Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_869_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
31.08.2026
Размер:
36 Мб
Скачать
35 The Role for Perfusion Angiography
377
change in intraoperative management, mostly leading to a more proximal transection of the colon (i.e. conduit) [11, 12, 2529]. When con­sidering only studies with more than 100 patients, there was a change in intraoperative management in 3.7–19% of cases [24]. The perfusion of the proximal colon is a key determinant in the suc­cess of the anastomosis and commonly reliant on the integrity of the marginal artery. A clearly ischaemic section of colon is apparent to all sur­geons, but often it can be difcult to assess the last few millimetres of bowel. The use of a uo­rophore to highlight perfusion to the edge of the transection margin is helpful to make a more con­dent assessment of the bowel viability. A clear cut-off is demonstrated which allows the anasto­moses to be constructed with a healthy, perfused section of bowel.
Decision on the Use of Diverting Ileostomy
PA can also be used as an adjuvant to inform the decision of not creating a diverting ileostomy in the context of low anterior resections [30]. A decision not to proceed with diversion was made in 6% of 90 low anterior resections in the VOIR network study [11], none of which had an anasto­motic leak. It is stated that the results of the per­fusion angiography provided enough assurance not to proceed with the ileostomy. Further study is warranted to explore this nding, but this has nancial and quality of life (QoL) implications. Diverting stoma is often kept for a period of months and associated with morbidity. In addi­tion, there is a nancial burden which must be borne out by healthcare systems.
Ileo-Anal Pouch Assessment
The TAMIS platform and general taTME tech­niques have been used for restorative procto­colectomy with ileo-anal pouch. The current data seems promising [3133], and this surgical approach has been used more frequently. For the pouch to reach the distal site prior to anastomo-
sis, sometimes lengthening techniques must be employed [34]. These involve specic mobiliza­tion of the mesentery but may also involve vascu­lar ligation of the ileocolic, right colic and superior mesenteric artery at its distal third, tak­ing advantage of the perfusion through the right branch of the middle colic and the marginal artery. Due to the need to ligate several important vessels, perfusion angiography could be a useful adjunct during surgery. The use of uorescence in this context has been described previously [11,
35, 36], and this is an area of active research.

Limitations

While the data on the use of PA is rapidly accu­mulating, there is still a need to identify its exact indications and in which patients there is most benet. This would require higher level evidence on the clinical outcomes after PA, a better under­standing of the aetiology of AL, the quantica­tion of the uorescent signal and the development of targeted uorophores.
Current State of Data on PA to Reduce Anastomotic Leaks
So far, no randomized evidence exists on the use of PA and its effect on AL rates. The current stage of this application of uorescence is an IDEAL phase 2b [37]. Despite having opened for recruit­ment, the PILLAR III randomized trial was closed in June 2017 [38]. The IntAct (intra­operative uorescence angiography to prevent anastomotic leak in rectal cancer surgery) trial is currently open for recruitment [39]. The trial will include both patients undergoing laparoscopic TME and taTME.This is an international multi­centre randomized trial that will allocate patients to surgery with or without FA.The primary out­come is clinical anastomotic leak within 90days of surgery. The recruitment target is 880 patients over 36months. The impact of PA in the decision to proceed with diverting ileostomy after colorec­tal anastomosis and after pouch surgery also mer­its further study given the potential benets.
378
A. S. Soares and M. Chand
Multifactorial Aetiology of AL
PA assesses the blood ow to the tissue but does not consider other factors that might play a causal role in the occurrence of AL.Surgeon prediction of AL is not reliable [40]. It seems plausible that patient factors (nutritional status, previous chemoradiotherapy, frailty) and technical aspects play an important role in AL [41]. Recently, dys­biosis and the impact of the microbiome in anas­tomotic integrity have been pursued in mechanistic studies. Surgery represents a major physiological stress, and postsurgical recovery is not fully understood. Recent evidence has shown that the preoperative bowel preparation, prophy­lactic antibiotics and surgical trauma have a sig­nicant impact in the microbiological environment at the anastomosis. The extent to which these factors shape the microbiome has not been completely elucidated [42]. This may lead to a disproportionate increase in bacteria with a more virulent phenotype [41]. The absence of the normal bacteria may favour the occurrence of disseminated infection and sepsis, AL or superin­fection (e.g. C.Difcile). Preclinical models have suggested that inamed and injured intestinal tis­sues undergoing repair select strains of bacteria that express a high collagenase-producing pheno­type which contributes to anastomotic leak [43]. The culture-based methods have been replaced by RNA sequencing and transcriptomic analysis that expands the ability to study the microbio­logical environment [42]. Therefore, there is great potential to explore the microbiome to improve health and prevent AL, as this becomes a more developed area of research.
Fluorescence Quantification
At present there is no method of quantifying uo­rescence in real time in the operating theatre. Benets of achieving this include standardization of the technique by different operators and a pos­sibility of relating uorescence intensity to out­comes. This is not achieved in practice where a qualitative assessment is performed.
Targeted Fluorophores
ICG is a nonspecic uorophore. The knowledge of cell markers [44] and the improvement of tech­nical capabilities have enabled the synthesis of targeted uorophores [45]. The development of this new area of uorescence-guided surgery opens the gateway to tailored uorescence and improved benet for patients. The regulatory pathways for these molecules are not yet stan­dardized [46] which is an area of active interven­tion by the scientic societies.

Conclusions and Future Directions

The use of uorescence angiography has been shown to be promising in observational studies in colorectal surgery and especially in the con­text of colorectal cancer. Lowering the Anastomotic leak rate and its attendant conse­quences is of extreme importance. Randomized trials are underway to better dene the contribu­tion of this technique to patient management. As data accrues, a rise in dissemination of the tech­nique is expected. Further work will also be nec­essary to elucidate the role of non-vascular factors in anastomotic leak. The inuence of the microbiome might be a relevant factor as pre­liminary reports have shown.
Fluorescence-guided surgery will continue to evolve. Future developments include the deni­tion of quantitative measures and synthesis of targeted uorophores. Aiming to improve patient care and outcomes, this eld will certainly increase the precision of the surgical armamen­tarium. It is then the job of surgeons, scientists and healthcare industry to collaborate to intro­duce these developments into clinical practice in an efcient and safe manner.

References

1. Vahrmeijer AL, Hutteman M, van der Vorst JR, etal.
Image-guided cancer surgery using near-infrared uorescence. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2013;10:507–18.
https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2013.123.
35 The Role for Perfusion Angiography
379
2. Gibbs SL.Near infrared uorescence for image-guided surgery. Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2012;2:177–87.
https://doi.org/10.3978/j.issn.2223-4292.2012.09.04.
3. Kobayashi H, Ogawa M, Alford R, etal. New strate­gies for uorescent probe design in medical diagnos­tic imaging. Chem Rev. 2010;110:2620–40. https://
doi.org/10.1021/cr900263j.
4. Nguyen QT, Tsien RY. Fluorescence-guided sur­gery with live molecular navigation— a new cutting edge. Nat Rev Cancer. 2013;13:653–62. https://doi.
org/10.1038/nrc3566.
5. Zhang RR, Schroeder AB, Grudzinski JJ, etal. Beyond the margins: real-time detection of cancer using tar­geted uorophores. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2017;14:347–
64. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2016.212.
6. DSouza AV, Lin H, Henderson ER, et al. Review of uorescence guided surgery systems: identication of key performance capabilities beyond indocya­nine green imaging. J Biomed Opt. 2016;21:080901.
https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JBO.21.8.080901.
7. Keller DS, Cohen R, Chand M, et al. Indocyanine green uorescence imaging in colorectal surgery: overview, applications, and future directions. www.
thelancet.com/gastrohep. Rev Lancet Gastroeneterol
Hepatol. 2017;2:757–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S2468-1253(17)30216-9.
8. Bjerregaard J, Pandia MP, Jaffe RA. Occurrence of severe hypotension after indocyanine green injection during the intraoperative period. A A Case Rep. 2013;1:26–30. https://doi.org/10.1097/
ACC.0b013e3182933c12.
9. Teitelbaum GP. A brief history of angiography and endovascular therapy. Semin Anesth. 2000;19:237–40.
10. Shogan BD, Carlisle EM, Alverdy JC, Umanskiy K. Do we really know why colorectal anastomoses leak? J Gastrointest Surg. 2013;17:1698–707.
11. Ris F, Liot E, Buchs NC, etal. Multicentre phase II trial of near-infrared imaging in elective colorectal surgery. Br J Surg. 2018;105:1359.
12. Jafari MD, Wexner SD, Martz JE, et al. Perfusion assessment in laparoscopic left-sided/anterior resec­tion (PILLAR II): a multi-institutional study. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;220:82–92.e1. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.09.015.
13. Ashraf SQ, Burns EM, Jani A, et al. The economic impact of anastomotic leakage after anterior resec­tions in English NHS hospitals: are we adequately remunerating them? Color Dis. 2013;15:190–9.
https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.12125.
