De-functioning Ileostomy Research Articles

Feasibility of triple assessment of the anastomosis using an anastomotic checklist.

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer and the second highest cause of cancer mortality in Australia. Despite advances in colorectal surgery, anastomotic leak still occurs in low-risk patients and is a substantial cause of morbidity and mortality. Many operative strategies are used to assess anastomotic integrity such as an air leak test or intraoperative flexible sigmoidoscopy, however an objective anastomotic checklist is yet to be developed and studied. This study aims to develop a photodocumentary anastomotic specific checklist and determine its feasibility for implementation. Patients undergoing left sided colorectal resections with primary anastomosis without a de-functioning ileostomy were prospectively included between May 2021 and December 2022. A photographic checklist assessing anastomotic perfusion, integrity via either air test or endoscopic image, evidence of complete operative doughnut specimens and the assessment of tension was implemented. The feasibility of an anastomotic checklist was externally validated by four independent colorectal surgeons from Australia, New Zealand and United States of America. The anastomotic checklist was completed in 44 patients. Mean age was 62 years, with 43% male and mean BMI 28. Operations included high anterior resection (45%), low anterior resection (18%), ultra-low anterior resection (20%), reversal of Hartmann's (11%). Median length of stay was 4 days. Complications post operatively were documented in six patients with anastomotic leak in 2% and wound infection in 6.8%. Intraclass correlation coefficients were poor amongst all reviewers with air leak and tension having no inter-reviewer correlation. The introduction of an anastomotic checklist was a feasible tool to systematically assess and document anastomotic integrity. Unfortunately, with the small sample size there was significant discrepancy in inter-observer variability, and this led to poor correlation regarding which patients were typically high risk requiring a temporary ileostomy. Larger studies on the implementation of an anastomotic checklist will be needed to evaluate if it is an inherently feasible approach and if there is an effect on anastomotic leak.

Analysis of decision-making factors for defunctioning ileostomy after rectal cancer surgery and their impact on perioperative recovery: a retrospective study of 1082 patients.

To explore the decision-making factors for defunctioning ileostomy (DI) after rectal cancer surgery and to analyze the impact of the DI on perioperative outcomes. A retrospective case-control study was conducted that included rectal cancer patients who underwent low anterior resection from January 2013 to December 2023. Among them, 33 patients did not undergo DI but with anastomotic leakage (AL) after surgery, and 1030 patients were without AL. Preoperative, operative and tumor factors between these two groups were compared to explore the decision-making factors for DI. Meanwhile, the differences of perioperative outcomes between the DI group of 381 cases and non-DI group of 701 cases were compared. For preoperative factors, the proportions of male patients and preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in the AL with non-DI group were greater than those in the non-AL group (p < 0.05); for operative factors, the proportion of patients in the AL with non-DI group with a surgical time > 180min were greater (p < 0.05); for tumor factors, the proportion of T3-4 stage was higher in the AL with non-DI group (p < 0.05). Multiple regression analysis revealed that male sex and preoperative CRT were the independent risk factors affecting DI. For perioperative outcomes, the DI did not reduce the incidence of all and symptomatic AL and non-AL postoperative complications (p > 0.05) but with 12.07% stoma-related complications, and increase hospitalization costs (p < 0.05); however, it can shorten the postoperative hospital stay, pelvic drainage tube removal time, and reduce the anal tube placement rate and readmission rate (all p < 0.05). Male patients and preoperative CRT were the independent risk factors affect the decision of DI in our study, and DI can shorten the postoperative hospitalization, pelvic drainage tube removal time, and decrease the anal tube placement rate and readmission rate during the perioperative period but with a higher economic cost.

Defunctioning ileostomy for typhoid ileal perforations: Out of the frying pan into the fire?

Typhoid ileal perforation (TIP) is a common surgical emergency in low-middle income countries (LMICs). Its high surgical morbidity and mortality is due to its often late presentation or diagnosis, the patient's malnutrition, severe peritoneal contamination and unavailability of intensive care in most peripheral hospitals. This prompted the philosophy of minimizing the crisis by avoiding any repair or anastomosis, limiting the surgery in these physiologically compromised patients and performing only a temporary defunctioning ileostomy (DI) which could then be closed 10-12 weeks later.

Retrospective study in a single unit: outcomes of delays in reversal of loop ileostomy

Background: Formation of loop ileostomy is common after anterior resection to reduce the sequalae of an anastomosis leak. Delays to reversal of ileostomy is associated with complications. Methods: Retrospective study between 1 July 2017 to 30 June 2023. Patients were included: &gt;18 years old, loop ileostomy formed as part of anterior resection surgery (benign and malignant). Exclusion criteria: loop ileostomy performed during other colonic resections, patients with inflammatory bowel disease, de-functioning ileostomy for obstructions. Primary outcome measures included complications associated with delayed closure of loop ileostomy and readmissions after reversal surgery. Secondary measures included reasons for delay to surgery, complications prior to reversal surgery, and morbidity and mortality associated with it. Results: 135 patients were included. 85.9% of patients experienced delays in reversal surgery. Those without delays in surgery had higher rate of stoma-related complications (p=0.002). Delays were due to a long waitlist (p&lt;0.01) and adjuvant chemotherapy (p=0.598). There were no significant differences in the delays to surgery during COVID pandemic. Delays were associated with higher rate of wound infection (6.04%), post-operative ileus (12.07%), anastomotic leak (1.72%), and Clostridium difficile (C. diff) infection (3.45%). Handsewn end to end anastomosis was associated with higher proportion of post-operative ileus compared to the stapled side to side anastomosis group. Conclusions: Reversal of ileostomy within 6 months of index surgery after adjuvant therapy could potentially reduce post-operative complications, and alleviate the burden on our healthcare system in the long run. A stapled side to side anastomosis should also be considered.

Fate of de-functioning ileostomy after left colon and rectal cancer resection: observation from a single unit of a cancer hospital.

Background: De-functioning ileostomy (DS) has been shown to reduce rate of anastomotic leak after left colon and rectal cancer resection and can avoid consequences of leak with its morbidity and possible mortality. Externalisation of bowel is not easily appreciated; patients always inquire about the timing of closure and not all stomas are closed. The aim of the study is to assess the timing of stoma closure and the reasons for stoma becoming permanent. Methods: Patients who underwent surgery for left colon and rectal cancer with de-functioning stoma from April 2019 to May 2022 in single unit of Bhaktapur Cancer Hospital, were assessed regarding timing of stoma closure. We have made a policy of stoma closure after completion of adjuvant therapy. De-functioning stoma that was not reversed at follow up were assessed regarding reason for it becoming permanent. Results: Forty-two patients underwent de-functioning stoma during the study period; 30 after rectal resection, 2 after pouch creation, 6 after anterior resection and 4 after left hemicolectomy. Twenty-eight (77%) stomas were closed, 5 are receiving adjuvant treatment. Closure was not done in 8 patients; 5 due to recurrence of disease; 1 due to patient wish, 2 deaths occurred prior to closure, one due to COVID-19 and another due to acute myocardial infraction. One patient with multiorgan resection died within 30 days of surgery due to other medical cause. The median time of stoma closure after completion of adjuvant treatment is 8 weeks, IQR (7-10). Patients had to stay with stoma for a median period of 6months, IQR (5-8). The median time for discharge after stoma reversal is 9 days, IQR (7-10). There were 4 Grade II Clavien-Dindo complications after stoma closure. Conclusion: Seventy- seven percent of patients with DS underwent closure in our series. Recurrence was the most common cause for it becoming permanent.

Short-Term Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Virtual/Ghost Ileostomy or Defunctioning Ileostomy after Anterior Resection of the Rectum: A Meta-Analysis.

Anterior rectal resection (ARR) represents one of the most frequently performed methods in colorectal surgery, mainly carried out for rectal cancer (RC) treatment. Defunctioning ileostomy (DI) has long been chosen as a method to "protect" colorectal or coloanal anastomosis after ARR. However, DI does not rule out risks of more or less serious complications. A proximal intra-abdominal closed-loop ileostomy, the so-called virtual/ghost ileostomy (VI/GI), could limit the number of DIs and the associated morbidity. We performed a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes (PRISMA) guidelines. Meta-analysis was performed by use of RevMan [Computer program] Version 5.4. The five included comparative studies (VI/GI or DI) covering an approximately 20-year study period (2008-2021). All included studies were observational ones and originated from European countries. Meta-analysis indicated VI/GI as significantly associated with lower short-term morbidity rates related to VI/GI or DI after primary surgery (RR: 0.21, 95% CI: 0.07-0.64, p = 0.006), fewer dehydration (RR: 0.17, 95% CI: 0.04-0.75, p = 0.02) and ileus episodes after primary surgery (RR: 0.20, 95% CI: 0.05-0.77, p = 0.02), fewer readmissions after primary surgery (RR: 0.17, 95% CI: 0.07-0.43, p = 0.0002) and readmissions after primary surgery plus stoma closure surgery (RR: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.06-0.30, p < 0.00001) than the DI group. On the contrary, no differences were identified in terms of AL after primary surgery, short-term morbidity after primary surgery, major complications (CD ≥ III) after primary surgery and length of hospital stay after primary surgery. Conclusions: Given the significant biases among meta-analyzed studies (small overall sample size and the small number of events analyzed, in particular), our results require careful interpretation. Further randomized, possibly multi-center trials may be of paramount importance in confirming our results.

Cost-effectiveness comparison of delayed versus immediate coloanal anastomosis following ultralow anterior resection for rectal cancer.

Following ultralow anterior resection for distal rectal cancers, a coloanal anastomosis is usually created along with a defunctioning ileostomy (DI). Recent evidence suggests that abdominoperineal pull-through with delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCAA) is a viable alternative to immediate coloanal anastomosis (ICAA), minimizing the risk of anastomotic leakage and avoiding the need for stoma creation with the risk of stoma-associated morbidity. However, DCAA requires a longer initial hospitalization. We aimed to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis to compare DCAA versus ICAA for elective rectal cancer surgery. A decision tree model was used to compare the cost-effectiveness of the two strategies. Cost data were obtained from the 2019 to 2020 United Kingdom National Health Service reference costs. Model probabilities were derived from published studies. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to evaluate the robustness of the results. DCAA was the overall cheaper strategy at £13 541 compared with £14 856 for ICAA in the base case analysis. This was explained by the decreased overall costs of hospitalization/surgery, reduction in costs associated with anastomotic or stoma-related complications, specifically dehydration-induced hospital readmissions and avoidance of stoma maintenance costs. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that DCAA remained consistently more inexpensive except when the duration of total parenteral nutrition exceeded 14 days. Despite a longer index hospitalization with higher initial costs, this economic analysis demonstrates that DCAA without stoma is overall more cost-effective compared with ICAA with DI following ultralow anterior resection. Cost savings should be considered an additional benefit when selecting the DCAA approach for rectal cancer surgery.

Comparison of early versus delayed temporary ileostomy reversal in colorectal anastomosis

Aim: To compare the outcome of early versus delayed temporary ileostomy reversal in colorectal anastomosis. Design: Randomized control clinical trials Place &amp; period of the study: Surgical Unit 1 of the Services Hospital in Lahore from December 2017 to June 2018. Methods: A total of 176 patients, undergoing distal colorectal resections were divided randomly into group A; ileostomy reversal in less than 2 weeks after primary surgery and group B; ileostomy reversal after 8 weeks of primary surgery was followed for 4 weeks to access wound infection, abdominal pain, anastomotic leak, soreness and gut material discharge through the wound. Results: The average age of patients was 40.48+13.13years [range 18-60] in group A. In group B, the average age of patients was 41.92+14.08 [range 18 – 60]. Post-operative wound infection occurred in group A were 12 (13.63%) and in group B 8 (9.09%) while anastomotic leakage observed in 7 (8%) of group A patients and 4 (4.5%) of group B patients. Calculated p – value was 0.350 and hence not significant (p&gt; 0.05). Conclusion: Early closing of loop de-functioning ileostomy in patients receiving distal colorectal resection is feasible and produces comparable results to delayed closure. Keywords: Ileostomy reversal, colorectal anastomosis, abdominal pain, loop ileostomy

Risk of Outlet Obstruction Associated With Defunctioning Loop Ileostomy in Rectal Cancer Surgery.

