Meta-analysis: loop ileostomy versus colostomy to prevent complications of anterior resection for rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: Anastomotic leakage is a serious complication of colorectal cancer surgery, prolonging hospital stays and impacting patient prognosis. Preventive colostomy is required in patients at risk of anastomotic fistulas. However, it remains unclear whether the commonly used loop colostomy(LC) or loop ileostomy(LI) can reduce the complications of colorectal surgery. This study aims to compare perioperative morbidities associated with LC and LI following anterior rectal cancer resection, including LC and LI reversal. METHODS: In this meta-analysis, the Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for prospective cohort studies, retrospective cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on perioperative morbidity during stoma development and reversal up to July 2023, The meta-analysis included 10 trials with 2036 individuals (2 RCTs and 8 cohorts). RESULTS: No significant differences in morbidity, mortality, or stoma-related issues were found between the LI and LC groups after anterior resection surgery. However, patients in the LC group exhibited higher rates of stoma prolapse (RR: 0.39; 95%CI: 0.19-0.82; P = 0.01), retraction (RR: 0.45; 95%CI: 0.29-0.71; P < 0.01), surgical site infection (RR: 0.52; 95%CI: 0.27-1.00; P = 0.05) and incisional hernias (RR: 0.53; 95%CI: 0.32-0.89; P = 0.02) after stoma closure compared to those in the LI group. Conversely, the LI group showed higher rates of dehydration or electrolyte imbalances(RR: 2.98; 95%CI: 1.51-5.89; P < 0.01), high-output(RR: 6.17; 95%CI: 1.24-30.64; P = 0.03), and renal insufficiency post-surgery(RR: 2.51; 95%CI: 1.01-6.27; P = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our study strongly recommends a preventive LI for anterior resection due to rectal cancer. However, ileostomy is more likely to result in dehydration, renal insufficiency, and intestinal obstruction. More multicenter RCTs are needed to corroborate this.

Rethinking postoperative care: same-day ileostomy closure discharge improves patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The evolution of enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) in colon and rectal surgery has led to the development of same-day discharge (SDD) procedures for selected patients. Early discharge after diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) closure was first described in 2003. However, its widespread adoption remains limited, with SDD accounting for only 3.2% of all DLI closures in 2005-2006, according to the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, and rising to just 4.1% by 2016. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of SDD DLI closure with those of DLI closure after the standard ERP. METHODS: A retrospective case-matched study compared 125 patients undergoing SDD DLI closure with 250 patients undergoing DLI closure after the standard ERP based on age (±1 year), sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, body mass index, surgery date (±2 months), underlying disease, and hospital site. The primary outcome was comparative 30-day complication rates. RESULTS: Patients in the traditional ERP group received more intraoperative fluids (1221.1 ± 416.6 vs 1039.0 ± 368.3 mL, P < .001) but had similar estimated blood loss. Ten patients (8%) in the SDD-ERP group failed SDD. The 30-day postoperative complication rate was significantly lower in the SDD group (14.8%) than the standard ERP group (25.7%, P = .025). This difference was primarily driven by a lower incidence of ileus in the SDD group (9.6% vs 14.8%, P = .034). There were no significant differences in readmission rate (9.6% of SDD-ERP vs 9.2% of standard ERP, P = .900) and reoperation rates (3.2% of SDD-ERP vs 2.4% of standard ERP, P = .650). CONCLUSION: SDD ileostomy closure is a safe, feasible, and effective procedure associated with fewer complications than the present study's standard ERP. This could represent a new standard of care. Further prospective trials are required to confirm the findings of this study.

Comparison of purse-string technique vs linear suture for skin closure after ileostomy reversal. A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Protective stoma after rectal surgery has been associated with important complications. The most common is surgical site infection (SSI) high rates after stoma reversal reported in literature. Our study compared the rate of SSI of two skin closure techniques, linear closure, and purse string closure. METHODS: We carried out a single center, prospective, randomized controlled trial in the Department of Colorectal Surgery of Fondazione Policlinico Campus Bio-Medico of Rome between January 2018 through December 2021, to compare LC vs PS closure of ileostomy sites. RESULTS: A total of 117 patients (53.84% male) with a mean age of 65.68 ± 14.33 years were finally evaluated in the study. 58 patients were included in the PS group and 59 patients in the LC one. There was a marked difference in the SSI rate between the two arms of the study: 3 of 58 patients in the purse-string arm versus 11 of 59 in the control arm (p = 0.043). The outcome of cosmesis was also higher in PS, with a statistical significance (mean ± DS 4,01 ± 0,73 for PS group vs mean ± DS 2,38 ± 0,72 for LC group, p < 0,001). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that the PS technique had a significantly lower incidence of stoma site SSI compared with LC technique. Our findings are in line with other randomized studies and suggest that PS closure could be considered as standard of care for wound closure after ileostomy reversal.