14. Ha GW, Kim JH, Lee MR.Oncologic impact of anas­tomotic leakage following colorectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24:3289–99. https://doi.org/10.1245/
s10434-017-5881-8.
15. McDermott FD, Heeney A, Kelly ME, etal. Systematic review of preoperative, intraoperative and postopera­tive risk factors for colorectal anastomotic leaks. Br J Surg. 2015;102:462–79. https://doi.org/10.1002/
bjs.9697.
16. Penna M, Hompes R, Arnold S, et al. Incidence and risk factors for anastomotic failure in 1594 patients treated by transanal total mesorectal exci­sion. Ann Surg. 2018;XX(1) https://doi.org/10.1097/
SLA.0000000000002653.
17. Vignali A, Gianotti L, Braga M, etal. Altered micro­perfusion at the rectal stump is predictive for rectal anastomotic leak. Dis Colon Rectum. 2000;43:76–82.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02237248.
18. Blanco-Colino R, Espin-Basany E. Intraoperative use of ICG uorescence imaging to reduce the risk of anastomotic leakage in colorectal sur­gery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Tech Coloproctol. 2017;22:8–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10151-017-1731-8.
19. Degett TH, Andersen HS, Gögenur I. Indocyanine green uorescence angiography for intraoperative assessment of gastrointestinal anastomotic perfusion: a systematic review of clinical trials. Langenbeck's Arch Surg. 2016;401:767–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s00423-016-1400-9.
20. Lange JF, Komen N, Akkerman G, etal. Riolan’s arch: confusing, misnomer, and obsolete. A literature survey of the connection(s) between the superior and inferior mesenteric arteries. Am J Surg. 2007;193:742–8.
21. Zattoni D, Popeskou GS, Christoforidis D.Left colon resection with transrectal specimen extraction: current status. Tech Coloproctol. 2018;22:411–23. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10151-018-1806-1.
22. Nachiappan S, Askari A, Currie A, etal. Intraoperative assessment of colorectal anastomotic integrity: a systematic review. Surg Endosc. 2014;28:2513–30.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3520-z.
23. Sherwinter DA, Gallagher J, Donkar T.Intra- operative transanal near infrared imaging of colorectal anastomotic perfusion: a feasibility study. Color Dis. 2013;15:91–
6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-1318.2012.03101.x.
24. I.M. Clinical role of uorescence imaging in colorec­tal surgery-a review. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2017;14:75–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/17434440.20
17.1265444.
25. Boni L, Fingerhut A, Marzorati A, etal. Indocyanine green uorescence angiography during laparoscopic low anterior resection: results of a case-matched study. Surg Endosc. 2017;31:1836–40. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s00464-016-5181-6.
26. Gröne J, Koch D, Kreis ME.Impact of intraoperative microperfusion assessment with Pinpoint Perfusion Imaging on surgical management of laparoscopic low rectal and anorectal anastomoses. Color Dis. 2015;17:22–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.13031.
27. Hellan M, Spinoglio G, Pigazzi A, Lagares-Garcia JA. The inuence of uorescence imaging on the location of bowel transection during robotic left-sided colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc. 2014;28:1695–702.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3377-6.
28. Kudszus S, Roesel C, Schachtrupp A, Höer JJ. Intraoperative laser uorescence angiography in colorectal surgery: a noninvasive analysis to reduce
380
A. S. Soares and M. Chand
the rate of anastomotic leakage. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg. 2010;395:1025–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s00423-010-0699-x.
29. Ris F, Hompes R, Cunningham C, etal. Near-infrared (NIR) perfusion angiography in minimally invasive colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc. 2014;28:2221–6.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3432-y.
30. Ris F, Buchs NC, Morel P, etal. Discriminatory inu­ence of Pinpoint perfusion imaging on diversion ileostomy after laparoscopic low anterior resection. Color Dis. 2015;17:29–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/
codi.13029.
31. De Buck Van Overstraeten A, Mark-Christensen A, Wasmann KA, etal. Transanal versus transabdominal minimally invasive (completion) proctectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in ulcerative colitis. Ann Surg. 2017;266:878–83. https://doi.org/10.1097/
SLA.0000000000002395.
32. Leo CA, Samaranayake S, Perry-Woodford ZL, etal. Initial experience of restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis by transanal total mesorectal rectal excision and single-incision abdominal laparoscopic surgery. Color Dis. 2016;18:1162–6. https://doi.
org/10.1111/codi.13359.
33. de Buck van Overstraeten A, Wolthuis AM, D’Hoore A.Transanal completion proctectomy after total col­ectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcer­ative colitis: a modied single stapled technique. Color Dis. 2016;18:O141–4. https://doi.org/10.1111/
codi.13292.
34. Uraiqat AA, Byrne CMD, Phillips RKS. Gaining length in ileal-anal pouch reconstruction: a review. Color Dis. 2007;9:657–61. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1463-1318.2006.01181.x.
35. Carvello M, David G, Sacchi M, et al. Restorative proctocolectomy and IPAA for right sided colonic adenocarcinoma on FAP: abdominal laparoscopic approach combined with transanal total mesorectal excision - video vignette. Color Dis. 2018;20:355.
https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.14024.
36. Spinelli A, Cantore F, Kotze PG, et al. Fluorescence angiography during transanal trans-stomal proc­tectomy and ileal pouch anal anastomosis - a video vignette. Color Dis. 2018;20:262–3. https://doi.
org/10.1111/codi.13992.
37. Hirst A, Philippou Y, Blazeby J, et al. No surgical innovation without evaluation. Ann Surg. 2018;XX:1.
https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002794.
38. Stamos M, Wexner S.A randomized, controlled, par­allel, multicenter study assessing perfusion outcomes with PINPOINT® near infrared uorescence imaging in low anterior resection; 2017. https://clinicaltrials.
gov/ct2/show/NCT02205307. Accessed 13 Feb 2018.
39. Armstrong G, Croft J, Corrigan N, etal. IntAct: intra­operative uorescence angiography to prevent anas­tomotic leak in rectal cancer surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Color Dis. 2018;20:O226–34. https://
doi.org/10.1111/codi.14257.
40. Karliczek A, Harlaar NJ, Zeebregts CJ, etal. Surgeons lack predictive accuracy for anastomotic leakage in gastrointestinal surgery. Int J Color Dis. 2009;24:569–
76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-009-0658-6.
41. Guyton K, Alverdy JC. The gut microbiota and gastrointestinal surgery. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;14:43–54. https://doi.org/10.1038/
nrgastro.2016.139.
42. Gaines S, Shao C, Hyman N, Alverdy JC.Gut micro­biome inuences on anastomotic leak and recur­rence rates following colorectal cancer surgery. Br J Surg. 2018;105:e131–41. https://doi.org/10.1002/
bjs.10760.
43. Shogan BD, Belogortseva N, Luong PM, et al. Collagen degradation and MMP9 activation by Enterococcus faecalis contribute to intestinal anasto­motic leak. Sci Transl Med. 2015;7:286ra68. https://
doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.3010658.
44. Boonstra MC, Prakash J, Van De Velde CJH, et al. Stromal targets for uorescent-guided oncologic surgery. Front Oncol. 2015;5:254. https://doi.
org/10.3389/fonc.2015.00254.
45. Boogerd LSF, Hoogstins CES, Schaap DP, et al. Safety and effectiveness of SGM-101, a uorescent antibody targeting carcinoembryonic antigen, for intraoperative detection of colorectal cancer: a dose­escalation pilot study. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018;3(3):181–91.
46. Tummers WS, Warram JM, Tipirneni KE, et al. Regulatory aspects of optical methods and exogenous targets for cancer detection. Cancer Res. 2017;77:2197–
206. https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-16-3217.

Perioperative Preparation and Postoperative Care Considerations

Anuradha R. Bhama, Alison R. Althans, and Scott R. Steele
36

Preoperative Assessment

History and Physical Examination
The preoperative assessment for transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) should begin with a thorough history and physical examination, which is the most important part of the patient’s evaluation. Typically, patients will present for their rst visit to a surgeon already carrying a diagnosis, and it is the surgeon’s task to assess if surgery is indicated and formulate the optimal surgical plan. It is important to elicit a thorough description of the patient’s current symptoms, which may indicate either benign or malignant pathology, and to get a sense of the patient’s understanding of his or her condition. In the set­ting of malignancy, the patient could be asymp­tomatic as the lesion may have been identied on
A. R. Bhama Rush University, Chicago, IL, USA
A. R. Althans Department of Colorectal Surgery, Digestive Disease and Surgery Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA
Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA
S. R. Steele (*) Department of Colorectal Surgery, Digestive Disease and Surgery Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA e-mail: steeles3@ccf.org
a routine screening examination. Other patients may present with rectal bleeding, incontinence, rectal pain, weight loss, anemia “change in bowel habits,” diarrhea, constipation, or abdominal pain [1]. Patients should be asked about their bowel habits including the quality of their stool– “pen­cil thin” stools may be a sign of impending obstruction. Patients may also complain of bloat­ing, abdominal cramping, nausea, or vomiting. It is important to assess for these types of symp­toms as they may be indicative of partial obstruc­tion and may alter the initial operative strategy with diversion prior to the initiation of neoadju­vant therapy, if indicated.
