Urgent Right Hemicolectomy

Abstract Right hemicolectomy with the formation of primary ileotransverse anastomosis is the method of choice in emergency surgery as well.
Aim of the study Comparative evaluation of the results of urgent right hemicolectomy with the formation of a primary anastomosis and without the formation of a primary anastomosis at the first stage of surgical intervention.
Material and methods A retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent emergency right hemicolectomy. The database includes: demographic indicators, comorbidity, data on the general condition of the patient, the time of the surgical intervention, the time from the onset of the disease to hospitalization, laboratory parameters. The patients were divided into two groups. Group 1 included patients in whom the operation was performed with the formation of a primary anastomosis, which was applied manually; group 2 consisted of patients who underwent surgery with the formation of a separate double-barrel stoma and the 2nd stage of surgical intervention was planned. The Clavien–Dindo classification was used to assess postoperative complications.
Results The results of 112 right hemicolectomies performed according to emergency indications were analyzed. Group 1 (operations with the formation of a primary anastomosis) included 87 patients (77.7%); group 2 (n=25) included 18 patients (16.1%) who underwent two-stage operations: stage 1 — right hemicolectomy without primary anastomosis formation, stage 2 — restorative intervention, anastomosis formation; and 7 patients (6.2%), in whom the operation ended with the formation of a separate double-barreled intestinal stoma. In the 1st group, the patients were younger: the average age was 61 years versus 73 years in the 2nd group (p=0.021). Patients of the 2nd group were in a more serious condition upon admission (ASA III–IV) and had a higher comorbidity. The average duration of surgical intervention was 162±10.2 minutes in group 1 and 110±9.5 minutes in group 2 (p=0.038). Group 2 had more serious complications (IIIB–IVB according to Clavien–Dindo) compared to group 1 (p=0.001). The main factors that had a statistically significant impact on the risk of postoperative complications were: severe degree of comorbidity (odds ratio — OR 3.1; 95% confidence interval — CI 1.4–6.3; p=0.002), severe general condition upon admission — ASA III–IV (OR 2.7; 95% CI 1.2–7.4; p=0.01), anemia — Hb<90 g/l (OR 1.7; 95% CI 1.5– 6.1; Odd=0.004), time between the onset of the disease and admission more than 12 hours (OR 2.1; 95% CI 0.9–6.8; p=0.03), time to perform the operation (OR 2 .05, 95% CI 1.38–8.1, p=0.033).
Conclusion The presence of chronic diseases characterized by systemic lesions and comorbidity determines the choice of a primary treatment strategy for perforation, bleeding, acute mesenteric ischemia, where it is advisable to perform a right hemicolectomy without primary anastomosis, followed by recovery stage.

1. Chaouch MA, Dougaz MW, Mesbehi M, Jerraya H, Nouira R, Khan JS, et al. A meta- analysis comparing hand-assisted laparoscopic right hemicolectomy and open right hemicolectomy for right-sided colon cancer. World J Surg Oncol. 2020;18(1):91. PMID:32381008 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-020-01869-w

2. Morita S, Ikeda K, Komori T, Tanida T, Hatano H, Tomimaru Y, et al. Outcomes in Colorectal Surgeon-Driven Management of Obstructing Colorectal Cancers. Dis Colon Rectum. 2016;59(11):1028–1033. PMID:27749477 https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0000000000000685

3. Li YW, Lian P, Huang B, Zheng HT, Wang MH, Gu WL, et al. Very Early Colorectal Anastomotic Leakage within 5 Post-operative Days: a More Severe Subtype Needs Relaparatomy. Sci Rep. 2017;7:39936. PMID:28084305 https://doi.org/10.1038/srep39936

4. Favuzza J. Risk Factors for Anastomotic Leak, Consideration for Proximal Diversion, and Appropriate Use of Drains. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2021;34(6):366–370. PMID:34853556 https://doi.org/10.1055/s0041-1735266

5. Neri A, Fusario D, Marano L, Savelli V, Bartalini Cinughi de Pazzi A, Cassetti D, et al. Clinical evaluation of the Mannheim Prognostic Index in post-operative peritonitis: a prospective cohort study. Updates Surg. 2020;72(4):1159–1166. PMID:32578039 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-020-00831-5

6. Yilmaz Y, Cengiz F, Kamer E, Acar T, Gür EÖ, Bag H, et al. The factors that affect the mortality of emergency operated ASA 3 colon cancer patients. Pan Afr Med J. 2020;36:290. PMID:33117484 https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2020.36.290.24385

7. Boström P, Svensson J, Brorsson C, Rutegård M. Early postoperative pain as a marker of anastomotic leakage in colorectal cancer surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2021;36(9):1955–1963. PMID:34272996 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-021-03984-w

