XXXX following low anterior resection: results of a standardized diagnostic and therapeutic approach.

@entity1 @entity295 @entity834 @entity5 @entity254 @entity1887 @entity2371 @entity530 @entity221 @entity298
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study analyzed the results of a standardized approach in @entity834 following low anterior resection for @entity5 without performance of a protective ileostomy during the primary operation. @entity1 AND METHODS: The study included all 306 @entity1 with @entity5 electively undergoing low anterior resection with retroperitonealization of the @entity254 over 9 years. The diagnostic procedure for @entity834 included serum laboratory investigations and abdominal CT together with contrast enema. Minor leakages, i.e., small leakages and @entity530 , were treated with rectoscopic lavage and/or CT-guided drainage of the abscess, respectively. Major leakage was defined as @entity1887 with or without @entity295 . Nonseptic @entity1 were treated by ileostomy and rectoscopic treatment. In septic @entity1 a revision of the @entity254 with loop ileostomy was performed. RESULTS: @entity834 was diagnosed in 30 @entity1 (overall 9.8%; 12 major, 18 minor leakages). Common clinical signs were @entity2371 and @entity221 . No @entity1 developed a @entity298 . The most accurate diagnostic instrument was CT (96.7%). CONCLUSION: Retroperitonealization appears to prevent @entity298 in @entity1 with @entity834 following low anterior resection. A differential treatment leads to good results in terms of mortality and anorectal function.