Baseline urinary and sexual function should be documented for all male patients. The rates of uri­nary dysfunction following surgery for rectal can­cer have been reported to be between 30% and 70% [25]. Similarly, the rates of sexual dysfunction in men following rectal cancer surgery is reportedly 30–64% [68]. Therefore, it is important to docu­ment function preoperatively to assess for any post­operative changes from baseline. Importantly, it is critical that the prostate gland is adequately assessed by history and physical examination. By DRE, the gland’s shape and size should be estab­lished at baseline. Furthermore, a history of prior prostatic surgery, such as prior radical prostatec­tomy, or a history of prior urethral reconstructive surgery is germane to the planning of the TaTME operation. This can help alert the transanal surgeon of the potential difculty with the anterior plane.
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 S. Atallah (ed.), Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery (TAMIS) and Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision (taTME), https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11572-2_36
381
382
A. R. Bhama et al.
A detailed obstetric history should also be obtained for women including assessment of number of pregnancies, vaginal deliveries, and any instrument-assisted deliveries; this history is important for assessing potential sphincter func­tion. Along these lines, an assessment of preop­erative continence is necessary to determine if a coloanal anastomosis will be tolerated. In cases concerning for possible difculty with postopera­tive continence, anal manometry may be utilized to objectively assess sphincter function.
Additional history should include past medi­cal, surgical, and family history. Past medical his­tory will often guide further preoperative testing. Assessment of baseline functional and cardiopul­monary status may warrant preoperative evalua­tion by specialists in cardiology, vascular medicine, pulmonary medicine, or anesthesia. These specialists may also assist in temporarily stopping or bridging anticoagulation therapy or determine if an inferior vena cava lter is required preoperatively. Frequently, patients with history of renal impairments undergo optimization and coordination with their nephrologists for medica­tion and uid management, as well as for plan­ning perioperative dialysis. Diabetes, immunosuppression, obesity, and smoking must all be addressed and managed preoperatively [9]. Consideration should be given to these various comorbidities that may contribute to an increased risk of anastomotic leak.
A thorough physical examination should focus on the abdominal and digital rectal exami­nations. The abdominal examination should assess for prior scars or hernias that should be taken into consideration for operative planning. The abdomen should be examined for distension, suggestive of partial obstruction, and organomeg­aly or masses, suggestive of potential metastatic disease. Body habitus should be noted as it plays a role in patient positioning and port placement in the operating room. Obesity also inuences potential sites for stoma marking.
Given that the goal of TaTME is sphincter preservation, a careful anorectal examination is crucial. This examination can be done in left lat­eral position or prone jackknife position, depend­ing on the patient’s tolerance and the surgeon’s
preference. First, an external inspection of the perianal skin should be performed to assess for ssures, stulas, abscesses, and skin tags. Patients undergoing TaTME for ileal pouch creation in ulcerative colitis should have a thorough anorec­tal examination to ensure there are no signs of unexpected perianal Crohn’s disease. The patient should be asked to squeeze with their sphincter muscles to assess function of the external anal sphincter. Next, a digital rectal examination is essential, as this will provide information regard­ing function as well as the extent and location of any malignant disease. The state of the pelvic oor muscles can be evaluated on digital exam as well. In cases of malignancy, the surgeon should note relation of the tumor to the anal verge and sphincter complex, possible adherence to of inva­sion of local structures, size of the mass, and qualities of the mass such as texture and mobility. TaTME is an especially helpful technique for obese males with bulky low rectal cancers, as the transanal approach allows for more direct visual­ization and denition of the distal margins, which is typically more challenging in these patients when utilizing the traditional transabdominal approach [10]. In women, if there is suspicion that the tumor invades the vaginal walls, then a vaginal exam should be performed. A bimanual exam, with a nger in the rectum and a nger in the vagina, may be helpful in delineating the true extent of invasion. This can be further character­ized on preoperative staging MRI.