Preoperative risk factors and cumulative incidence of temporary ileostomy non-closure after sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Temporary ileostomy (TI) has proven effective in reducing the severity of anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery; however, some ileostomies fail to reverse over time, leading to conversion into a permanent stoma (PS). In this study, we aimed to investigate the preoperative risk factors and cumulative incidence of TI non-closure after sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis after searching the Embase, Web of Science, PubMed, and MEDLINE databases from their inception until November 2023. We collected all published studies on the risk factors related to TI non-closure after sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer. RESULTS: A total of 1610 studies were retrieved, and 13 studies were included for meta-analysis, comprising 3026 patients. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the identified risk factors included older age (p = 0.03), especially > 65 years of age (p = 0.03), male sex (p = 0.009), American Society of Anesthesiologists score ≥ 3 (p = 0.004), comorbidity (p = 0.001), and distant metastasis (p < 0.001). Body mass index, preoperative hemoglobin, preoperative albumin, preoperative carcinoma embryonic antigen, tumor location, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, smoking, history of abdominal surgery, and open surgery did not significantly change the risk of TI non-closure. CONCLUSION: We identified five preoperative risk factors for TI non-closure after sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer. This information enables surgeons to identify high-risk groups before surgery, inform patients about the possibility of PS in advance, and consider performing protective colostomy or Hartmann surgery.

Management of the Difficult Stoma.

Fecal ostomy creation is a commonly performed procedure with many indications. Better outcomes occur when preoperative patient education and stoma site marking are provided. Despite a seemingly simple operation, ostomy creation is often difficult and complications are common. Certain risk factors, particularly obesity, are strongly associated with stoma-related complications. The ability to optimize the ostomy and stoma in the operating room and to troubleshoot frequently encountered post-operative stoma-related issues are critical skills for surgeons and ostomy nurses alike.

[Morphological predictors of water-electrolyte disorders in patients with preventive ileostomy after rectal resection for cancer]. / Issledovanie morfologicheskikh prediktorov vodno-elektrolitnykh narushenii u patsientov so sformirovannoi preventivnoi ileostomoi pri rezektsii pryamoi kishki po povodu raka.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze morphological changes in wall of functioning and non-functioning small intestine in patients with preventive ileostomy and to determine histological predictors of water-electrolyte disorders. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We prospectively analyzed 57 patients >18 years old who underwent rectal resection with preventive ileostomy between January 2022 and November 2023. Anthropometric data included gender, age, body mass index, ECOG and ASA classes. Complications associated with large losses through ileostomy were water-electrolyte disorders, dehydration and acute renal failure with repeated hospitalization. Morphological analysis implied intraoperative full-layer biopsy of small intestine on anterior abdominal wall (ileostomy). Intraoperative biopsy of efferent and afferent loops was also carried out. Tissue samples were examined by light microscopy. We analyzed mean height of mucous membrane villi and depth of crypts, as well as their ratio. Fibrosis and swelling of submucosa were evaluated too. The results were analyzed in the SPSS Statistics 20 software. RESULTS: Mean height of intestinal villi <465 microns (p=0.028), ratio of their height to crypt depth <4.38 (p=0.034) and submucosal fibrosis (p=0.031) significantly affected malabsorption and readmission of patients. The risk of readmission was 11.5 and 5.5 times higher in univariate analysis. Multivariate analysis revealed in-hospital dehydration with resumption of infusion therapy as a predictor of readmission (p=0.046). CONCLUSION: Ileostomy is a certain stress for the patient's body. Not every patient is able for adaptation. One of the adaptation mechanisms is hypertrophy of mucous membrane villi involved in digestion. This mechanism is less pronounced in patients with repeated hospitalizations. Preoperative morphological examination of ileum mucosa may be an additional objective predictor of possible complications of preventive ileostomy.

