Early vs. standard reversal ileostomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Formation of a defunctioning loop ileostomy is common after mid and low rectal resection. Historically, they were reversed between 3 and 6 months after initial resection. Recently, earlier closure (< 14 days) has been suggested by some current randomised controlled trials. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of early stoma closure on surgical and patient outcomes. METHODS: A systematic review of the current randomised controlled trial literature comparing early and standard ileostomy closure after rectal surgery was performed. Specifically, we examined surgical outcomes including; morbidity, mortality and quality of life. RESULTS: Six studies met the predefined criteria and were included in our analysis. 275 patients underwent early stoma closure compared with 259 patients having standard closure. Overall morbidity was similar between both groups (25.5% vs. 21.6%) (OR, 1.47; 95% CI 0.75-2.87). However, there tended to be more reoperations (8.4 vs. 4.2%) (OR, 2.02, 95% CI 0.99-4.14) and small bowel obstructions/postoperative ileus (9.3% vs. 4.4%) (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.22-0.90) in the early closure group, but no difference across the other domains. CONCLUSIONS: Early closure appears to be a feasible in highly selective cases after good perioperative counselling and shared decision-making. Further research on quality of life outcomes and long term benefits is necessary to help define which patients are suitable candidates for early closure.

Incisional hernias post renal transplant: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Incisional hernia (IH) post renal transplant (RT) is relatively uncommon and can be challenging to manage clinically due to the presence of the kidney graft and patient immunosuppression. This systematic review and meta-analysis synthesises the current literature in relation to IH rates, risk factors and outcomes post RT. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched up to July 2023. The most up to date Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses guidelines were followed. Pertinent clinical information was synthesised. A meta-analysis of the pooled proportions of IH rates, the rates of patients requiring surgical repair and the rates of recurrence post RT are reported. RESULTS: Twenty studies comprising 16,018 patients were included in this analysis. The pooled rate of IH occurrence post RT was 4% (CI 3-5%). The pooled rate of IH repair post RT was 61% (CI 14-100%). The pooled rate of IH recurrence after repair was 16% (CI 9-23%). Risk factors identified for IH development post RT are BMI, immunosuppression, age, smoking, incision type, reoperation, concurrent abdominal wall hernia, lymphocele formation and pulmonary disease. CONCLUSIONS: IH post RT is uncommon and the majority of IH post RT are repaired surgically on an elective basis.

Incisional hernias post cytoreductive surgery/peritonectomy and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) is often combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for the treatment of peritoneal tumour deposits. Considering CRS, the evidence relating the large incisions, local chemotherapy and abdominal wall trauma to incisional hernias (IH) has not been synthesized. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to examine the proportion of IH present in patients post CRS and the effect HIPEC had on these rates. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Registry of Trials were searched up to June 2023 to examine studies relating IH and CRS plus or minus HIPEC. The most up to date PRISMA guidelines were followed. Pertinent clinical information was synthesized in tabular form. A meta-analysis reporting the pooled proportions of IH post CRS plus or minus HIPEC, the odds of IH in HIPEC versus non-HIPEC CRS and the difference in follow-up time between groups was conducted. RESULTS: Nine studies comprising 1416 patients were included. The pooled proportion of IH post CRS was 12% (95% confidence interval (CI) 8-16%) in HIPEC and 7% (95% CI 4-10%) in non-HIPEC patients and 11% (95% CI 7-14%) overall. Previously reported rates of IH in midline laparotomy range from 10 to 30%. The odds of IH in the HIPEC was 1.9 times higher compared to non-HIPEC cohorts however this was not statistically significant (odds ratio (OR) 1.9, 95% 0.7-5.2; p = 0.21). There was no significant difference in average follow-up times between HIPEC and non-HIPEC cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: IH post CRS plus or minus HIPEC were in the expected range for midline laparotomies. IH in patients receiving HIPEC may occur at a greater proportion than in non-HIPEC patients, however, there were too few studies in our meta-analysis to determine this with statistical significance.