Stoma Closure Site Research Articles

P0552 Incisional and parastomal hernia after surgical management of inflammatory colitis: a common complication presenting a real therapeutical challenge in a tertiary expert center

Abstract Background Surgical management of inflammatory colitis often requires a staged approach involving multiple interventions with or without stoma creation. Data on the incidence, risk factors, impact and management of incisional and parastomal hernias (IH and PSH) in UC patients are limited. This study aims to assess the incidence of IH and PSH after surgical completion in colitis patients and to identify associated risk factors. Methods All patients undergoing surgical management for inflammatory colitis between March 2010 and May 2024 were eligible. The primary endpoint was the incidence of IH and/or PSH and/or and/or stoma prolapse. Risk factors of hernia (IH and/or PSH) were analysed using univariate and multivariate analyses. Results A hundred and nine patients had surgical management for inflammatory colitis and were included in the analysis (87 UC [80%], 6 Crohn’s disease [5.5%], 14 indeterminate [13%], 2 drug-induced [1.8%]). Mean age was 46 ± 17 years. Indications included refractory colitis (n=32, 29%), severe acute colitis (n=58, 54%), and dysplasia (n=19, 17%). Procedures performed were ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) in 73(67%) patients, ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) in 23(21%), and non-restorative proctocolectomy with end ileostomy in 13(12%). Patients underwent a mean of 2.7±0.96 procedures with 99 patients requiring 2 or more procedures. Temporary stomas were created in 84(77%), and 19(17%) had permanent stomas. Median follow-up time was 44[21-91] months. 25(23%) patients had parietal complications after a median delay of 25[11-35] months following the last procedure: 22(20%) IH, 4(3.6%) PSH, and 3(2.8%) stomas prolapse*. None of the 4 patients with prophylactic biological mesh placement during stoma closure developed complications. Among 25 patients with parietal complications, 20 underwent abdominal wall repair. Of these, 6(30%) had recurrence requiring redo abdominal wall surgery in 3(15%). Adjusted risk factors for parietal complications included BMI≥25 (OR=3.13;95%CI=1.11-8.82;p=0.031) and permanent stoma (OR=5.86;95%CI=1.83-18.80; p=0.003). The type and number of procedures, and surgical indications were not associated with parietal complications. * Several patients had several complications Conclusion Parietal complications represent a major clinical challenge in the surgical management of inflammatory colitis. Nearly one-quarter of patients develop abdominal incisional or parastomal hernias, and one-third of patient experience recurrence following abdominal wall repair. Prophylactic mesh placement at the stoma closure site should be studied as an option to reduce this risk. References None

Diverting ileostomy in benign colorectal surgery: the real clinical cost analysis.

There are three types of complications stoma related: ones related to its construction, ones related to its function and related to closure. The aim of this study was to assess the risk of complications related to the stoma presence and to identificate variables related to complications. We conducted a retrospective study of patients who underwent sphincter-preserving elective surgery for benign condition between January 2013 and December 2020 at IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital in Negrar, Verona. Data were collected regarding demographics and complications associated with primary surgery, stoma closure and the interval period. Univariable and multivariable analysIs were conducted. A total of 446 (12.2%) diverting loop ileostomies were performed. At index procedure, 76 (17%) patients had complications and 34 patients had complications related to ileostomy creation. Twenty patients (4.4%) were re admitted before stoma closure for dehydration. One hundred and eighty-seven patients (41.9%) suffered from ileostomy management's problems. At univariate analysis, complications of having stoma are more frequent in elder patients (p = 0.013), ASA score > 2 (p = 0.02), IBD diagnosis (p = < 0.001) and patients who had ileostomy creation complications (p = 0.04). At stoma closure, 55 (12.3%) patients had complications. Forty-seven patients (10.5%) presented incisional hernia in the stoma closure site. Ileostomy closure complications are more common with ASA score > 2 (p = 0.01) and IBD diagnosis (p < 0.001). IBD was found an independent factor of poor outcome at the time of ileostomy creation and closure. Developing complications at the time of ileostomy creation is statistically related to develop complications during ileostomy maintenance at multivariable analysis A loop ileostomy is usually created to limit the potentially life-threatening consequenceS of anastomotic leakage, but it is not able to decrease the leak-related mortality, wound sepsis, postoperative bleeding and small bowel obstruction. Debate rises not only for its uncertain efficacy but also because of the significant morbidity related to stoma. The surgeon could use these data in order to tailor his surgical strategy to the patients and their disease.