8. Gray M, Marland JRK, Murray AF, Argyle DJ, Potter MA. Predictive and Diagnostic Biomarkers of Anastomotic Leakage: A Precision Medicine Approach for Colorectal Cancer Patients. J Pers Med. 2021;11(6):471. PMID:34070593 https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11060471

9. Tsuchiya A, Yasunaga H, Tsutsumi Y, Matsui H, Fushimi K. Mortality and Morbidity After Hartmann’s Procedure Versus Primary Anastomosis Without a Diverting Stoma for Colorectal Perforation: A Nationwide Observational Study. World J Surg. 2018;42(3):866–875. PMID:28871326 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-017-4193-2

10. Lambrichts DPV, Vennix S, Musters GD, Mulder IM, Swank HA, Hoofwijk AGM, et al.; LADIES trial collaborators. Hartmann’s procedure versus sigmoidectomy with primary anastomosis for perforated diverticulitis with purulent or faecal peritonitis (LADIES): a multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, open-label, superiority trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;4(8):599–610. PMID:31178342 https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-1253(19)30174

11. Pisano M, Zorcolo L, Merli C, Cimbanassi S, Poiasina E, Ceresoli M, et al. 2017 WSES guidelines on colon and rectal cancer emergencies: obstruction and perforation. World J Emerg Surg. 2018; 13:36. PMID:30123315 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13017-018-0192-3

12. Petrov DI, Yartsev PA., Blagovestnov DA, Levitsky VD, Tsuleiskiri BT, Kirsanov II, et al. Minimally Invasive Methods of Temporary Decompression of the Colon with Obturation Colonic Obstruction: a Literature Review. Russian Sklifosovsky Journal Emergency Medical Care. 2019;8(1):74–80. https://doi.org/10.23934/2223-9022-2019-8-1-74-80

13. Chernookov AI, Mylnikov AG, Garunov AN, Marinova LA, Karapetyan MM, Kosachenko MV, et al. Minimally Invasive Approach for RightSided Colon Cancer, Complicated By Large-Bowel Obstruction. Russian Sklifosovsky Journal Emergency Medical Care. 2017;6(2):166–169. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.23934/2223-9022-2017-6-2-166-169

14. Amelung FJ, de Beaufort HW, Siersema PD, Verheijen PM, Consten EC. Emergency resection versus bridge to surgery with stenting in patients with acute right-sided colonic obstruction: a systematic review focusing on mortality and morbidity rates. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2015;30(9):1147–1155. PMID:25935448 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-015-2216-8

15. Boeding JRE, Ramphal W, Rijken AM, Crolla RMPH, Verhoef C, Gobardhan PD, et al. A Systematic Review Comparing Emergency Resection and Staged Treatment for Curable Obstructing Right-Sided Colon Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28(7):3545–3555. PMID:33067743 https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-09124-y

16. Shabunin AV, Bagateliya ZA. Algorithm of Surgical Care in Complicated Colorectal Cancer. Koloproktologia. 2019;18(1(67)):66–73. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.33878/2073-7556-2019-18-1-66-73

17. Schaeva SN. Survival analysis for complicated colorectal cancer. Pelvic Surgery and Oncology. 2017;7(2):20–29. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17650/2220-3478-2017-7-2-20-29

18. Mureșan MG, Balmoș IA, Badea I, Santini A. Abdominal Sepsis: An Update. J Crit Care Med (Targu Mures). 2018;4(4):120–125. PMID:30574564 https://doi.org/10.2478/jccm-2018-0023

19. Berg A, Rosenzweig M, Kuo YH, Onayemi A, Mohidul S, Moen M, et al. The results of rapid source control laparotomy or open abdomen for acute diverticulitis. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2022;407(1):259–265. PMID:34455491 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-021-02304-8

20. El Edelbi M, Abdallah I, Jaafar RF, Tamim H, Deeba S, Doughan S. Comparing Emergent and Elective Colectomy Outcomes in Elderly Patients: A NSQIP Study. Int J Surg Oncol. 2021;2021: 9990434. PMID:34912578 https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/9990434

21. Yamamoto R, Logue AJ, Muir MT. Colon Trauma: Evidence-Based Practices. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2018;31(1):11–16. PMID:29379402 https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0037-1602175

22. Otani K, Kawai K, Hata K, Tanaka T, Nishikawa T, Sasaki K, et al. Colon cancer with perforation. Surg Today. 2019;49(1):15–20. PMID:29691659 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-018-1661-8

23. Lolis ED, Theodoridou E, Vogiatzis N, Neonaki D, Markakis C, Daskalakis K. The safety of primary repair or anastomosis in high-risk trauma patients. Surg Today. 2015;45(6):730–739. PMID:25030128 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-014-0982-5

24. Christou N, Rivaille T, Maulat C, Taibi A, Fredon F, Bouvier S, et al. Identification of risk factors for morbidity and mortality after Hartmann’s reversal surgery – a retrospective study from two French centers. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):3643. PMID:32107426 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-60481-w