Sexual and urinary functioning after rectal surgery: a prospective comparative study with a median follow-up of 8.5 years

Annemiek Doeksen, Jan A H Gooszen, Peter van Duijvendijk, Pieter J Tanis, Roel Bakx, J Frederik M Slors, J Jan B van Lanschot, Annemiek Doeksen, Jan A H Gooszen, Peter van Duijvendijk, Pieter J Tanis, Roel Bakx, J Frederik M Slors, J Jan B van Lanschot

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to prospectively compare rectal resection (RR) with colonic resection on sexual, urinary and bowel function and quality of life in both short-term and long-term.

Methods: Eighty-three patients who underwent RR were compared to 53 patients who underwent a colonic resection leaving the rectum in situ (RIS). A questionnaire assessing sexual, urinary and bowel functioning with a quality of life questionnaire (SF-36) was sent to all participants preoperatively, 3 and 12 months postoperatively and approximately 8 years after the onset of the study.

Results: Short-term dysfunction included diminished sexual activity in female RR patients at 3 months and significantly more erectile dysfunction in RR patients 1 year postoperatively. Long-term dysfunction included more frequent and more severe erectile dysfunction in RR patients compared to RIS patients. These short-term and long-term outcomes did not influence overall quality of life. The incidence of urinary dysfunction was comparable between both groups. Bowel functioning was significantly better in the RIS group compared to the RR group 3 months and 1 year postoperatively.

Conclusions: Patients who underwent RR experienced up to 1 year postoperatively more sexual and bowel function problems than RIS patients. However, short-term and long-term dysfunction did not influence overall quality of life. Erectile dysfunction in male RR patients persisted in time, whereas other aspects of sexual, urinary and bowel function after RR and colonic resection are similar after a median follow-up of 8.5 years.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study cohort. p.o. postoperatively
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Bowel functioning over time comparing the RR group and the RIS group. Superscript letter a indicates that the scores are linearly transformed to fit in a score range from 0 to 100, with lower scores indicating more bowel function problems. *p < 0.01 Wilcoxon test preoperative vs. 3 months RR group; ±p < 0.01 Mann–Whitney and independent samples t test RR vs. RIS
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Overall quality of life scores of the general population [16] versus the RR and RIS groups at different time-points. The SF-36 scores are linearly transformed to fit in a score range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating a better health-related quality of life status. Significance was tested by the Wilcoxon test (p < 0.05). Asterisk significant differences between the RR group compared to the RIS group. Preoperatively, quality of life in the RR group was significantly better than the RIS group in all but one (PF) subscales. Plus–minus sign significant differences between the RR/RIS group compared to the general population. In comparison with the general population, the preoperative scores from the RR group were significantly lower in three subscales (RP, GH and RE), whereas quality of life in the RIS group was significantly lower in all subscales

