Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Revista Científica do Hospital e Maternidade José Martiniano de Alencar

Artigo Original

Vol. 4 No. 2 (2023)

Epidemiological profile of patients undergoing colorectal surgeries and analysis of the incidence of anastomotic fistulas in a secondary hospital - from 2019 to 2024

DOI
https://doi.org/10.54257/2965-0585.v4.i2.88
Submitted
September 18, 2025
Published
2025-09-29

Abstract

Objectives: Anastomotic fistula is one of the most severe complications in colorectal surgery. This study aimed to outline the profile of patients undergoing colorectal surgeries and identify the risk factors associated with the occurrence of fistulas. Methods: A review of medical records from 114 patients who underwent colorectal surgeries was conducted, analyzing data related to sex, age, underlying pathology, type of surgery, surgical approach, incidence of anastomotic fistulas, classification and management, morbidity and mortality. Results: The overall incidence of fistulas was 10.5%, and the factors associated with anastomotic fistulas were male sex (RR=1.89; 95% CI: 0.54–6.59), history of acute diverticulitis (RR=2.03; 95% CI: 0.51–6.09), laparotomic surgery (RR=2.5; 95% CI: 0.8–8.3), and anastomosis involving the rectum (RR=2.8; 95% CI: 0.8–9.8). Conservative treatment was the primary approach (50%), followed by surgical reintervention (41.7%), while a smaller proportion was managed with percutaneous drainage (8.3%). Mortality and lethality rates were 0.87% and 8.3%, respectively. Conclusions: Data analysis suggests that male sex, history of acute diverticulitis, low anastomosis, and laparotomic surgery are the factors most associated with the development of anastomotic fistulas, though without statistical significance. The overall incidence of fistulas is slightly lower than values reported in the global literature, while mortality is well below expected levels, highlighting the excellence and expertise of this service in performing such surgeries. Conservative treatment was sufficient in most cases.

References

  1. Spanjersberg WR, et al. Fast track surgery versus conventional recovery strategies for colorectal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;
  2. Chiarella MM, et al. Anastomotic leakage in colorectal cancer surgery. Surg Oncol. 2022;40:101708.
  3. Tsang Y, Chen W. Management of anastomotic leakage after rectal surgery: a review article. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2019;10.
  4. Vallance A, et al. A collaborative review of the current concepts and challenges of anastomotic leaks in colorectal surgery. Colorectal Dis. 2017;19(1):O1–12. doi:10.1111/codi.13534. PMID: 27671222.
  5. Denicu MM, et al. Anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery: risk factors, diagnosis and therapeutic options. Curr Health Sci J. 2023;49(3):333–42. doi:10.12865/CHSJ.49.03.05.
  6. Beck C, et al. The influence of postoperative complications on long-term prognosis in patients with colorectal carcinoma. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2020;35(6):1055–66. doi:10.1007/s00384-020-03557-3.
  7. Kauv P, et al. Anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery: diagnostic accuracy of CT. Eur Radiol. 2015;25(12):3543–51.
  8. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205–13. doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934
  9. Rahbari NN, et al. Definition and grading of anastomotic leakage following anterior resection of the rectum: a proposal by the International Study Group of Rectal Cancer. Surgery. 2010;147(3):339–51.
  10. Turrentine FE, et al. Morbidity, mortality, cost, and survival estimates of gastrointestinal anastomotic leaks. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;220(2):195–206.
  11. Zhang W, et al. Multicenter analysis of risk factors for anastomotic leakage after middle and low rectal cancer resection without diverting stoma: a retrospective study of 319 consecutive patients. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2017;32(10):1431–7. doi:10.1007/s00384-017-2875-8.
  12. Toyoshima A, et al. Narrow pelvic inlet plane area and obesity as risk factors for anastomotic leakage after intersphincteric resection. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2020;12(10):425–34. doi:10.4240/wjgs.v12.i10.425. PMID: 33194091; PMCID: PMC7642346.
  13. Alekseev M, et al. Intraoperative fluorescence angiography as an independent factor of anastomotic leakage and a nomogram for predicting leak for colorectal anastomoses. Ann Coloproctol. 2022;38:380–6.
  14. Kim MJ, et al. The impact of heavy smoking on anastomotic leakage and stricture after low anterior resection in rectal cancer patients. World J Surg. 2011;35:2806–11.
  15. Kwag SJ, et al. The nutritional risk is an independent factor for postoperative morbidity in surgery for colorectal cancer. Ann Surg Treat Res. 2014;86(4):206–11.
  16. Slim K, et al. Intolerance to early oral feeding in enhanced recovery after colorectal surgery: an early red flag? Colorectal Dis. 2020;22(1).
  17. Bonjer HJ, et al. A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(14):1324–32. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1414882.
  18. Juo YY, et al. Is minimally invasive colon resection better than traditional approaches? First comprehensive national examination with propensity score matching. JAMA Surg. 2014;149:177–84. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2013.3660.
  19. Krarup PM, et al. A nationwide study on anastomotic leakage after colonic cancer surgery. Colorectal Dis. 2012;14:e661–7. doi:10.1111/j.1463-1318.2012.03079
  20. Ellis CT, Maykel JA. Defining anastomotic leak and the clinical relevance of leaks. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2021;34(6):359–65. doi:10.1055/s-0041-1735265.
  21. Guerra F, et al. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on the use of suction drains following rectal surgery. Dig Surg. 2018;35:482–90. doi:10.1159/000485139.
  22. Montedori A, et al. Covering ileo- or colostomy in anterior resection for rectal carcinoma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;(5):CD006878. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006878.pub2. PMID: 20464746.
  23. Sparreboom CL, van Groningen JT, Lingsma HF, Wouters MWJM, Menon AG, Kleinrensink GJ, Jeekel J, Lange JF; Dutch ColoRectal Audit group. Different risk factors for early and late colorectal anastomotic leakage in a nationwide audit. Dis Colon Rectum. 2018;61(11):1258–66. doi:10.1097/DCR.0000000000001202. PMID: 30239395.
  24. McKechnie T, et al. Double-row staple technology versus triple-row staple technology for colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surgery. 2024;176(3):633–44. doi:10.1016/j.surg.2024.04.039. Epub 2024 Jun 13. PMID: 38876899.
  25. Balciscueta Z, et al. Impact of the number of stapler firings on anastomotic leakage in laparoscopic rectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Tech Coloproctol. 2020;24(9):919–25. doi:10.1007/s10151-020-02240-7.
  26. Shen R, Zhang Y, Wang T. Indocyanine green fluorescence angiography and the incidence of anastomotic leak after colorectal resection for colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2018;61(10):1228–34.
  27. Ris F, et al. Multicentre phase II trial of near-infrared imaging in elective colorectal surgery. Br J Surg. 2018;105:1359–67. doi:10.1002/bjs.10844.
  28. Heimroth J, Chen E, Sutton E. Management approach for enterocutaneous fistula. Am Surg. 2018;84:326–33.
  29. McArdle CS, McMillan DC, Hole DJ. Impact of anastomotic leakage on long-term survival of patients undergoing curative resection for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2005;92(9):1150–4. doi:10.1002/bjs.5054. PMID: 16035134.

Most read articles by the same author(s)