Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The use of Endo-SPONGE® in rectal anastomotic leaks: a systematic review

  • Review
  • Published:
Techniques in Coloproctology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of an endoluminal vacuum device (Endo-SPONGE®) in the treatment of rectal anastomotic leaks.

Methods

All studies looking at endoluminal vacuum therapy with Endo-SPONGE® in the treatment of rectal anastomotic leaks were included. A comprehensive search was conducted as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Primary outcome was defined as the rate of total anastomotic salvage, with secondary outcomes including rate of ileostomy closure, additional transrectal closures and functional outcomes

Results

Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. There was a significant publication bias (z = 3.53, p = 0.0004). Two hundred sixty-six patients were identified. The median treatment failure rate was 11.8% (range 0–44%), with random effects model of 0.17 (95% CI 0.11–0.22). There was improvement with early therapy start (OR 3.48) and negative correlation with neoadjuvant radiotherapy (OR 0.56). Fifty-one percent of all diverting stomas were closed at the end of treatment period and 12.8% of patients required an additional trans-rectal closure of the abscess cavity.

Conclusions

Endo-SPONGE® seems to be a useful method of rectal anastomotic leak treatment in selected group of patients; however, the quality of available data is poor and it is impossible to draw a final conclusion. There is unexpected high rate of permanent ileostomy. There is a need for further assessment of this therapy with well-designed randomised or cohort studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rullier E, Laurent C, Garrelon JL, Michel P, Saric J, Parneix M (1998) Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after resection of rectal cancer. Br J Surg 85(3):355–358

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Chadi SA, Fingerhut A, Berho M, DeMeester SR, Fleshman JW, Hyman NH et al (2016) Emerging trends in the etiology, prevention, and treatment of gastrointestinal anastomotic leakage. J Gastrointest Surg 20(12):2035–2051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Chambers WM, Mortensen NJMC (2004) Postoperative leakage and abscess formation after colorectal surgery. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 18(5):865–880

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Phitayakorn R, Delaney CP, Reynolds HL, Champagne BJ, Heriot AG, Neary P et al (2008) Standardized algorithms for management of anastomotic leaks and related abdominal and pelvic abscesses after colorectal surgery. World J Surg 32(6):1147–1156

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Blumetti J, Chaudhry V, Cintron JR, Park JJ, Marecik S, Harrison JL et al (2014) Management of anastomotic leak: lessons learned from a large colon and rectal surgery training program. World J Surg 38(4):985–991

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Elagili F, Stocchi L, Ozuner G, Dietz DW, Kiran RP (2014) Outcomes of percutaneous drainage without surgery for patients with diverticular abscess. Dis Colon Rectum 57(3):331–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Weidenhagen R, Gruetzner KU, Wiecken T, Spelsberg F, Jauch KW (2008) Endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure of anastomotic leakage following anterior resection of the rectum: a new method. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 22(8):1818–1825

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ 339(7716):332–336

    Google Scholar 

  9. Slim K, Nini E, Forestier D, Kwiatkowski F, Panis Y, Chipponi J (2003) Methodological index for non-randomized studies (minors): development and validation of a new instrument. ANZ J Surg 73(9):712–716

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Verlaan T, Bartels SAL, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Tanis PJ, Fockens P, Bemelman WA (2011) Early, minimally invasive closure of anastomotic leaks: a new concept. Color Dis 13(Suppl. 7):18–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Glitsch A, von Bernstorff W, Seltrecht U, Partecke I, Paul H, Heidecke C (2008) Endoscopic transanal vacuum-assisted rectal drainage (ETVARD): an optimized therapy for major leaks from extraperitoneal rectal anastomoses. Endoscopy 40(3):192–199

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Kuehn F, Janisch F, Schwandner F, Alsfasser G, Schiffmann L, Gock M et al (2016) Endoscopic vacuum therapy in colorectal surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 20(2):328–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Strangio G, Zullo A, Ferrara EC, Anderloni A, Carlino A, Jovani M et al (2015) Endo-sponge therapy for management of anastomotic leakages after colorectal surgery: a case series and review of literature. Dig Liver Dis 47(6):465–469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Nerup N, Johansen JL, Alkhefagie GA, Maina P, Jensen KH (2013) Promising results after endoscopic vacuum treatment of anastomotic leakage following resection of rectal cancer with ileostomy. Dan Med J 60(4):A4604

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Keskin M, Bayram O, Bulut T, Balik E (2015) Effectiveness of endoluminal vacuum-assisted closure therapy (endosponge) for the treatment of pelvic anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutaneous Tech 25(6):505–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mees ST, Palmes D, Mennigen R, Senninger N, Haier J, Bruewer M (2008) Endo-vacuum assisted closure treatment for rectal anastomotic insufficiency. Dis Colon Rectum 51(4):404–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gardenbroek TJ, Musters GD, Buskens CJ, Ponsioen CY, D’Haens GRAM, Dijkgraaf MGW et al (2015) Early reconstruction of the leaking ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: a novel solution to an old problem. Color Dis 17(5):426–432

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Nagell CF, Holte K (2006) Treatment of anastomotic leakage after rectal resection with transrectal vacuum-assisted drainage (VAC). Int J Colorectal Dis 21(7):657–660

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Bernstorff W, Glitsch A, Schreiber A, Partecke LI, Heidecke CD (2009) ETVARD (endoscopic transanal vacuum-assisted rectal drainage) leads to complete but delayed closure of extraperitoneal rectal anastomotic leakage cavities following neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy. Int J Colorectal Dis 24(7):819–825

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Arezzo A, Verra M, Passera R, Bullano A, Rapetti L, Morino M (2015) Long-term efficacy of endoscopic vacuum therapy for the treatment of colorectal anastomotic leaks. Dig Liver Dis 47(4):342–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Riss S, Stift A, Kienbacher C, Dauser B, Haunold I, Kriwanek S et al (2010) Recurrent abscess after primary successful endo-sponge treatment of anastomotic leakage following rectal surgery. World J Gastroenterol 16(36):4570–4574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Rottoli M, Di MRMP, Vallicelli SC, Liguori LVG, Poggioli LBG (2018) Endoluminal vacuum-assisted therapy as treatment for anastomotic leak after ileal pouch—anal anastomosis: a pilot study. Tech Coloproctol 22(3):223–229

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Srinivasamurthy D, Wood C, Slater R, Garner J (2013) An initial experience using transanal vacuum therapy in pelvic anastomotic leakage. Tech Coloproctol 17(3):275–281

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Van Koperen PJ, Van Berge Henegouwen MI, Rosman C, Bakker CM, Heres P, Slors JFM et al (2009) The Dutch multicenter experience of the endo-sponge treatment for anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 23(6):1379–1383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Karanjia ND, Corder AP, Bearn P, Heald RJ (1994) Leakage from stapled low anastomosis after total mesorectal excision for carcinoma of the rectum. Br J Surg 81(8):1224–1226

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Vignali A, Fazio VW, Lavery IC, Milsom JW, Church JM, Hull TL et al (1997) Factors associated with the occurrence of leaks in stapled rectal anastomoses: a review of 1,014 patients. J Am Coll Surg 185(2):105–113

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Matthiessen P, Hallböök O, Andersson M, Rutegård J, Sjödahl R (2004) Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after anterior resection of the rectum. Colorectal Dis 6(6):462–469

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Barnett GC, West CML, Dunning AM, Elliott RM, Coles CE, Pharoah PDP et al (2009) Normal tissue reactions to radiotherapy: Towards tailoring treatment dose by genotype. Nat Rev Cancer 9(2):134

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Shalaby M, Emile S, Elfeki H, Sakr A, Wexner SD, Sileri P (2019) Systematic review of endoluminal vacuum-assisted therapy as salvage treatment for rectal anastomotic leakage. BJS Open 3(2):153–160

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

There is no funding or conflict of interest to declare for all authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Derriford Hospital, University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, Derriford Road, Plymouth, PL6 8DH, UK

    B. Mahendran, B. Rossi, M. Coleman & S. Smolarek

Authors
  1. B. Mahendran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. B. Rossi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Coleman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S. Smolarek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to B. Mahendran.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participation or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

This type of study does not require formal consent.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This systematic review was registered on PROSPERO under identification number CRD42018106742.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mahendran, B., Rossi, B., Coleman, M. et al. The use of Endo-SPONGE® in rectal anastomotic leaks: a systematic review. Tech Coloproctol 24, 685–694 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-020-02200-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-020-02200-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation