» Articles » PMID: 33094038

Protective Loop Ileostomy Closure Techniques: Comparison of Three Different Surgical Techniques

Overview
Journal Cureus
Date 2020 Oct 23
PMID 33094038
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective Anastomotic leaks can be very dangerous in colorectal cancers. Protective loop ileostomy is life-saving in low anterior rectal tumors to prevent pelvic sepsis. The aim of this study is to compare early morbidities for stapled, handsewn closure (end to end) or handsewn closure (anterior wall only) of loop ileostomy, and to further assess efficacy and safety for each technique.  Methods Patients who underwent loop ileostomy closure from January 2014 and December 2019 retrospectively were analyzed. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the effect of the potential risk factors on the rate of each complication. The patients were divided into three groups based on the anastomoses. The first group included patients who had handsewn anterior closure; the second group included patients who had side-to-side anastomosis using linear stapler, and the third group included patients who had end-to-end handsewn anastomosis. The primary endpoint of the study was the postoperative 30 days. IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), version 22.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) was used for statistical analysis. Results A total of 198 patients underwent reversal. There was a statistical difference between the handsewn anterior wall and stapler anastomosis in terms of postoperative ileus and wound infection. The handsewn group was superior to anastomosis with stapler (p: 0.027 and p: 0.042, respectively). A statistical difference was found between handsewn anterior wall closure and handsewn end-to-end anastomosis in terms of postoperative ileus, wound infection, and postoperative hospital stay (p: 0.013, p: 0.037, and p: 0.046, respectively). When stapled anastomosis and handsewn end-to-end anastomosis techniques were compared, a statistical difference was found in terms of postoperative ileus risk (p: 0.043), but no significant difference was found in terms of postoperative wound infection and hospital stay. Conclusions There was no significant difference in the rate of anastomotic leakage between the handsewn and stapled techniques. The rate of small-bowel obstruction was higher in the handsewn group. As a result, in this study, it was revealed that the handsewn anterior wall closure technique is the best among all ileostomy closure techniques.

Citing Articles

Effect of Perioperative Intravenous Lidocaine on Postoperative Recovery in Patients Undergoing Ileostomy Closure: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Liu J, Liu K, Wang H, Hu H, Sun G, Ye X J Pain Res. 2022; 15:1863-1872.

PMID: 35813030 PMC: 9259056. DOI: 10.2147/JPR.S362911.

References
1.
De Robles M, Bakhtiar A, Young C . Obesity is a significant risk factor for ileostomy site incisional hernia following reversal. ANZ J Surg. 2019; 89(4):399-402. DOI: 10.1111/ans.14983. View

2.
Lob S, Luetkens K, Krajinovic K, Wiegering A, Germer C, Seyfried F . Impact of surgical proficiency levels on postoperative morbidity: a single centre analysis of 558 ileostomy reversals. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2018; 33(5):601-608. DOI: 10.1007/s00384-018-3026-6. View

3.
Tilney H, Sains P, Lovegrove R, Reese G, Heriot A, Tekkis P . Comparison of outcomes following ileostomy versus colostomy for defunctioning colorectal anastomoses. World J Surg. 2007; 31(5):1142-51. DOI: 10.1007/s00268-006-0218-y. View

4.
Baraza W, Wild J, Barber W, Brown S . Postoperative management after loop ileostomy closure: are we keeping patients in hospital too long?. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2010; 92(1):51-5. PMC: 3024618. DOI: 10.1308/003588410X12518836439209. View

5.
Gong J, Guo Z, Li Y, Gu L, Zhu W, Li J . Stapled vs hand suture closure of loop ileostomy: a meta-analysis. Colorectal Dis. 2013; 15(10):e561-8. DOI: 10.1111/codi.12388. View