Risk of bowel fistula following surgical management of deep endometriosis of the rectosigmoid: a series of 1102 cases

Horace Roman, Valérie Bridoux, Benjamin Merlot, B. Resch, Benoit Resch, Rachid Chati, Julien Coget, J Coget, Damien Forestier, Jean–Jacques Tuech, Jean-Jacques Tuech
Human Reproduction · 2020 · vol. 35(7) , pp. 1601–1611 · doi:10.1093/humrep/deaa131 · PMID:32619233 · W3038946370
article OA: bronze CC0 ⤵ 39 in-corpus citations
📄 Open PDF View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-10 ⓘ

Opening the rectal lumen during surgical management of rectosigmoid endometriosis increases fistula risk, with rectovaginal fistula repair being more complex than leakage repair.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

STUDY QUESTION: What are the risk factors and prevalence of bowel fistula following surgical management of deep endometriosis infiltrating the rectosigmoid and how can it be managed? SUMMARY ANSWER: In patients managed for deep endometriosis of the rectosigmoid, risk of fistula is increased by bowel opening during both segmental colorectal resection and disc excision and rectovaginal fistula repair is more challenging than for bowel leakage. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Bowel fistula is known to be a severe complication of colorectal endometriosis surgery; however, there is little available data on its prevalence in large series or on specific management. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A retrospective study employing data prospectively recorded in the North-West Inter Regional Female Cohort for Patients with Endometriosis (CIRENDO) from June 2009 to May 2019, in three tertiary referral centres. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: One thousand one hundred and two patients presenting with deep endometriosis infiltrating the rectosigmoid, who were managed by shaving, disc excision or colorectal resection. The prevalence of bowel fistula was assessed, and factors related to the complication and its surgical management. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Of 1102 patients enrolled in the study, 52.5% had a past history of gynaecological surgery and 52.7% had unsuccessfully attempted to conceive for over 12 months. Digestive tract subocclusion/occlusion was recorded in 12.7%, hydronephrosis in 4.5% and baseline severe bladder dysfunction in 1.5%. An exclusive laparoscopic approach was carried out in 96.8% of patients. Rectal shaving was performed in 31.9%, disc excision in 23.1%, colorectal resection in 35.8% and combined disc excision and sigmoid colon resection in 2.9%. For various reasons, the nodule was not completely removed in 6.4%, while in 7.2% of cases complementary procedures on the ileum, caecum and right colon were required. Parametrium excision was performed in 7.8%, dissection and excision of sacral roots in 4%, and surgery for ureteral endometriosis in 11.9%. Diverting stoma was performed in 21.8%. Thirty-seven patients presented with bowel fistulae (3.4%) of whom 23 (62.2%) were found to have rectovaginal fistulae and 14 (37.8%) leakage. Logistic regression model showed rectal lumen opening to increase risk of fistula when compared with shaving, regardless of nodule size: adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) for disc excision, colorectal resection and association of disc excision + segmental resection was 6.8 (1.9-23.8), 4.8 (1.4-16.9) and 11 (2.1-58.6), respectively. Repair of 23 rectovaginal fistulae required 1, 2, 3 or 4 additional surgical procedures in 12 (52.2%), 8 (34.8%), 2 (8.7%) and 1 patient (4.3%), respectively. Repair of leakage in 14 patients required 1 procedure (stoma) in 12 cases (85.7%) and a second procedure (colorectal resection) in 2 cases (14.3%). All patients, excepted five women managed by delayed coloanal anastomosis, underwent a supplementary surgical procedure for stoma repair. The period of time required for diverting stoma following repair of rectovaginal fistulae was significantly longer than for repair of leakages (median values 10 and 5 months, respectively, P = 0.008). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The main limits relate to the heterogeneity of techniques used in removal of rectosigmoid nodules and repairing fistulae, the lack of accurate information about the level of nodules, the small number of centres and that a majority of patients were managed by one surgeon. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Deep endometriosis infiltrating the rectosigmoid can be managed laparoscopically with a relatively low risk of bowel fistula. When the type of bowel procedure can be chosen, performance of shaving instead of disc excision or colorectal resection is suggested considering the lower risk of bowel fistula. Rectovaginal fistula repair is more challenging than for bowel leakage and may require up to four additional surgical procedures. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): CIRENDO is financed by the G4 Group (The University Hospitals of Rouen, Lille, Amiens and Caen) and the ROUENDOMETRIOSE Association. No financial support was received for this study. H.R. reports personal fees from ETHICON, Plasma Surgical, Olympus and Nordic Pharma outside the submitted work. The other authors declare no conflict of interests related to this topic.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Condition tags

mesh:D004715endometriosis

MeSH descriptors

Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Laparoscopy Rectal Diseases Rectal Diseases Rectal Diseases Colon Female Humans Postoperative Complications Postoperative Complications Postoperative Complications Retrospective Studies Treatment Outcome

Citation neighborhood

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.

References (28)

Cited by (39)

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-06-04T01:30:01.192114+00:00
openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-05-13T22:21:53.586419+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK