Protective Loop Ileostomy Research Articles

Impact of the laparoscopic approach, early closure and preoperative stimulation on outcomes of ileostomy closure after rectal resection

AimTo evaluate the clinical outcome of early closure of a protective ileostomy and preoperative stimulation of the efferent limb in a cohort of patients with rectal cancer treated surgically, primarily using the laparoscopic approach. MethodsWe performed an observational retrospective cohort study in a prospectively recorded series of patients with rectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic surgery with a protective loop ileostomy between 2017 and 2022. Ileostomy closure was programmed for within 3 months after surgery. All patients underwent stimulation of the efferent limb. Primary outcomes were morbidity and mortality, length of stay (LOS), and re-admission. ResultsBetween 2017 and 2022, 108 patients underwent resection for rectal cancer and protective ileostomy. The laparoscopic approach was performed in 84.3% of patients (n = 91). Permanent ileostomy was performed in 5 patients (4.6%). Ileostomy closure was thus performed in 95.4% of patients (n = 103). Median time to closure was 74.5 days (range 57–113). In 63.1% (n = 65) of patients, reconstructive surgery was performed within 90 days. Prior to closure, efferent limb stimulation was performed in 77.8% (n = 84) of patients. Global morbidity was 26.2% (n = 27) (85.19%, n = 23 Clavien-Dindo I and 7.41%, n = 2 Clavien-Dindo II). The main causes of morbidity were postoperative ileus (10.7%, n = 11) and rectal bleeding (8.7%, n = 9). Anastomosis leakage occurred in 2 patients. Median hospital stay was 6 days (5–7). Readmission was needed in 6.8% (n = 7) of patients. ConclusionA previous laparoscopic approach, early closure and stimulation of the efferent limb could be a useful strategy to reduce the morbidity and mortality of temporary ileostomy closure.

Unveiling the intrinsic role of malnutrition in patients with Crohn's disease undergoing major surgery using entropy balancing weighting analysis.

The negative role of malnutrition in patients with Crohn's disease is known; however, many coexisting disease-related factors could cause misinterpretation of the real culprit. This study aimed to describe the role of malnutrition using a novel methodology, entropy balancing. This was a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients undergoing elective major surgery for Crohn's disease, preoperatively screened following the European Society for Clinical Nutrition guidelines. Two-step entropy balancing was applied to the group of malnourished patients to obtain an equal cohort having a null or low risk of malnutrition. The first reweighting homogenised the cohorts for non-modifiable confounding factors. The second reweighting matched the two groups for modifiable nutritional factors, assuming successful treatment of malnutrition. The entropy balancing was evaluated using the d-value. Postoperative results are reported as mean difference or OR, with a 95 % CI. Of the 183 patients, 69 (37·7 %) were at moderate/high risk for malnutrition. The malnourished patients had lower BMI (d = 1·000), Hb (d = 0·715), serum albumin (d = 0·981), a higher lymphocyte count (d = 0·124), Charlson Comorbidity Index (d = 0·257), American Society of Anaesthesiologists (d = 0·327) and Harvey-Bradshaw scores (d = 0·696). Protective loop ileostomy was more frequently performed (d = 0·648) in the malnourished group. After the first reweighting, malnourished patients experienced a prolonged length of stay (mean difference = 1·9; 0·11, 3·71, days), higher overall complication rate (OR 4·42; 1·39, 13·97) and higher comprehensive complication index score (mean difference = 8·9; 2·2 15·7). After thesecond reweighting, the postoperative course of the two groups was comparable. Entropy balancing showed the independent role of preoperative malnutrition and the possible advantages obtainable from a pre-habilitation programme in Crohn's disease patients awaiting surgery.

Early versus late closure of protective loop ileostomy: functional significant results in a preliminary analysis.

Protective loop ileostomy (PLI), commonly performed in rectal cancer surgery, is one of the most reliable methods to reduce the risk of sepsis associated with anastomotic complications. The correct timing of PLI closure is not well defined. Recently, most surgeons proposed to close early the PLI. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the timing of stoma closure on postoperative outcomes. We analyzed prospectively data of patients who received PLI anterior resection for rectal cancer between January 2020 to June 2022. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the timing of stoma closure, until four weeks (EC group) and more than four weeks (LC group). Outpatient clinic follow-up, perioperative data, postoperative complications and evidence of anterior resection syndrome with the Low-Anterior Resection Score (LARS) score were recorded. In the EC group 24 patients were included while 27 patients were considered for LC group. There were no differences between the groups with respect to all parameters, except for recourse to adjuvant therapy, higher for LC group. Perioperative analyzed characteristics were similar among groups. There was no statistically significant difference between the EC group and the LC group for complication rate. LARS score was higher in the LC group for score >20 and >30. Timing of PLI closure was not a significant independent predictor of post-closure complications rate. LARS incidence was significantly related to longer time of closure, with probably late recovery of motility function, but this should be confirmed by randomized studies.

Impact of the laparoscopic approach, early closure and preoperative stimulation on outcomes of ileostomy closure after rectal resection

AimTo evaluate the clinical outcome of early closure of a protective ileostomy and preoperative stimulation of the efferent limb in a cohort of patients with rectal cancer treated surgically, primarily using the laparoscopic approach. MethodsWe performed an observational retrospective cohort study in a prospectively recorded series of patients with rectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic surgery with a protective loop ileostomy between 2017 and 2022. Ileostomy closure was programmed for within 3 months after surgery. All patients underwent stimulation of the efferent limb. Primary outcomes were morbidity and mortality, length of stay (LOS), and re-admission. ResultsBetween 2017 and 2022, 108 patients underwent resection for rectal cancer and protective ileostomy. The laparoscopic approach was performed in 84.3% of patients (n = 91). Permanent ileostomy was performed in 5 patients (4.6%). Ileostomy closure was thus performed in 95.4% of patients (n = 103). Median time to closure was 74.5 days (range 57–113). In 63.1% (n = 65) of patients, reconstructive surgery was performed within 90 days. Prior to closure, efferent limb stimulation was performed in 77.8% (n = 84) of patients. Global morbidity was 26.2% (n = 27) (85.19%, n = 23 Clavien-Dindo I and 7.41%, n = 2 Clavien-Dindo II). The main causes of morbidity were postoperative ileus (10.7%, n = 11) and rectal bleeding (8.7%, n = 9). Anastomosis leakage occurred in 2 patients. Median hospital stay was 6 days (5–7). Readmission was needed in 6.8% (n = 7) of patients. ConclusionA previous laparoscopic approach, early closure and stimulation of the efferent limb could be a useful strategy to reduce the morbidity and mortality of temporary ileostomy closure.

A commentary on '"Dumpling suture method" versus traditional suture method of protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic anterior rectal resection with specimen extraction through stoma incision: a retrospective comparative cohort study'.

A commentary on '"Dumpling suture method" versus traditional suture method of protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic anterior rectal resection with specimen extraction through stoma incision: a retrospective comparative cohort study'.

'Dumpling suture method' versus traditional suture method of protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic anterior rectal resection with specimen extraction through stoma incision: a retrospective comparative cohort study.

A diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) is performed in laparoscopic anterior rectal resection (LAR) surgery at high risk of anastomotic fistula. Minimally invasive surgery promotes postoperative recovery and cosmetics. To reduce abdominal trauma, specimen extraction through stoma incision (EXSI) is usually performed to avoid auxiliary abdominal incision with enlarged stomal incision. The traditional suture method (TSM) reduces the incision size by suturing the ends of the enlarged incision, leading to peristomal incisions and a higher risk of stomal complications. The study aimed to introduce the dumpling suture method (DSM) of PLI and compare this new method with TSM. The authors propose a novel stoma suture technique, which utilized a method of skin folding suture to reduce the enlarged incision size. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 71 consecutive patients with rectal cancer who underwent LAR-DLI with EXSI, and the intraoperative details and postoperative outcomes of the two groups were measured. The DSM group showed a lower stomal complication rate (10.3 vs. 35.7%, P=0.016) than that of the TSM group. The scores of DET (Discoloration, Erosion, Tissue overgrowth), stomal pain, quality of life were all significantly lower in DSM group than in TSM group. In multivariate analysis, DSM was an independent protective factor for stoma-related complications. Operative time, time to first flatus, defecation and eat, nonstomal related postoperative complications were similar in both groups. DSM utilizes a method of skin folding suture to reduce the enlarged incision size, which is safe and effective in reducing the incidence of peristomal skin infections and stomal complications. This procedure offers a novel suturing approach for loop ileostomy with enlarged incision, effectively reducing the postoperative trauma and incidence of stomal complications.

Role and Morbidity of Protective Ileostomy after Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer: One Centre Experience and Review of Literature

The creation of a protective stoma is considered a valid life-saving tool, significantly reducing the effects of anastomotic leakage in terms of related morbidity, mortality, and reoperation rate. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of a protective loop ileostomy in terms of short- and long-term postoperative morbidity, quantifying the stoma-related complications arising after stoma creation and stoma closure and the risk of permanent stoma. From January 2009 to January 2020, 149 patients with rectal cancer treated by anterior resection and protective ileostomy were enrolled in the study. A total of 113 (75.84%) patients were preoperatively treated with neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy. A clinically relevant anastomotic leak occurred in two patients (1.34%). The postoperative stoma complication rate was 6%. According to the Clavien classification, the stoma-related complication grade was I in seven patients (4.7%) and II in two patients (1.3%). A late stoma-related parastomal hernia occurred in one patient (0.67%). In 129 patients (86.57%), it was possible to close the stoma. Postoperative complications of stoma closure occurred in 12 patients (9.3%). The stoma closure complication grade was I in seven cases (5.43%), II in two cases (1.55%), and ≥3 in three cases (2.33%). Incisional hernia was the only late complication recorded in seven cases (5.42%). The permanent stoma rate was 13.43%. A protective ileostomy has a nonnegligible complication rate, but the rate of severe complications is low. Every effort should be made to clearly identify patients in whom the risk of anastomotic leakage justifies the stoma.

Assessment of Quality of Life Before and After Ileostomy Reversal After Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer

Aim: Low Anterior Resection Syndrome negatively affects patients’ quality of life after surgery for rectal cancer. Temporary loop leostomy is preferred to avoid anastomosis leakage related problems. Aim of this study is to evaluate Patients’ quality of life before and after ileostomy reversal. 
 Material and Methods: Patients with laparoscopic low anterior resection with protective loop ileostomy were included in the study. Before and after the reversal of the ileostomy quality of life assessment was done by EORTC QLQ-C30 scale. 
 Results: Sixty two patients with temporary loop ileostomy after laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer were included in the study. Our study population showed better results in General health scale and social function scale after ileostomy reversal. However; there is no significant difference in general function and general symptom scale. 
 Conclusion: Temporary ileostomy can negatively affect patients’ quality of life and patients have higher quality of life scores after ileostomy reversal.

The impact of circular stapler size on the risk of anastomotic stricture following total mesorectal excision in rectal cancer patients: A retrospective cross-sectional study.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery complications are a major issue affecting morbidity and mortality rates. Anastomotic stricture, which occurs in almost 30% of patients after surgery for rectal cancer, is one of the most serious but underreported side effects. In this study, we tried to assess the effect of stapler size on anastomotic stricture rate. At our facility, all patients underwent low anterior resections (LAR) performed using an open laparotomy technique. A contour-curved stapler and an end-to-end anastomosis (EEA) circular stapler were used in the double stapling technique (DST). All patients also underwent a protective loop ileostomy. Patients who developed stricture following leakage were excluded. This study comprised a total of 173 rectal cancer patients. A 29-mm circle stapler was used to anastomose 77 patients (44.5%), while a 31-mm circular stapler was used to anastomose 96 patients (55.5%). Six individuals experienced strictures; two had a 29 mm stamper and four (4.4%) had a 31 mm one. There was no significant difference between the two groups (p:0.575). On aggregate, 8 patients experienced leakage; 3 (3.8%) of these patients received treatment with a 29 mm stapler, whereas 5 (5.2%) received treatment with a 31 mm stapler. this study found no statistically significant difference in the stricture rates and stapler size. The findings of this study provide credibility to the notion that in rectal cancer patients having LAR, strictures can be safely avoided by performing the anastomoses with both staplers.

PHaLIR: prevent hernia after loop ileostomy reversal—a study protocol for a randomized controlled multicenter study

BackgroundRectal cancer is a common cancer worldwide. Surgery for rectal cancer with low anterior resection often includes the formation of a temporary protective loop ileostomy. The temporary ostomy is later reversed in a separate operation.One complication following stoma closure is the development of a hernia at the former stoma site, and this has been reported in 7–15% of patients. The best method to avoid hernia after stoma closure is unclear. The most common closure is by suturing only, but different forms of mesh have been tried. Biological mesh has in a randomized trial halved hernia incidence after stoma reversal. Biosynthetic mesh and retromuscular mesh are currently being evaluated in ongoing studies.MethodsThe present multicenter, double-blinded, randomized, controlled study will compare standard suture closure of the abdominal wall in loop ileostomy reversal with retromuscular synthetic mesh at the stoma site. The study has been approved by the Regional Ethical Review board in Stockholm.Patients aged 18–90 years, operated on with low anterior resection and a protective loop ileostomy for rectal cancer and planned for ileostomy reversal, will be considered for inclusion in the study. Randomization will be 1:1 on the operation day with concealed envelopes. The estimated sample size is intended to evaluate the superiority of the experimental arm and to detect a reduction of hernia occurrence from 12 to 3%. The operation method is blinded to the patients and in the chart and for the observer at the 30-day follow-up. The main outcome is hernia occurrence at the stoma site within 3 years postoperatively, diagnosed through CT with strain. Secondary outcomes are operation time, length of hospital stay, pain, and 30-day complications.DiscussionThis double-blinded randomized controlled superiority study will compare retromuscular synthetic mesh during the closure of loop ileostomy to standard care. If this study can show a lower frequency of hernia with the use of prophylactic mesh, it may lead to new surgical guidelines during stoma closure.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03720262. Registered on October 25, 2018.

"Free-Floating Anus": A Flap-Free Approach for Definitive Excision of Circumferential Giant Condyloma Acuminata.

Giant condyloma acuminata (GCA), or Buschke-Löwenstein tumor, is a rare exophytic cauliflower-like growth in the anogenital region. The spectrum of treatment options is wide, ranging from the application of topical ointments to the performance of an abdominoperineal resection. Currently, wide local excision is the most common approach and may entail the creation of a protective loop ileostomy or implementation of flaps or grafts that facilitate closure. We describe a unique surgical approach for the management of circumferential GCA void of the use a protective loop ileostomy, flaps, or grafts. Our report highlights that the implementation of a radical, circumferential, wide excision resulting in "free-floating anus" and healing via secondary intention can ultimately lead to excellent functional and cosmetic results and therefore may be considered a minimally invasive surgical option for patients afflicted with a large, circumferential GCA.

Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision Considering the Embryology Along the Fascia in Rectal Cancer Patients.

