Hartmann's reversal as a safe procedure for selected patients: analysis of 199 patients at a high-volume center in Sao Paulo.

PURPOSE: We analyzed the morbidity and mortality associated with Hartmann's reversal (HR) and the risk factors for major complications and mortality. METHODS: The subjects of this retrospective study were patients who underwent HR in a high-volume center. We evaluated complications as categorical variables using univariate analyses. RESULTS: Between 2003 and 2018, 199 patients underwent HR at our hospital [56.5 years; body mass index (BMI): 26.3 kg/m2; American Society of Anesthesiology score (ASA) 3: 7.5%; 36.2% had hernias]. The mean time to HR was 20.2 months and the mean operation time was 302 min. The anastomosis was stapled in 71.4% and was performed in the low/medium rectum in 21.6%. Midline hernias were repaired with mesh in 80.1%. The mean hospitalization period was 10.1 days. Surgical site infection (SSI) developed in 27.1% of the patients, 94.4% of whom were treated at the bedside. BMI was a risk factor for SSI (27.8 vs. 25.6; p = 0.047). Major complications (Clavien-Dindo III-V) developed in 27 patients (13.5%), including anastomosis dehiscence in 2.5%. ASA, BMI, age, hernia repair, and rectal stump size were not associated with major complications. The mortality rate was 2.5%. An ASA of 3 was associated with high mortality (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Hartmann's reversal remains challenging but can have low complication and mortality rates if performed on selected patients in a reference center. An ASA of 3 was the only predictor of mortality.

The influence of diverting loop ileostomy vs. colostomy on postoperative morbidity in restorative anterior resection for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the morbidity of loop ileostomy (LI) and loop colostomy (LC) creation in restorative anterior resection for rectal cancer as well as the morbidity of their reversal. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE via Ovid, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched for records published from 1980 to 2017 by three independent researchers. The primary endpoint was overall morbidity after stoma creation and reversal. Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio (OR) was used to compare categorical variables. Clinical significance was evaluated using numbers needed to treat (NNT). RESULTS: Six studies (two randomized controlled trials and four observational studies) totaling 1063 patients (666 LI and 397 LC) were included in the meta-analysis. Overall morbidity rate after both stoma creation and closure was 15.6% in LI vs. 20.4% in LC [OR(95%CI) = 0.67 (0.29, 1.58); p = 0.36] [NNT(95%CI) = 21 (> 10.4 to benefit, > 2430.2 to harm)]. Morbidity rate after stoma creation was both statistically and clinically significantly lower after LI [18.2% vs. 30.6%; OR(95%CI) = 0.42 (0.25, 0.70); p = 0.001; NNT(95%CI) = 9 (4.7, 29.3)]. Dehydration rate was 3.1% (8/259) in LI vs. 0% (0/168) in LC. The difference was not statistically or clinically significant [OR(95%CI) = 3.00 (0.74, 12.22); p = 0.13; NNT (95%CI) = 33 (19.2, 101.9)]. Ileus rates after stoma closure were significantly higher in LI as compared to LC [5.2% vs. 1.7%; OR(95%CI) = 2.65 (1.13, 6.18); p = 0.02]. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis found no difference between LI and LC in overall morbidity after stoma creation and closure. Morbidity rates following the creation of LI were significantly decreased at the cost of a risk for dehydration.

Short-term Outcomes After Open and Laparoscopic Colostomy Creation.

BACKGROUND: Colostomy creation is a common procedure performed in colon and rectal surgery. Outcomes by technique have not been well studied. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated outcomes related to open versus laparoscopic colostomy creation. DESIGN: This was a retrospective review of patients undergoing colostomy creation using univariate and multivariate propensity score analyses. SETTINGS: Hospitals participating in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database were included. PATIENTS: Data on patients were obtained from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program 2005-2011 Participant Use Data Files. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We measured 30-day mortality, 30-day complications, and predictors of 30-day mortality. RESULTS: A total of 2179 subjects were in the open group and 1132 in the laparoscopic group. The open group had increased age (open, 64 years vs laparoscopic, 60 years), admission from facility (17.0% vs 14.9%), and disseminated cancer (26.1% vs 21.4%). All were statistically significant. The open group had a significantly higher percentage of emergency operations (24.9% vs 7.9%). Operative time was statistically different (81 vs 86 minutes). Thirty-day mortality was significantly higher in the open group (8.7% vs 3.5%), as was any 30-day complication (25.4% vs 17.0%). Propensity-matching analysis on elective patients only revealed that postoperative length of stay and rate of any wound complication were statistically higher in the open group. Multivariate analysis for mortality was performed on the full, elective, and propensity-matched cohorts; age >65 years and dependent functional status were associated with an increased risk of mortality in all of the models. LIMITATIONS: This study has the potential for selection bias and limited generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: Colostomy creation at American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program hospitals is more commonly performed open rather than laparoscopically. Patient age >65 years and dependent functional status are associated with an increased risk of 30-day mortality.

[Intestinal stomas. Are they as simple as they seem?] / Enterostomías, ¿son tan simples como parecen?

OBJECTIVES: To examine the morbidity and mortality of the formation and closure of enterostomies. METHODS: Retrospective study between 2000-2014 of patients younger than 14 years old who underwent an enterostomy. We evaluated: surgical technique, underlying pathology, general and stoma complications, sex, age and weight at the time of formation. At the closure we evaluated: surgical technique, age, weight, hemoglobin, hematocrit and albumin, as well as complications. RESULTS: We performed 120 enterostomies in 114 patients: 69 (57.5%) colostomies, 43 (35.8%) ileostomies and 8 (6.7%) yeyunostomy. The most frequent causes were: anorectal malformation (45/69), necrotizing enterocolitis (24/43) and intestinal atresia (4/8) respectively. 39 (32.5%) complications related to the stoma (colostomy 21, Ileostomy 15, Yeyunostomy 3; p= 0.845), 11 (9.2%) required surgery (colostomy 8, Ileostomy 2, Yeyunostomy 1; p= 0.439), and 17 (14.2%) general complications (colostomy 9, Ileostomy 7, Yeyunostomy 1; p= 0.884). We found a higher rate of complications requiring surgery in loop enterostomy 8/38 (21.1%), separated 3/54 (5.3%) or double-barrel 0/25 (p= 0.007). We closed 96 (80%), presenting complications in 14; yeyunostomy 4/6 (66.7%), colostomies 5/59 (8.5%), ileostomies 5/31 (16.1%) (p= 0.001). Hematocrit and hemoglobin below age average, and albumin under normal values are associated with complications when closing enterostomies (p< 0.05). Six patients (25%) who didn't went to closure died as a result of the underlying pathology and 5 (20.8%) of other causes. CONCLUSION: The formation and closing of enterostomies remains a procedure with a high rate of complications. However, there are no clear risk factors, excepting the use of loop enterostomy and lower albumin, hemoglobin or hematocrit at the time of closure.

OBJETTIVO: Examinar la morbimortalidad de la realización y cierre de las enterostomías. MATERIAL Y METODOS: Estudio retrospectivo entre 2000-2014, de pacientes menores de 14 años a los que se les realizó una enterostomía. Evaluamos: técnica quirúrgica, patología base, complicaciones del estoma y generales, sexo, edad y peso al momento de la cirugía. Al cierre evaluamos: técnica quirúrgica, edad, peso, hemoglobina, hematocrito y albúmin, así como complicaciones. RESULTADOS: En 114 pacientes, realizamos 120 enterostomías: colostomías 69 (57,5%), ileostomías 43 (35,8%) y yeyunostomías 8 (6,7%); las causas más frecuentes para cada una: malformación ano-rectal (45/69), enterocolitis necrotizante (24/43) y atresia intestinal (4/8) respectivamente. Complicaciones relacionadas al estoma 39 (32,5%) (colostomía 21, ileostomía 15, yeyunostomía 3; p= 0,845), requirieron cirugía 11 (9,2%) (colostomía 8, ileostomía 2, yeyunostomía 1; p= 0,439), y complicaciones generales 17 (14,2%) (colostomía 9, ileostomía 7, yeyunostomía 1; p= 0,884). Encontrando mayor índice de complicaciones que requirieron cirugía en la enterostomía en asa 8/38 (21,1%), separada 3/54 (5,3%) o cañón 0/25 (p= 0,007). Cerramos 96 (80%), presentando complicaciones 14; yeyunostomías 4/6 (66,7%), colostomías 5/59 (8,5%), ileostomías 5/31 (16,1%) (p= 0,001). Se asocian a complicaciones del cierre hemoglobina y hematocrito por debajo de la media para la edad, y albúmina bajo valores normales (p< 0,05). De los pacientes no anastomosados, 6 (25%) fallecieron por patología base y 5 (20,8%) por otra causa. CONCLUSION: La elaboración y cierre de enterostomías sigue siendo un procedimiento con alto índice de complicaciones. Sin embargo, no existen factores de riesgo claros, a excepción del uso de la enterostomía en asa y de albúmina, hemoglobina y hematocrito bajos al cierre.

Laparoscopic versus open Hartmann procedure for the emergency treatment of diverticulitis: a propensity-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: A laparoscopic approach has been proposed to reduce the high morbidity and mortality associated with the Hartmann procedure for the emergency treatment of diverticulitis. OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to determine whether a laparoscopic Hartmann procedure reduces early morbidity or mortality for patients undergoing an emergency operation for diverticulitis. DESIGN: This is a comparative effectiveness study. A subset of the entire American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program patient sample matched on propensity for undergoing their procedure with the laparoscopic approach were used to compare postoperative outcomes between laparoscopic and open groups. SETTING: This study uses data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Participant User Files from 2005 through 2009. PATIENTS: All patients who underwent an emergency laparoscopic or open partial colectomy with end colostomy for colonic diverticulitis were reviewed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measures were 30-day mortality and morbidity. RESULTS: Included in the analysis were 1186 patients undergoing emergency partial colectomy with end colostomy for diverticulitis. Among the entire cohort, the laparoscopic group had fewer overall complications (26% vs 41.7%, p = 0.008) and shorter mean length of hospitalization (8.9 vs 11.6 days, p = 0.0008). Operative times were not significantly different between groups. When controlling for potential confounders, a laparoscopic approach was not associated with a decrease in morbidity or mortality. In comparison with a propensity-match cohort, the laparoscopic approach did not reduce postoperative morbidity or mortality. LIMITATIONS: This study is limited by its retrospective nature and the absence of pertinent variables such as postoperative pain indices, time for return of bowel function, and rates of readmission. CONCLUSIONS: A laparoscopic approach to the Hartmann procedure for the emergency treatment of complicated diverticulitis does not significantly decrease postoperative morbidity or mortality in comparison with the open technique.

Retrospective analysis of protective stoma after low anterior resection for rectal cancer with total mesorectal excision: three-year follow-up results.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Anastomotic leakage is a complication of low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer with total mesorectal excision (TME). This study evaluated the need for a protective stoma by a three-year follow-up. METHODOLOGY: A retrospective study of 56 LAR patients was conducted. Thirty patients (53.6%) had a protective stoma. C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin 6 (IL-6) and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) in peripheral blood on the first and third day after surgery were compared, in addition to short-term and later complications, long-term mortality and quality of life (QOL). RESULTS: There was significant difference between patients with and without a stoma in CRP, IL-6 on the third day after surgery (p<0.05). Anastomotic leakage occurred in two patients (6.7%) with a stoma and seven (26.9%) without (p=0.039). The incidence of leaks requiring re-operation was significantly lower with a stoma (p=0.012). After a mean follow-up of three years, there was no difference in long-term mortality, survival or scores on QOL questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS: A protective stoma can reduce the stress reaction, promote recovery of bowel function and reduce anastomotic leakage and re-operation rates in LAR for rectal cancer with TME. No significant difference was observed in long-term mortality or QOL.

How often do patients return to the operating room after colorectal resections?

AIM: We sought to identify the rate of re-operation after an index colorectal surgical procedure and potential contributing risk factors. METHOD: This is a retrospective cohort study from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. We identified all patients who either returned or did not return to the operating room after any colorectal resection from January 2005 to December 2008. RESULTS: From a total cohort of 635, 265 patients included in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program over the 4-year study period, we identified 54, 237 patients who underwent colorectal operations. A return to the operating room was coded in 5.4 ± 0.1% of non colorectal resection patients and 7.6 ± 0.2% of colorectal resection patients (P < 0.001). The multivariate model identified patients with postoperative diagnostic codes for abdominal cavity hernia or colostomy complication as having the highest odds of return to the operating room within 30 days. Patients returning to the operating room had longer length of stay and higher overall mortality compared with those patients who did not return to the operating room. CONCLUSION: Return to the operating room is a relatively common occurrence after colorectal resections, with an associated high rate of mortality. Given the association between return to the operating room and adverse patient outcomes, emphasis should be placed on determining strategies to reduce the need for return to the operating room.

Self-expanding metallic stent as a bridge to surgery versus emergency surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The use of a colonic stent as a bridge to surgery aims to provide patients with elective one-stage surgical resection while reducing stoma creation and postoperative complications. This study used meta-analytic techniques to compare the outcomes of stent use as a bridge to surgery and emergency surgery in the management of obstructive colorectal cancer. METHODS: A literature search of Medline, Embase, Cochrane controlled trials registry, and the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database was performed on all studies comparing stent as a bridge to surgery and emergency surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer. A meta-analysis of the included studies was carried out to identify the differences in outcomes between the two procedures. RESULTS: Eight studies matched the criteria for inclusion and reported on the outcomes of 601 patients, of whom 232 (38.6%) underwent stent insertion and 369 (61.4%) underwent emergency surgery. Fewer patients in the stent group needed intensive care (risk ratio [RR], 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19-0.93; p = 0.03) and stoma creation (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.50-0.99; p = 0.04). The primary anastomosis rate in the stent group was higher (RR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.21-2.16; p = 0.001). Overall complications (RR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.24-0.71; p = 0.001), including anastomotic leakage (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.14-0.69; p = 0.004), were reduced by stent insertion. Stent placement before elective surgery did not adversely affect mortality and long-term survival. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a stent as a bridge to surgery for obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer could increase the chance of primary anastomosis and reduce the need for stoma creation and postprocedural complications. Stent insertion before subsequent surgery has no effect on perioperative mortality and long-term survival.

Who performs proctectomy for rectal cancer in the United States?

BACKGROUND: There is wide variation in surgical care for rectal cancer in the United States. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the differences in individual surgeon procedural profiles that might explain variations in the rates of restorative vs nonrestorative proctectomy for rectal cancer. DESIGN: This study was a retrospective examination of a cohort derived from trackable state hospital discharge data from 11 states. PATIENTS: We identified all patients with rectal cancer that underwent restorative proctectomy (sphincter-sparing surgery) vs nonrestorative proctectomy (colostomy formation) over a 24-month study period (January 1, 2003 through December 31, 2004). INTERVENTION: We developed an inpatient procedural profile of each treating surgeon's practice across general surgery procedure codes and summed the number of restorative vs nonrestorative proctectomies for rectal cancer by surgeon. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measures were nonrestorative proctectomy, mortality, and length of stay. RESULTS: A total of 7519 proctectomies were performed for rectal cancer by 2588 surgeons. During the 24-month study period, 1003 (38.8%) surgeons performed only nonrestorative procedures for rectal cancer. On multivariate analysis, the likelihood that a surgeon performed only nonrestorative procedures was increased if that surgeon performed more integumentary procedures and decreased if the surgeon performed at least one ileoanal pouch procedure or more anorectal procedures. Patients who underwent proctectomy by surgeons who performed only nonrestorative procedures had significantly higher mortality (2.5 ± 0.7%) and longer length of stay (11.3 ± 8.8 days) in comparison with those patients treated by surgeons who performed both restorative and nonrestorative procedures (1.3 ± 0.3% mortality and 9.2 ± 6.9 days, P < .001 for both analyses). The volume of proctectomy performed significantly affected all analyses. LIMITATIONS: : The retrospective design introduces potential selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: Over a 24-month period, 38.8% of surgeons performed only nonrestorative procedures for rectal cancer. These surgeons did not regularly perform anorectal or ileoanal pouch procedures, suggesting that they may not have a focus on colorectal disease in their practice; they had significantly higher mortality and length of stay for their patients who underwent proctectomy for rectal cancer.

A comparison of palliative stenting or emergent surgery for obstructing incurable colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: Acute colonic obstruction because of advanced colonic malignancy is a surgical emergency. Our aim was to review our experience with self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) compared to emergent surgery as the initial therapy for the management of patients with incurable obstructing colon cancer. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients with obstructing colon cancer who underwent insertion of a SEMS (n = 53) or surgery (n = 70) from 2002 to 2008 was performed. The primary endpoint was relief of obstruction. Secondary endpoints include technical success of the procedure, duration of hospital stay, early and long-term complications, and overall survival. RESULTS: Both groups were similar in age, sex, and tumor distribution. Placement of SEMS was successful in 50/53 (94%) patients. Surgery was effective in relieving obstruction in 70/70 (100%) patients. Patients in the SEMS group have a significantly shorter median hospital stay (2 days) as compared to the surgery group (8 days) (P < 0.001). Patients with SEMS also had significantly less acute complications compared to the surgery group (8 vs. 30%, P = 0.03). The hospital mortality for the SEMS group was 0% compared to 8.5% in patients that underwent surgical decompression (P = 0.04). There was no difference in survival between the two groups (P = 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with colorectal cancer and obstructive symptoms, SEMS provide a highly effective and safe therapy when compared to surgery. In most patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and obstruction, SEMS provide a minimally invasive alternative to surgical intervention.

Can elderly patients with colorectal cancer tolerate planned surgical treatment? A practical approach to a common dilemma.

AIM: Analysing the effectiveness of a surgical procedure is mandatory in every modern health-care system. The aging of the population stresses the need for a good standard of care. This study tests the hypothesis that porthsmouth-physiologic operative severity score for enumeration of morbidity and mortality (P-POSSUM) and colorectal-POSSUM (CR-POSSUM) would be useful clinical auditing tools in colorectal cancer surgery for aged patients. METHOD: One hundred and seventy-seven consecutive patients over 70 years of age underwent emergency or elective surgery from January 2003 to December 2005. Demographic, clinical and surgical information, score systems' prediction, complications and 30-day mortality data were prospectively entered in a comprehensive database. The observed over expected morbidity and mortality rate was calculated. RESULTS: Thirty-day observed mortality was 10.3% (19/177) while P-POSSUM and CR-POSSUM expected mortality were, respectively, 11.21% (P = NS) and 13.08% (P = NS). Overall observed morbidity was 42.7%, P-POSSUM prediction was 59.3% (P = 0.002). Morbidity and mortality data were analysed for specific subgroups of patients (resection and anastomosis/resection and stoma/palliative; emergency/elective). CONCLUSION: P-POSSUM and CR-POSSUM are useful tools to predict mortality in elderly patients. P-POSSUM significantly overestimated the risk of complications. A more accurate tool for preoperative assessment for aged patients is probably needed to predict the post-surgical outcome.

Short term outcome after emergency and elective surgery for colon cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Emergency presentation of colon cancer is common and associated with high mortality and morbidity following surgical treatment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate postoperative mortality and complications in a consecutive and population based series. METHOD: All patients with adenocarcinoma of the colon diagnosed between 1993 and 2007 were registered prospectively. Postoperative mortality and complication rates in elective and emergency patients were compared. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent risk factors for postoperative complications. RESULTS: In the study period 1129 patients were admitted, of whom 279 (25%) presented as an emergency. A total of 999 (89%) patients underwent surgical treatment; 924 patients (82%) had a major resection. The mortality rate was 3.5% after elective and 10% after emergency operation with resection (P < 0.01), and the complication rate was 24% and 38% (P < 0.01), respectively. In patients with left-sided obstruction, the mortality rate after Hartmann's procedure was 19% compared to 3% after resection with primary anastomosis (P < 0.01). Multivariate analyses demonstrated that emergency operation, increasing age, advanced tumour stage and ASA class IV were independent risk factors for postoperative mortality. CONCLUSION: Emergency operation for colon cancer was associated with high rates of complications and mortality, indicating that immediate surgery should be avoided if possible. Decompression of left sided obstruction with a stent seems promising, whereas no conclusion can be made with regard to optimal procedure if stent placement fails; in this study Hartmann's procedure was associated with high mortality and morbidity.

Palliative stoma creation: comparison of laparoscopic vs conventional procedures.

BACKGROUND: The creation of a stoma is an established therapeutic concept for the palliation of non-resectable rectal carcinomas and advanced tumours infiltrating the pelvis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In two prospective country-wide multicentre studies, each conducted over a similar period of time, the peri-operative course and postoperative short-term outcomes of laparoscopic vs laparotomy-based stoma construction were compared. RESULTS: A total of 90 patients underwent palliative laparoscopic construction; 550 patients received a stoma via a laparotomy. The intra-operative complication rate was lower after open surgery than after laparoscopic surgery (2.7 vs 5.6%; p = 0.15), although the difference was not significant. With regard to general (30.9 vs 15.6%; p = 0.003) and also specific postoperative complications (13.8 vs 5.6%; p = 0.029), however, a significant advantage of the laparoscopic approach was seen. Furthermore, mortality in the laparoscopic group was also significantly lower (4.4 vs 14.0%; p = 0.011). CONCLUSION: Palliative stoma done via laparoscopy had significantly better outcomes in terms of postoperative morbidity and mortality in comparison with the open surgical procedure.

Impact of anastomotic leakage on oncological outcome after rectal cancer resection.

BACKGROUND: : Anastomotic leakage has a major impact on morbidity and mortality in rectal cancer surgery. Its relevance to oncological outcome is controversial. This observational study investigated the influence of anastomotic leakage on oncological outcome. METHODS: : Data for 1741 patients undergoing curative resection of rectal cancer (located less than 12 cm from the anal verge) with normal healing were compared with those for 303 patients who experienced anastomotic leakage. Morbidity, mortality and long-term oncological outcomes were analysed. RESULTS: : Median follow-up was 40 months. Patients with anastomotic leakage had a higher postoperative mortality rate than those with no leakage (4.3 versus 1.2 per cent; P < 0.001). Patients with leakage necessitating surgical treatment had a higher 5-year local recurrence rate (17.5 versus 10.1 per cent; P = 0.006) and a lower 5-year disease-free survival rate (70.9 versus 75.4 per cent; P = 0.020) than those without leakage. Patients with anastomotic leakage not requiring surgical intervention did not have a worse oncological outcome. CONCLUSION: : A negative prognostic impact of anastomotic leakage on local recurrence and disease-free survival was found only for patients with leakage needing surgical revision.

Ileostomy or colostomy for temporary decompression of colorectal anastomosis.

BACKGROUND: The use of loop ileostomy or loop transverse colostomy represents an important issue in colorectal surgery. Despite a slight preference for a loop ileostomy as a temporary stoma, the best form for temporary decompression of colorectal anastomosis still remains controversial. OBJECTIVES: To assess the evidence in the use of loop ileostomy compared with loop transverse colostomy for temporary decompression of colorectal anastomosis, comparing the safety and effectiveness. SEARCH STRATEGY: We identified randomised controlled trials from MEDLINE, EMBASE, Lilacs, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Further, by hand-searching relevant medical journals and proceedings from major gastroenterological congresses. We did not limit the seaches regarding date and language. SELECTION CRITERIA: We assessed all randomised clinical trials, that met the objectives and reported major outcomes: 1. Mortality; 2. Wound infection; 3. Time of formation of stoma; 4. Time of closure of stoma; 5. Time interval between formation and closure of stoma; 6. Stoma prolapse; 7. Stoma retraction; 8. Parastomal hernia; 9. Parastomal fistula; 10. Stenosis; 11. Necrosis; 12. Skin irritation; 13. Ileus; 14. Bowel leakage; 15. Reoperation; 16. Patient adaptation; 17. Length of hospital stay; 18. Colorectal anastomotic dehiscence; 19. Incisional hernia; 20. Postoperative bowel obstruction. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Details of the randomisation, blinding, whether an intention-to-treat analysis was done, and the number of patients lost to follow-up was recorded. For data analysis the relative risk and risk difference were used with corresponding 95% confidence interval; fixed effect was used for all outcomes unless incisional hernia (random effect model). Statistical heterogeneity in the results of the meta-analysis was assessed by inspection of graphical presentation (funnel plot) and by calculating a test of heterogeneity. MAIN RESULTS: Five trials were included with 334 patients: 168 to loop ileostomy group and 166 to loop transverse colostomy group. The continuous outcomes could not be measured because of the lack of the data. The outcomes stoma prolapse had statistical significant difference: p=0.00001, but with statistical heterogeneity, p=0,001. When the sensitive analysis was applied excluding the trials that included emergencies surgeries, the result had a discreet difference: p = 0.02 and Test for heterogeneity: chi-square = 0.78, df = 2, p = 0.68, I(2)=0%. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The best available evidence for decompression of colorectal anastomosis, either use of loop ileostomy or loop colostomy, could not be clarified from this review. So far, the results in terms of occurrence of postoperative stoma prolapse support the choice of loop ileostomy as a technique for fecal diversion for colorectal anastomosis, but large scale RCT's is needed to verify this.

[A study of the value of colonic stenting as a bridge to elective surgery for the management of acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: the STENT-IN 2 study]. / Onderzoek naar de waarde van colonstentplaatsing als overbrugging tot electieve operatie bij de behandeling van een acute maligne linkszijdige colonobstructie: de STENT-IN 2-studie.

Conventionally, patients with acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction are treated with emergency surgery to restore luminal patency. These emergency operations have a mortality rate of 15-34% and a morbidity rate of 32-64% despite advances in perioperative care. Since the early 1990s, colonic stenting has been introduced, mainly in the left-sided colon, to restore luminal patency. In uncontrolled studies, stent placement before elective surgery has been suggested to improve the patient's clinical condition, thus decreasing mortality, morbidity, and the number of colostomies. To date, only one randomised controlled trial has been published: this study had several limitations, due to which there is still insufficient evidence. Therefore, a large-scale comparison between these two treatment algorithms has been initiated in a prospective multicentre randomised setting with respect to quality of life, morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs.

[Morbi-mortality related to ileostomy and colostomy closure]. / Morbimortalidad asociada al cierre de ileostomía y colostomía en asa.

INTRODUCTION: The main goal of gastrointestinal stomas is to divert the faecal stream from technically difficult anastomoses or intestinal obstruction. Current tendency is to avoid definitive stomas, temporary loop stomas are commonly used to protect high risk anastomosis or sections of the distal bowel. The aim of this study was to determine and compare the morbi-mortality after loop stomas closure. METHODS: Retrolective, observational and comparative study was conducted. The files of patients submitted to loop ileostomy or colostomy closure from 1981 to 2001 were reviewed. Statistical analysis was performed by the Fisher's exact test and the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: From a total of 107 procedures included, 73% were ileostomy closures and 27% colostomy closures. The mean age was 46 years (14-88). Protection of anastomoses was the most common indication in both stoma groups. The colostomy group had a larger interval days between stoma creation and closure than the ileostomy group (172.3 days vs. 125.6 days p = 0.008). Stoma closure was performed by hand sewn sutures in 81.3% patients and by stapled technique in 19.7% patients. The mean operative time for stoma closure was higher for colostomy group than for ileostomy (108.1 min vs. 88.3 min, p = 0.04). Colostomy group patients required a midline abdominal incisions more often than ileostomy group (21.4 vs. 2.5% p = 0.04). Morbidity rates were 7.6% for the ileostomy group and 10.3% for the colostomy group. Colostomy closure required a longer length of stay. There was no mortality. CONCLUSION: The results of this study showed that stoma closure was a well tolerated procedure with low morbidity and no mortality rates. The result suggest that ileostomy closure is a simpler procedure.

Race and socioeconomic disparities in national stoma reversal rates.

BACKGROUND: Many temporary stomas are never reversed leading to significantly worse quality of life. Recent evidence suggests a lower rate of reversal among minority patients. Our study aimed to elucidate disparities in national stoma closure rates by race, medical insurance status, and household income. METHODS: Five years of data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2008 to 2012) was used to identify the annual rates of stoma formation and annual rates of stoma closure. Stomas labeled as "permanent" or those created secondary to colorectal cancers were excluded. Temporary stoma closure rates were calculated, and differences were tested with the chi-square test. Separate analyses were performed by race/ethnicity, insurance status, and household income. Nationally representative estimates were calculated using discharge-level weights. RESULTS: The 5-year average annual rate of temporary stoma creation was 76,551 per year (46% colostomies and 54% ileostomies). The annual rate of stoma reversal was 50,155 per year that equated to an annual reversal rate of 65.5%. Reversal rates were higher among white patients compared with black patients (67% vs 56%, P < .001) and among privately insured patients compared with uninsured patients (88% vs 63%, P < .001). Reversal rates increased as the household income increased from 61% in the lowest income quartile to 72% in the highest quartile (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Stark disparities exist in national rates of stoma closure. Stoma closure is associated with race, insurance, and income status. This study highlights the lack of access to surgical health care among patients of minority race and low-income status.

The impact of surgeon volume on colostomy reversal outcomes after Hartmann's procedure for diverticulitis.

BACKGROUND: Colostomy reversal after Hartmann's procedure for diverticulitis is a morbid procedure, and studies investigating factors associated with outcomes are lacking. This study identifies patient, surgeon, and hospital-level factors associated with perioperative outcomes after stoma reversal. METHODS: The Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System was queried for urgent/emergency Hartmann's procedures for diverticulitis between 2000-2012 in New York State and subsequent colostomy reversal within 1 year of the procedure. Surgeon and hospital volume were categorized into tertiles based on the annual number of colorectal resections performed each year. Bivariate and mixed-effects analyses were used to assess the association between patient, surgeon, and hospital-level factors and perioperative outcomes after colostomy reversal, including a laparoscopic approach; duration of stay; intensive care unit admission; complications; mortality; and 30-day, unscheduled readmission. RESULTS: Among 10,487 patients who underwent Hartmann's procedure and survived to discharge, 63% had the colostomy reversed within 1 year. After controlling for patient, surgeon, and hospital-level factors, high-volume surgeons (≥40 colorectal resections/yr) were independently associated with higher odds of a laparoscopic approach (unadjusted rates: 14% vs 7.6%; adjusted odds ratio = 1.84, 95% confidence interval = 1.12, 3.00), shorter duration of stay (median: 6 versus 7 days; adjusted incidence rate ratio = 0.87, 95% confidence interval = 0.81, 0.95), and lower odds of 90-day mortality (unadjusted rates: 0.4% vs 1.0%; adjusted odds ratio = 0.30, 95% confidence interval = 0.10, 0.88) compared with low-volume surgeons (1-15 colorectal resections/yr). CONCLUSION: High-volume surgeons are associated with better perioperative outcomes and lower health care utilization after Hartmann's reversal for diverticulitis. These findings support referral to high-volume surgeons for colostomy reversal.

A reappraisal of the Mikulicz enterostomy in infants and children.

We performed the Mikulicz procedure in 46 pediatric patients. Thirty-five were high-risk patients, 20 of whom had necrotizing enterocolitis. High risk was defined by the presence of peritonitis, intestinal perforation, poorly demarcated intestinal gangrene, or severe associated systemic illness. The remaining 11 patients had the procedure performed for technical reasons, most commonly a discrepancy in the size of the proximal distal limb ratio greater than 4:1. The procedure consisted of intestinal resection with double-barreled enterostomy, crushing of the spur between stomas, and subsequent lateral closure of the enterostomy. The mortality rate of 30% was due to the underlying disease and in no instance was death caused by a complication of the procedure. Complications (13%) were stricture or prolapse of the stoma and wound infection. Subsequent enterostomy closure in 32 patients had no mortality rate and a 3% complication rate. Because the risk of fatal anastomotic leak and peritonitis is very low, we prefer the Mikulicz procedure to all other intestinal anastomotic techniques for high-risk pediatric patients.