References

    1. Heald RJ, Ryall RD. Recurrence and survival after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Lancet. 1986;1:1479–1482. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(86)91510-2.
    1. Engel J, Kerr J, Schlessinger-Raab A, et al. Quality of life in rectal cancer patients: a four-year prospective study. Ann Surg. 2003;238:203–213.
    1. Pahlman L. The rectal cancer debate. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2001;27:439. doi: 10.1053/ejso.2001.1081.
    1. Marijnen CA, van de Velde CJ, Putter H, et al. Impact of short-term preoperative radiotherapy on health-related quality of life and sexual functioning in primary rectal cancer: report of a multicenter randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:1847–1858. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.05.256.
    1. Vironen JH, Kairaluoma M, Aalto AM, Kellokumpu IH. Impact of functional results on quality of life after rectal cancer surgery. Dis Colon Rectum. 2006;49:568–578. doi: 10.1007/s10350-006-0513-6.
    1. Peeters KC, van de Velde DJ, Leer JW, et al. Late side effects of short-course preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: increased bowel dysfunction in irradiated patients—a Dutch colorectal cancer group study. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:6199–6206. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.14.779.
    1. Pocard M, Zinzindohoue F, Haab F, et al. A prospective study of sexual and urinary function before and after total mesorectal excision with autonomic nerve preservation for rectal cancer. Surgery. 2002;131:368–372. doi: 10.1067/msy.2002.122371.
    1. Gismera CS, Aladren BS. Inflammatory bowel diseases: a disease(s) of modern times? Is incidence still increasing? World J Gastroenterol. 2008;14:5491–5498. doi: 10.3748/wjg.14.5491.
    1. Keating JP. Sexual function after rectal resection. ANZ J Surg. 2004;74:248–259. doi: 10.1111/j.1445-2197.2004.02954.x.
    1. Enker WE. Potency, cure, and local control in the operative treatment of rectal cancer. Arch Surg. 1992;127:1396–1401.
    1. Wallner C, Lange MM, Bonsing BA, et al. Causes of faecal and urinary incontinence after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer based on cadaveric surgery. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:4466–4472. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.17.3062.
    1. Lee JF, Maurer VM, Block GE. Anatomic relations of pelvic autonomic nerves to pelvic operations. Arch Surg. 1973;107:324–328.
    1. Heald RJ, Moran BJ, Brown G, et al. Optimal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer is by dissection in from of Denonvilliers’ fascia. Br J Surg. 2004;91:121–123. doi: 10.1002/bjs.4386.
    1. van Duijvendijk P, Slors JF, Taat CW, et al. Functional outcome after colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis compared with proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in familial adenomatous polyposis. Ann Surg. 1999;230:648–654. doi: 10.1097/00000658-199911000-00006.
    1. Ware JE, Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30:473–483. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002.
    1. Aaronson NK, Muller M, Cohen PD, et al. Translation, validation, and norming of the Dutch language version of the SF-36 Health Survey in community and chronic disease populations. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51:1055–1068. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(98)00097-3.
    1. Platell CF, Thompson PJ, Makin GB. Sexual health in women following pelvic surgery for rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2004;91:465–468. doi: 10.1002/bjs.4471.
    1. Hendren SK, O’Connor BI, Liu M, et al. Prevalence of male and female sexual dysfunction is high following surgery for rectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2005;242:212–223. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000171299.43954.ce.
    1. Lange MM, Marijnen CAM, Maas CP, et al. Risk factors for sexual dysfunction after rectal cancer treatment. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:1578–1588. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.12.014.
    1. Sterk P, Shekarriz B, Gunter S, et al. Voiding and sexual dysfunction after deep rectal resection and total mesorectal excision: prospective study on 52 patients. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2005;20:423–427. doi: 10.1007/s00384-004-0711-4.
    1. Lange MM, Maas CP, Marijnen CAM. Urinary dysfunction after rectal cancer treatment is mainly caused by surgery. Br J Surg. 2008;95:1020–1028. doi: 10.1002/bjs.6126.
    1. Jayne DG, Brown JM, Thorpe H, et al. Bladder and sexual function following resection for rectal cancer in a randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open technique. Br J Surg. 2005;92:1124–1132. doi: 10.1002/bjs.4989.
    1. Maas CP, Moriya Y, Steup WH, et al. A prospective study on radical and nerve-preserving surgery for rectal cancer in the Netherlands. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2000;26:751–757. doi: 10.1053/ejso.2000.0998.
    1. Maeda K, Maruta M, Utsumi T, et al. Bladder and male sexual functions after autonomic nerve-sparing TME with or without lateral node dissection for rectal cancer. Tech Coloproctol. 2003;7:29–33. doi: 10.1007/s101510300005.
    1. Maurer CA. Urinary and sexual function after total mesorectal excision. Recent Results Cancer Res. 2005;165:196–204. doi: 10.1007/3-540-27449-9_21.
    1. Kneist W, Junginger T. Long-term urinary dysfunction after mesorectal excision: a prospective study with intraoperative electrophysiological confirmation of nerve preservation. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2007;33:1068–1074. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2007.03.027.
    1. Del RC, Sanchez-Santos R, Oreja V, et al. Long-term urinary dysfunction after rectal cancer surgery. Colorectal Dis. 2004;6:198–202. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2004.00624.x.
    1. van Duijvendijk P, Slors JF, Taat CW, et al. Prospective evaluation of anorectal function after total mesorectal excision for rectal carcinoma with or without preoperative radiotherapy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;97:2282–2289. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2002.05782.x.
    1. van Duijvendijk P, Slors JF, Taat CW, et al. A prospective evaluation of anorectal function after total mesorectal excision in patients with a rectal carcinoma. Surgery. 2003;133:56–65. doi: 10.1067/msy.2003.3.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores y Colaboradores

Condiciones médicas

Intervenciones de drogas

3
Suscribir