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.

[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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

The Effect of a Temporary Stoma on Long-term Functional Outcomes Following Surgery for Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with rectal cancer may undergo surgical resection with or without a temporary stoma. OBJECTIVE: This study primarily aimed to compare long-term functional outcomes between patients with and without a temporary stoma after surgery for rectal cancer. The secondary aim was to investigate the effect of time to stoma reversal on functional outcomes. DESIGN: This was a multicenter, cross-sectional study. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at 7 Dutch hospitals. PATIENTS: Included were patients who had undergone rectal cancer surgery (2009-2015). Excluded were deceased patients, who were deceased, had a permanent stoma, or had intellectual disability. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Functional outcomes were measured using the Rome IV criteria for constipation and fecal incontinence and the low anterior resection syndrome score. RESULTS: Of 656 patients, 32% received a temporary ileostomy and 20% a temporary colostomy (86% response). Follow-up was at 56 (interquartile range, 38.5-79) months. Patients who had a temporary ileostomy experienced less constipation, more fecal incontinence, and more major low anterior resection syndrome than those without a temporary stoma. Patients who had a temporary colostomy experienced more major low anterior resection syndrome than those without a temporary stoma. A temporary ileostomy or colostomy was not associated with constipation or fecal incontinence after correction for confounding factors (eg, anastomotic height, anastomotic leakage, radiotherapy). Time to stoma reversal was not associated with constipation, fecal incontinence, or major low anterior resection syndrome. LIMITATIONS: Cross-sectional design. CONCLUSIONS: Although patients with a temporary ileostomy or colostomy have worse functional outcomes in the long term, it seems that the reason for creating a temporary stoma, rather than the stoma itself, underlies this phenomenon. Time to reversal of a temporary stoma does not influence functional outcomes. See Video Abstract . EL EFECTO DEL ESTOMA TEMPORAL SOBRE LOS RESULTADOS FUNCIONALES A LARGO PLAZO DESPUS DE LA CIRUGA POR CNCER DE RECTO: ANTECEDENTES:Los pacientes con cáncer de recto pueden someterse a resección quirúrgica con o sin un estoma temporal.OBJETIVO:El objetivo principal de este estudio fue comparar los resultados funcionales a largo plazo entre pacientes con y sin estoma temporal después de cirugía por cáncer de recto. El objetivo secundario fue investigar el efecto del tiempo transcurrido hasta la reversión del estoma sobre los resultados funcionales.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio transversal multicéntrico.ESCENARIO:Este estudio se llevó a cabo en siete hospitales holandeses.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron pacientes sometidos a cirugía de cáncer de recto (2009-2015). Se excluyeron pacientes fallecidos, pacientes con estoma permanente o discapacidad intelectual.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los resultados funcionales se midieron utilizando los criterios de Roma IV para el estreñimiento y la incontinencia fecal y la puntuación del síndrome de resección anterior baja (LARS).RESULTADOS:De 656 pacientes, el 32% recibió una ileostomía temporal y el 20% una colostomía temporal (respuesta del 86%). El seguimiento fue de 56.0 (RIQ 38.5-79.0) meses. Los pacientes a los que se les realizó una ileostomía temporal experimentaron menos estreñimiento, más incontinencia fecal y más LARS mayor que los pacientes sin un estoma temporal. Los pacientes que tuvieron una colostomía temporal experimentaron más LARS mayor que los pacientes sin un estoma temporal. Una ileostomía o colostomía temporal no se asoció con estreñimiento o incontinencia fecal después de la corrección de factores de confusión (p. ej., altura anastomótica, fuga anastomótica, radioterapia). El tiempo hasta la reversión del estoma no se asoció con estreñimiento, incontinencia fecal o LARS mayor.LIMITACIONES:El presente estudio está limitado por su diseño transversal.CONCLUSIONES:Aunque los pacientes con una ileostomía o colostomía temporal tienen peores resultados funcionales a largo plazo, parece que la razón para crear un estoma temporal, más que el estoma en sí, se asocia a este fenómeno. El tiempo hasta la reversión de un estoma temporal no influye en los resultados funcionales. (Traducción-Dr. Jorge Silva Velazco ).

Biologic use is not associated with postoperative complications in patients with Crohn's disease undergoing stoma reversion.

PURPOSE: Stoma creation is a common procedure in patients with Crohn's disease (CD), and early prophylaxis with biologics is recommended for high-risk patients. However, the effect of biologic exposure on morbidity after stoma closure remains unknown. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the impact of biologic use on the occurrence of complications in CD patients following stoma closure. METHODS: Consecutive patients diagnosed with CD who underwent ileostomy reversal at a tertiary care centre between 1 January 2013 and 1 December 2021, were included in the study. The primary outcome was the occurrence of 90-day postoperative complications. RESULTS: The study included 347 eligible patients who underwent ileostomy reversal. There was no significant difference in terms of infectious complications, overall complications or length of postoperative stay between the biologic and non-biologic groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified several predictors of postoperative morbidity, including preoperative haemoglobin levels below 100 g/L, CRP levels above 10 mg/L, anastomotic site, ileostomy-related infectious complications and albumin levels below 35 g/L. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that the use of biologics is not associated with adverse outcomes. However, such as high CRP levels, ileostomy-related infectious complications, hypoproteinemia, and hemoglobinemia, should be optimized prior to surgery to reduce postoperative morbidities.

Efferent limb stimulation prior to loop ileostomy closure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative ileus (POI) remains a common phenomenon following loop ileostomy closure. Our aim was to determine whether preoperative physiological stimulation (PPS) of the efferent limb reduced POI incidence. METHODS: A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis searching PubMed, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases was performed. The last search was carried out on 30 January 2023. All randomized studies comparing PPS versus no stimulation were included. The primary endpoint was POI incidence. Secondary endpoints included the time to first passage of flatus/stool, time to resume oral diet, need for nasogastric tube (NGT) placement postoperatively, length of stay (LOS) and other complications. Random effects models were used to calculate pooled effect size estimates. Trial sequential analyses (TSA) were also performed. RESULTS: Three randomized studies capturing 235 patients (116 PPS, 119 no stimulation) were included. On random effects analysis, PPS was associated with a quicker time to resume oral diet (MD - 1.47 days, 95% CI - 2.75 to - 0.19, p = 0.02), shorter LOS (MD - 1.47 days, 95% CI - 2.47 to - 0.46, p = 0.004) (MD - 1.41 days, 95% CI - 2.32 to - 0.50, p = 0.002, I2 = 56%) and fewer other complications (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.01, p = 0.05). However, there was no difference in POI incidence (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.21, p = 0.10), the requirement for NGT placement (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.20, p = 0.12) or time to first passage of flatus/stool (MD - 0.60 days, 95% CI - 1.95 to 0.76, p = 0.39). TSA revealed imprecise estimates for all outcomes (except LOS) and further studies are warranted to meet the required information threshold. CONCLUSIONS: PPS prior to stoma closure may reduce LOS and postoperative complications albeit without a demonstrable beneficial effect on POI. Further high-powered studies are required to confirm or refute these findings.

Early vs. Standard Loop Ileostomy Closure: An Unmatched Case-Control Study / Cierre Temprano vs Estándar de Ileostomía en Asa. Estudio de Casos y Controles no Emparejado

SUMMARY: Early closure of a loop ileostomy (ECI) is a relatively new practice, for which there is insufficient evidence regarding its effectiveness in relation to closure at conventional times. The aim of this study was to report postoperative complications (POC) and hospital mortality in patients with loop ileostomy (LI) who underwent ECI, compared with patients with LI who underwent late closure. Un- matched case-control study. Patients with LI who underwent surgery at Clínica RedSalud Mayor Temuco (2010-2022) were included. Cases were defined as patients with LI who underwent early closure and controls as subjects who underwent closure at the usual times. No matching was performed, but a 1:1 relationship between cases and controls was considered. Outcome variables were postoperative complications and hospital mortality. Other variables of interest were surgical time and hospital stay. Descriptive statistics were applied with calculation of proportions and measures of central tendency. Subsequently, t-test and Pearson Chi2 for comparison of averages and proportions was applied, and odds ratios and their respective 95 % CI were calculated. In this study 39 patients with AI were operated on (18 cases and 21 controls). Age and BMI average of the studied subjects was 71.3±7.1 years and 27.3±19.8 kg/m2 respectively. Mean LI closure time, surgical time, and hospitalization were: 10.0±0.7 months; 62.5±10.6min; 3.8±0.1 days respectively. POC were only surgical site infections. Three in cases (16.7 %) and 3 in controls (14.3 %). No anastomotic dehiscence or hospital mortality was observed in either cases or controls. There were no differences in comorbidities or surgical site infection between cases and controls (OR of 0.6 and 1.2 respectively) In this experience, the results of performing the CTI were similar to the late closing in relation to the variables studied.

El cierre temprano de una ileostomía en asa (IA), es una práctica relativamente nueva, sobre la que no hay suficiente evidencia respecto de su efectividad en relación con el cierre en tiempos convencionales. El objetivo de este estudio fue verificar diferencias en la tasa de complicaciones postoperatorias (CPO) y de mortalidad hospitalaria en pacientes con IA sometidos a cierre temprano comparados con pacientes con IA sometidos a cierre tardío. Estudio de casos y controles sin emparejamiento. Se incluyeron pacientes con IA que fueron sometidos a cirugía en la Clínica RedSalud Mayor Temuco (2010-2022). Los casos se definieron como pacientes con IA sometidos a cierre temprano y los controles como sujetos con IA sometidos a cierre en tiempos habituales. No se realizó emparejamiento. Se consideró una relación 1:1 entre casos y controles. Las variables de resultado fueron CPO y mortalidad hospitalaria. Otras variables de interés fueron: tiempo quirúrgico y hospitalización. Se aplicó estadísticas descriptivas (cálculo de proporciones y medidas de tendencia central). Posteriormente, se aplicó prueba t-test y Chi2 para comparación de promedios y proporciones; y se calcularon odds ratios e intervalos de confianza del 95 %. Se operaron 39 pacientes con IA (18 casos y 21 controles). El promedio de edad e IMC fue 71,3±7,1 años y 27,3±19,8 kg/m2, respectivamente. El tiempo promedio de cierre de IA, tiempo quirúrgico y hospitalización fueron: 10,0±0,7 meses; 62,5±10,6 minutos; 3,8±0,1 días, respectivamente. Las CPO fueron infecciones del sitio quirúrgico (3 casos; 16,7 % y 3 controles; 14,3 %). No se observó dehiscencia anastomótica ni mortalidad hospitalaria en casos ni controles. No hubo diferencias en comorbilidades ni en infecciones del sitio quirúrgico entre casos y controles (OR de 0,6 y 1,2, respectivamente). No se evidenciaron diferencias entre realizar cierre temprano o tardío de IA, respecto de las variables CPO y de mortalidad hospitalaria.

The Role of Ileostomy in the Prevention and Treatment of Anastomotic Leakage after Elective Rectal Cancer Surgery - A Retrospective Analysis of Specific Risk Factors, Outcomes, and Complications.

Background: The objective of this paper is to highlight the role and place of ileostomy from the perspective of the risk of anastomotic leakage (AL). Materials and method: This was a retrospective study of 74 (46.54%) low and ultra-low anterior resections from 159 cases of rectal cancer operated on in a seven-year interval (2015 - 2021). The cases were divided into two groups: Group A with protective ileostomy (47 cases = 63.51%) and Group B without protective ileostomy (27 cases = 35.49%). Results: The type of anastomosis was low colorectal for 15 cases and ileorectal for two cases, both in Group A, with either mechanical or manual sutures. Continuous loop ileostomy was the only fecal diversion procedure used for protection. The ileostomy-specific complications recorded in Group A were peristomal skin lesions (8 cases), early peristomal hernia (2 cases), and severe dehydration with acute renal-insufficency (7 cases). The closure of the ileostomy was performed in 42 cases (89.36%), with the time between the primary operation and the closure being 4.28 months on average, with limits between 12 days and 10 months. AL treatment was conservative in 13 (76.47%) cases and surgical in four cases, with the types of operations performed at reintervention being take-down of the anastomosis + left terminal colostomy + ileostomy closure in three cases (2 in Group A and 1 in Group B) and terminal ileostomy in one case in Group A. Conclusions: To reduce its specific complications, ileostomy should be performed in well-selected patients. Those with risk factors for leakage include males, the elderly, and those having important comorbidities, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, low tumors below 5 cm from the anal verge, or complete circumferential stenosis and peritumoral inflammatory infiltrate.

Complications and Healthcare Costs Associated With the First Year Following Colostomy and Ileostomy Formation: A Retrospective Study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes during the first year following ostomy formation. DESIGN: Single-center retrospective audit. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: The sample comprised 200 patients who underwent surgery leading to ileostomy or colostomy at a large English National Health Service (NHS) Trust. METHODS: Clinical complications, medicine prescriptions, and interactions with healthcare services were reported over 12 months postsurgery, and interactions with the NHS were matched to the closest NHS unit cost to determine mean patient cost. RESULTS: The most common ostomy-related surgical site complications were high output (35.0%; n = 70), followed by moderate/severe peristomal skin complications (24.5%; n = 49) and bleeding (23.5%; n = 47). Ostomy management-related complications included general difficulties with ostomy management (50.0%; n = 100) and leakage-related mild peristomal skin issues (48.5%; n = 97). Clinical complication rates were highest in the first quarter following ostomy formation, except parastomal hernia, which increased in incidence over time. Ileostomy patients more frequently experienced high output, acute renal failure, and ostomy management-related complications and had increased length of inpatient admission. However, healthcare resource use was high in both groups, with a median of 13 inpatient admission days and 12 outpatient contacts overall within the first year. Mean cost per patient was £20,444.60 (US $26,018.41); 90.5% of these costs were attributed to ostomy-related factors. CONCLUSIONS: Patients are likely to experience at least one clinical complication following intestinal ostomy formation and have multiple interactions with the NHS. While a number of complications are more frequent in patients with ileostomies, both groups experienced considerable costs within the first year following surgery associated with ostomy management and recovery.