The outlet obstruction (OO) rate is 5.4-18.4% after defunctioning ileostomy (DI) following rectal cancer resection to reduce the incidence and severity of anastomotic leakage; OO affects a patient's quality of life and prolongs hospitalization. A retrospective analysis was performed of patients who underwent anterior rectal resection and DI for rectal cancer. Among 100 patients undergoing anterior rectal resection with DI for rectal cancer, 28 (28%) developed OO. Anastomotic leakage and a rectus abdominis muscle thickness ≥10 mm on preoperative computed tomography were significantly associated with the risk of OO in univariate analysis. Multivariate analysis also demonstrated that anastomotic leakage (odds ratio=4.320, 95% confidence interval=1.280-14.60, p=0.019) and rectus abdominis muscle thickness ≥10 mm (odds ratio=3.710, 95% confidence intervaI=1.280-10.70, p=0.016) were significantly risk factors for OO. When OO is observed, an anastomotic leakage should be suspected, especially if there is a high rectus abdominis muscle thickness.

Comparative study between ghost ileostomy and defunctioning ileostomy in terms of morbidity and cost-effectiveness in low anterior resection for rectal cancer.

The aim of this study was to compare ghost ileostomy (GI) and defunctioning ileostomy (DI) in patients who underwent low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer in terms of postoperative morbidity, rehospitalization rates, and total costs. Patients with an anastomosis level between 5 and 10 cm from the anal verge after LAR were analyzed retrospectively. Clinical characteristics, operative outcomes, postoperative morbidity, rehospitalization rates, and total costs were compared. A total of 123 patients were enrolled as follows: 42 patients in the GI group and 81 patients in the DI group. Anastomotic leakage (AL) was identified in three patients who underwent GI, and in all of them, GI was easily converted to DI. There were 96.3% of the patients with DI rehospitalized at least one time because of surgery-related and/or stoma-related complications or stoma closure. When we did not take into account the patients who were rehospitalized for stoma closure, the rates of rehospitalization were 4.7% and 22.2% in the GI and DI groups, respectively (P= 0.01). The mean total costs calculated by removing additional surgical procedures and adding all of the rehospitalization costs were 25,767 USD and 41,875 USD in the GI and DI groups, respectively (P= 0.0001). GI may be a safe and cost-effective method in patients who underwent LAR with low or medium risk factors for AL. It is possible to avoid unnecessary ileostomy and reduce unwanted outcomes due to it, such as postoperative complications, rehospitalizations, and increased total costs by performing GI.

Is diverting loop ileostomy necessary for completion proctectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis? A multicenter randomized trial of the GETAID Chirurgie group (IDEAL trial): rationale and design (NCT03872271)

BackgroundThere is no quality evidence of the benefit of defunctioning ileostomy (DI) in ileal pouch-anal anastomoses (IPAAs) performed for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but most surgical teams currently resort to DI. In the case of a staged procedure with subtotal colectomy first, completion proctectomy with IPAA is performed for healthy patients, namely, after nutritional support, inflammation reduction and immunosuppressive agent weaning. Therefore, the aim of this trial is to assess the need for systematic DI after completion proctectomy and IPAA for IBD.Methods/designThis is a multicenter randomized open trial comparing completion proctectomy and IPAA without (experimental) or with (control) DI in patients presenting with ulcerative colitis or indeterminate colitis. Crohn’s disease patients will not be included. The design is a superiority trial. The main objective is to compare the 6-month global postoperative morbidity, encompassing both surgical and medical complications, between the two groups. The morbidity of DI closure will be included, as appropriate. The sample size calculation is based on the hypothesis that the overall 6-month morbidity rate is 30% in the case of no stoma creation (i.e., experimental group) vs. 55% otherwise (control group). With the alpha risk and power are fixed to 0.05 and 0.80, respectively, and considering a dropout rate of 10%, the objective is set to 194 patients. The secondary objectives are to compare both strategies in terms of morbi-mortality at 6 months and functional results as well as quality of life at 12 months, namely, the 6-month major morbidity and unplanned reoperation rates, 6-month anastomotic leakage rate, 6-month mortality, length of hospital stay, 6-month unplanned readmission rate, quality of life assessed 3 and 12 months from continuity restoration (i.e., either IPAA or stoma closure), functional results assessed 3 and 12 months from continuity restoration, 12-month pouch results, 12-month cost-utility analysis, and 12-month global morbidity.DiscussionThe IDEAL trial is a nationwide multicenter study that will help choose the optimal strategy between DI and no ileostomy in completion proctectomy with IPAA for IBD.Trial registrationClinicalTrial.gov: NCT03872271, date of registration March 13th, 2019.

Safety of temporary ileostomy via specimen extraction site in rectal cancer patients who underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection

If anastomotic site leakage is expected after laparoscopic low anterior resection (LAR), de-functioning ileostomy is required. However, there is controversy about the consequence of stoma formation via the specimen extraction site (SES). Therefore, we aimed to investigate stoma-related complication according to stoma formation via the SES. We enrolled rectal cancer patients who underwent laparoscopic LAR with temporary ileostomy between January 2013 and December 2017. Patients were divided into two groups: stoma through the SES (SES) and stoma through a new site (NS). The difference in the incidence of stoma-related complications was analysed. In total, 198 patients underwent laparoscopic LAR (SES = 141 patients, NS = 57 patients). The SES group had a shorter operation time (204.7 ± 74.4 min vs 229.5 ± 90.5 min, p = 0.049) and was associated with fewer cases of wound infection (0% vs 7%, p = 0.006) than the NS group. There was no statistically significant difference between the SES group and NS group in all-stoma complications (22.7% vs 12.3%, p = 0.095). The incidence of parastomal hernia also was not significantly different (11.3% vs 5.3%, p = 0.286). Stoma via the SES is feasible after laparoscopic LAR with temporary ileostomy, although stoma-related complication rate was higher, without a significant difference. It can shorten the operation time and reduce wound infection rate.

Are radiologic pouchogram and pouchoscopy useful before ileostomy closure in asymptomatic patients operated for ulcerative colitis?

Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the "gold standard" procedure for patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) requiring surgical intervention. A de-functioning ileostomy is usually performed, as a step for the IPAA procedure. The aim of this study is to present the methodology and results of the routine double assessment of IPAA integrity in asymptomatic patients prior to the ileostomy reversal and evaluate its necessity. This is a retrospective study of 61 UC patients, who underwent IPAA construction, in 2010-2016. A diverting ileostomy was created after IPAA construction, which was reversed at least 3months later. A double assessment, with pouchogram and pouchoscopy, of IPAA integrity was performed, before stoma closure. Post-operative symptoms and signs of complications, imaging studies, and endoscopic findings were recorded during follow-up. Prior to the ileostomy reversal, both pouchoscopy and pouchogram identified no patient with evidence of anastomotic leakage. During a mean follow-up of 3.67years after ileostomy reversal, 11 patients developed complications but only one had signs of leakage, which presented as a pouch-vaginal fistula. The specificity of both the pouchogram and pouchoscopy reached 100% and the negative predictive value ranged between 98.4 and 100%. The specificity of pouchoscopy and pouchogram prior to ileostomy closure, in asymptomatic patients with IPAA for UC, is very high in recognizing an intact anastomosis, but their combination did not alter the diagnostic accuracy or had any effect in further management. At least, pouchogram could be selectively performed only in patients with high-risk clinical indicators. • The double assessment of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis with pouchogram and pouchoscopy, prior to ileostomy closure, specifically in patients with ulcerative colitis has not been evaluated before. • The specificity of pouchoscopy and pouchogram prior to ileostomy closure, in asymptomatic patients with IPAA for UC, is very high in recognizing an intact anastomosis. • However, their combination did not alter the diagnostic accuracy or had any effect in further management, in asymptomatic patients.

Standardization of surgical procedures to reduce risk of anastomotic leakage, reoperation, and surgical site infection in colorectal cancer surgery: a retrospective cohort study of 1189 patients.

Anastomotic leakage (AL) and surgical site infection (SSI) are prevalent complications of colorectal surgery. To lower this risk, we standardized our surgical procedures in 2012, with a preferential use of laparoscopic approach (LS) for both colon and rectal surgery, combined with triangulating anastomosis (TA) for colon surgery and defunctioning ileostomy (DI) for low anterior resection. Our aim was to evaluate the outcomes of our standardized procedures. The incidence rate of AL (primary outcome) and of reoperation and SSI (secondary outcome) was compared before (early period, n = 648) and after (late period, n = 541) standardization, through a retrospective analysis. The incidence rate of AL (6.6 versus 1.8%; P = 0.001), reoperation (3.5 versus 0.7%; P = 0.0012), and SSI (7.7 versus 4.6%; P = 0.029) was lower in late than in the early period. For colon cancer, TA and LS reduced the risk of AL (2.1 versus 0.3%, P = 0.020, for TA, and 3.2 versus 0.4%, P = 0.0027, for LS) and reoperation (2.9 versus 0.3%, P = 0.003, for TA, and 2.5 versus 0.2%, P = 0.0040, for LS). For rectal cancer, the incidence of all adverse outcomes (AL, reoperation, and SSI) was lower in cases treated by LS. However, the incidence of AL was lower in the late than in early period (P = 0.002) and with LS (P = 0.002). On multivariate analysis, late period and LS were independent factors of a lower risk of adverse outcomes. Our surgical standardization seems to be effective in lowering the risks of AL, reoperation, and SSI after colorectal cancer surgery.

Defunctioning Ileostomy Is a Key Risk Factor for Small Bowel Obstruction After Colorectal Cancer Resection.

Early postoperative small bowel obstruction (EPSBO) prolongs hospital stays after surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the risk factors for EPSBO associated with colorectal cancer resection. We retrospectively compared the clinical variables of patients with EPSBO (n=37) and those without (n=812) after primary tumor resection for colorectal cancer at our hospital between January 2010 and December 2015. In multivariate analysis, significant differences between the two groups was found in male sex, open surgery, and defunctioning ileostomy (DI) placement (p=0.024, p<0.0001, and p=0.023, respectively), but not for colostomy placement. Of 16 patients with DI who developed EPSBO, 13 (81.3%) cases resulted from obstruction of the stomal outlet. Male sex, open surgery, and DI placement are risk factors for EPSBO after colorectal cancer resection. For patients with placement of DI, obstruction of the stomal outlet should be carefully considered.

Quality of life of ulcerative colitis patients treated surgically with proctocolectomy and J-pouch formation: a comparative study before surgery and after closure of the defunctioning ileostomy.

Background:Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a lifelong disease with a relapse-remission pattern that affects patients’ social and psychological wellbeing. Restorative proctocolectomy and J-pouch formation is the gold-standard surgical procedure in cases where symptoms are refractory to currently available medical treatment. The aim of this study was to assess patients’ quality of life (QoL) in order to evaluate the efficiency of surgery and patients’ symptomatology.Methods:We performed a prospective comparative study of the QoL of 47 patients with UC, treated surgically. As research tools, we used the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) and the Cleveland Global Quality of Life (CGQL) questionnaire. Parametric and non-parametric tests were used in order to correlate areas of QoL and other selected factors, such as marital status, sex, age, and education.Results:The mean scores before and after closure of the ileostomy were 153.29 and 178 for the IBDQ (P=0.0025), and 17.4 and 23.42 for the CGQL (P<0.001), suggesting an overall improvement in QoL. The research showed that there was no specific QoL factor, such as intestinal, systemic, emotional or social life symptoms, that improved significantly more than the others (P=0.99). The IBDQ showed that patients aged less than 20 years (P<0.001), female patients (P=0.03) and patients with secondary education (P<0.001) reported the greatest improvement.Conclusions:The QoL in UC patients treated surgically improved following closure of the de-functioning ileostomy. QoL studies are encouraged to optimize and maintain high standards of surgical care, and they could potentially be used for assessment of therapeutic efficacy.

Risk Factors for Early Postoperative Small Bowel Obstruction After Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer.

The aim of the study was to evaluate risk factors for small bowel obstruction (SBO) in early postoperative period after anterior resection for rectal cancer. Patients who underwent anterior resection (AR) [high AR (HAR) or low AR (LAR)] for rectal cancer between January 2009 and April 2016 were enrolled into the study after fulfilling selection criteria. In included patients, risk factors for early postoperative SBO (EPSBO) were analyzed by means of univariate and multivariate analysis. Cases with perioperative major complications other than intestinal obstruction and with simultaneous resection of other organs were excluded. The same analyses were also performed for cases of redo surgery due to EPSBO. EPSBO was defined as clinically and radiologically confirmed SBO that developed after resuming oral intake within 30days following surgery. The logistic regression method was used for statistical analyses. In enrolled 180 patients, EPSBO occurred in 23 (12.8%). In univariate analysis, male sex [odds ratio (OR)=2.17, 95% CI=0.82-6.84, p<0.0001], previous abdominal surgery (OR=0.20, 95% CI=0.03-0.73, p=0.0117), low tumor (OR=3.26, 95% CI=1.28-8.13, p=0.0140), LAR (OR=17.25, 95% CI=3.49-312.55, p<0.0001), D3 node dissection (OR=13.61, 95% CI=2.75-246.69, p=0.0002), defunctioning ileostomy (DI) formation (OR=9.88, 95%=3.80-29.14, p<0.0001), and prolonged operation time (OR=1.01, 95% CI=1.00-1.01, p=0.0122) were significantly related to EPSBO. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that D3 node dissection (OR=10.93, 95% CI=1.94-208.23, p=0.0038) and DI formation (OR=5.82, 95% CI=1.55-25.31, p=0.0083) were independent risk factors for EPSBO. Four cases (17.4%) with EPSBO required re-operation because conservative therapies failed; all were laparoscopic DI formation cases. In three of those four cases, stenosis of stoma at the level of the posterior sheath of rectus abdominis muscle was the reason of SBO, and in one case it was kinking of the stomal limb. D3 lymph node dissection and DI formation are independent risk factors for EPSBO in AR.

Risk Factors for Nonclosure of a Temporary Defunctioning Ileostomy Following Anterior Resection of Rectal Cancer.

In patients with colorectal cancer, a defunctioning ileostomy is commonly constructed to reduce anastomotic complications. However, many patients do not undergo a subsequent procedure to have their temporary stoma closed. This study investigated the incidence of nonclosure of ileostomies and identified factors associated with nonclosure. This study is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. This study was conducted at a tertiary referral cancer hospital. A total of 296 patients who received anterior resection with a defunctioning ileostomy with protective intention from 2006 to 2013 were included. The primary outcomes measured were the incidence of nonclosure of ileostomy and associated risk factors. Patients were followed for a median time of 29 months (range, 21-100 months). At the end of the study, 51 (17.2%) patients were left with a permanent ileostomy. The median time interval from the creation of a defunctioning ileostomy to closure was 192 days (range, 14-865 days). Multivariate analyses using a logistic regression model showed that metastatic diseases (OR, 0.179, p < 0.001), Charlson Comorbidity Index score >1 (OR, 0.268; p < 0.01), and complications from the index surgery (OR, 0.391; p = 0.013) were significant independent risk factors for failing to close a defunctioning ileostomy. Although our study has a large patient cohort, it is limited by its retrospective nature. It is difficult to fully evaluate stoma complications after hospital discharge, and the prevalence may be underestimated. One in 6 temporary ileostomies constructed during an elective anterior resection for rectal cancer was not closed. Patients should be told before the index surgery that there is a risk of nonclosure and possible complications associated with permanent ileostomy.