Risk factors for renal dysfunction after isolated intestinal transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: Kidney dysfunction is a known complication of intestinal transplantation; however, the rate of development and risk factors for chronic kidney disease (CKD) remain poorly defined. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective review of isolated adult intestinal allograft recipients from 2011 to 2019. Patients who died or experienced graft loss within 1-year or had a prior transplant were excluded. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was calculated using the CKD-EPI equation at 0-, 6- and 12-months post-transplant, and multivariable linear regression was performed to identify variables associated with adjusted eGFR at 1-year. Independent variables included age, ethnicity, BMI, history of diabetes/hypertension, vasopressor use, TPN and stoma days, urinary or bloodstream infections, intravenous contrast exposure, rejection, concomitant immunosuppression, and time above the therapeutic range of tacrolimus. Variables with a p < .1 in univariate analysis were considered for multivariable modeling. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were included with a mean age of 43.9 ± 13.0. A mean 42.3% decline in eGFR was observed at 1-year post-transplant, with 15.2% of patients developing new stage 4/5 CKD. Factors associated with a greater decline in adjusted eGFR in the univariate model included increasing age, decreased BMI, stoma days, and vasopressor use. In the adjusted multivariable model patient age (ß = -.77, p < .01) and stoma days (ß = -.06, p < .01) remained significant. Tacrolimus and sirolimus exposure were not associated with decline in eGFR at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: Renal dysfunction is common following intestinal transplantation. The need for stoma creation should be carefully considered, and reversal should be performed when feasible for renal protection.

Critical appraisal of total gastrectomy plus total colectomy with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy as a treatment for advanced pseudomyxoma peritonei.

BACKGROUND: The absolute requirement for a long-term favorable result with cytoreductive surgery for pseudomyxoma peritonei is a complete resection of all visible disease. A combination of parietal peritonectomy procedures and visceral resections is required for this to occur. The cytoreductive surgery is supplemented by hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. METHODS: We searched our database and secured files for patients who required a total gastrectomy and a total colectomy to achieve a complete cytoreductive surgery. Survival of low-grade mucinous neoplasm (LAMN) and mucinous appendiceal adenocarcinoma (MACA) histologies were determined. Clinical and histologic variables were assessed for their impact on survival. RESULTS: Thirteen of 450 patients (2.9%) with LAMN histology and 14 of 186 patients (7.5%) with MACA histology had these visceral resections. Median survival of these 27 patients was 10 years. LAMN and MACA patients showed the same survival. For LAMN histology, this requirement for extensive visceral resection markedly reduced survival (p < 0.0001). For MACA, there was no adverse impact on survival (p = 0.4359). Class 4 adverse events caused reduced survival (p = 0.0014). CONCLUSIONS: A 10-year median survival accompanies total gastrectomy plus total colectomy for advanced pseudomyxoma peritonei. Systemic chemotherapy and class 4 adverse events reduced survival.

Meta-analysis: loop ileostomy versus colostomy to prevent complications of anterior resection for rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: Anastomotic leakage is a serious complication of colorectal cancer surgery, prolonging hospital stays and impacting patient prognosis. Preventive colostomy is required in patients at risk of anastomotic fistulas. However, it remains unclear whether the commonly used loop colostomy(LC) or loop ileostomy(LI) can reduce the complications of colorectal surgery. This study aims to compare perioperative morbidities associated with LC and LI following anterior rectal cancer resection, including LC and LI reversal. METHODS: In this meta-analysis, the Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for prospective cohort studies, retrospective cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on perioperative morbidity during stoma development and reversal up to July 2023, The meta-analysis included 10 trials with 2036 individuals (2 RCTs and 8 cohorts). RESULTS: No significant differences in morbidity, mortality, or stoma-related issues were found between the LI and LC groups after anterior resection surgery. However, patients in the LC group exhibited higher rates of stoma prolapse (RR: 0.39; 95%CI: 0.19-0.82; P = 0.01), retraction (RR: 0.45; 95%CI: 0.29-0.71; P < 0.01), surgical site infection (RR: 0.52; 95%CI: 0.27-1.00; P = 0.05) and incisional hernias (RR: 0.53; 95%CI: 0.32-0.89; P = 0.02) after stoma closure compared to those in the LI group. Conversely, the LI group showed higher rates of dehydration or electrolyte imbalances(RR: 2.98; 95%CI: 1.51-5.89; P < 0.01), high-output(RR: 6.17; 95%CI: 1.24-30.64; P = 0.03), and renal insufficiency post-surgery(RR: 2.51; 95%CI: 1.01-6.27; P = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our study strongly recommends a preventive LI for anterior resection due to rectal cancer. However, ileostomy is more likely to result in dehydration, renal insufficiency, and intestinal obstruction. More multicenter RCTs are needed to corroborate this.

Clostridium difficile infection after stoma reversal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) has been described in the early post-operative phase after stoma reversal. This systematic review aimed to describe the incidence of CDI after stoma reversal and to identify pre-operative variables correlated with an increased risk of infection. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines in March 2024. Manuscripts were included if reported at least one patient with CDI-associated diarrhoea following stoma reversal (colostomy/ileostomy). The primary outcome of interest was the incidence of CDI; the secondary outcome was the comparison of clinical variables (age, sex, time to stoma reversal, neo-adjuvant and adjuvant therapies after index colorectal procedure) in CDI-positive versus CDI-negative patients. A meta-analysis was performed when at least three studies reported on those variables. RESULTS: Out of 43 eligible manuscripts, 1 randomized controlled trial and 10 retrospective studies were selected, including 17,857 patients (2.1% CDI). Overall, the mean age was 64.3 ± 11.6 years in the CDI group and 61.5 ± 12.6 years in the CDI-negative group (p = 0.51), with no significant difference in sex (p = 0.34). Univariable analyses documented that the mean time to stoma reversal was 53.9 ± 19.1 weeks in CDI patients and 39.8 ± 15.0 weeks in CDI-negative patients (p = 0.40) and a correlation between neo-adjuvant and adjuvant treatments with CDI (p < 0.001). A meta-analysis was performed for time to stoma reversal, age, sex, and neo-adjuvant therapies disclosing no significant differences for CDI (stoma delay, MD 11.59; 95%CI  24.32-1.13; age, MD 0.97; 95%CI 2.08-4.03; sex, OR1.11; 95%CI 0.88-1.41; neo-adjuvant, OR0.81; 95%CI 0.49-1.35). Meta-analysis including patients who underwent adjuvant therapy evidenced a higher risk of CDI (OR 2.88; 95%CI 1.01-8.17, p = 0.11). CONCLUSION: CDI occurs in approximately 2.1% of patients after stoma reversal. Although a trend of increased delay in stoma reversal and a correlation with chemotherapy were documented in CDI patients, the use of adjuvant therapy was the only possible risk factor documented on meta-analysis. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023484704.

Comparison of adjustment to a temporary or permanent ostomy using the OAI-23.

AIM: The aim of this work was to compare adjustment between those with a new temporary or permanent ostomy in a cohort of Australian adults. METHOD: This is a multicentre, longitudinal observational study. Ostomy adjustment was measured using the Ostomy Adjustment Inventory (OAI-23) at six possible time points ending at 9 months postsurgery or at the time of ostomy closure in those with a temporary stoma. The OAI-23 includes four domains: anger, acceptance, anxious preoccupation and social engagement. RESULTS: Eligibility criteria were met by 1230 patients, with 849 (69%) recruited and consented. Of these, 108 were excluded as their surgery did not result in the formation of an ostomy and a further 41 were excluded due to there being no data on ostomy type (temporary or permanent). This left a study population of 700, of whom 397 had a temporary and 303 a permanent ostomy. Only small differences were observed between the temporary and permanent ostomy groups at most time points within the four OAI-23 domains. There were no statistically significant differences found beyond 2 weeks postdischarge and the differences were of small size. While no difference was found between the groups in the domain of anxious preoccupation, both groups demonstrated an increase in anxious preoccupation over time. Neither group regained their presurgery confidence to attend social engagements. CONCLUSION: We found only minor differences in adjustment in those with a new temporary ostomy compared with a new permanent ostomy. Both groups demonstrated increasing anxious preoccupation and problems with social engagement. This suggests that access to education, training and support should be equitable between these two groups in clinical practice, and needs to incorporate a focus on psychological as well as physical outcomes.

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.

SafeHeal Colovac Colorectal Anastomosis Protection Device evaluation (SAFE-2) pivotal study: an international randomized controlled study to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the Colovac Colorectal Anastomosis Protection Device.

AIM: Although proximal faecal diversion is standard of care to protect patients with high-risk colorectal anastomoses against septic complications of anastomotic leakage, it is associated with significant morbidity. The Colovac device (CD) is an intraluminal bypass device intended to avoid stoma creation in patients undergoing low anterior resection. A preliminary study (SAFE-1) completed in three European centres demonstrated 100% protection of colorectal anastomoses in 15 patients, as evidenced by the absence of faeces below the CD. This phase III trial (SAFE-2) aims to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the CD in a larger cohort of patients undergoing curative rectal cancer resection. METHODS: SAFE-2 is a pivotal, multicentre, prospective, open-label, randomized, controlled trial. Patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the CD arm or the diverting loop ileostomy arm, with a recruitment target of 342 patients. The co-primary endpoints are the occurrence of major postoperative complications within 12 months of index surgery and the effectiveness of the CD in reducing stoma creation rates. Data regarding quality of life and patient's acceptance and tolerance of the device will be collected. DISCUSSION: SAFE-2 is a multicentre randomized, control trial assessing the efficacy and the safety of the CD in protecting low colorectal anastomoses created during oncological resection relative to standard diverting loop ileostomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05010850.

Perioperative outcomes of ileorectal anastomosis - an analysis of 823 patients.

AIM: Ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) following total abdominal colectomy (TAC) allows for resortation of bowel continuity but prior studies have reported rates of anastomotic leak (AL) to be as high as 23%. We aimed to report rates of AL and complications in a large cohort of patients undergoing IRA. We hypothesized that AL rates were lower than previously reported and that selective use of diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) is associated with decreased AL rates. METHOD: Patients undergoing TAC or end-ileostomy reversal with IRA, with or without DLI, between 1980 and 2021 were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional database and retrospectively analysed. Redo IRA cases were excluded. Short-term (30-day) surgical outcomes were collected using our database. AL was defined using a combination of imaging and, in the case of return to the operating room, intraoperative findings. RESULTS: Of 823 patients in the study cohort, DLI was performed in 27% and performed more frequently for constipation and inflammatory bowel disease. The overall AL rate was 3% (1% and 4% in those with and without DLI, respectively) and diversion was found to be protective against leak (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.08-0.94, p = 0.04). However, patients undergoing diversion had a higher overall rate of postoperative complications (51% vs. 36%, p < 0.001) including superficial wound infection, urinary tract infection, dehydration, blood transfusion and portomesenteric venous thrombosis (all p < 0.04). CONCLUSION: Our study represents the largest series of patients undergoing IRA reported to date and demonstrates an AL rate of 3%. While IRA appears to be a viable surgical option for diverse indications, our study underscores the importance of careful patient selection and thoughtful consideration of staging the anastomosis and temporary faecal diversion when necessary.

Outcomes comparison of robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic and open surgery for patients undergoing rectal cancer resection with concurrent stoma creation.

BACKGROUND: Despite widespread adoption of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in rectal cancer resection, there remains limited knowledge of its clinical advantage over laparoscopic (Lap) and open (OS) surgery. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes of RAS with Lap and OS for rectal cancer. METHODS: We identified all patients aged ≥ 18 years who had elective rectal cancer resection requiring temporary or permanent stoma formation from 1/2013 to 12/2020 from the PINC AI™ Healthcare Database. We completed multivariable logistic regression analysis accounting for hospital clustering to compare ileostomy formation between surgical approaches. Next, we built inverse probability of treatment-weighted analyses to compare outcomes for ileostomy and permanent colostomy separately. Outcomes included postoperative complications, in-hospital mortality, discharge to home, reoperation, and 30-day readmission. RESULTS: A total of 12,787 patients (OS: 5599 [43.8%]; Lap: 2872 [22.5%]; RAS: 4316 [33.7%]) underwent elective rectal cancer resection. Compared to OS, patients who had Lap (OR 1.29, p < 0.001) or RAS (OR 1.53, p < 0.001) were more likely to have an ileostomy rather than permanent colostomy. In those with ileostomy, RAS was associated with fewer ileus (OR 0.71, p < 0.001) and less bleeding (OR 0.50, p < 0.001) compared to Lap. In addition, RAS was associated with lower anastomotic leak (OR 0.25, p < 0.001), less bleeding (OR 0.51, p < 0.001), and fewer blood transfusions (OR 0.70, p = 0.022) when compared to OS. In those patients who had permanent colostomy formation, RAS was associated with fewer ileus (OR 0.72, p < 0.001), less bleeding (OR 0.78, p = 0.021), lower 30-day reoperation (OR 0.49, p < 0.001), and higher discharge to home (OR 1.26, p = 0.013) than Lap, as well as OS. CONCLUSION: Rectal cancer patients treated with RAS were more likely to have an ileostomy rather than a permanent colostomy and more enhanced recovery compared to Lap and OS.

Primary anastomosis with diverting loop ileostomy vs. Hartmann's procedure for acute diverticulitis: what happens after discharge? Results of a nationwide analysis.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend resection with primary anastomosis with diverting loop ileostomy over Hartmann's procedure if deemed safe for acute diverticulitis. The primary objective of the current study was to compare the utilization of these strategies and describe nationwide ostomy closure patterns and readmission outcomes within 1 year of discharge. METHODS: This was a retrospective, population-based, cohort study of United States Hospitals reporting to the Nationwide Readmissions Database from January 2011 to December 2019. There were 35,774 patients identified undergoing non-elective primary anastomosis with diverting loop ileostomy or Hartmann's procedure for acute diverticulitis. Rates of ostomy closure, unplanned readmissions, and complications were compared. Cox proportional hazards and logistic regression models were used to control for patient and hospital-level confounders as well as severity of disease. RESULTS: Of the 35,774 patients identified, 93.5% underwent Hartmann's procedure. Half (47.2%) were aged 46-65 years, 50.8% female, 41.2% publicly insured, and 91.7% underwent open surgery. Primary anastomosis was associated with higher rates of 1-year ostomy closure (83.6% vs. 53.4%, p < 0.001) and shorter time-to-closure [median 72 days (Interquartile range 49-103) vs. 115 (86-160); p < 0.001]. Primary anastomosis was associated with increased unplanned readmissions [Hazard Ratio = 2.83 (95% Confidence Interval 2.83-3.37); p < 0.001], but fewer complications upon stoma closure [Odds Ratio 0.51 (95% 0.42-0.63); p < 0.001]. There were no differences in complications between primary anastomosis and Hartmann's procedure during index admission [Odds Ratio = 1.13 (95% Confidence Interval 0.96-1.33); p = 0.137]. CONCLUSION: Patients who undergo primary anastomosis for acute diverticulitis are more likely to undergo ostomy reversal and experience fewer postoperative complications upon stoma reversal. These data support the current national guidelines that recommend primary anastomosis in appropriate cases of acute diverticulitis requiring operative treatment.

Comparison of purse-string technique vs linear suture for skin closure after ileostomy reversal. A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Protective stoma after rectal surgery has been associated with important complications. The most common is surgical site infection (SSI) high rates after stoma reversal reported in literature. Our study compared the rate of SSI of two skin closure techniques, linear closure, and purse string closure. METHODS: We carried out a single center, prospective, randomized controlled trial in the Department of Colorectal Surgery of Fondazione Policlinico Campus Bio-Medico of Rome between January 2018 through December 2021, to compare LC vs PS closure of ileostomy sites. RESULTS: A total of 117 patients (53.84% male) with a mean age of 65.68 ± 14.33 years were finally evaluated in the study. 58 patients were included in the PS group and 59 patients in the LC one. There was a marked difference in the SSI rate between the two arms of the study: 3 of 58 patients in the purse-string arm versus 11 of 59 in the control arm (p = 0.043). The outcome of cosmesis was also higher in PS, with a statistical significance (mean ± DS 4,01 ± 0,73 for PS group vs mean ± DS 2,38 ± 0,72 for LC group, p < 0,001). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that the PS technique had a significantly lower incidence of stoma site SSI compared with LC technique. Our findings are in line with other randomized studies and suggest that PS closure could be considered as standard of care for wound closure after ileostomy reversal.

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.

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.

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.

What affects the selection of diverting ileostomy in rectal cancer surgery: a single-center retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: The selection of diverting ileostomy (DI) is controversial. This study aimed to explore the factors affecting the selection of diverting ileostomy (DI) following laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer. METHODS: This retrospective, case-control study included patients who underwent laparoscopic-assisted sphincter-saving surgery for mid-low rectal cancer from January 2019 to June 2021. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed on the patient's clinicopathological characteristics and pelvic dimensions measured by abdominopelvic electron beam computed tomography. RESULTS: A total of 382 patients were included in the analysis, of which 182 patients (47.6%) did not undergo DI, and 200 patients (52.4%) underwent DI. The univariate analysis suggested that male sex (p = 0.003), preoperative radiotherapy (p < 0.001), patients with an anastomosis below the levator ani plane (p < 0.001), the intertuberous distance (p < 0.001), the sacrococcygeal distance (p = 0.025), the mid pelvis anteroposterior diameter (p = 0.009), and the interspinous distance (p < 0.001) were associated with performing DI. Multivariate analysis confirmed that preoperative radiotherapy (p = 0.037, odds ratio [OR] = 2.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.07-8.30), anastomosis below the levator ani plane (p < 0.001, OR = 7.09, 95% CI = 4.13-12.18), and the interspinous distance (p = 0.047, OR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.93-1.00) were independently associated with performing DI. CONCLUSION: Pelvic parameters also influence the choice of DI. According to this single-center experience, patients with a shorter interspinous distance, particularly narrow pelvic with an interspinous distance of < 94.8 mm, preoperative radiotherapy, and anastomosis below the levator ani plane, prefer to have a DI and should be adequately prepared by the physician.

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.

Stoma associated complications after diverting loop ileostomy, end ileostomy or split stoma formation after right sided colectomy-a retrospective cohort study (StoComSplit Analysis).

BACKGROUND: For high-risk patients receiving right-sided colectomy, stoma formation is a safety strategy. Options are anastomosis with loop ileostomy, end ileostomy, or split stoma. The aim is to compare the outcome of these three options. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included all patients who underwent right sided colectomy and stoma formation between January 2008 and December 2021 at two tertial referral centers in Switzerland. The primary outcome was the stoma associated complication rate within one year. RESULTS: A total of 116 patients were included. A total of 20 patients (17%) underwent primary anastomosis with loop ileostomy (PA group), 29 (25%) received an end ileostomy (ES group) and 67 (58%) received a split stoma (SS group). Stoma associated complication rate was 43% (n = 21) in PA and in ES group and 50% (n = 34) in SS group (n.s.). A total of 30% (n = 6) of patients in PA group needed reoperations, whereas 59% (n = 17) in ES and 58% (n = 39) in SS group had reoperations (P = 0.07). Wound infections occurred in 15% (n = 3) in PA, in 10% (n = 3) in ES, and in 30% (n = 20) in SS group (P = 0.08). A total of 13 patients (65%) in PA, 7 (24%) in ES, and 29 (43%) in SS group achieved stoma closure (P = 0.02). A total of 5 patients (38%) in PA group, 2 (15%) in ES, and 22 patients (67%) in SS group had a stoma-associated rehospitalization (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Primary anastomosis and loop ileostomy may be an option for selected patients. Patients with end ileostomies have fewer stoma-related readmissions than those with a split stoma, but they have a lower rate of stoma closure. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial not registered.

Early diverting stoma closure is feasible and safe: results from a before-and-after study on the implementation of an early closure protocol at a tertiary referral center.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on early closure (EC) of defunctioning stoma (DS) after colorectal surgery shows a favorable effect when patients are carefully selected. Therefore, a clinical pathway adapted to the implementation of an EC strategy was developed in our center. The aim of this study was to carry out a comparative analysis of time until DS closure and DS-related morbidity before and after the implementation of an EC protocol (ECP). METHODS: This study is a before-and-after comparative analysis. Patients were divided into two cohorts according to the observational period: patients from the period before the ECP implementation (January 2015-December 2019) [Period 1] and those from the period after that (January 2020-December 2022) [Period 2]. All consecutive patients subjected to elective DS closure within both periods were eligible. Early closure was defined as the reversal within 30 days from DS creation. Patients excluded from EC or those not closed within 30 days since primary surgery were analyzed as late closure (LC). Baseline characteristics and DS-related morbidity were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 145 patients were analyzed. Median time with DS was shorter in patients after ECP implementation [42 (21-193) days versus 233 (137-382) days, p < 0.001]. This reduction in time to closure did not impact the DS closure morbidity and resulted in less DS morbidity (68.8% versus 49.2%, p = 0.017) and fewer stoma nurse visits (p = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: The ECP was able to significantly reduce intervals to restoration of bowel continuity in patients with DS, which in turn resulted in a direct impact on the reduction of DS morbidity without negatively affecting DS closure morbidity.

Complications associated with loop ileostomy: analysis of risk factors.

BACKGROUND: Loop ileostomy is a common surgical procedure but is associated with complications such as outlet obstruction (OO), parastomal hernia (PH), and high-output stoma (HOS). This study aimed to identify risk factors for these complications, as well as their causal relationships. METHODS: The study included 188 consecutive patients who underwent loop ileostomy between April 2016 and September 2021. Clinical factors and postoperative stoma-related complications (OO, HOS, and PH) were analyzed retrospectively. Stoma-related factors were evaluated using specific measurements from computed tomography (CT) scans. The incidence, clinical course, and risk factors for the stoma-related complications were investigated. RESULTS: OO was diagnosed in 28 cases (15.7%), PH in 60 (32%), and HOS in 57 (31.8%). A small longitudinal stoma diameter at the rectus abdominis level on CT and a right-sided stoma were significantly associated with OO. Creation of an ileostomy for anastomotic leakage was independently associated with HOS. Higher body weight and a large longitudinal stoma diameter at the rectus abdominis level on CT were significantly associated with PH. There was a significant relationship between the occurrence of OO and HOS. However, the association between OO and PH was marginal. CONCLUSION: This study identified key risk factors for OO, HOS, and PH as complications of loop ileostomy and their causal relationships. Our findings provide insights that may guide the prevention and management of complications related to loop ileostomy.

Surgical outcomes of very-early-onset ulcerative colitis: retrospective comparative study with older pediatric patients.

PURPOSE: The study compares the surgical outcomes of very-early-onset ulcerative colitis (VEO-UC), which is a rare disease diagnosed in pediatric patients < 6 years, with those of older pediatric patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS: A retrospective observational study of 57 pediatric patients with UC was conducted at a single center. The study compared surgical complications and postoperative growth between the two groups. RESULTS: Out of the 57 patients, 6 had VEO-UC, and 5 of them underwent total colectomy. Compared with the surgical cases of older patients with UC (n = 6), the rate of postoperative complications in patients with VEO-UC (n = 5) was not significantly different, except for high-output ileostomy (80% vs. 0% at 3 weeks postoperatively, p = 0.02). The rate of postoperative central venous catheter (CVC) placement at > 90 days was higher in patients with VEO-UC (100% vs. 17%, p = 0.02). The median change in the Z-score of height before and 2 years after colectomy was not significantly different between VEO-UC and older patients (1.1 vs. 0.3, p = 0.13). CONCLUSION: With regard to complications and outcomes, total colectomy for VEO-UC patients and that for older pediatric UC patients is comparable. However, high-output ileostomy and the long duration of CVC placement may pose management challenges.