Laparoscopic-Assisted Colonic Derotation in Patients With Hirschsprung Disease

BackgroundChildren with Hirschsprung disease (HSCR) proximal to the splenic flexure or those needing a redo pull-through (PT) are at risk for tension and ischemia of the PT which could result in leak, stricture, or loss of ganglionated bowel. Colonic derotation is a technique used to minimize tension and avoid duodenal obstruction. The aim of this study was to describe this technique and outcomes in a series of patients requiring this intervention. MethodsAll patients underwent initial diversion and colonic mapping. The derotation procedure involves mobilization of the remaining colon, counterclockwise rotation via the stoma closure site, placement of the pull through (the right colon) lying on the right of the pelvis, and ligation of the middle colic artery with preservation of the marginal branch running from the ileocolic artery. This maneuver prevents compression of the duodenum by the mesenteric vessels and allows for an isoperistaltic, tension-free anastomosis. Intraoperative indocyanine green fluorescence angiography (ICG-FA) was utilized in many of the cases to map the blood supply of the pull-through colon. We reviewed outcomes for all children with HSCR who underwent colonic derotation from 2014 to 2023. Descriptive statistics were performed. ResultsThere were 37 children included. Most were male (67.5%) with the original transition zone proximal to the rectosigmoid (81.1%). The median age at PT was 9.3 months [6.1–39.7]. Median operative time was 6.6 h [4.9–7.4] and 19 cases (51.4%) used ICG-FA. Most children had no 30-day postoperative complications (67.6%); in those who did develop complications, readmissions for electrolyte imbalance was most common (50.0%).There were zero cases of anastomotic leak at PT anastomosis. At long-term follow up, median 4.4 years [2.3–7.0], three children (8.1%) developed an anastomotic stricture, all were amenable to anal dilation, and five experienced episodes of enterocolitis (14.7%). Most children had between 1 and 4 stools per day (58.8%). ConclusionColonic derotation is a useful strategy to ensure well-perfused colonic length, protect the marginal artery blood supply, avoid duodenal compression, and ensure a tension-free anastomosis with minimal complications. Type of StudyOriginal research, retrospective cohort. Level of EvidenceIII.

Purse-string skin closure versus linear skin closure in people undergoing stoma reversal.

Stoma reversal is associated with a relatively high risk of surgical site infection (SSI), occurring in up to 40% of cases. This may be explained by the presence of microorganisms around the stoma site, and possible contamination with the intestinal contents during the open-end manipulation of the bowel, making the stoma closure site a clean-contaminated wound. The conventional technique for stoma reversal is linear skin closure (LSC). The purse-string skin closure (PSSC) technique (circumferential skin approximation) creates a small opening in the centre of the wound, enabling free drainage of contaminants and serous fluid. This could decrease the risk of SSI compared with LSC. To assess the effects of purse-string skin closure compared with linear skin closure in people undergoing stoma reversal. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases, and three trials registers on 21 December 2022. We also checked references, searched for citations, and contacted study authors to identify additional studies. We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PSSC and LSC techniques in people undergoing closure of stoma (loop ileostomy, end ileostomy, loop colostomy, or end colostomy) created for any indication. Two review authors independently selected eligible studies, extracted data, evaluated the methodological quality of the included studies, and conducted the analyses. The most clinically relevant outcomes were SSI, participant satisfaction, incisional hernia, and operative time. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, each with its corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). We used the GRADE approach to rate the certainty of the evidence. Nine RCTs involving 757 participants were eligible for inclusion. Eight studies recruited only adults (aged 18 years and older), and one study included people aged 12 years and older. The participants underwent elective reversal of either ileostomy (82%) or colostomy (18%). We considered all studies at high risk of performance and detection bias (lack of blinding) and four studies at unclear risk of selection bias related to random sequence generation. PSSC compared with LSC likely reduces the risk of SSI (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.29; I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 757 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The anticipated absolute risk of SSI is 52 per 1000 people who have PSSC and 243 per 1000 people who have LSC. The likelihood of being very satisfied or satisfied with stoma closure may be higher amongst people who have PSSC compared with people who have LSC (100% vs 89%; OR 20.11, 95% CI 1.09 to 369.88; 2 studies, 122 participants; low-certainty evidence). The results of the analysis suggest that PSSC compared with LSC may have little or no effect on the risk of incisional hernia (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.07 to 3.70; I2 = 49%; 4 studies, 297 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and operative time (MD -2.67 minutes, 95% CI -8.56 to 3.22; I2 = 65%; 6 studies, 460 participants; very low-certainty evidence). PSSC compared with LSC likely reduces the risk of SSI in people undergoing reversal of stoma. People who have PSSC may be more satisfied with the result compared with people who have LSC. There may be little or no difference between the skin closure techniques in terms of incisional hernia and operative time, though the evidence for these two outcomes is very uncertain.

