Early versus late closure of protective loop ileostomy: functional significant results in a preliminary analysis.

BACKGROUND: Protective loop ileostomy (PLI), commonly performed in rectal cancer surgery, is one of the most reliable methods to reduce the risk of sepsis associated with anastomotic complications. The correct timing of PLI closure is not well defined. Recently, most surgeons proposed to close early the PLI. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the timing of stoma closure on postoperative outcomes. METHODS: We analyzed prospectively data of patients who received PLI anterior resection for rectal cancer between January 2020 to June 2022. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the timing of stoma closure, until four weeks (EC group) and more than four weeks (LC group). Outpatient clinic follow-up, perioperative data, postoperative complications and evidence of anterior resection syndrome with the Low-Anterior Resection Score (LARS) score were recorded. RESULTS: In the EC group 24 patients were included while 27 patients were considered for LC group. There were no differences between the groups with respect to all parameters, except for recourse to adjuvant therapy, higher for LC group. Perioperative analyzed characteristics were similar among groups. There was no statistically significant difference between the EC group and the LC group for complication rate. LARS score was higher in the LC group for score >20 and >30. CONCLUSIONS: Timing of PLI closure was not a significant independent predictor of post-closure complications rate. LARS incidence was significantly related to longer time of closure, with probably late recovery of motility function, but this should be confirmed by randomized studies.

The Italian Unitary Society of Colon-proctology (SIUCP: Società Italiana Unitaria di Colonproctologia) guidelines for the management of anal fissure.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of these evidence-based guidelines is to present a consensus position from members of the Italian Unitary Society of Colon-Proctology (SIUCP: Società Italiana Unitaria di Colon-Proctologia) on the diagnosis and management of anal fissure, with the purpose to guide every physician in the choice of the best treatment option, according with the available literature. METHODS: A panel of experts was designed and charged by the Board of the SIUCP to develop key-questions on the main topics covering the management of anal fissure and to performe an accurate search on each topic in different databanks, in order to provide evidence-based answers to the questions and to summarize them in statements. All the clinical questions were discussed by the expert panel in different rounds through the Delphi approach and, for each statement, a consensus among the experts was reached. The questions were created according to the PICO criteria, and the statements developed adopting the GRADE methodology. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute anal fissure the medical therapy with dietary and behavioral norms is indicated. In the chronic phase of disease, the conservative treatment with topical 0.3% nifedipine plus 1.5% lidocaine or nitrates may represent the first-line therapy, eventually associated with ointments with film-forming, anti-inflammatory and healing properties such as Propionibacterium extract gel. In case of first-line treatment failure, the surgical strategy (internal sphincterotomy or fissurectomy with flap), may be guided by the clinical findings, eventually supported by endoanal ultrasound and anal manometry.