Omentoplasty to reduce anastomotic leak in colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leaks (AL) remain a devastating complication following intestinal anastomoses resulting in increased morbidity and mortality. Wrapping the anastomosis with omentum may be protective although data are conflicting. We performed a meta-analysis to assess the effect of omentoplasty on colorectal anastomoses. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched for relevant articles from inception until August 2021. All randomized controlled trials (RCT) that reported on the use of omentoplasty in colon and rectal surgery were included. The primary outcome was rate of overall AL while secondary outcomes included clinical and radiological AL, overall reoperation and mortality. Random effects models were used to calculate pooled effect size estimates. Sensitivity analyses were also performed. RESULTS: Four RCTs were included capturing 1067 patients. The mean (SD) age of the cohort was 61.5 (±14.8) years. On random effects analysis, omentoplasty reduced rate of overall (OR 0.43, 95% CI = 0.21-0.87, p = 0.02) and clinical AL (OR = 0.35, 95% CI = 0.15-0.81, p = 0.01). However, there was no difference in radiological AL (OR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.40-1.47, p = 0.42), overall reoperations (OR 0.48, 95% CI = 0.18-1.32, p = 0.16) or mortality (OR 0.52, 95% CI = 0.12 to-2.18, p = 0.37). On sensitivity analysis, assessing rectal anastomoses only, the results for overall AL remained similar (OR 0.28, 95% CI = 0.12-0.61, p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Although omentoplasty appears to reduce the rate of overall and clinical AL, the heterogeneity in the data prevents definitive recommendations from being made. Further well-designed trials are needed to investigate this technique.

Incidence of Clostridioides difficile in patients post loop ileostomy reversal in an Australian tertiary hospital: a retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of a loop ileostomy is to temporarily divert faeces away from a distal anastomosis, to reduce the consequences of anastomotic leak. This ultimately requires a second procedure to restore bowel continuity, which confers risk of complications including the development of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). It is hypothesized that patients who undergo loop ileostomy reversal are at increased risk of CDI when compared with other patients undergoing elective colorectal surgical procedures, and that these patients also experience an increased length of stay (LOS). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed on all patients who underwent loop ileostomy reversal at the Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2019. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-eight patients were identified. Eight tested positive for CDI on faecal PCR (3.51%), a higher incidence than that in patients who underwent an elective colorectal surgical procedure during the same period (0.83%) (RR = 4.23). Additionally, median LOS for ileostomy reversal patients was significantly increased in those who also had CDI when compared with those without CDI (11 versus 4 days; P = 0.0003). CONCLUSION: The study confirmed that the incidence of CDI was higher in those who underwent ileostomy reversal when compared with an otherwise comparable hospital population (elective colorectal surgery patients). Additionally, those patients who underwent ileostomy reversal and had CDI experienced an increased LOS which translates to increased cost to the healthcare system. Further investigation into pre-operative screening and prophylactic antibiotics should be considered as a measure to mitigate this post-operative complication.

Prophylactic mesh placement at index permanent end colostomy creation to prevent parastomal hernia-an updated meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Debate persists regarding the efficacy of prophylactic mesh insertion (PMI) at index permanent stoma creation to reduce the rate of parastomal hernia (PSH). This meta-analysis aimed to appraise all the latest evidence from newly published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on PMI for PSH prevention. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched for relevant articles from inception until November 2020. All RCTs that reported on PMI at end colostomy creation with ≥ 12 months follow-up were included. The primary objective was the rate of clinical and radiological PSH while secondary objectives included number of PSH requiring repair and stoma (or mesh)-related complications. Random effects models were used to calculate pooled effect size estimates. Sensitivity analyses were also performed. RESULTS: Eleven RCTs were included capturing 1097 patients. The mean (SD) age was 67.9 (±9.4) years. On random effects analysis, prophylactic mesh appeared to reduce the rate of both clinical (OR = 0.27, 95% CI = 0.12 to 0.61, p = 0.002) and radiological (OR = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.24 to 0.65, p = 0.0002) PSH. However, there was no difference in number of PSH requiring repair or stoma-related complications. On sensitivity analysis, when focusing on low-risk of bias studies, the benefit of prophylactic mesh in the retrorectus space was lost for both clinical (OR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.62 to 1.51, p = 0.89) and radiological PSH (OR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.46 to 1.18, p = 0.20). CONCLUSION: PMI may reduce the rate of subsequent PSH. However, further studies are required to confirm these findings and to establish the optimal mesh position and shape before definite recommendations can be made.