A meta-analysis of low Hartmann's procedure versus abdominoperineal resection for non-restorative treatment of rectal cancer.

backgroundNon-restorative surgery for rectal cancer is indicated in patients with comorbidities, advanced disease and poor continence. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the postoperative morbidity of Hartmann's procedure (HP) with that of extrasphincteric and intersphincteric abdominoperineal resection (APR) in the treatment of rectal cancer.

methodsThe Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched for publications comparing postoperative morbidity of HP and APR. The incidence of overall surgical complications, pelvic-perineal complications and pelvic abscess was analysed as primary endpoints. Readmissions requiring reintervention and postoperative mortality were also compared.

resultsA cumulative analysis showed a significantly higher rate of overall complications (odds ratio (OR) 0.553, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.320 to 0.953 and P value 0.033) and pelvic-perineal complications (OR 0.464, 95% CI 0.250 to 0.861 and P value 0.015) after APR. The incidence of isolated pelvic abscess formation was significantly higher after HP (OR 2.523, 95% CI 1.383 to 4.602 and P value 0.003). A subgroup analysis of intersphincteric APR compared with HP did not show any significant difference in the incidence of overall complications, pelvic-perineal complications or pelvic abscess formation (P values of 0.452, 0.258 and 0.100, respectively). There was no significant difference in readmissions, reinterventions and mortality after HP and APR (P 0.992, 0.198 and 0.151).

conclusionAn extrasphincteric APR is associated with higher overall and pelvic-perineal complications and may be reserved for tumours invading the anal sphincter complex. In the absence of sphincter involvement, both HP and intersphincteric APR are better alternatives with comparable morbidity.