Ileostomy reversal with handsewn techniques. Short-term outcomes in a teaching hospital.

INTRODUCTION: Fecal diversion is considered an effective procedure to protect bowel anastomosis at high risk for leak. Some concerns exist regarding the risk for a significant morbidity associated to ileostomy creation itself and moreover to its closure. Surgical expertise and closure techniques are considered potential factors influencing morbidity. Aim of the study is to present a single-institution experience with ileostomy closures, in a teaching hospital, whereas ileostomy reversal is mainly performed by young residents. METHODS: A prospective database was investigated to extract data of patients who underwent loop ileostomy closure between January 2005 and December 2014. Ileostomy reversion was always realized in a handsewn fashion, performing either a direct closure (DC) or a resection plus end-to-end anastomosis (EEA). Postoperative morbidity was graded according to Clavien-Dindo classification. Outcomes after DC and EEA were compared by Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon rank-sum test. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-eight patients were included. Ileostomy reversal was performed by EEA in 236 patients (79.19 %) and by DC in 62 patients (20.81 %). Surgery was performed with a peristomal access in 296 cases (99.33 %). Incidence of anastomotic leak was 0.67 % (2/298). Overall reoperation rate was 0.34 % (1/298). Short-term overall morbidity rate was 20.47 %; but major complications (≥ grade III) occurred in only one patient (0.34 %). Mortality was nil. No significant differences in postoperative morbidity were found between the DC and EEA group. CONCLUSION: Loop ileostomy reversal is a safe procedure, associated to a low major morbidity and excellent results, even if performed with a handsewn technique by supervised trainee surgeons.

[Management of access site vascular complications in transcatheter aortic valve implantation]. / Gestione delle complicanze vascolari del sito di accesso nell'impianto transcatetere di valvola aortica.

Since its advent, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has experienced a continuous expansion, thanks to extraordinary clinical results and to the dramatic increase of safety, enabled by improvements of prosthesis and delivery systems, refinement of implantation techniques, increasing operator experience, and use of computed tomography scan for procedural planning. However, complications rates are still not negligible. As vascular complications, and, particularly, access-related complications are among the most frequent adverse events, all TAVI operators should know how to prevent and how to manage those potentially catastrophic situations. Here we provide an overview of the most frequent access site vascular complications and the respective treatment options.