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) remains a challenging technique for rectal dissection. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and oncological outcomes of TaTME, compared to those of the laparoscopic TME (LaTME) in rectal cancer. Using propensity score-matched analyses, we analyzed retrospective data from 134 consecutive patients with rectal cancer who underwent TaTME or LaTME from January 2011 to June 2020 in our hospital. Clinical and oncological outcomes were evaluated. The primary endpoint was the 2-year local recurrence rate. Before data analysis, significant group-dependent differences were observed only in the tumor height (p<0.01). After analysis, preoperative patient demographics were similar between the TaTME and LaTME groups. The operative time was significantly shorter in the TaTME group (p=0.02), and the rates of hand-sewn anastomosis and protective loop ileostomy were significantly higher (p<0.01). The TaTME group showed a null conversion to open surgery compared to the LaTME group (5.9%). The postoperative complications, including anastomotic leak, were comparable between the two groups. However, the rate of Clavien-Dindo grade III tended to be lower in the TaTME group (p=0.07). There were no statistically significant differences in terms of pathological findings, and the 2-year local recurrence rate was similar between the two groups (both 5.9%). TaTME based on embryology along the fascia is feasible and seems a safe alternative to LaTME in selected patients with rectal cancer when considering the conversion rate and the operative time.

Integration of prolapsing technique and one-stitch method of ileostomy during laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a retrospective study.

Prolapsing technique is a type of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery that can overcome the difficulty of precise transection of the distal rectum and subsequent anastomosis in a narrow pelvic space. Currently, protective ileostomy is widely utilized in low anterior resection for low rectal cancer, which may reduce the severe consequences caused by anastomotic leakage. The study aimed to combine the prolapsing technique with a one-stitch method of ileostomy and evaluate the surgical outcomes. A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients with low rectal cancer who underwent protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic low anterior resection between January 2019 and December 2022. The patients were divided into prolapsing technique combined with the one-stitch method of ileostomy (PO) group and traditional method (TM) group, and the intraoperative details and early postoperative outcomes of the two groups were measured. A total of 70 patients met the inclusion criteria, including 30 patients who underwent PO and 40 patients who underwent the traditional procedure. The PO group had a shorter total operative time than the TM group (197.8 ± 43.4 vs. 218.3 ± 40.6 min, P = 0.047). The time of intestine function recovery in the PO group was shorter than that in the TM group (24.6 ± 3.8 vs. 32.7 ± 5.4 h, P < 0.001). Compared with the TM group, the average VAS score was significantly lower in the PO group (P < 0.001). The incidence of anastomotic leakage in the PO group was significantly lower than that in the TM group (P = 0.034). The operative time of loop ileostomy was 2.0 ± 0.6 min in the PO group, which was significantly less than 15.1 ± 2.9 min in the TM group. Skin irritation was observed in 2 patients in the PO group and 10 patients in the TM group; therefore, there was a significant difference (P = 0.044). This method is safe and feasible, which reduces the technical difficulty and achieves rapid postoperative recovery with few complications.

Comparative short-term and survival outcomes of three specimen extraction techniques in laparoscopic low rectal cancer surgery: does it affect ileostomy closure?

IntroductionThis study aimed to compare the short-term and survival outcomes in laparoscopic low rectal cancer surgery with three different specimen extraction techniques, and whether it affects loop ileostomy closure.Materials and methodsA consecutive series of patients with low rectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection plus protective loop ileostomy (LAR-PLI) were enrolled. Three main techniques, namely specimen extraction through auxiliary incision (EXAI), specimen extraction through stoma incision (EXSI), and specimen eversion and extra-abdominal resection (EVER), were employed. The postoperative short-term and survival outcomes of the three techniques and the impact on loop ileostomy closure were compared.ResultsIn all, 254 patients were enrolled in this study: 104 (40.9%) in the EXAI group, 104 (40.9%) in the EXSI group, and 46 (18.1%) in the EVER group. For primary surgery, EXAI group had significantly longer operative time (P < 0.001), more intraoperative bleeding (P < 0.001), longer length of abdominal incision (P<0.001), longer time to first flatus (P < 0.001), longer time to first defecation (P < 0.001), longer time to first eat (P < 0.001), and longer postoperative hospital stays (P = 0.005) than the EXSI and EVER groups. The primary postoperative complication rate in the EXAI and EVER group was significantly higher than in the EXSI group (P = 0.005). In loop ileostomy closure, EXAI group had significantly longer operative time (P = 0.001), more bleeding volume, and longer postoperative hospital stays (P < 0.001) than the EXSI and EVER groups. For survival outcomes, the 3-year local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) is 92.6% for all patients. The 3-year LRFS for patients in EXAI, EXSI, and EVER were 90.1%, 95.4%, and 92.7%, with P = 0.476.ConclusionsOur single-center results found that in LAR-PLI surgery for low rectal cancer, the short-term outcomes of specimen extraction through the stoma incision or anus were better than that through the auxiliary incision, but the 3-year LRFS was no statistically different.

