Impact of anastomotic leakage after colorectal cancer surgery on quality of life: A systematic review Table 2. Continued Reference Indication for surgery Type of surgery AL rate Yes : No Sex (M : F)w Age (years, mean ± SD or median (IQR)) Comorbidities/ASA Clavien Dindo AL No AL AL No AL ASA AL No AL Lim et al. Rectal cancer (n=126), adenoma (n=4), endometriosis (n=2), M. Crohn (n=1), diverticulitis (n=3) or postendomucosal resection (n=2) TME with anastomotic distance of no more than 10 cm from the anal verge 23 : 115 (16.67%) 11 : 12 72 : 43 Clinical 66 (54-81) Subclinical 62 (51-75) II III IV Clinical AL 6 5 2 Subclinical 4 5 1 NA Marinatou et al. Rectal cancer TME for lower and mid rectum tumors, and PME with transection of the mesorectum at least 5 cm distal to the tumor for upper rectum tumors. 25 : 50 (33.33%)* 15 : 10 30: 20 62 ± 15.2 61 ± 16.3 I II III IV 1 9 13 2 5 20 23 2 NA McGiffin et al. Rectal cancer Laparoscopic and robotic LAR with an extra-peritoneal anastomosis 24 : 200 (10.71%) 15 : 9 119 : 81 62 (52-69.8) 65 (56.3-73) I II III-V 9 14 1 56 106 32 Used but not specified Miura et al. Rectal cancer LAR (n=157) and ISR (n=118) 60 : 215 (21.81%) 199 : 76 64 ASA III-IV 30 Grade I/II: 62 Grade III: 66 Grade IV: 6 Grade V: 1 Mongin et al. Rectal cancer Laparoscopic sphinctersaving TME 21 : 42 (33.33%)* 4 : 17 11 : 31 61 ± 9 60 ± 11 NA NA 9
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw