Quality of life of patients with permanent colostomy and low anterior resections (meta-analysis)
https://doi.org/10.33878/2073-7556-2024-23-2-161-172
Abstract
BACKGROUND: patients with rectal cancer after low anterior resections and with permanent colostomy inevitably face negative functional consequences of treatment. The question of anastomosis performing often remains unanswered. AIM: to compare the quality of life of patients with rectal cancer after low anterior resections and surgical treatment with a permanent colostomy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: literature search was performed in MEDLINE database according to PRISMA criteria using the keywords: “QoL”, “Quality of life”, “EORTC”, “low anterior resection” “rectal”, “stoma”, “ostomy” using suffixes [OR], [AND]. The meta-analysis included 9 retrospective studies with 2438 patients.
RESULTS: no significant differences were found in global health status between the groups (p = 0.11). A significant difference with a worse score in ostomy patients is noted on the physical (p = 0.003), role (p = 0.002), emotional (p = 0.03) and social functioning (p = 0.004). In contrast, patients undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery have a higher incidence of constipation and diarrhea (p < 0.00001).
CONCLUSION: patients with permanent stoma and after low anterior resections have comparable global health status. These patients have different profiles of disturbances in QoL patterns and functional consequences of surgery.
About the Authors
E. A. KhomyakovRussian Federation
Salyama Adilya st., 2, Moscow, 123423, Russia
Barrikadnaya st., 2/1-1, Moscow, 125993, Russia
V. B. Abramenkov
Russian Federation
Salyama Adilya st., 2, Moscow, 123423, Russia
E. G. Rybakov
Russian Federation
Salyama Adilya st., 2, Moscow, 123423, Russia
A. I. Moskalev
Russian Federation
Salyama Adilya st., 2, Moscow, 123423, Russia
O. I. Sushkov
Russian Federation
Salyama Adilya st., 2, Moscow, 123423, Russia
References
1. Barleben A, Mills S. Anorectal anatomy and physiology. Surg Clin North Am. 2010 Feb;90(1):1–15, Table of Contents.. PMID: 20109629. doi: 10.1016/j.suc.2009.09.001
2. Kaprin A.D., Starinsky V.V., Shakhzadova A.O. The state of oncological care for the population of Russia in 2022. M.: P.A. Herzen Moscow State Medical Research Institute — branch of the Federal State Budgetary Institution “NMIRC” of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation. 2023; 254 р. (in Russ.). doi: 10.17709/2409-2231-2015-2-3-118-123
3. Sawicki T, Ruszkowska M, Danielewicz A, et al. A Review of Colorectal Cancer in Terms of Epidemiology, Risk Factors, Development, Symptoms and Diagnosis. Cancers (Basel). 2021 Apr 22;13(9):2025. doi: 10.3390/cancers13092025
4. Rawla P, Sunkara T, Barsouk A. Epidemiology of colorectal cancer: incidence, mortality, survival, and risk factors. Prz Gastroenterol. 2019;14(2):89–103. doi: 10.5114/pg.2018.81072
5. Keum N, Giovannucci E. Global burden of colorectal cancer: emerging trends, risk factors and prevention strategies. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;16(12):713–732. doi: 10.1038/s41575-019-0189-8
6. Rybakov E.G., Nafedzov I.O., Khomyakov E.A., et al. Method Apostille conservative treatments low perednay resection syndrome (review). Koloproktologia. 2018;3:79–83. (in Russ.). doi: 10.33878/2073-7556-2018-0-3-79-83
7. Pappou EP, Temple LK, Patil S, et al. Quality of life and function after rectal cancer surgery with and without sphincter preservation. Front Oncol. 2022 Oct 21;12:944843. PMID: 36353560; PMCID: PMC9639454. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.944843
8. Lee CM, Huh JW, Park YA, et al. Risk factors of permanent stomas in patients with rectal cancer after low anterior resection with temporary stomas. Yonsei Med J. 2015;56(2):447 453. doi: 10.3349/ymj.2015.56.2.447
9. Peng B, Lu J, Wu Z, et al. Intersphincteric Resection Versus Abdominoperineal Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis. Surgical Innovation. 2020;27(4):392–401. doi: 10.1177/1553350620918414
10. Cornish JA, Tilney HS, Heriot AG, et al. A meta–analysis of quality of life for abdominoperineal excision of rectum versus anterior resection for rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(7):2056 2068. doi: 10.1245/s10434-007-9402-z
11. Liberati A, Altman D, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta–analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ [Internet]. 2009;339:2700–b2700. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2700
12. Schmidt C, Bestmann B, Küchler T, et al. Prospective evaluation of quality of life of patients receiving either abdominoperineal resection or sphincter–preserving procedure for rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12(2):117 123. doi: 10.1245/ASO.2005.12.036
13. Feddern ML, Emmertsen KJ, Laurberg S. Quality of life with or without sphincter preservation for rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis. 2019;21(9):1051 1057. doi: 10.1111/codi.14684
14. Kasparek MS, Hassan I, Cima RR, et al. Quality of life after coloanal anastomosis and abdominoperineal resection for distal rectal cancers: sphincter preservation vs quality of life. Colorectal Dis. 2011;13(8):872–877. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2010.02347.x
15. Mrak K, Jagoditsch M, Eberl T, et al. Long-term quality of life in pouch patients compared with stoma patients following rectal cancer surgery. Colorectal Dis. 2011;13(12):e403 410. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2011.02740.x
16. Guren MG, Eriksen MT, Wiig JN, et al. Norwegian Rectal Cancer Group. Quality of life and functional outcome following anterior or abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2005;31(7):735–742. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2005.05.004
17. Näsvall P, Dahlstrand U, Löwenmark T, et al. Quality of life in patients with a permanent stoma after rectal cancer surgery. Qual Life Res. 2017;26(1):55–64. doi: 10.1007/s11136-016-1367-6
18. Konanz J, Herrle F, Weiss C, et al. Quality of life of patients after low anterior, intersphincteric, and abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer –– a matched–pair analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2013;28(5):679–688. doi: 10.1007/s00384-013-1683-z
19. Du P, Wang SY, Zheng PF, et al. Comparison of overall survival and quality of life between patients undergoing anal reconstruction and patients undergoing traditional lower abdominal stoma after radical resection. Clin Transl Oncol. 2019;21(10):1390–1397. doi: 10.1007/s12094-019-02106-x
20. Trenti L, Galvez A, Biondo S, et al. Quality of life and anterior resection syndrome after surgery for mid to low rectal cancer: A cross–sectional study. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2018;44(7):1031–1039. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2018.03.025
21. Sato S, Kato T, Tanaka JI. Defining the distal margin of rectal cancer for surgical planning. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2017 Feb;8(1):194–198. PMID: 28280625; PMCID: PMC5334053. doi: 10.21037/jgo.2017.01.11
22. Tsunoda A, Nakao K, Hiratsuka K, et al. Prospective analysis of quality of life in the first year after colorectal cancer surgery. Acta Oncol. 2007;46(1):77 82. doi: 10.1080/02841860600847053
23. Shelygin Y.A., Pikunov D.Y., Khomyakov E.A., et al. Validation of the Russian-language version of the questionnaire to assess the severity of low anterior rectal resection syndrome. Koloproktologia. 2016;(4):7–14. (in Russ.). doi: 10.33878/2073-7556-2016-0-4-7-14
24. de Campos-Lobato LF, Alves-Ferreira PC, Lavery IC, et al. Abdominoperineal resection does not decrease quality of life in patients with low rectal cancer. Clinics. 2011;66(6):1035–1040. doi: 10.1590/s1807-59322011000600019
25. Maslyankov S, Penchev D, Todorov G, et al. A metaAnalysis of quality of life, estimated by questionnaires of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) after rectal cancer surgery. Chirurgia (Bucur). 2015;110(4):356–361. PMID: 26305200
26. Lawday S, Flamey N, Fowler GE, et al. Quality of life in restorative versus non–restorative resections for rectal cancer: systematic review. BJS Open. 2021;9:5(6). doi: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrab101
Review
For citations:
Khomyakov E.A., Abramenkov V.B., Rybakov E.G., Moskalev A.I., Sushkov O.I. Quality of life of patients with permanent colostomy and low anterior resections (meta-analysis). Koloproktologia. 2024;23(2):161-172. https://doi.org/10.33878/2073-7556-2024-23-2-161-172