Background: The outlet obstruction (OO) rate is 5.4-18.4% after defunctioning ileostomy (DI) following rectal cancer resection to reduce the incidence and severity of anastomotic leakage; OO affects a patient’s quality of life and prolongs hospitalization. Patients and Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed of patients who underwent anterior rectal resection and DI for rectal cancer. Results: Among 100 patients undergoing anterior rectal resection with DI for rectal cancer, 28 (28%) developed OO. Anastomotic leakage and a rectus abdominis muscle thickness ≥10 mm on preoperative computed tomography were significantly associated with the risk of OO in univariate analysis. Multivariate analysis also demonstrated that anastomotic leakage (odds ratio=4.320, 95% confidence interval=1.280-14.60, p=0.019) and rectus abdominis muscle thickness ≥10 mm (odds ratio=3.710, 95% confidence intervaI=1.280-10.70, p=0.016) were significantly risk factors for OO. Conclusion: When OO is observed, an anastomotic leakage should be suspected, especially if there is a high rectus abdominis muscle thickness.

Background Surgery for perforated rectal cancer is technically difficult because of paralytic dilatation due to generalized fecal peritonitis, the presence of a bulky tumor, and fecal retention due to obstruction. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is the latest minimally invasive transanal technique pioneered to facilitate difficult pelvic dissections. It can provide a good surgical field linearly from the perineal side and reduce manipulations from the intraabdominal side. Here, we present two cases of emergency TaTME performed for perforated rectal cancer. Case presentation The patients were a 38-year-old female and a 75-year-old male. They were diagnosed with perforated rectal cancer and were in a state of septic shock. Emergency Hartmann’s procedure was performed in both cases. Intraoperative findings showed fecal contamination of the entire abdomen and dilated intestines and bulky tumors with perforation. The female patient had multiple uterine fibroids, and the male patient had an enlarged prostate. For both patients, dissection of the mesorectum to the anal side of the tumor and transection of the rectum on the anal side of the tumor via a linear stapler were considered difficult because of the insufficient surgical field of view into the pelvis. Therefore, a two-team approach with TaTME was adopted. En bloc resection of the rectum was completed by collaboration of the abdominal team and the transanal team, and the autonomic nerves were successfully preserved. Finally, the specimens were resected, and the anal edge of the rectum was closed with a purse-string suture by the transanal team. Although these two cases were emergency surgeries in difficult situations, the cancer lesions were successfully and safely removed without involvement of the resection margin. Conclusions This is the first report of emergency TaTME. Although these cases were emergency operations in a situation where it was difficult to pursue radical resection—and often times in these situations, the operation may end with only stoma creation—the specimens were safely resected. Emergency TaTME is a useful procedure for treatment of perforated rectal cancer.

Background: In parastomal hernia (PH) repair, laparoscopic Sugarbaker technique (LS) is considered the best practice; however, meshes specific for LS repairs ceased to be available. Purpose:The aim of the study was to evaluate feasibility of using a physicianmodified mesh (tailored mesh: TM) in LS. Methods: Thirty-three patients who underwent LS for PH between June 2012 and September 2021 were examined to compare surgical outcomes between LS with TM (n = 11) and with a ready-made specific mesh (SM, n = 22). All meshes were coated plastic meshes. Statistical analysis was performed with the Mann-Whitney U test and Fisher's exact test. P < .05 was considered to be statistically significant.Results: We compared the outcomes of TM with SM in LS for similar hernia types during median follow-up periods of 23 (range, 2-29) and 74 (range, 36-110) months (P < .0001), respectively. The median operation times were 146 (range, 45-423) for TM and 193 (range, minutes for SM (P = .2301). Perioperative complications were observed in one TM patient (9%) and two SM patients (9%) (P = 1.0000). The lengths of postoperative stay were similar. Recurrence was observed in two cases in the SM group (9%) within 1 year after the operation. Conclusion:In LS, TM seems to be a feasible mesh comparable to SM within short-and mid-term follow-up.

No abstract

No abstract