ILEOSTIM trial: a study protocol to evaluate the effectiveness of efferent loop stimulation before ileostomy reversal

PurposeA protective loop ileostomy is the most useful method to reduce sequelae in the event of an anastomotic leakage (AL) after rectal cancer surgery. However, it requires an additional stoma reversal surgery with its own potential complications. Postoperative ileus (POI) remains the most common complication after ileostomy reversal, which leads to an increase in morbidity, length of hospital stay (LOS) and overall healthcare costs. Several retrospective studies carried out in this field have concluded that there are insufficient evidence-based recommendations about the routine application of preoperative bowel stimulation in clinical practice. Here we discuss whether stimulation of the efferent limb before ileostomy reversal might reduce POI and improve postoperative outcomes.MethodsThis is a multicentre randomised controlled trial to determine whether mechanical stimulation of the efferent limb during the 2 weeks before the ileostomy reversal would help to reduce the development of POI after surgery. This study was registered on Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05302557). Stimulation will consist of infusing a solution of 500 ml of saline chloride solution mixed with a thickening agent (Resource©, Nestlé Health Science; 6.4 g sachet) into the distal limb of the ileostomy loop. This will be performed within the 2 weeks before ileostomy reversal, in an outpatient clinic under the supervision of a trained stoma nurse.ConclusionThe results of this study could provide some insights into the preoperative management of these patients.

Comparison of specimen extraction site and another site for protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection: a retrospective comparative study

BackgroundProtective loop ileostomy is commonly performed in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection to prevent the serious complications of anastomotic fistula. It is usually created at the right lower quadrant of the abdomen and another wound is required for stoma. The study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of ileostomy at the specimen extraction site (SES) and another site (AS) beside the auxiliary incision.MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 101 eligible patients with pathologically diagnosed adenocarcinoma of the rectum from January 2020 to December 2021 in the study center. According to whether the ileostomy was at the specimen extraction site, patients were divided into SES group (40 patients) and AS group (61 patients). Clinicopathological characteristics, the intraoperative details, and postoperative outcomes of the two groups were measured.ResultsUnivariate analysis showed that the operative time was significantly shorter and the blood loss was significantly less in the SES group than in the AS group during laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection, the time to first flatus was significantly shorter, and the pain was significantly less in the SES group than in the AS group during ileostomy closure. The postoperative complications were similar in both groups. Multivariable analysis showed that ileostomy at the specimen extraction site was a significant factor influencing the operative time and blood loss of rectal resection, and influencing the pain and the time to first flatus during ileostomy closure.ConclusionCompared to ileostomy at AS, protective loop ileostomy at SES was time-saving and less bleeding during laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection, and more quick to first flatus and less pain during stoma closure, and did not lead to more postoperative complications. The median incision of the lower abdomen and the left lower abdominal incision were both good sites for ileostomy.

Outcome of early versus late ileostomy closure in patients with rectal cancers undergoing low anterior resection: A prospective cohort study

BackgroundProtective loop ileostomy is performed following low anterior resection (LAR) in patients with rectal cancer to reduce the complications of primary anastomosis. The optimal timing for ileostomy closure remains controversial. The aim of the current study was to compare the effects of early (<2 weeks) versus late (≥2 months) closure of the stoma in patients with rectal cancer undergoing LAR on surgical outcome and complications rates. MethodsThis prospective cohort study was conducted in two referral centers in Shiraz, Iran, during a 2-year period. We have consecutively and prospectively included adult patients with rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent LAR followed by protective loop ileostomy in our center during the study period. The baseline, tumor characteristics and complication as well as outcome was recorded in a 1-year follow-up and was compared between early and late ileostomy closure. ResultsOverall, 69 patients (32 in early and 37 in late group) were included. The mean age of the patients was 59.40 ± 9.30 years and there were 46 (66.7%) men and 23 (33.3%) women. Patients undergoing early closure of the ileostomy had significantly shorter operation duration (p<0.001) and lower intraoperative bleeding (p<0.001) compared to late ileostomy closure. There was no significant difference between two study groups regarding the complications. Early closure was also not found to be a predictive factor of post-ileostomy closure complications. ConclusionEarly closure (<2 weeks) of ileostomy after LAR in patients with rectal adenocarcinoma is a safe and feasible technique which is associated with favorable outcome.

Protective loop ileostomy or colostomy? a risk evaluation of all common complications.

Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice. Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared. There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female sex, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542). We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolong diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.

Analysis of Prevention and Treatment of Anastomotic Leakage after Sphincter-Preserving Surgery for Middle- and Low-Grade Rectal Cancer under Laparoscopy.

Anastomotic leakage is one of the most serious complications that can occur after laparoscopic-assistedsphincter-preserving surgery for middle- and low-grade rectal cancer. To explore the cause, prevention, and treatment of anastomotic leakage after sphincter-preserving surgery for middle- and low-grade rectal cancer under laparoscopy. The clinical data from patients with mid- and low-grade rectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic-assistedanus-preserving surgery in the anorectal surgery department of our hospital have been analyzed. Patients with a definite diagnosis, indications for laparoscopic surgery, and sphincter-preserving surgery were included in the analysis, and patients with a protective loop ileostomy and laparotomy were excluded. Among the 126 patients with middle- and low-grade rectal cancer undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery under laparoscopy. There were 75 male patients and 51 female patients, ranging in age from 37 to 89 years old, with an average age of 60.2 ± 6.7. The distance from the lower edge of the rectal tumor to the anal edge was ≤10 cm. 6 developed anastomotic leakage after the operation (leakage rate of 4.7%). Moreover, turbid purulent fluid was drained from the abdominal drainage tube in three patients on the third and fourth days after the operation, and the abdominal drainage tube drained serous drainage in three more patients on the fifth and sixth days, with signs of peritonitis appearing locally. All patients received continuous flushing and negative pressure drainage with a self-made double cannula and symptomatic treatment, and all were cured and discharged. Many factors can cause anastomotic leakage after this operation, and adequate perioperative preparation, meticulous operation during surgery, and careful postoperative management are key factors in preventing it.

Hartmann's Reversal: Controversies of a Challenging Operation.

Hartmann's reversal is a complex operation with a high morbidity rate. Minimally invasive surgery has been used to reduce the impact of surgery on fragile patients. The aim of this comparative study is to look at the results of Hartmann's reversal procedures with different approaches. All the patients who underwent Hartmann's reversal were collected retrospectively (124 cases). Sixty-four patients (50.4%) had an open operation, 6 cases (5%) were treated with a conventional laparoscopic approach, 34 patients (28.1%) underwent single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS), and 20 (16.5%) required other additional trocars. SILS operations were slightly longer than the open procedures (175 min vs 150 min), with the same rate of postoperative complications and reoperations (p = 0.83 and p = 0.42), but with a shorter hospital stay (5 days p = 0.007). Age (p = 0.03), long operative time (p = 0.01), and ASA score (p = 0.05) were identified as independent factors affecting postoperative morbidity. The grade of adhesions caused a longer operative time (p = 0.001) and a higher risk of conversion (p < 0.001), and short rectal stump increased the risk of protective loop ileostomy (p = 0.008). Patients with grade 2-3 of adhesions had a longer length of stay (p = 0.05). Minimally invasive procedures had a shorter hospital stay and did not show any increase in morbidity rate when compared with open cases. Age, longer operative time, and ASA score increased the risk of postoperative complications. Furthermore, patients with a short rectal stump had a higher chance of having a defunctioning ileostomy.