Clinical Outcomes of Ileostomy Closure during versus after Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients with Rectal Cancer.

Background: Protective ileostomy can effectively prevent severe anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery; however, the optimal timing for ileostomy closure during adjuvant chemotherapy remains unclear. This study aimed to explore the safety and long-term outcomes of early ileostomy closure during adjuvant chemotherapy. Method: Patients who underwent laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery combined with protective ileostomy and adjuvant chemotherapy between April 2017 and April 2021 were retrospectively evaluated. Patients were divided into an early closure group during chemotherapy (group A) and a late closure group after chemotherapy (group B). Results: A total of 215 patients were included in this study, with 115 in group A and 100 in group B. There were no significant differences in demographic and clinical characteristics between the two groups. In group A, durations of stoma status (p < 0.001) and low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) (p < 0.001) were shorter, and rectal stenosis (p=0.036) and stoma-related complications (p=0.007), especially stoma stenosis (p=0.041), were less common. However, compliance with chemotherapy was worse (p=0.009). There were no significant differences in operative time, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, incidence and severity of LARS, disease-free survival, or overall survival between groups. Conclusion: Early ileostomy closure can effectively reduce the duration of stoma status, duration of LARS, rectal stenosis, and stoma-related complications while not affecting surgical complications and oncological outcomes. Ileostomy closure should not be delayed because of adjuvant chemotherapy. However, follow-up should be strengthened to increase compliance and integrity with chemotherapy.

Clostridium Difficile Infection in Rectal Cancer Patients after Diverted Loop Ileostomy Closure.

AIM: Clostridium difficile infection is a cause of increased morbidity and mortality in hospitals, particularly in patients with cancer pathology. There are several factors favouring the development of Clostridium difficile infection among cancer patients, including age, exposure to antibiotic and proton pump inhibitors therapy, and chemotherapy. This study was conducted to observe the prevalence of Clostridium difficile infection after the reversal of ileostomy loop for rectal cancer surgery, which were initially operated either open or laparoscopic. METHOD: A retrospective study was performed on patients who were operated in a single surgical team for rectal cancer who benefited of a diverted loop ileostomy over a 4-year period. Results: 23 patients were documented with Clostridium difficile infection out of a total of 63. All 23 patients underwent ileostomy closure later than 3 months after primary surgery, and postoperatively received antibiotic therapy associated with proton pump inhibitors in the first 24 hours. Conclusions: Closure of ileostomy later than 3 months after primary surgery, combined with chemotherapy, antibiotic therapy and proton pump inhibitors, increases the risk of developing Clostridium difficile infection.

Nutritional management of high-output ileostomies in paediatric patients is vital and more evidence-based guidelines are needed.

AIM: Paediatric patients with high-output ileostomies (HOI) face an elevated risk of complications. This study aimed to comprehensively review the existing literature and offer nutritional management recommendations for paediatric patients with an HOI. METHODS: PubMed and Embase were searched for relevant English or French language papers up to 31 June 2022. The emphasis was placed on studies involving paediatric ileostomy patients, but insights were obtained from adult literature and other intestinal failure pathologies when these were lacking. RESULTS: We identified 16 papers that addressed nutritional issues in paediatric ileostomy patients. Currently, no evidence supports a safe paediatric HOI threshold exceeding 20 mL/kg/day on two consecutive days. Paediatric HOI patients were at risk of dehydration, electrolyte disturbances, micronutrient deficiencies and growth failure. The primary dietary choice for neonates is bolus feeding with breastmilk. In older children, an enteral fluid restriction should be installed favouring isotonic or slightly hypotonic glucose-electrolyte solutions. A diet that is high in calories, complex carbohydrates and proteins, low in insoluble fibre and simple carbohydrates, and moderate in fat is recommended. CONCLUSION: Adequate nutritional management is crucial to prevent complications in children with an HOI. Further research is needed to establish more evidence-based guidelines.

