muehldorfer S, Hohenberger W (1997) Continence after colorectal reconstruction following resection: impact of level of anastomosis. Int J Colorectal Dis 12:82–87

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Wallner C, Lange MM, Bonsing BA et al (2008) Causes of fecal and urinary incontinence after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer based on cadaveric surgery: a study from the Cooperative Clinical Investigators of the Dutch total mesorectal excision trial. J Clin Oncol 26:4466–4472

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kang SB, Park JW, Jeong SY et al (2010) A comparison of open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid and low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (COREAN trial): short-term outcomes of randomized controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 11:637–645

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Park JS, Kang SB, Kim DW, Lee KH, Kim YH (2009) Laparoscopic resection with selective splenic flexure mobilization for rectum and sigmoid colon cancer: safety of resection without splenic flexure mobilization. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 19:62–68

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Rockwood TH, Church JM, Fleshman JW et al (1999) Patient and surgeon ranking of the severity of symptoms associated with fecal incontinence: the Fecal Incontinence Severity Index. Dis Colon Rectum 42:1525–1532

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Park JS, Kang SB, Kim DW, Kim NY, Lee KH, Kim YH (2007) Iatrogenic colorectal perforation induced by anorectal manometry: report of two cases after restorative proctectomy for distal rectal cancer. World J Gastroenterol 13:6112–6114

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Laurent A, Parc Y, McNamara D, Parc R, Tiret E (2005) Colonic J-pouch-anal anastomosis for rectal cancer: a prospective, randomized study comparing handsewn vs. stapled anastomosis. Dis Colon Rectum 48:729–734

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Matsushita K, Yamada K, Sameshima T et al (1997) Prediction of incontinence following low anterior resection for rectal carcinoma. Dis Colon Rectum 40:575–579

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Williamson ME, Lewis WG, Finan PJ, Miller AS, Holdsworth PJ, Johnston D (1995) Recovery of physiologic and clinical function after low anterior resection of the rectum for carcinoma: myth or reality? Dis Colon Rectum 38:411–418

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Ueno H, Mochizuki H, Hashiguchi Y et al (2004) Preoperative parameters expanding the indication of sphincter preserving surgery in patients with advanced low rectal cancer. Ann Surg 239:34–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Cornish JA, Tilney HS, Heriot AG, Lavery IC, Fazio VW, Tekkis PP (2007) A meta-analysis of quality of life for abdominoperineal excision of rectum versus anterior resection for rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 14:2056–2068

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, 300 Gumi-dong, Bundang-gu, Seongnam, Gyeonggi-do, 463-707, Republic of Korea

    Taek-Gu Lee & Sung-Bum Kang

  2. Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, and Boramae Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea

    Seung Chul Heo

  3. Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea

    Seung-Yong Jeong & Kyu Joo Park

Authors
  1. Taek-Gu Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sung-Bum Kang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Seung Chul Heo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Seung-Yong Jeong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kyu Joo Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sung-Bum Kang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lee, TG., Kang, SB., Heo, S.C. et al. Risk Factors for Persistent Anal Incontinence After Restorative Proctectomy in Rectal Cancer Patients with Anal Incontinence: Prospective Cohort Study. World J Surg 35, 1918–1924 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1116-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1116-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation