Clinical application of the B-type sutured ileostomy in robotic-assisted low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a propensity score matching analysis.

Currently, there is no consensus on the position and method for temporary ileostomy in robotic-assisted low anterior resection for rectal cancer. Herein, this study introduced the B-type sutured ileostomy, a new temporary ileostomy technique, and compared it to the traditional one to assess its efficacy and safety. Between September 2020 and December 2022 in our centre, B-type sutured ileostomy was performed on 124 patients undergoing robotic-assisted low anterior resection for rectal cancer. A retrospective review of a prospectively collected database identified patients who underwent robotic-assisted low anterior resection for rectal cancer with a temporary ileostomy between January 2018 and December 2022. Patients who underwent B-type sutured ileostomy (B group) were matched in a 1:1 ratio with patients who underwent traditional ileostomy (Control group) using a propensity score based on age, sex, BMI, Comorbidity, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, and Prior abdominal surgery history. Surgical and postoperative outcomes, health status, and stoma closure data were analyzed for both groups. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier：NCT05915052.  The B group (n = 118) shows advantages compared to the Control group (n = 118) regarding total operation time (155.98 ± 21.63 min vs 168.92 ± 21.49 min, p = 0.001), postoperative body pain (81.92 ± 4.12 vs 78.41 ± 3.02, p = 0.001) and operation time of stoma closure (46.19 ± 11.30 min vs 57.88 ± 11.08 min, p = 0.025). The two groups had no other notable differences. The B-type sutured ileostomy is a safe and feasible option in robotic-assisted low anterior resection for rectal cancer. The B-type sutured ileostomy may offer advantages such as shorter overall surgical duration, lighter postoperative pain, and shorter second-stage ostomy incorporation surgery. However, attention should be directed towards the occurrence of stoma prolapse.

'Dumpling suture method' versus traditional suture method of protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic anterior rectal resection with specimen extraction through stoma incision: a retrospective comparative cohort study.

BACKGROUND: A diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) is performed in laparoscopic anterior rectal resection (LAR) surgery at high risk of anastomotic fistula. Minimally invasive surgery promotes postoperative recovery and cosmetics. To reduce abdominal trauma, specimen extraction through stoma incision (EXSI) is usually performed to avoid auxiliary abdominal incision with enlarged stomal incision. The traditional suture method (TSM) reduces the incision size by suturing the ends of the enlarged incision, leading to peristomal incisions and a higher risk of stomal complications. The study aimed to introduce the dumpling suture method (DSM) of PLI and compare this new method with TSM. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The authors propose a novel stoma suture technique, which utilized a method of skin folding suture to reduce the enlarged incision size. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 71 consecutive patients with rectal cancer who underwent LAR-DLI with EXSI, and the intraoperative details and postoperative outcomes of the two groups were measured. RESULTS: The DSM group showed a lower stomal complication rate (10.3 vs. 35.7%, P=0.016) than that of the TSM group. The scores of DET (Discoloration, Erosion, Tissue overgrowth), stomal pain, quality of life were all significantly lower in DSM group than in TSM group. In multivariate analysis, DSM was an independent protective factor for stoma-related complications. Operative time, time to first flatus, defecation and eat, nonstomal related postoperative complications were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: DSM utilizes a method of skin folding suture to reduce the enlarged incision size, which is safe and effective in reducing the incidence of peristomal skin infections and stomal complications. This procedure offers a novel suturing approach for loop ileostomy with enlarged incision, effectively reducing the postoperative trauma and incidence of stomal complications.

Novel Repair Technique for Oral and Anal Side Stoma Prolapse of a Loop Colostomy With the Stapled Modified Altemeier Method Using Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Imaging.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Stoma prolapse is a common complication in the late phase after stoma creation. With advances in chemotherapy, a double-orifice colostomy or ileostomy and chemotherapy are used to treat primary unresectable colorectal cancer. Preoperative therapy with a double-orifice colostomy or ileostomy is performed to aid primary colorectal cancer miniaturization. Therefore, the number of stoma prolapses will likely increase in the future. Previous reports on the repair of stoma prolapse focused on unilateral stoma prolapse of loop colostomy, and there are no reports about the bilateral stoma prolapse of loop colostomy or ileostomy. CASE REPORT: We report a novel repair technique for oral and anal side (bilateral) stoma prolapse of a loop colostomy with the stapled modified Altemeier method using indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging considering the distribution of marginal artery in preventing marginal artery injury which has considerable clinical significance. CONCLUSION: Our novel technique for the oral and anal side prolapse of a loop colostomy is considered effective and safe.

Is proctoscopy sufficient for the evaluation of colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal? A nationwide retrospective analysis of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology Colorectal Cancer Network Collaborative group (SICO-CCN).

AIM: Several methods for assessing anastomotic integrity have been proposed, but the best is yet to be defined. The aim of this study was to compare the different methods to assess the integrity of colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal. METHOD: A retrospective cohort analysis on patients between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2020 with a defunctioning stoma for middle and low rectal anterior resection was performed. A propensity score matching comparison between patients who underwent proctoscopy alone and patients who underwent proctoscopy plus any other preoperative method to assess the integrity of colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal (transanal water-soluble contrast enema via conventional radiology, transanal water-soluble contrast enema via CT, and magnetic resonance) was performed. RESULTS: The analysis involved 1045 patients from 26 Italian referral colorectal centres. The comparison between proctoscopy alone versus proctoscopy plus any other preoperative tool showed no significant differences in terms of stenoses (p = 0.217) or leakages (p = 0.103) prior to ileostomy reversal, as well as no differences in terms of misdiagnosed stenoses (p = 0.302) or leakages (p = 0.509). Interestingly, in the group that underwent proctoscopy and transanal water-soluble contrast enema the comparison between the two procedures demonstrated no significant differences in detecting stenoses (2 vs. 0, p = 0.98), while there was a significant difference in detecting leakages in favour of transanal water-soluble contrast enema via CT (3 vs. 12, p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: We can confirm that proctoscopy alone should be considered sufficient prior to ileostomy reversal. However, in cases in which the results of proctoscopy are not completely clear or the surgeon remains suspicious of an anastomotic leakage, transanal water-soluble contrast enema via CT could guarantee its detection.

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.

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.

Postoperative Oral Rehydration and Regimented Follow-up Decrease Readmissions After Colorectal Surgery That Includes Ileostomies.

BACKGROUND: Ileostomies constitute 15% to 43% of readmissions after colorectal surgery, often due to dehydration and acute kidney injury. Prior institutional interventions decreased readmissions but not among patients who underwent new ileostomies. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate readmissions among patients who underwent new ileostomies after postoperative oral rehydration solution and standardized clinic visits. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of prospective database. SETTINGS: Enhanced recovery colorectal surgery service. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent new ileostomy before and after intervention. INTERVENTIONS: Postoperative oral rehydration solution and postdischarge clinic visits with review of inputs/outputs, antimotility and appliance needs, and trained nurse reeducation 4 to 7 days after discharge, 30 days postoperatively, and every 1 to 2 weeks thereafter as needed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Readmission rate due to dehydration/acute kidney injury (primary), emergency department visits, and readmission rates overall and for specific diagnoses. Analysis used univariate and weighted techniques. RESULTS: A total of 312 patients (199 preintervention; 113 postintervention) were included, with a mean age of 59.0 years. Patients were predominantly White (94.9%) and evenly split between men and women. The most common diagnosis was diverticulitis (43.3%). The most common procedure was high anterior resection (38.8%), followed by low anterior resection (16.35%). Patient and procedure characteristics were well matched between groups. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that readmission rate due to dehydration/acute kidney injury significantly decreased between pre- and postintervention study groups (45.7% vs 16.5%, p = 0.039). Emergency department visits due to dehydration/acute kidney injury (12.0% vs 1.7%, p < 0.001) and readmissions from all causes (24.33% vs 10.6%, p = 0.005) also significantly decreased. Other complications were not significantly different between groups. Average stoma output 24 hours before (776 vs 625 mL, p = 0.005) and after (993 vs 890 mL, p = 0.025) discharge was significantly decreased in the postintervention group. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective single-center study. CONCLUSIONS: An oral rehydration solution and frequent standardized postdischarge visits led by trained nursing staff decreased readmissions and emergency department visits among patients who underwent new ileostomies after colorectal surgery. See Video Abstract . LA REHIDRATACIN ORAL POSOPERATORIA Y EL SEGUIMIENTO REGLAMENTADO REDUCEN LOS REINGRESOS EN PACIENTES DE CIRUGA COLORRECTAL CON ILEOSTOMAS: ANTECEDENTES:Las ileostomías constituyen del 15 al 43% de los reingresos después de la cirugía colorrectal, a menudo debido a la deshidratación y la lesión renal aguda. Las intervenciones institucionales previas redujeron los reingresos, pero no entre los pacientes con nuevas ileostomías.OBJETIVO:Evaluar los reingresos entre pacientes con nuevas ileostomías después del uso de solución de rehidratación oral postoperatoria y visitas clínicas estandarizadas.DISEÑO:Análisis retrospectivo de base de datos prospectiva.AJUSTES:Servicio de cirugía colorrectal de recuperación mejorada.PACIENTES:Pacientes con ileostomía nueva antes y después de la intervención.INTERVENCIÓN(ES):Solución de rehidratación oral posoperatoria y visitas clínicas posteriores al alta con revisión de entradas/salidas, antimotilidad y necesidades de aparatos, y reeducación de enfermeras capacitadas 4-7 días después del alta, 30 días después de la operación y cada 1-2 semanas después, según sea necesario.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Tasa de readmisión debido a deshidratación/lesión renal aguda (primaria), tasa de urgencias y de readmisión en general y para diagnósticos específicos. El análisis utilizó técnicas univariadas y ponderadas.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron un total de 312 pacientes (199 preintervención; 113 postintervención), con una edad media de 59,0 años. Los pacientes eran predominantemente blancos (94,9%) y se dividieron equitativamente entre hombres y mujeres. El diagnóstico más frecuente fue diverticulitis (43,3%). El procedimiento más común fue la resección anterior alta (38,8 %) seguida de la resección anterior baja (16,35 %). Las características del paciente y del procedimiento coincidieron bien entre los grupos. El análisis multivariante demostró que la tasa de reingreso debido a deshidratación/lesión renal aguda disminuyó significativamente entre los grupos de estudio antes y después de la intervención (45,7 % frente a 16,5 %, p = 0,039). Las visitas a urgencias por deshidratación/insuficiencia renal aguda (12,0 % frente a 1,7 %, p < 0,001) y los reingresos por todas las causas (24,33 % frente a 10,6 %, p = 0,005) también disminuyeron significativamente. Otras complicaciones no fueron significativamente diferentes entre los grupos. El gasto medio del estoma 24 horas antes (776 ml frente a 625 ml, p = 0,005) y después (993 ml frente a 890 ml, p = 0,025) del alta disminuyó significativamente en el grupo posterior a la intervención.LIMITACIONES:Estudio retrospectivo de centro único.CONCLUSIONES:Una solución de rehidratación oral y frecuentes visitas estandarizadas posteriores al alta dirigidas por personal de enfermería capacitado redujeron los reingresos y las visitas al servicio de urgencias entre los pacientes con nuevas ileostomías después de la cirugía colorrectal. ( Traducción-Dr. Yolanda Colorado ).

Quality of life amongst patients with diverting umbilical stomas in rectal surgery: a single centre prospective randomized controlled pilot study.

BACKGROUND: The umbilical stoma (umbistoma) has been proposed as a viable alternative site for a temporary defunctioning stoma. Suggested advantages of the umbistoma include decreased number of surgical incisions required, improved cosmesis and ease of reversal surgery. This study aimed to assess the patient experience of umbilical loop ileostomies in rectal surgery, with the primary outcome being patient reported quality of life (QoL). METHODS: A total of 20 patients undergoing laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery were randomly allocated to have a defunctioning ileostomy at a conventional site (right iliac fossa) or at the umbilicus. Patient-reported QoL was assessed at 6 weeks using the Stoma-QoL questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were number of stomas reversed, length of time awaiting stoma reversal surgery, duration of operative time for stoma reversal, length of hospital stay following stoma reversal and rate of parastomal or post reversal incisional hernias. RESULTS: Patients who had an umbilical stoma scored significantly lower on the Stoma-QoL questionnaire compared to the conventional group, particularly on questions regarding feelings of tiredness, body insecurity and anxiety. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in relation to secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: There may be potential disadvantages to the umbilical stoma with negative impacts on body image and subsequent increased social anxiety. Patient selection and adequate counselling will be important when considering an umbilical stoma. Further larger scale prospective studies are required to further validate the feasibility and longer-term safety of umbilical stomas in both clinical outcomes as well as patient QoL.

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.

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.

Peristomal Moisture-Associated Skin Damage Treatment: Use of Cyanoacrylate Liquid Skin Protectant: A Case Series.

BACKGROUND: Despite recent advances in ostomy care, the incidence of stoma and peristomal skin complications including peristomal moisture-associated skin damage (MASD) remains as high as 80% of patients living with ostomies. We evaluated a cyanoacrylate liquid skin protectant (CLSP) for the treatment and healing of peristomal MASD in patients with an ileostomy, ileal conduit, or colostomy. CASES: Five patients (24-85 years old) with peristomal MASD related to an ileostomy (n = 2), ileal conduit (n = 2), or colostomy (n = 1) were evaluated in this case study. All were treated with a CLSP in an attempt to reduce peristomal MASD caused by effluent leakage, which resulted in painful denudation of the peristomal skin. All patients received 1 to 2 applications of the CLSP prior to replacement of the pouching system. Prior to CLSP application, patients underwent assessment focusing on the causes of ostomy pouching system undermining and leakage. Interventions to prevent recurrent undermining and leakage, usually focused on modifications of the pouching system, were completed when indicated. CONCLUSIONS: For these 5 patients, complete resolution of peristomal MASD was observed at 2 to 8 days following CLSP treatment. More severe peristomal MASD cases required 7 to 8 days for complete resolution while less severe peristomal MASD resolved within 2 to 3 days. Patients showed less frequent pouching system changes, healing of peristomal skin, and reduced peristomal MASD associated with the CLSP treatment and addressing underlying etiology. On a pain scale of 0 to 10, patients reported less pain with an average of more than 7 out of 10 prior to the CLSP treatment and less than 4 out of 10 after treatment.

Wound Infection After Ileostomy Closure: An Interim Analysis of a Prospective Randomized Study Comparing Primary Versus Circumferential Subcuticular Closure Techniques.

Background: Circumferential subcuticular wound approximation (CSWA) of round shaped skin wounds after ileostomy take down is believed to lower the rates of surgical site infection (SSI). We performed this randomized trial to compare the rates of SSI and other short-term outcomes among primary linear skin closure (PC) and CSWA groups of patients. Patients and Methods: All patients undergoing ileostomy reversal during the study period were randomly assigned to either PC or CSWA. The primary outcome was the incidence of SSI as assessed by ASEPSIS scoring system. The secondary outcomes included healing time, length of post-operative hospital stay, and patients' satisfaction regarding cosmetic outcome, expectations, pain, time of healing, wound care, and activity on a five-point Likert scale. Results: Thirty-one patients (PC = 15; CSWA = 16) underwent ileostomy reversal during the study period. There was no SSI in the PC group whereas three patients developed SSI in the CSWA group but the result was not statistically significant (p = 0.23). The scores for time of healing (p < 0.001), wound care (p = 0.007), and activity (p < 0.001) were significantly better for PC compared with CSWA whereas there was no significant difference in the scores for cosmetic outcome, expectations, and pain. Healing time was shorter in the PC group (6.7 vs. 34.2 days; p < 0.001) whereas the post-operative length of stay was comparable (6.3 vs. 7 days; p = 0.27). Conclusions: Although there was no difference in the incidence of SSI among the two groups, the PC group fared better in terms of mean time to healing and requirement of wound care.

Analysis of abdominal adhesion using the ileostomy model.

Abdominal adhesion occurs commonly in clinical practice, causing unfavorable symptoms and readmission. The ileostomy operation is a common surgical procedure and we utilized this model to evaluate abdominal adhesion. Adhesion grade score was calculated in 35 patients (Cohort 1) and subjected to correlation and receiver operating characteristic analysis. Then 98 consecutive patients (Cohort 2) who underwent ileostomy and ileostomy closure were included into a retrospective study. Logistic regression analysis was performed, and the risk of small bowel obstruction was also assessed. The time of ileostomy closure correlated with adhesion grade score in Cohort 1, justifying its use as an indicator of abdominal adhesion. All patients in Cohort 2 were then divided into the high- and low-adhesion group. A multi-variable logistic regression analysis indicated that type of surgery and peritoneum suture during ileostomy were significant factors affecting the risk of abdominal adhesion. Abdominal adhesion had the trend to prolong the length of stay postoperatively without increasing the risk of bowel obstruction. Nine patients suffered bowel obstruction, and age older than 65 significantly increased the risk. We proposed the ileostomy procedure to be a model of abdominal adhesion, and the operative time of ileostomy closure could be used as an alternative of adhesion score. Type of surgery and peritoneum suture may be risk factors of abdominal adhesion. Older age increased the risk of small bowel obstruction after ileostomy surgery.

Cost benefit analysis and pathology review of ileostomy and colostomy specimens processed over a 20-year period.

Rising healthcare costs have been linked to overtreatment and overuse of available resources. Identifying and eliminating low-value services is vital for reducing such costs. At many institutions, including ours, all ileostomy and colostomy specimens are sent for pathological evaluation. It is estimated that approximately 120,000 ileostomy/colostomy procedures are done every year, and at least 1 million patients have stomas at any given time in North America. Hence, we decided to analyze the pathological findings and cost-benefit of undertaking the pathological evaluation of these colostomy and ileostomy specimens. The pathology database of our department was searched for all ileostomy and colostomy specimens received between 2000 and 2020, resulting in a total of 2762 cases (1944 ileostomy and 818 colostomy). We performed a cost-benefit analysis and pathologic review of these cases. The results of our study show that 99.38% of these specimens did not show any significant pathological abnormality, and non-neoplastic pathologic findings accounted for 99.63% of cases. Less than 1% of our cases showed any clinically significant pathological findings. All 10 cases that showed a neoplastic or malignant diagnosis showed some abnormal finding that was appreciated at the time of gross examination. We conclude that microscopic evaluation of ileostomy and colostomy specimens incurs significant costs and provides no clear value or relevant information for patient care. The results of our study provide support for ileostomy and colostomy specimens to be triaged by gross-only pathological examination in the first instance for the vast majority of cases.

Cost associated with diverting ostomy after rectal cancer surgery: a transnational analysis.

BACKGROUND: Diverting ileostomy and colostomy after total mesorectal excision reduces the risk of complications related to anastomotic leakages but is associated with a reduction in health-related quality of life and long-term economic consequences that are unknown. Our objective was to estimate the lifetime costs of stoma placement after rectal cancer resection in the U.S., England, and Germany. METHODS: Input parameters were derived from quasi-systematic literature searches. Decision-analytic models with survival from colorectal cancer-adjusted life tables and country-specific stoma reversal proportions were created for the three countries to calculate lifetime costs. Main cost items were stoma maintenance costs and reimbursement for reversal procedures. Discounting was applied according to respective national guidelines. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to explore the impact of parameter uncertainty onto the results. RESULTS: The cohort starting ages and median survival were 63 and 11.5 years for the U.S., 69 years and 8.5 years for England, and 71 and 6.5 years for Germany. Lifetime discounted stoma-related costs were $26,311, £9512, and €10,021, respectively. All three models were most sensitive to the proportion of ostomy reversal, age at baseline, and discount rate applied. CONCLUSION: Conservative model-based projections suggest that stoma care leads to significant long-term costs. Efforts to reduce the number of patients who need to undergo a diverting ostomy could result in meaningful cost savings.

Complications of preventive loop ileostomy versus colostomy: a meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis, and systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Preventive colostomy is required for colorectal surgery, and the incidence of complications associated with ileostomy and colostomy remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the incidence of postoperative complications between ileostomy and colostomy procedures. METHODS: Data analysis was conducted on 30 studies, and meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) were performed on five studies. The basic indicators, such as stoma prolapse, leak, wound infection, ileus, and a series of other indicators, were compared. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were observed with complications other than stoma prolapse. Meta-analysis and TSA showed that the incidence of ileostomy prolapse was lower than that of colostomy prolapse, and the difference was statistically significant. Apart from the four complications listed above, the general data analysis showed differences in incidence between the two groups. The incidence of skin irritation, parastomal hernia, dehydration, pneumonia, and urinary tract infections was higher with ileostomy than with colostomy. In contrast, the incidence of parastomal fistula, stenosis, hemorrhage, and enterocutaneous fistula was higher with colostomy than with ileostomy. CONCLUSIONS: There were differences in the incidence of ileostomy and colostomy complications in the selected studies, with a low incidence of ileostomy prolapse. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022303133.

Evaluation of the SafeHeal Colovac+ anastomosis protection device after low anterior resection for rectal cancer: the safe anastomosis feasibility evaluation (SAFE) 2019 trial.

BACKGROUND: Protective ileostomy (PI) is the current standard of care to protect the anastomosis after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer, but is associated with significant morbidity. Colovac is an anastomosis protection device designed to shield the anastomosis from fecal content. A second version (Colovac+) was developed to limit the migration risk during the implantation period. The objective of this clinical trial was to evaluate the preliminary efficacy and safety of the Colovac+. METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter, pilot study aiming to enroll 15 patients undergoing LAR with Colovac+ placement. After 10 days, a CT scan was performed to evaluate the anastomosis and the Colovac+ was retrieved endoscopically. During the 10-day implantation and 3-month follow-up period, we collected data regarding predefined efficacy and safety endpoints. The primary endpoint was the rate of major (Clavien-Dindo III-V) postoperative complications related to the Colovac+ or LAR procedure. RESULTS: A total of 25 patients were included (68% male), of whom 15 were consecutively treated with the Colovac+ and Vacuum Loss Alert System. The Colovac+ was successfully implanted in all 15 patients. No major discomfort was reported during the implantation period. The endoscopic retrieval was performed in 14/15 (93%) patients. The overall major postoperative morbidity rate was 40%, but none of the reported complications were related to the Colovac+. A device migration occurred in 2 (13%) patients, but these were not associated with AL or stoma conversion. Overall, Colovac+ provided effective fecal diversion in all 15 patients and was able to avoid the PI in 11/15 (73%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Colovac+ provides a safe and effective protection of the anastomosis after LAR, and avoids the PI in the majority (73%) of patients. The improved design reduces the overall migration rate and limits the clinical impact of a migration.

Reconstruction, oversewing, or taking the anastomosis down - which surgical intervention is most potent in the treatment of anastomotic leaks following colorectal resections?

PURPOSE: Anastomotic leak (AL) following colorectal resections can be treated interventionally. However, most cases require surgical intervention. Thus, several surgical techniques are available, which intend to affect the further course positively. The aim of this retrospective analysis is to determine which surgical technique proves to have the biggest potential in reducing the morbidity and mortality as well as to minimize the need of re-interventions after AL. METHODS: All patients with a history of AL following colorectal resection between 2008 and 2020 were analyzed. Patient's outcomes following surgical treatment of AL, including morbidity and mortality, clinical and para-clinical (laboratory examinations, ultrasound, and CT-scan) detection of AL recurrence, re-intervention rate, and the length of hospital stay were documented and correlated with the surgical technique used (e.g. simply over-sewing the AL, over-sewing the AL with the construction of a protective ileostomy, resection and reconstruction of the anastomosis, peritoneal lavage and transanal drainage, or taking the anastomosis down and constructing an end stoma). RESULTS: A total of 2,724 colorectal resections were documented. Grade C AL occurred in 92 (4.4% AL occurrence-rate) and 31 (7.2% AL occurrence-rate) cases following colon and rectal resections, respectively. The anastomosis was not preservable in 52 and 17 cases following colon and rectal resections, respectively. Therefore, the anastomosis had been taken down and an end-stoma had been constructed. Over-sewing the AL with the construction of a protective ileostomy had the highest anastomosis preservation rate (14 of 18 cases) and lowest re-intervention rate (mean value of 1.5 re-interventions) following colon and rectal resections (7 of 9 cases; mean value, 1.5 re-interventions). CONCLUSION: In cases where an AL is preservable, over-sewing the anastomosis and constructing a protective ileostomy has the greatest potential for positive short-term outcomes following colorectal resections.