Abstract:Objective: To investigate the effect of pelvic peritoneum reconstruction on the prognosis of patients underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection of rectal adenocarcinoma. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 97 patients who underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection of rectal adenocarcinoma in General Surgery Department, the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University from January 2017 to June 2021. According to the implementation of pelvic peritoneum reconstruction, the subjects were divided into study group (48 patients underwent pelvic peritoneum reconstruction after laparoscopic resection) and control group (49 patients not underwent pelvic peritoneum reconstruction). The two groups were compared in terms of Wexner score of anal function, anorectal manometry results, normal rate of defecation sensation, pelvic floor anatomical structure and postoperative complications. Five-year survival analysis was performed. Results: Patients in the study group and the control group were (61.25±10.38) years old and (59.47±11.40) years old (P>0.05). The proportions of male patients were 60.4% (29 cases) and 55.1% (27 cases) (P>0.05) in the study group and control group, respectively. At 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery, Wexner scores of anal function in the study group were lower than those in the control group [(14.29±2.07) vs (16.33±2.18), P<0.001; (9.57±2.34) vs (11.26±2.85), P=0.002; (5.41±1.36) vs (7.86±1.95), P<0.001, respectively]. The anal resting pressure and anal systolic pressure of the study group were higher than those of the control group [(56.29±7.31) mmHg vs (52.88±6.65) mmHg, P=0.018; (129.33±17.36) mmHg vs (110.45±15.22) mmHg, P<0.001, respectively] (1 mmHg=0.133 kPa). The rectal sensory volume, rectal maximum tolerance volume, and the length of anal high-pressure area in the study group were greater than those in the control group [(32.15±4.38) vs (29.76±4.29), P=0.008; (209.57±40.27) vs (184.39±37.56), P=0.002; (3.07±0.52) vs (2.80±0.49), P=0.010, respectively]. At 3 and 6 months after surgery, the normal rates of defecation sensation in the study group were 47.9% (23 cases) and 70.8% (34 cases), respectively, higher than those in the control group [26.5% (13 cases) and 51.0% (25 cases)] (P=0.029 and 0.046, respectively). The detection rate of intestinal tube accumulation in the study group was lower than that in the control group [12.5% (6 cases) vs 38.9% (19 cases)] (P=0.003). There was no significant difference in the total incidence of complications (anastomotic leakage, abdominal infection, intestinal obstruction, pendant pneumonia and urinary tract infection) between the two groups [18.8% (9 cases) vs 24.5% (12 cases)] (P=0.493). There was no significant difference in 5-year cumulative survival rate between the study group and the control group (71.6% vs 68.2%, P=0.309). Conclusion: Pelvic peritoneum reconstruction can improve postoperative anal function and reduce intestinal tube accumulation in patients underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection of rectal adenocarcinoma with high safety and feasibility.

Comparison of Colonic J-pouch and Straight Coloanal Anastomosis after Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Carcinoma: a Meta-Analysis of 8 Randomized Trails

Comparison of colonic J pouch and straight coloanal anastomosis after low anterior resection:a meta-analysis of 759 randomized controlled trails

Surgical Options for Appropriate Length of J-Pouch Construction for Better Outcomes and Long-term Quality of Life in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis after Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis

Effects of Colonic Reservoir Construction and Coloanal Anastomosis on Improving Defecation after Resection for Rectal Carcinoma

J-pouch coloanal anastomosis after low anterior resection for the middle and low rectal carcinoma

A Meta-analysis about Early Results of Small J-pouch Versus Straight Anastomosis after Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer

Meta Analysis of Different Intestinal Tract Reconstruction after Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer

Clinical significance of low anterior resection and colonanal anastomosis with colonic J-ansae using single anastomat

Bowel Control Effect in Elderly Low Rectal Cancer Patients after Colonic J-pouch Anus-Retained Operation

Influence of Different Treatment Methods of Left Colic Artery on Postoperative Rehabilitation of Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Radical Resection of Rectal Cancer

The effect of anus-retained operation in different anastomotic location on bowel control in elderly patients with low rectal cancer

Application of Sigmoid Coloplasty after Resection of Middle or Low Rectal Cancer

[Meta-Analysis for High-Risk Factor of Anastomotic Leakage after Anal-Preserving Surgery for Rectal Cancer].

[Research Progress of Different Bowel Reconstructions for Postoperative Functional Protection During Low Anterior Resections of Rectal Cancer].

Comparison of high or modified low tie of the inferior mesenteric artery in laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: A meta-analysis

Clinical Effects of Prophylactic Transverse Colostomy in Patients Undergoing Completely Laparoscopic Transabdominal Approach Partial Intersphincteric Resection

[Effect of pelvic peritoneum reconstruction on the prognosis of patients underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection of rectal adenocarcinoma]

High and low inferior mesenteric artery ligation in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resections: A retrospective study

Trans-abdominal coloanal anastomosis for low rectal cancer located between 4 and 6cm away from the anal verge

Comparison of Anal Function Between Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision and Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.