Preoperative Testing
During the general preoperative evaluation, the surgeon should always be cognizant of and searching for factors that may inuence the risk of anastomotic leak. Several studies have identi­ed the following as possible risk factors for leak: male gender, obesity, smoking, chronic immunosuppression, hypoalbuminemia, tumors >25mm, and preoperative steroid and nonsteroi­dal anti-inammatory drug use [11, 12]. As part of the preoperative screening evaluation, all patients undergoing abdominal surgery should generally have routine laboratory tests drawn,
36 Perioperative Preparation and Postoperative Care Considerations
383
including a complete blood count, serum chemis­try, as well as coagulation studies. Blood should be typed and screened. Testing should also include an assessment of the patient’s nutrition levels and protein stores. In patients with rectal cancer, a baseline preoperative CEA level should also be established. Women of childbearing age must have a urine pregnancy test. Patients may be evaluated at a pre-anesthesia clinic, which can determine the need for any further testing such as hemoglobin A1C levels, thyroid function studies, iron studies, electrocardiogram, stress testing, or other testing. Attention should be paid to nutri­tional status, substance abuse screening, preop­erative opioid utilization assessments, and any special medications. This may include anticoagu­lation, immunosuppression, and chemotherapy.
Endoscopic visualization of the lesion is nec­essary following the digital rectal exam. This can be accomplished with exible or rigid proctos­copy, with or without sedation. In cases of benign indications, proctoscopy should be performed to rule out any underlying malignancy. Visualizing the lesion endoscopically will allow for charac­terization of the lesion in regard to circumfer­ence, friability, and both distal and proximal extent. The level of obstruction of the lumen can also be judged during the endoscopic examina­tion. This will help determine if the patient requires diversion prior to the initiation of neoad­juvant therapy. Biopsies can be taken to conrm pathology. If not already done, all patients should undergo a complete colonoscopy to exclude syn­chronous lesions.
Staging is key to the preoperative assessment of any cancer patient. In regard to the history and physical, inquiring about systemic symptoms such as weight loss and fatigue is important. On exam, special attention should be given to signs such as muscle wasting, abdominal distension, hepatomegaly, and lymphadenopathy [13]. As mentioned previously, asking questions regard­ing change in bowel habits and signs of obstruc­tion is important. Utilization of ASCRS and NCCN staging guidelines is necessary for all patients with rectal cancer to direct both local and distant staging. A CT of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis should be obtained for distant staging, and
a pelvic MRI with contrast should be obtained for local staging [14]. In patients with a contraindi­cation to MRI, an endorectal ultrasound can be utilized for local staging. All patients are pre­sented at a multidisciplinary tumor board, where the clinical presentation, radiologic ndings, and pathology slides can be reviewed by a multidisci­plinary group of experts to create an individual­ized plan of care for each patient [15, 16]. The principles of neoadjuvant therapy for patients undergoing TaTME are consistent with those applied to any other preoperative rectal cancer patient. Depending on multidisciplinary tumor board recommendations, patients will typically undergo short- or long-course chemoradiation therapy followed by resection at the appropriate time interval. PET scans are not routinely indi­cated and should be reserved for select situations, typically following the guidance of a multidisci­plinary tumor board recommendation.
Preoperative Stoma Marking
Prior to surgery patients should be marked for ostomy sites. This includes both diverting loop ileostomy and end colostomy. Patients who undergo preoperative marking have better results postoperatively [17]. Patients should always be counseled as to the need for an ostomy. In the case of diverting loop ileostomy, the ostomy does not help prevent anastomotic leak but does mini­mize the clinical severity if one were to occur [18]. In some cases, even with the intention of performing a TaTME with primary anastomosis, there are situations in which an anastomosis can­not be performed and an end colostomy must be created. Patients should be marked and counseled for this possibility, regardless of the low proba­bility of this occurring.
Sphincter Evaluation
In addition to a thorough physical examination, several studies are available to evaluate the func­tion and anatomy of the internal and external sphincter muscle. Since a transanal approach is
384
A. R. Bhama et al.
used, it is important to document baseline func­tion for planning and comparative purposes. Anorectal manometry, which can be performed without sedation, can provide information regard­ing the anatomy and function of the sphincter muscle. First, the length of anal canal can be measured; men typically have a longer sphincter complex than women. Functional metrics that may be assessed include rectoanal reexes, rectal sensation, rectal compliance, and intraluminal pressure changes when bearing down. Resting and squeeze pressures are provided. The volume to rst sensation, volume to rst urge to defecate, and maximum tolerate volume are also measured. Balloon expulsion testing is typically performed. Patients who are unable to expel the balloon within 1 min are suspected to have defecatory disorders [19, 20]. Patients with abnormal manometry may require defecography or endo­anal ultrasound as well. Endoanal ultrasound, especially in women, will provide information regarding the anatomy of the sphincter muscles and whether or not there are any defects in the muscles from prior obstetric injuries. Patients with abnormal studies should be thoughtfully evaluated if proctectomy with sphincter preserva­tion is appropriate, and patients should be selected on an individualized basis.