Endoscopic Evaluation of the Ileal Pouch.

Structural and inflammatory adverse sequelae are common after restorative proctocolectomy and IPAA. On rare occasions, neoplasia can occur in patients with ileal pouches. Pouchoscopy plays a key role in the diagnosis, differential diagnosis, disease monitoring, assessment of treatment response, surveillance, and delivery of therapy. A systematic review of the literature was performed, and principles and techniques of pouchoscopy were described. PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases. Relevant articles on endoscopy in ileal pouches published between January 2000 and May 2023 were included based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Diagnostic, surveillance, and therapeutic endoscopy in ileal pouch disorders were included. Accurate characterization of the ileal pouch in healthy or diseased states. The main anatomic structures of a J- or S-pouch are the stoma closure site, prepouch ileum, inlet, tip of the "J," pouch body, anastomosis, cuff, and anal transition zone. Each anatomic location can be prone to the development of structural, inflammatory, or neoplastic disorders. For example, ulcers and strictures are common at the stoma closure site, inlet, and anastomosis. Leaks are commonly detected at the tip of the "J" and anastomosis. Characterization of the anastomotic distribution of inflammation is critical for the differential diagnosis of subtypes of pouchitis and other inflammatory disorders of the pouch. Neoplastic lesions, albeit rare, mainly occur at the cuff, anal transition zone, or anastomosis. This is a qualitative, not quantitative, review of mainly case series. Most structural, inflammatory, and neoplastic disorders can be reliably diagnosed with a careful pouchoscopy. The endoscopist and other clinicians taking care of pouch patients should be familiar with the anatomy of the ileal pouch and be able to recognize common abnormalities. See video from symposium.

Endoscopic therapy of stoma closure site strictures in ileal pouches is safe and effective.

Strictures are a common complication after ileal pouch surgery with the most common locations being at the anastomosis, pouch inlet, and stoma closure site. No previous literature has described endoscopic therapy of stoma site stricture. This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of endoscopic therapy in the treatment of stoma closure site strictures. Patients diagnosed with stoma closure site strictures following ileal pouch surgery who underwent endoscopic treatment at the Center for Colorectal Diseases, Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD), and Ileal Pouch between 2018 and 2022 were analysed. Primary outcomes (technical success and surgery-free survival) were compared between endoscopic balloon dilation (EBD) and stricturotomy and/or strictureplasty. A total of 30 consecutive eligible patients were analysed. Most patients were female (66.7%) and most patients were diagnosed with IBD (93.3%). Twenty patients (66.7%) had end-to-end anastomosis. A total of 52 procedures were performed, with EBD in 16 (30.8%) and stricturotomy and/or strictureplasty in 36 (69.2%). The mean stricture length was 1.7 ± 1.0 cm. Immediate technical success was achieved in 47 of 52 interventions (90.4%). During a mean follow-up of 12.7 ± 9.9 months, none of the patients underwent surgical intervention for the stricture. Fourteen (46.7%) required endoscopic re-intervention for their strictures with an interval between index and re-interventional pouchoscopy of 8.8 ± 6.3 months. Post-procedural complications were reported in 2 (6.7%) with bleeding and none with perforation. Upon follow-up, 20 (66.7%) patients reported improvement in their symptoms. EBD and endoscopic stricturotomy and/or strictureplasty are safe and effective in treating stoma closure site strictures in patients with ileal pouches, providing symptomatic relief in most patients as well as avoiding surgery.