Comparison of hand-sewn anterior repair, resection and hand-sewn anastomosis, resection and stapled anastomosis techniques for the reversal of diverting loop ileostomy after low anterior rectal resection: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Low anterior resection in patients with rectal cancer may require a defunctioning loop ileostomy formation that requires closure after a period of time. There are three common techniques for ileostomy closure: anterior repair (AR or fold-over closure), resection and hand-sewn anastomosis (RHA), and resection and stapled anastomosis (RSA). We aimed to compare them on the basis of operative and postoperative features. METHODS: Patients with rectal cancer who underwent low anterior resection without complications were included in this study and randomly assigned to three parallel groups to undergo loop ileostomy closure via either AR, RHA, or RSA. Early and late outcomes were gathered from all included patients. RESULTS: Among 93 patients with a mean age of 56.21 ± 11.78 years, consisting of 58 (62.4%) men, 31 patients underwent AR, 30 patients RHA, and 32 patients RSA. There was no significant difference among the groups regarding the frequency and location of intraoperative injuries (P = 0.157). The AR groups demonstrated significantly less consumption of gauzes following intraoperative bleeding compared to the two others groups. The results showed that the duration of surgery in the RSA was significantly shorter than in the AR or RHA group (both P < 0.001). Regarding postoperative course, only one case of hematoma and two cases of surgical wound infection occurred in the RHA group. Anastomotic leakage and complete or partial obstruction did not occur in any group of patients. Latent postoperative complications did not occur in any group of patients. The median time between surgery and discharge as well as the interval until first gas passage, first defecation, oral tolerated liquid diet, as well as oral tolerated soft and regular diet in the AR group were significantly lower than in the two other groups (both P < 0.001). However, there was no statistical difference in these intervals between the RHA and RSA groups. CONCLUSIONS: Resection and stapled anastomosis had the shortest duration among the three techniques; however, anterior repair had faster recovery, including earlier tolerated oral diet, gas passing and defecation, and discharge, in comparison with the other techniques. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration number IRCT20120129008861N5.

Timing and Complications of Intestinal Ostomy Takedown After Intestinal and Multivisceral Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Ileostomies are typically created at the time of intestinal and multivisceral transplantation to assist in graft monitoring with endoscopy and biopsies. Often, these ostomies are reversed with a takedown procedure once there is stable graft function, but data are limited on associated complications of the takedown procedure for patients with intestinal transplants. METHODS: To assess complications associated with takedowns in this patient population, we performed a retrospective analysis of patients who had an intestinal transplant with elective ostomy takedown after transplant. No prisoners were used in the study and this manuscript is in compliance with the Helsinki Congress and the Declaration of Istanbul. RESULTS: A total of 16 patients, 10 isolated patients with intestinal transplants and 6 patients with multivisceral transplants, were included in the study, and takedown occurred at a mean of (236.8 ± 117.1) days after transplant. Of the 16 patients, 5 patients (31%) had uncomplicated courses after takedown with no infection, no rejection, and no hospital readmission within 3 months of takedown. The rest of the patients (69%) developed either infection or rejection within 3 months of takedown, and 1 patient died of infection after ileostomy takedown. CONCLUSION: This case series highlights the high risk of complications after ileostomy takedown for patients with intestinal transplants and contributes to the growing debate regarding the role of ileostomy creation and reversal in patients with intestinal transplants.

Evaluation of a Skin Barrier Ring With Assisted Flow: A Prospective Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of a skin barrier ring with assisted flow in preventing peristomal skin complications (PSCs) in patients with an ileostomy and to evaluate the participants' perceptions of the device. DESIGN: Single-group, prospective cohort study. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: Both inpatients and outpatients with newly created (n = 14) or established (n = 1) ileostomies were recruited from 2 clinical sites in the United States: one was an academic teaching hospital system in the Midwestern United States and the second was a teaching hospital located in the Southeastern United States. METHODS: Participants used the skin barrier ring with assisted flow after receiving education on its use. The pouching system was changed on a routine basis as determined by the ostomy nurse specialist. The Ostomy Skin Tool (OST) was used to assess each participant's peristomal discoloration (D), erosion (E), and tissue overgrowth (T) on admission to the study (baseline) and at final assessment (60 ± 33 days). Secondary outcomes (device handling, comfort, and discretion) were assessed through a questionnaire administered during the final data collection visit. RESULTS: The mean baseline DET score among the 14 participants with a new ileostomy was 2 or less, indicating no PSCs. The incidence of PSCs in this study was 40% (n = 6). Thirteen of 15 participants (86.7%) agreed that the skin barrier ring with assisted flow was easy to apply. Fourteen (93.4%) agreed that the device was comfortable and easy to remove. All 15 participants (100%) agreed it was discreet under clothing. CONCLUSIONS: Sixty percent of participants (n = 9) using the investigational device experienced a PSC. More than 90% of participants agreed that the device was comfortable and easy to remove, and all participants (100%) agreed it was discreet when worn under clothing.

