A meta-analysis comparing side to end with colonic J-pouch formation after anterior resection for rectal cancer.
BACKGROUND
A meta-analysis of published literature comparing J-pouch with side to end anastomosis after anterior resection (AR) for rectal cancer.


METHODS
Electronic databases were searched from January 1980 to March 2009. A systematic review was performed to obtain a summative outcome.


RESULTS
Four randomized controlled trials involving 273 patients were analysed. One hundred and thirty-eight patients were in the J-pouch and 135 in the side to end anastomosis (STEA) group. No significant difference in surgically related outcomes was established (hospital stay, operative time, estimated blood loss, overall morbidity and mortality). Resting pressures at 24 months post-operatively were lower in J-pouch group compared with STEA and approached statistical significance [random effects model: SMD = -1.23, 95% CI (-2.47, -0.01), z = -1.94, P = 0.053]. No statistical difference was found in volumetric parameters (Volume at which the patient first experiences a sensation to defaecate and maximal tolerable volume). No statistical difference except urgency at 6 months [P < 0.05] was elicited in functional outcomes (use of enemas, bowel medications, pads, incomplete defaecation and stool frequency) between J-pouch and STEA groups.


CONCLUSIONS
J-pouch or STEA are acceptable and safe options after AR for rectal cancer. Either approach may be considered according to surgeon choice. A randomized controlled trial including a larger number of patients is required to strengthen the evidence.
Siddiqui
M R S
MR
Department of Colorectal Surgery, Worthing Hospital, Worthing, West Sussex, BN11 2DH, UK. md0u812a@mac.com
Sajid
M S
MS
Woods
W G A
WG
Cheek
E
E
Baig
M K
MK
D000714:Anastomosis, Surgical / Q000379:methods*; D039021:Colonic Pouches; D006801:Humans; D016737:Proctocolectomy, Restorative; D012004:Rectal Neoplasms / Q000473:pathology / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000601:surgery*; D016896:Treatment Outcome