A comparative study of stoma-related complications from diverting loop ileostomy or colostomy after colorectal surgery.

Even though minor, stoma-related complications significantly impact quality of life, they are often excluded from clinical analyses that compare short-term postoperative outcomes of loop ileostomy and loop colostomy. This study compares stoma-related complications between loop ileostomy and loop colostomy after rectal resection, including minor complications, and discusses the characteristics of diverting stoma types. A retrospective review was conducted in patients who underwent diverting stoma construction after rectal resection. Data on patient background and postoperative short-term outcomes, including stoma-related complications and morbidity after stoma closure, were collected and compared between loop ileostomy and loop colostomy groups. Morbidities of all severity grades were targeted for analysis. A total of 47 patients (27 loop ileostomy, 20 loop colostomy) underwent diverting stoma construction following rectal resection. Overall stoma-related complications, incidence of skin irritation, high-output stoma, and outlet obstruction were significantly higher in the loop ileostomy group but high-output stoma and outlet obstruction were absent in the loop colostomy group. Regarding morbidity after stoma closure, operation times and surgical site infections were significantly higher in the loop colostomy group while anastomotic leakage after diverting stoma closure occurred (2 cases; 15%) in the loop colostomy group but not the loop ileostomy group. Because stoma-related complications were significantly higher in the loop ileostomy group, and even these minor complications may impair QOL, early loop ileostomy closure is recommended. For loop colostomy, stoma-related morbidities are lower but post-closure leakage is a calculated risk.

Effectiveness of negative pressure wound therapy with instillation and dwelling after stoma closure: a retrospective and propensity score matching analysis

The use of temporary diverting stoma has become more common in low colorectal anastomosis to reduce anastomotic complications. Surgical site infection (SSI) at the stoma closure site has been one of the most frequent postoperative complications. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term outcomes between conventional primary suture closure and negative pressure wound therapy with instillation and dwelling (NPWTi-d) therapy following purse-string suturing, using propensity score matching analysis. We retrospectively evaluated the medical records of 107 patients who underwent stoma closure between January 2016 and October 2020. The primary outcome was the proportion of SSI. The secondary outcome was the day of postoperative length of stay. Propensity score matching with one-to-one match was performed for reducing treatment selection bias. Of a total of 107 patients, 67 patients had been treated with conventional primary closure and 40 with NPWTi-d therapy. The propensity score matching derived 37 pairs. The respective SSI proportions were 0% and 16.2% in the groups with NPWTi-d and primary closure (P = 0.025). The respective median days of postoperative hospital stay were 9.0 and 10.0 in the groups with NPWTi-d and primary closure (P = 0.453). NPWTi-d therapy with purse-string suturing was effective in reducing SSI after stoma closure.

Endoscopic Mini/Less Open Sublay Repair for Two Large Abdominal Incisional Hernias in a Midline Wound and Stoma Closure Site

Endoscopic Mini/Less Open Sublay Repair for Two Large Abdominal Incisional Hernias in a Midline Wound and Stoma Closure Site

Study of Purse-string Skin Closure Plus Negative-pressure Wound Therapy for Stoma Closure.

Although purse-string skin closure (PSC) is an effective method for stoma closure considering wound infection, the period for scarring will be prolonged. The aim of this study was to assess whether negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) can reduce the wound-scarring period for PSC after stoma closure. Patients who underwent stoma closure between January 2015 and August 2020 at our department were retrospectively assessed. Patients in the control group received only PSC, and patients in the NPWT group received both PSC and NPWT using the VAC® or PICO®. The primary endpoint of this study was the short-term reduction ratio (RR). The RR is calculated by the length, width, and depth of the wound of the stoma closure site. The secondary endpoints were scarring period and wound-related complications such as surgical site infection, dermatitis, bleeding, enterocutaneous fistula, and ventral hernia. Of the 53 patients included in this study, 21 had their stoma closed by PSC and 32 had their stoma closed by PSC plus NPWT. No significant differences were observed in patient characteristics or peri-operative states. The RR in the NPWT group was significantly smaller than that in the PSC group at 7 postoperative days (p=0.04). There was no difference in scarring period between the two groups (p=0.11).The rates of postoperative wound-related complications were similar in the two groups (control group: 4 (19%), NPWT group: 7 (21.9%), p=1.0). Our study suggests that PSC plus NPWT might be more effective for wound healing after stoma closure than only PSC.