Management of a Peristomal Abscess in a Patient With an Ileostomy: A Case Study.

BACKGROUND: Peristomal abscess (PA) is an uncommon but challenging peristomal skin complication. The initial treatment of the PA usually includes incision and drainage of the abscess, resulting in a peristomal wound. The presence of the wound makes it difficult to maintain a seal between the ostomy skin barrier and the peristomal skin resulting in frequent removal and application of the skin barrier to prevent leakage and allow for daily wound care. CASE: Ms T was a 52-year-old woman with an ileostomy resulting from a prior left hemicolectomy for colon cancer who developed a PA. Treatment of the PA was implemented, along with a modified 2-piece skin barrier that allowed access to the peristomal wound for daily dressing changes while maintaining a seal around the ostomy. CONCLUSION: The modified 2-piece skin barrier technique proved a successful treatment for the management of the PA without frequent changes of the ostomy pouching system.

Comparing Surgical Site Infection Rate Between Primary Closure and Rhomboid Flap After Stoma Reversal.

BACKGROUND: Primary closure (PC) is a common wound closure procedure after stoma reversal and is associated with a high rate of surgical site infection (SSI). This study introduced a new method of skin closure, a rhomboid flap (RF), for skin closure after stoma reversal and compared the SSI rate between the 2 techniques. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective study. Patients who underwent colostomy or ileostomy closure performed using either rotation flap (n = 33) or PC (n = 121) techniques for skin closure after stoma reversal between April 2019 and July 2022 were enrolled in this study. Medical records were retrospectively reviewed to obtain data. Both groups were followed up postoperatively at 1 month for wound infection. Wound infection within 30 days after surgery was indicated by the presence of purulent discharge, erythema, local heat, or positive culture for bacteria. RESULTS: In the PC group, the infection rate was 25.6% (n = 121) compared with 12.1% (n = 33) in the RF group (P = 0.158). Among the patients who underwent colostomy reversal, the infection rate of the RF group was significantly lower compared with that of the PC group (11.1% vs 36.9%, P = 0.045). Among the patients who underwent ileostomy reversal, no significant differences in the infection rates between the groups were found (13.3% vs 12.5%, P = 1.000). CONCLUSIONS: Although the RF technique requires slightly longer operative time for flap design in practice than the linear closure method, the technique can significantly reduce the SSI rate after colostomy reversal through the dissection of the surrounding inflammatory tissues and obliteration of the dead space. Additional studies are required to evaluate this technique, compare it with other existing methods, and explore long-term complications.

Prevention of incisional hernia with retrorectus synthetic mesh versus biological mesh following loop ileostomy closure (Preloop trial).

BACKGROUND: The rate of incisional hernia after closure of a temporary loop ileostomy is significant. Synthetic meshes are still commonly avoided in contaminated wounds. The Preloop trial was a multicentre RCT designed to evaluate the benefits of synthetic mesh in incisional hernia prevention, and its safety for use in a contaminated surgical site compared with biological mesh. METHODS: Study patients who underwent closure of a loop ileostomy after anterior resection for rectal cancer were assigned to receive either retrorectus synthetic or biological mesh to prevent incisional hernia. The primary outcomes were surgical-site infections within 30 days, and clinical or radiological incisional hernia incidence at 10 months. Secondary outcomes were reoperation rate, operating time, duration of hospital stay, other complications within 30 days of surgery, 5-year quality of life measured by RAND-36, and incisional hernia incidence within 5 years of follow-up. RESULTS: Between November 2018 and September 2021, 102 patients were randomised, of whom 97 received the intended allocation. At 10-month follow-up, 90 patients had undergone clinical evaluation and 88 radiological evaluation. One patient in each group (2 per cent) had a clinical diagnosis of incisional hernia (P = 0.950) and one further patient in each group had a CT-confirmed incisional hernia (P = 0.949). The number of other complications, reoperation rate, operating time, and duration of hospital stay did not differ between the study groups. CONCLUSION: Synthetic mesh appeared comparable to biological mesh in efficacy and safety for incisional hernia prevention at the time of loop ileostomy closure. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03445936 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

High-output stoma is a risk factor for stoma outlet obstruction in defunctioning loop ileostomies after rectal cancer surgery.

