Purpose: Proctectomy for the treatment of rectal cancer results in inevitable changes to bowel habits. Symptoms such as fecal incontinence, constipation, and tenesmus are collectively referred to as low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). Among the several risk factors that cause LARS, anastomotic leakage (AL) is a strong risk factor for permanent stoma formation. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between the severity of LARS and AL in patients with rectal cancer based on the LARS score and the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) defecation symptom questionnaires.Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal cancer since January 2010. Patients who completed the questionnaire were classified into the AL group and control group based on medical and imaging records. Major LARS and MSKCC scores were analyzed as primary endpoints.Results: Among the 179 patients included in this study, 37 were classified into the AL group. After propensity score matching, there were significant differences in the ratio of major LARS and MSKCC scores of the control group and AL group (ratio of major LARS: 11.1% and 37.8%, P<0.001; MSKCC score: 67.29±10.4 and 56.49±7.2, respectively, P<0.001). Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that AL was an independent factor for major LARS occurrence and MSKCC score.Conclusion: This study showed that AL was a significant factor in the occurrence of major LARS and defecation symptoms after proctectomy.

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in Korea and the third leading cause of death from cancer. Treatment outcomes for colon cancer are steadily improving due to national health screening programs with advances in diagnostic methods, surgical techniques, and therapeutic agents.. The Korea Colon Cancer Multidisciplinary (KCCM) Committee intends to provide professionals who treat colon cancer with the most up-to-date, evidence-based practice guidelines to improve outcomes and help them make decisions that reflect their patients’ values and preferences. These guidelines have been established by consensus reached by the KCCM Guideline Committee based on a systematic literature review and evidence synthesis and by considering the national health insurance system in real clinical practice settings. Each recommendation is presented with a recommendation strength and level of evidence based on the consensus of the committee.

Hemorrhoids manifest with a range of symptoms and severities, prompting the development of various conservative, interventional, and surgical treatments. Selecting the most suitable treatment for each case is challenging, especially with the continuous evolution of new methods. This review aims to advance hemorrhoid treatment and research by exploring recent developments over the last five years. Conservative approaches have focused on isolating active ingredients from traditional herbal remedies to create new products and understand their mechanisms. In office-based treatments, advanced devices such as modified rubber band ligation and polymer clips with stronger binding forces have been introduced. Polidocanol in foam form has shown promise in sclerotherapy, while infrared coagulation is being replaced by alternative energy-based methods. Additionally, endoscopic office treatments and embolization of hemorrhoidal vessels via angiography are increasingly used as safer options for patients with high surgical risks or bleeding issues. Stapled hemorrhoidopexy has shifted to partial resection instead of complete circular resection, and hemorrhoidal artery ligation techniques have been reported to be effective when combined with stapled hemorrhoidopexy or excisional hemorrhoidectomy in severe cases. Evidence is growing that hemorrhoidal artery ligation remains effective even without Doppler guidance. With ongoing research into various methods, there is a need for scientific comparison and evaluation of their advantages and disadvantages, standardization of indicators and treatment protocols, and cost-effectiveness considerations. Surgeons should offer well-informed options and explanations to patients, based on a comprehensive understanding of available treatments.

Background: Although the wound-healing period for purse-string closure (PSC) after stoma reversal is longer than that required for the primary closure method, the rate of wound infection is reduced. The application of negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) can reduce the healing period for many types of wounds. Herein, we describe a planned trial to test the hypothesis that NPWT can reduce the healing period for PSC after stoma reversal. Methods/design: Patients undergoing stoma reversal will be recruited and allocated into intervention and control groups, with 1:1 randomisation. Patients in the control group will receive standard postsurgical wound care; patients in the intervention group will receive NPWT using the PICO™ system. The target sample size will be 38 patients, as this will provide 80% power at the 5% level of significance to detect a 7-day reduction in the wound-healing period in the intervention group compared to that in the control group. The primary endpoint will be the duration to wound healing, defined as the time to nearly complete epithelisation of the wound, without any discharge or surgical site infection (SSI). Secondary endpoints will be the SSI rate, length of postoperative hospital stay, number of wound dressings and visits to the hospital for wound dressing after discharge, total cost of wound dressings, and patient and observer scar assessment scale scores. Discussion: The results of this planned randomised controlled study will clarify the role of NPWT in patients undergoing stoma reversal and strengthen the rationale for choosing a dressing technique. Trial registration: Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS), KCT0004063. Registered on 6 June 2019.

Kang SI, et al. Ann Surg Treat Res. 2023 Sep;105(3):126-132. https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2023.105.3.126