Using Prophylactic Prolene Mesh to Reduce the Incidence of Incisional Hernia at the Site of Stoma Closure

Abstract Background Incisional hernias at stoma sites are not an infrequent problem, occurring in up to 30% of cases and it also varied in a range of studies from 0-48%. Objectives This is a prospective study to detect the feasibility of application of prolene mesh at the site of stoma closure in reducing the rate of post stomal incisional. INTRODUCTION Abdominal wall hernias are common and are a significant cause of morbidity. Stomas are commonly constructed following colorectal surgery to protect distal anastomosis or when sepsis prevents primary anastomosis. There is a risk of a wide range of morbidity following both stoma formation and stoma reversal (Chow et al., 2009). Incisional hernias at stoma sites are not an infrequent problem, occurring in up to 30% of cases and it also varied in a range of studies from 0-48% (Tilney et al., 2008). They occur over time and are generally under-reported, which may be due to the elderly nature of the population, the significant co-morbidities or early discharge from follow-up (Cingi et al., 2006). One in three patients may develop a hernia after stoma closure, and around half of hernias that are detected require repair.Risk of hernia is greater after colostomy closure than after ileostomy closure(Bhangu et al., 2012). A meta-analysis published in 2012 investigated the incidence of incisional hernia following closure of stoma, The overall mean incisional hernia rate following stoma closures was 7.4%. The authors reported a lower risk of hernia following reversal of ileostomy when compared to respectively (Bhangu et al., 2012). A further systematic review found a similar incidence for stoma site incisional hernias to be 8.3% (0–33.9%) (Nguyen et al., 2014). Two factors should be noted with regard to the incidence of stoma site hernia. Firstly, that the long-term risk is not known and secondly, that clinical examination alone is shown to have a lower detection rate of incisional hernia post stoma closure when compared to clinical imaging (Bhangu et al., 2012; Cingi et al., 2006). Therefore, studies focusing on only clinical examination may be underestimating the prevalence, as radiological detected herniae may become symptomatic over time and may be missed in studies with a short follow-up period. AIM OF THE WORK This is a prospective study to detect the feasibility of application of prolene mesh at the site of stoma closure in reducing the rate of post stomal incisional.

Negative pressure therapy for stoma closure sites-a nonrandomised case control study.

The PICO (Smith & Nephew, UK) dressing is a single use negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) system that is designed to be used for up to 7 days for closed wounds. We aimed to assess its use for stoma closure wounds. We conducted a retrospective analysis of stoma reversal wounds from April 2018 to June 2019. The wound was partially closed with an absorbable subcutaneous suture in a purse-string fashion. A 15 cm × 15 cm PICO dressing was applied directly over this wound. A control group who had received partial purse string closure with packing over the same time period was identified. Patients were contacted and information collected using a questionnaire. The primary outcome measure was the number of visits for dressing changes in the community. Further information was collected about length of stay, time to resolution of pain and return to work. On average, the patients with PICO dressings attended the community nurses 1.9 times. The patients in the PICO group stated it took 1-2 weeks to return to full work/daily activities. The control group averaged attending the community nurse 11.9 times, and 33% had not returned to work/daily activities in 1-2 weeks. Those who had a PICO dressing required fewer visits to the community nurse and the majority were able to return to work or resume usual activities within 1 to 2 weeks. This pilot study suggests that negative pressure dressings may be a useful aid for stoma closure site wounds.