Preoperative
Patient evaluation and optimization
Patient education
Mechanical and antibiotic bowel preparation
Preoperative analgesia (NSAIDs, gabapentin)
Fasting prior to surgery
Intraoperative
Minimally invasive approaches when indicated
Intraoperative fluid restriction
Intraoperative analgesia (TAP block)
Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis
Postoperative
Early feeding and advancement of diet Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis
Postoperative analgesia (multimodal,avoiding
opioids when possible)
Postoperative fluid restriction
Fig. 36.1 Enhanced recovery after surgery
feeding and advancement of diet, venous throm­boembolism prophylaxis, specic analgesia regi­mens, uid restriction, and discharge planning. While each institution typically has its own spe­cic regimen for ERAS, generalized guidelines exist.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS)

Though titled enhanced recovery after surgery, the ERAS pathways include preoperative, intra­operative, and postoperative components for patients undergoing colorectal surgery that allows for optimization of their entire perioperative care (Fig.36.1).
The preoperative phase includes the initial evaluation of the patient, patient education, mechanical and antibiotic bowel preparation, pre­operative analgesia, and fasting prior to the opera­tion. The intraoperative phase of ERAS includes the utilization of minimally invasive approaches, such as TaTME, intraoperative uid restriction, analgesia, and venous thromboembolism prophy­laxis. The postoperative phase includes early
Preoperative
Preoperative evaluation should focus on optimi­zation of the patient’s general condition as well as specic presurgical elements. Smoking cessa­tion and limiting alcohol consumption have been shown to have improved postoperative outcomes when carried out for greater than 4weeks prior to operation [21]. Optimization of nutritional sup­port, through patient education and/or the addi­tional of protein supplements, may improve the overall status of the patient as well. Evaluation and optimization of medical comorbidities are also necessary and may include several evalua­tions by subspecialty physicians. Preoperative evaluation may include utilization of a modied frailty index (MFI) that has been shown to
36 Perioperative Preparation and Postoperative Care Considerations
385
correlate with increased length of stay and can assist in identication of patients who may require additional resources. These patients may be identied to participate in prehabilitation pro­grams to further optimize outcomes.
Along with optimization of the patient, educa­tion is paramount in preparation for surgery. Clear goals should be set with the patient in regard to pain control, diet advancement, patient participation in recovery, and discharge criteria. In preparation for the operation, all patients should undergo mechanical bowel preparation. Though the utility in bowel preparation in pre­venting infection or leak remains in question, it is still commonly utilized as it provides several benets in the laparoscopic setting. The decom­pressed bowel after mechanical bowel prepara­tion allows for easier manipulation and specimen extraction [22]. The addition of oral neomycin and metronidazole with the mechanical bowel prep remains controversial, but some studies have shown a signicant decrease in rate of post­operative surgical site infection when utilized [23]. Given the transanal nature of the operation, the rectum should be completely cleared of stool for visualization of the rectal mucosa during placement of the purse-string suture in the TaTME approach. Furthermore, colon prepara­tion can help limit the soiling of bacteria into the surgical eld in the event a purse-string failure is encountered intraoperatively.
Traditionally, patients have remained fasting from midnight the night prior to surgery. Some centers have chosen to allow patients to continue to consume clear liquids up until 2h prior to sur­gery and/or provide patients with various carbo­hydrate loading uids to consume the morning of surgery. The theory behind this strategy is that reduction of insulin resistance may lead to a faster recovery [24]. There is no denitive data that this improves surgical outcomes and may in fact increase the anesthetic risks [25]. More research on this topic is necessary prior to draw­ing a rm conclusion.
Prior to the operation, patients should be given venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. 5000units of heparin administered subcutaneously prior to the induction of anesthesia has been shown to
decrease the rate of venous thromboembolism [26]. The use of preoperative intravenous antibiotics administered within 60minutes of the incision, and in adherence with SCIP (Surgical Care Improvement Program) guidelines, has been shown to minimize the risk of surgical site infection [27]. Several antibiotic regimens are utilized (isolated or in combination), including cefoxitin, ertapenem, ampicillin/sulbactam, ceftriaxone, cefazolin, Flagyl, Cipro, gentamycin, and clindamycin [28]. Administration of IV antibiotics within 60 min prior to incision has been found to result in a sig­nicant reduction in surgical site infection follow­ing colorectal surgery [29, 30]. Anti-nausea prophylaxis should also be administered. The utili­zation of alvimopan in minimally invasive surgery remains controversial, and current indications in colorectal surgery include open operations without creation of a diverting ostomy [31, 32].