PURPOSE: Defunctioning loop ileostomy has been reported to reduce symptomatic anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery; however, stoma outlet obstruction (SOO) is a serious postileostomy complication. We, therefore, explored novel risk factors for SOO in defunctioning loop ileostomy after rectal cancer surgery. METHODS: This is a retrospective study that included 92 patients who underwent defunctioning loop ileostomy with rectal cancer surgery at our institution. Among them, 77 and 15 ileostomies were created at the right lower abdominal and umbilical sites, respectively. We defined the output volumeMAX as the maximum output volume the day before the onset of SOO or-for those without SOO-that was observed during hospitalization. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate risk factors for SOO. RESULTS: SOO was observed in 24 cases, and the median onset was 6 days postoperatively. The stoma output volume in the SOO group was consistently higher than that in the non-SOO group. In the multivariate analysis, the rectus abdominis thickness (p < 0.01) and output volumeMAX (p < 0.01) were independent risk factors for SOO. CONCLUSION: A high-output stoma may predict SOO in patients with defunctioning loop ileostomy for rectal cancer. Considering that SOO occurs even at umbilical sites with no rectus abdominis, a high-output stoma may trigger SOO primarily.

Outcomes of Early Versus Standard Closure of Diverting Ileostomy After Proctectomy: Meta-analysis and Meta-regression Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare outcomes of early and standard closure of diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) after proctectomy and determine risk factors for anastomotic leak (AL) and complications. BACKGROUND: Formation of DLI has been a routine practice after proctectomy to decrease the incidence and potential adverse sequela of AL. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared outcomes of early versus standard closure of DLI after proctectomy. Main outcome measures were postoperative complications, AL, ileus, surgical site infection, reoperation, readmission, and hospital stay following DLI closure. RESULTS: Eleven RCTs (932 patients; 57% male) were included. Early closure group included 474 patients and standard closure 458 patients. Early closure was associated with higher odds of AL [odds ratio (OR): 2.315, P =0.013] and similar odds of complications (OR: 1.103, P =0.667), ileus (OR: 1.307, P =0.438), surgical site infection (OR: 1.668, P =0.079), reoperation (OR: 1.896, P =0.062), and readmission (OR: 3.431, P =0.206). Hospital stay was similar (weighted mean difference: 1.054, P =0.237). Early closure had higher odds of AL than standard closure when early closure was done ≤2 weeks (OR: 2.12, P =0.047) but not within 3 to 4 weeks (OR: 2.98, P =0.107). Factors significantly associated with complications after early closure were diabetes mellitus, smoking, and closure of DLI ≤2 weeks, whereas factors associated with AL were ≥ American Society of Anesthesiologists II classification and diabetes mellitus. CONCLUSIONS: Early closure of DLI after proctectomy has a higher risk of AL, particularly within 2 weeks of DLI formation. On the basis of this study, routine early ileostomy closure cannot be recommended.

Preoperative stoma site marking reduces postoperative stoma-related complications in emergency surgery: A single center retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Stoma site marking is an important factor in reducing stoma-related complications, thereby influencing the long-term quality of life in the elective setting. The impact of preoperative stoma site marking in emergency stoma creation is largely unknown. We aimed to determine whether preoperative stoma site marking in emergency stoma creation reduces stoma-related complications. METHODS: Patients who underwent emergency stoma creation at our hospital between 2009 and 2022 were examined by reviewing our prospective database and retrospective chart review. Subjects were classified into the "marking (+)" or "marking (-)" group according to stoma site marking (194 and 151 patients, respectively). The changes in the frequency of stoma marking over time and the effects of stoma marking on stoma-related complications were analyzed. RESULTS: The overall frequency of grade 2 or higher stoma-related complications was lower in the marking (+) group than in the marking (-) group (24% versus 36%, p = 0.010). Stoma site marking was associated with fewer soma site bleeding (2% versus 10%, p < 0.001), and the frequency of peristomal dermatitis was also lower (10%) in the marking (+) group (versus 18%, p = 0.042). Moreover, the lack of stoma site marking was an independent risk factor for overall stoma-related complications (adjusted odds ratio: 1.69, p = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative stoma site marking was associated with stoma-related complications in emergency surgery. The clinical significance of our attempt is worth validating with prospective studies.