Prophylactic biological mesh reinforcement versus standard closure of stoma site (ROCSS): a multicentre, randomised controlled trial

SummaryBackgroundClosure of an abdominal stoma, a common elective operation, is associated with frequent complications; one of the commonest and impactful is incisional hernia formation. We aimed to investigate whether biological mesh (collagen tissue matrix) can safely reduce the incidence of incisional hernias at the stoma closure site.MethodsIn this randomised controlled trial (ROCSS) done in 37 hospitals across three European countries (35 UK, one Denmark, one Netherlands), patients aged 18 years or older undergoing elective ileostomy or colostomy closure were randomly assigned using a computer-based algorithm in a 1:1 ratio to either biological mesh reinforcement or closure with sutures alone (control). Training in the novel technique was standardised across hospitals. Patients and outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was occurrence of clinically detectable hernia 2 years after randomisation (intention to treat). A sample size of 790 patients was required to identify a 40% reduction (25% to 15%), with 90% power (15% drop-out rate). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02238964.FindingsBetween Nov 28, 2012, and Nov 11, 2015, of 1286 screened patients, 790 were randomly assigned. 394 (50%) patients were randomly assigned to mesh closure and 396 (50%) to standard closure. In the mesh group, 373 (95%) of 394 patients successfully received mesh and in the control group, three patients received mesh. The clinically detectable hernia rate, the primary outcome, at 2 years was 12% (39 of 323) in the mesh group and 20% (64 of 327) in the control group (adjusted relative risk [RR] 0·62, 95% CI 0·43–0·90; p=0·012). In 455 patients for whom 1 year postoperative CT scans were available, there was a lower radiologically defined hernia rate in mesh versus control groups (20 [9%] of 229 vs 47 [21%] of 226, adjusted RR 0·42, 95% CI 0·26–0·69; p<0·001). There was also a reduction in symptomatic hernia (16%, 52 of 329 vs 19%, 64 of 331; adjusted relative risk 0·83, 0·60–1·16; p=0·29) and surgical reintervention (12%, 42 of 344 vs 16%, 54 of 346: adjusted relative risk 0·78, 0·54–1·13; p=0·19) at 2 years, but this result did not reach statistical significance. No significant differences were seen in wound infection rate, seroma rate, quality of life, pain scores, or serious adverse events.InterpretationReinforcement of the abdominal wall with a biological mesh at the time of stoma closure reduced clinically detectable incisional hernia within 24 months of surgery and with an acceptable safety profile. The results of this study support the use of biological mesh in stoma closure site reinforcement to reduce the early formation of incisional hernias.FundingNational Institute for Health Research Research for Patient Benefit and Allergan.

When is the best time for temporary stoma closure in laparoscopic sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer? A study of 259 consecutive patients.

There is no consensus regarding the best timing for temporary stoma closure after proctectomy for rectal cancer, especially if the patient requires adjuvant chemotherapy. This study aimed to assess whether the timing of stoma closure could influence postoperative morbidity. Patients with rectal cancer undergoing laparoscopic proctectomy with temporary stoma were included and divided into three groups according to the delay of stoma closure after proctectomy: ≤60 days (Group A), 61-90 days (Group B), and >90 days (Group C). From 2008 to 2013, 259 patients (146 men, median age 61 years) were divided into Groups A (n = 65), B (n = 115), and C (n = 79). At the time of stoma closure, seven (11%) patients received adjuvant chemotherapy in Group A versus 42 (37%) in Group B (p = 0.0002) and 24 (30%) in Group C (p = 0.004), and peristomal hernia was noted in four patients (6%) in Group A versus 14 (12%) in Group B and 21 (27%) in Group C (p < 0.0001). Although overall postoperative morbidity was similar between groups, anastomotic leakage (at the stoma closure site) was noted in one patient in Group A versus zero in Group B versus four in Group C (p = 0.03). Median hospital stay was 5 days in Group A versus 6 in Group B versus 6 in Group C (p = 0.004). Our results suggested that timing of temporary stoma closure can influence postoperative morbidity. Best results were obtained if stoma closure was performed before 90 days, even during adjuvant chemotherapy. There is no benefit in delaying stoma closure after completion of adjuvant chemotherapy.