Intraoperative
There are several intraoperative elements that are involved in the ERAS guidelines that require participation by both the surgical and anesthesia teams. First, surgeons should attempt to utilize minimally invasive techniques when­ever possible, either laparoscopic or robotic. Laparoscopy has been shown to have improved outcomes including decreased surgical site infection, infectious complications, pain scores, anastomotic leak, and decreased length of stay [3338].
Long-acting opioids should be avoided as they contribute to postoperative ileus. In the preopera­tive area, patients may be given various nonste­roidal (acetaminophen, celecoxib) or neuropathic (gabapentin) pain medications to minimize the need for opioids [39]. Another adjunct that may reduce the need for opioids is the transverse abdominus plane (TAP) block [40, 41]. This can be performed by either the anesthesia or surgical teams. This block is designed to anesthetize the nerves that supply the abdominal wall (T6 to L1). Studies have shown that TAP blocks improve immediate postoperative pain outcomes and decrease opiate requirements [42].
386
A. R. Bhama et al.
The routine utilization of nasogastric decom­pression postoperatively is no longer recom­mended. Patients may forgo the use of gastric decompression altogether, or an orogastric tube may be utilized during the operation when indi­cated with removal at the end of the operation [43]. The patient’s body temperature should be maintained at normothermic temperatures (36– 38 °C). Methods to achieve normothermia include use of warm airow blankets, warming the ambient temperature of the operating room, and warm intravenous uids. Maintenance of normothermia has been shown to decrease surgi­cal site infection [44, 45]. Surgical drains should also be used judiciously, as the data regarding drain placement are conicting [46, 47].
One of the more controversial intraoperative ERAS items is the management of uid adminis­tration. There are two approaches to intraopera­tive uid resuscitation– traditional and restrictive [48]. Traditionally, uids are given liberally at a maintenance rate with additional uids given to replenish insensible losses and estimated blood loss. Newer data has emerged that demonstrates that this liberal approach to uid resuscitation has been associated with adverse postoperative outcomes [49, 50]. Several randomized control trials have demonstrated mixed results. Some have shown that a restrictive, goal-directed approach is associated with decreased postopera­tive complications, earlier return of bowel func­tion, and reduced length of hospital stay [51]. Other studies, still, have demonstrated that a lib­eralized uid management approach confers improved outcomes [52]. Further randomized studies are needed to determine the ideal approach to uid management in colorectal patients.
Postoperative
Postoperative ERAS is essential for patient recovery. Over the last decade, there has been a substantial paradigm shift in postoperative care in the colorectal surgery patient in regard to nearly every aspect of their care. Typically, no
nasogastric tubes are left in place and patients are advanced on a diet rather quickly. Patients ini­tially start on clear liquids and advance to full liquids and then a low-residue diet within the rst day postoperatively. Studies have shown that patients who are provided with a solid diet imme­diately postoperatively have shorter overall lengths of stay than those who are started on liq­uids [53, 54]. Patients are allowed to self-regulate their diets based upon their own tolerance levels. If a nasogastric tube is left for gastric decompres­sion, it is closely monitored for output and qual­ity of drainage. The tubes are removed as soon as possible, and the patient is advanced on a diet as tolerated. Multimodal analgesia utilizing nonste­roidal anti-inammatory drugs and neuropathic pain medications helps avoid the need for narcot­ics, which decreases ileus and in turn decreases length of stay. Early mobilization is also a major factor in reducing ileus, and patients are encour­aged to ambulate in the hallway of the surgical unit ve times per day with assistance. Again, uid management is judicious, and as patients tolerate oral intake, intravenous uid rates are minimized.
Post discharge planning starts immediately upon admission to the surgical unit. If necessary, physical therapy evaluations and recommenda­tions are obtained, and discharge needs are iden­tied early. Patients start working with wound ostomy care nursing on the rst postoperative day to become accustomed to managing their ostomy.
Enhanced recovery after surgery requires col­laboration and participation from all members of the patient care team. This includes not only the surgery team but the preoperative nursing staff, the postoperative nursing staff, and the anesthesia teams for management of intraoperative elements. With careful attention to patients’ specic needs, ERAS can allow patients to successfully be dis­charge home safely without a risk for readmission or increased complications. The ERAS protocols used for traditional laparoscopic and open rectal cancer surgery should also be applied to those patients undergoing the TaTME approach.