A comparative study between primary resection anastomosis versus Hartmann’s procedure with colostomy in patients of colonic mass presenting with acute intestinal obstruction

Kishore Kumar A.; Kirankumar P. Jadhav; Kishor B. Jeughale; Manisha T. Chavan; Aniket B. Deshmukh; Riyaz Pinjari

doi:10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20252777

Authors

Kishore Kumar A. Department of General Surgery, B. J. Government Medical College, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Kirankumar P. Jadhav Department of General Surgery, B. J. Government Medical College, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Kishor B. Jeughale Dr. D. Y. Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre, Pimpri, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Manisha T. Chavan Department of General Surgery, B. J. Government Medical College, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Aniket B. Deshmukh Department of General Surgery, B. J. Government Medical College, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Riyaz Pinjari Department of General Surgery, B. J. Government Medical College, Pune, Maharashtra, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20252777

Keywords:

Acute intestinal obstruction, Hartmann procedure, Colostomy, Colonic mass, Primary resection and anastomosis, Postoperative complications

Abstract

Background: Acute intestinal obstruction is a life-threatening condition, with colonic masses being a significant cause. The choice of surgical procedure primary resection and anastomosis (PRA) or the Hartmann procedure (HP) with colostomy-depends on multiple factors, including patient stability and the extent of obstruction. Both techniques have distinct advantages and associated risks, with ongoing debate about their comparative outcomes in emergency settings.

Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted over 18 months at the Department of Surgery, B. J. M. C. and S. G. H. Pune. Sixty patients with colonic masses presenting with acute intestinal obstruction were analysed. Patients were divided into two groups: those undergoing PRA and those undergoing HP. Data on perioperative parameters, postoperative complications, and outcomes were collected and statistically analysed using statistical package for the social sciences (SPSS) version 18.0.

Results: Among the 60 patients, PRA was associated with shorter hospital stays (mean 7.57 days) compared to HP (mean 12.33 days; p=0.000). Postoperative wound infections occurred in 25% of patients, with higher rates in the HP group (33.3%) than the PRA group (16.7%). Colostomy-related complications were exclusive to the HP group (23.3%). There was no significant difference in mortality between the two groups (6.7% each), but PRA patients experienced a higher rate of anastomotic leaks (6.7%).

Conclusions: PRA offers faster recovery and fewer long-term complications in select patients, while HP remains safer for those with severe contamination or hemodynamic instability. Individualized patient assessment is crucial for determining the optimal surgical approach.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Tekkis PP, Kinsman R, Thompson MR, Stamatakis JD. The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland study of large bowel obstruction caused by colorectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2004;240(1):76-81.

De Salvo L, Vallribera F, Mora L. Management of acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: a European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP) survey. Colorectal Dis. 2020;22(9):1173-82.

Biondo S, Martí-Ragué J, Kreisler E. Emergency operations for obstructed colorectal neoplasms in the elderly. Dis Colon Rectum. 2005;48(5):1055-61.

Van Hooft JE, van Halsema EE, Vanbiervliet G, Beets-Tan RGH, Everett S, Götz M, et al. Self-expandable metal stents for obstructing colonic and extracolonic cancer: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline. Endoscopy. 2014;46(11):990-1053. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1390700

Vermeer TA, Orsini RG, Daams F, Tanis PJ, Bemelman WA. Anastomotic leakage and postoperative mortality in patients undergoing surgery for left-sided obstructive colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Oncol. 2015;24(2):117-24.

Resch T, Biebl M, Mittlböck M. Primary anastomosis vs. Hartmann’s procedure in left-sided colon and proximal rectal cancer obstruction. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2020;405(1):71-9.

Khan MA, Hossain MS, Uddin MJ. Outcome of primary anastomosis in patients with obstructive left sided colorectal cancer: a prospective study. Mymensingh Med J. 2022;31(1):102-8.

Braga M, Frasson M, Vignali A, Zuliani W, Di Carlo V. Laparoscopic resection in diverticular disease: a prospective comparative study. Dis Colon Rectum. 2002;45(8):1032-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-004-6362-2

Fleischmann D, Roller M, Wenzl E. Quality of life in patients with permanent colostomy: Results of the Austrian Stoma Registry. Colorectal Dis. 2021;23(7):1805-12.

Deijen CL, Velthuis S, Tsai A. Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer: a randomized trial. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18(3):297-307.

Chang GJ, Kaiser AM, Mills S, Rafferty JF. Practice parameters for the management of colon cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2012;55(8):831-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0b013e3182567e13

Johnson RL, Sun V, Hays RD. Health-related quality of life and functional outcomes in long-term colorectal cancer survivors with ostomies: results from the CanCORS cohort. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39(4):365-75.

Ekinci O, Gapbarov A, Erol CI, Yabanoglu H, Caliskan C, Gok AFK, et al. Resection and Primary Anastomosis versus Hartmann’s Operation in Emergency Surgery for Acute Mechanical Obstruction due to Left-Sided Colorectal Cancer. Indian J Surg. 2021;83(2):428-34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-020-02387-5

De Salvo GL, Gava C, Pucciarelli S, Lise M. Curative surgery for obstruction from primary left colorectal carcinoma: Primary or staged resection? Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004;2:CD002101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002101.pub2

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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13017-018-0192-3

Cirocchi R, Farinella E, Trastulli S, Desiderio J, Listorti C, Parisi A, et al. Safety and efficacy of endoscopic colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery versus emergency surgery for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Oncol. 2013;22(1):14-21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suronc.2012.10.003

Aslaner A, Kuzu MA, Çetinkaya E, Balik E, Cihan A, Karasu S, et al. A multicentre randomized controlled trial comparing primary anastomosis with or without defunctioning stoma versus Hartmann’s procedure in patients with left-sided colorectal emergencies: ColoCare study protocol. BMC Surg. 2016;16(1):37.

Coccolini F, Ansaloni L, Manfredi R, Montori G, De’ Angelis N, Sartelli M, et al. Perforated colorectal cancer: predictive factors and prognosis. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2017;402(3):371-9.

Kronborg O, Hage E, Deichgraeber E. The value of emergency stenting as a bridge to surgery in obstructing colorectal cancer: a randomized controlled trial. Dis Colon Rectum. 1994;37(10):984-9.

Tekkis PP, Kinsman R, Thompson MR, Stamatakis JD. The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland study of large bowel obstruction caused by colorectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2004;240(1):76-81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000130723.81866.75

Runkel NS, Hinz U, Lehnert T, Buhr HJ, Herfarth C. Improved outcome after emergency surgery for cancer of the left colon. Arch Surg. 1998;133(4):352-7.

Sjo OH, Larsen S, Lunde OC, Nesbakken A. Short term outcome after emergency and elective surgery for colon cancer. Colorectal Dis. 2009;11(6):733-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-1318.2008.01613.x