The influence of laparoscopy on incisional hernia rates: a retrospective analysis of 1057 colorectal cancer resections.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of incisional hernia formation after laparoscopic and open surgery for colorectal cancer. A retrospective analysis was conducted of 1057 colorectal cancer resection cases (289 laparoscopic, 768 open) performed in a single national laparoscopic training centre between January 2006 and December 2011. Clinical notes and serial computed tomography scans were reviewed, with any incisional hernia including those at a surgical incision, port site, stoma and stoma closure site identified and the size of the defect measured. The overall incisional hernia rate was 14.8%. There was no significant difference between the open and laparoscopic groups (14.4% vs 15.9%, P = 0.566). Excluding stoma-related hernia, 10.7% of the open group developed a surgical wound hernia, and 11.1% of the laparoscopic group developed a hernia at a port site, extraction site or surgical midline incision. There was no statistical difference between the two groups (P = 0.853). The defects were smaller in the laparoscopic group (P < 0.005). There were significantly more parastomal hernias in the laparoscopic group (40%) than in the open group (12.7%, P < 0.001). The incidence of incisional hernia formation was similar after laparoscopic or open surgery for colorectal cancer. Parastomal hernia was more frequent after laparoscopic surgery.

Reinforcement of closure of stoma site using a biological mesh

Incisional hernia at the site of stoma closure is an under-reported problem, having been recently shown to occur in up to 30% of patients. This technical note describes a technique for the placement of intraperitoneal biological mesh to prophylactically reinforce stoma closure sites. Seven consecutive patients underwent mesh placement as part of a pilot study. Following closure of the stoma through a trephine incision, 6 anchoring sutures were placed between the peritoneum/deep fascia and the edges of the mesh circumferentially. The mesh was delivered into the peritoneal cavity and parachuted up against the abdominal wall, and the sutures tied. If closure was performed through a midline laparotomy, the anchoring sutures were placed in a similar fashion through the midline incision. The fascia above the mesh and soft tissues was then closed. The mesh was successfully placed in all 7 patients. Follow-up at 30days showed one superficial wound infection. An ultrasound scan of this patient revealed that the mesh was still in place and that the infection did not breach the fascia. No other early adverse events occurred. Prophylactic biological mesh reinforcement of stoma closure sites is technically feasible and safe in the short term. Longer-term results from a prospective randomised trial are needed, including clinical and radiological assessment for hernia rates, to establish what if any are the realisable benefits of this technique.

The effects on quality of life of a hernia at the site of stoma closure are unknown

Colorectal DiseaseVolume 15, Issue 1 p. 120-120 Correspondence The effects on quality of life of a hernia at the site of stoma closure are unknown A. Bhangu, A. Bhangu aneelbhangu@doctors.org.uk West Midlands Research Collaborative, Academic Department of Surgery, Room 29, 4th Floor, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TH UKSearch for more papers by this authorT. Pinkney, T. Pinkney West Midlands Research Collaborative, Academic Department of Surgery, Room 29, 4th Floor, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TH UKSearch for more papers by this authorD. Nepogodiev, D. Nepogodiev West Midlands Research Collaborative, Academic Department of Surgery, Room 29, 4th Floor, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TH UKSearch for more papers by this authorK. Futaba, K. Futaba West Midlands Research Collaborative, Academic Department of Surgery, Room 29, 4th Floor, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TH UKSearch for more papers by this authorD. Morton, D. Morton West Midlands Research Collaborative, Academic Department of Surgery, Room 29, 4th Floor, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TH UKSearch for more papers by this author A. Bhangu, A. Bhangu aneelbhangu@doctors.org.uk West Midlands Research Collaborative, Academic Department of Surgery, Room 29, 4th Floor, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TH UKSearch for more papers by this authorT. Pinkney, T. Pinkney West Midlands Research Collaborative, Academic Department of Surgery, Room 29, 4th Floor, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TH UKSearch for more papers by this authorD. Nepogodiev, D. Nepogodiev West Midlands Research Collaborative, Academic Department of Surgery, Room 29, 4th Floor, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TH UKSearch for more papers by this authorK. Futaba, K. Futaba West Midlands Research Collaborative, Academic Department of Surgery, Room 29, 4th Floor, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TH UKSearch for more papers by this authorD. Morton, D. Morton West Midlands Research Collaborative, Academic Department of Surgery, Room 29, 4th Floor, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TH UKSearch for more papers by this author First published: 18 June 2012 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-1318.2012.03129.xRead the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume15, Issue1January 2013Pages 120-120 RelatedInformation

Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis of the Incidence of Incisional Hernia at the Site of Stoma Closure

The incidence of incisional hernias at the site of stoma closure is surprisingly unclear. A review of the current literature was undertaken to determine how commonly this complication may occur and to assess the quality of evidence available. A systematic review was performed to identify studies reporting the incidence of incisional hernia after closure of an ileostomy or colostomy. Studies including children (<16 years old) and studies in which >10% of the total number were trauma patients were excluded. Thirty-four studies provided outcomes for 2,729 closed stomas. Median follow-up time was 36 months but was only described in seven studies. Closure of loop ileostomies was the most commonly performed procedure (48%). The overall reported hernia rate was 7%, but with a wide range among studies (0-48%). Most studies based their hernia rates on retrospective clinical findings only. A separate analysis of three studies that were specifically designed to assess for stoma site hernias found the clinical hernia rate to be 30% (28/93) and the combined clinical/radiological hernia rate to be 35% (33/93). From 11 studies reporting reoperation rates, 51% of patients who developed a hernia required a surgical repair (34/66). There was a lower risk of hernia following reversal of ileostomy versus colostomy (odds ratio 0.28, 95% confidence interval 0.12-0.65). One in three patients may develop a hernia after stoma closure, and around half of hernias that are detected require repair. Risk of hernia is greater after colostomy closure than after ileostomy closure. Clinical measures to reduce the development of these hernias warrant consideration.

A clinical and radiological assessment of incisional hernias following closure of temporary stomas

AimsThe rate of incisional hernia at stoma closure sites is unclear. This study aimed to describe this rate in patients with closed stomas who had definitive post-operative imaging of their abdominal wall. MethodsA retrospective review of patients who had undergone stoma reversal and had a CT or MRI scan of the abdomen ≥2 months following reversal was performed. A radiologist, blinded to the original radiological report and clinical results, reviewed all scans for abdominal wall herniation. This was correlated to documented clinical findings. ResultsFifty-nine patients were included: 49 loop ileostomy and 10 end colostomy reversals. CT scans were performed for 57 patients and MRI for two. The median time from closure to imaging was 10 months (range 3–32 months). The combined clinical and radiological hernia rate was 34% (20/59). Imaging alone produced a rate of 31% (18/59). The clinical rate of hernia detection was 14% (8/59). Using the rate of clinical herniation as the detection standard, imaging had a low positive predictive value (33%, 6/18) but a high negative predictive value (95%, 39/41). Four patients required surgical repair of their stoma site hernia (20%, 4/20). ConclusionsOne in three patients undergoing stoma closure developed an incisional hernia. One in five of those with a hernia underwent surgical repair. Definitive imaging may provide an early surrogate marker for late clinically relevant hernias. Consideration of methods to prevent stoma closure site hernias should be considered.

Wound Infection Following Stoma Takedown: Primary Skin Closure versus Subcuticular Purse‐string Suture

Stoma closure has been associated with a high rate of surgical site infection (SSI) and the ideal stoma-site skin closure technique is still debated. The aim of this study was to compare the rate of SSI following primary skin closure (PC) versus a skin-approximating, subcuticular purse-string closure (APS). All consecutive patients undergoing stoma closure between 2002 and 2007 by two surgeons at a single tertiary-care institution were retrospectively assessed. Patients who had a new stoma created at the same site or those without wound closure were excluded. The end point was SSI, determined according to current CDC guidelines, at the stoma closure site and/or the midline laparotomy incision. There were 61 patients in the PC group (surgeon A: 58 of 61) and 17 in the APS group (surgeon B: 16 of 17). The two groups were similar in baseline and intraoperative characteristics, except that patients in the PC group were more often diagnosed with benign disease (p=0.0156) and more often had a stapled anastomosis (p=0.002). The overall SSI rate was 14 of 78 (18%). All SSIs occurred in the PC group (14 of 61 vs. 0 of 17, p=0.03). Our study suggests that a skin-approximating closure with a subcuticular purse-string of the stoma site leads to less SSI than a primary closure. Randomized studies are needed to confirm our findings and assess additional end points such as healing time, cost, and patient satisfaction.