Factors affecting timing of loop ileostomy closure: a regional centre's experience with 106 patients.

INTRODUCTION: The burden of defunctioning ileostomy is significant with up to two thirds of patients reporting stoma-related morbidity. While timely reversal is safe and cost-effective, the time to reversal in regional Australian hospitals is not well described in professional publications. We aim to assess the current timeliness of ileostomy closure and identify possible reasons for delaying closure. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of loop ileostomies created and reversed in Launceston General Hospital for both rectal cancer surgery and other benign indications was undertaken. Patients with loop ileostomy created between 2010 and 2020 were included. Clinical data of timing of events, complications, readmission and stoma follow-up were recorded; and analysed using multivariate regression analyses to identify clinically relevant risk factors for delayed closure. RESULTS: A total of 123 patients underwent loop-ileostomy formation during the study period, of which 106 patients (86.2%) were reversed. Median time to closure was 8.5 months (IQR 5.2-12.4) for patients with rectal cancers, compared to 5.2 months (IQR 3.6-9.3) for patients who did not have rectal cancer, with a difference of 3.4 months (95% CI 0.9, 5.9; P = 0.008). Adjuvant chemotherapy and unexpected readmission to hospital were associated with delayed reversal (P = 0.0081 and P = 0.0005, respectively). CONCLUSION: Stoma reversal is often scheduled 3-6 months after creation. More than two-thirds of patients experienced delays due to changing clinical concerns and non-clinical factors, such as unexpected delays at each stage of surgical planning. Early placement on the waiting list and better-coordinated follow-ups may expedite reversal surgery and reduce associated morbidities.

Care fragmentation is associated with increased mortality after ileostomy creation.

BACKGROUND: Ileostomy is the mainstay treatment option for various gastrointestinal conditions. Given the increased risk of post-discharge complications and high readmission rates that can be further aggravated by receiving care at different facilities (care fragmentation), further examination is necessary. We thus used a national cohort to explore the associations of care fragmentation among ileostomy patients experiencing adverse outcomes and increased hospitalization expenditures. METHODS: All adult hospitalizations for ileostomy were tabulated from the 2016 to 2020 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Those readmitted within 90 days after discharge were included for analysis. Patients treated at a different facility than the original location where the index ileostomy was performed were categorized into the care-fragmented cohort. Multivariable regressions were developed to characterize the association of the care-fragmented cohort with postoperative outcomes, readmissions, and expenditures. RESULTS: Of 52,254 patients with ileostomy creation hospitalizations with 90-day nonelective readmission, 9,045 (17.3%) experienced care fragmentation. Following risk adjustment, those experiencing care fragmentation faced increased odds of mortality (adjusted odds ratio 1.81, 95% confidence interval 1.54-2.12), cardiac (adjusted odds ratio 1.63, 95% confidence interval 1.42-1.85), respiratory (adjusted odds ratio 1.71, 95% confidence interval 1.53-1.91), infectious (adjusted odds ratio 1.33, 95% confidence interval 1.23-1.43), and thromboembolic (adjusted odds ratio 1.28, 95% confidence interval 1.13-1.45) complications. Furthermore, patients experiencing care fragmentation were more likely to have increased hospitalization costs ($1,700, 95% confidence interval 0.8-2.5). CONCLUSION: Care fragmentation in ileostomy patients demonstrated an increased risk for mortality, postoperative complications, and increased hospitalization expenses. To mitigate risks for adverse outcomes, future studies should evaluate the impacts of inter-hospital communication with the goal of improving care continuity and optimizing healthcare delivery for care-fragmented populations.