Literature DB >> 1589991

Improved stabilization of conventional (Brooke) ileostomies with the stapler technique.

K W Ecker1, T Schmid, H S Xu, G Feifel.   

Abstract

The rate of functional complications of conventional (Brooke) ileostomy is high and endangers the complete postoperative rehabilitation of the patients. About half of these complications (retraction with/without stenosis, intermittent recession, and prolapse) occur within the classical prominent stoma and are caused by displacement of the serosa surfaces. We have stabilized conventional ileostomies in 39 patients with rows of staples placed paramesenterially and longitudinally. The ileum was everted in the classical way in the primary construction of ileostomies in 19 patients. On the other hand, in 11 patients the prominence of the stoma was established by pulling the ileum out through the previously plane-sutured stoma. In addition, 9 patients with ileostomies which were not primarily stabilized were corrected with the stapler technique to treat complications. With follow-up ranging from 0.2 years to 4.2 years, there have been no complications due to sliding of the nipple in these 39 patients. In contrast, there were complications in 37% of 38 patients with non-stabilized ileostomies with follow-up to the second postoperative year. It was more easily reproducible, more exact, and less traumatic to create the stoma prominence by pulling the intestine out from a primarily plane stoma than with classical eversion. With use of the stapler in repairing complications, local ileostomy constructions were no longer required in every second patient. Consequently, a Brooke ileostomy can be constructed more easily with the stapler technique, ensuring long-term function or restoration of function.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1589991     DOI: 10.1007/bf02104461

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Surg        ISSN: 0364-2313            Impact factor:   3.352


  12 in total

1.  Complications and problems associated with the management of ulcerative colitis.

Authors:  J A BARGEN
Journal:  Gastroenterologia       Date:  1956

2.  Indications and outcome of reoperation for ileostomy complications in inflammatory bowel disease.

Authors:  R M Weaver; J Alexander-Williams; M R Keighley
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  1988-03       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  The management of an ileostomy, including its complications.

Authors:  B N BROOKE
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1952-07-19       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Long-term ileostomy complications in patients with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease.

Authors:  A Carlstedt; S Fasth; L Hultén; S Nordgren; I Palselius
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  1987-02       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Management of conventional ileostomies.

Authors:  J H Pemberton
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  1988-04       Impact factor: 3.352

6.  Life with a conventional heostomy.

Authors:  J Boné; F H Sorensen
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1974 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 4.585

7.  The hazards of a permanent ileostomy.

Authors:  R A Jacob; W G Pace; N R Thomford
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  1969-11

8.  Ileostomy and excisional surgery for chronic inflammatory disease of the colon: a survey of one hospital region.

Authors:  J K Ritchie
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1971-07       Impact factor: 23.059

9.  Ileostomy in ulcerative colitis. A questionnaire study of 1,803 patients.

Authors:  D A Morowitz; J B Kirsner
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1981-03       Impact factor: 2.565

Review 10.  Alternatives to ileostomy after colectomy for inflammatory bowel disease.

Authors:  B M Taylor; R W Beart
Journal:  Annu Rev Med       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 13.739

View more
  1 in total

1.  Peritonitis following stapling of a flush ileostomy.

Authors:  B Perakath; M R B Keighley
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2010-04-01       Impact factor: 3.781

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.