Literature DB >> 20464746

Covering ileo- or colostomy in anterior resection for rectal carcinoma.

Alessandro Montedori1, Roberto Cirocchi, Eriberto Farinella, Francesco Sciannameo, Iosief Abraha.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leakage is one of the most important complications that occur after surgical low anterior resection for rectal cancer. There are indications that anastomotic leak is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, frequent re-operation or radiological drainage, and prolonged hospital stay. Defunctioning stoma can be useful for patients undergoing a rectal surgery.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy of protective defunctioning stoma in low anterior resection for rectal carcinoma. SEARCH STRATEGY: Searches were conducted November 2009. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (from 1966) and EMBASE (from 1980). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised clinical trials comparing the use of stoma versus "no stoma" in patients that received low anterior resection for rectal cancer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Six randomised controlled trials were identified and included in this review. Five trials were fully published in peer-reviewed journals. An attempt was made to obtain further information from the authors of the trial that was available only in an abstract form. The studies analysed the following outcomes: clinical anastomotic leakage, urgent reoperation, mortality and length of postoperative hospital stay. Review authors extracted the data independently, the risk ratios (RR) were estimated for the dichotomous outcomes and standardised mean difference were estimated for the continuous outcome MAIN
RESULTS: All the trials reported results for clinical anastomotic leakage, urgent reoperation and mortality. Only two trials reported the results for length of postoperative hospital stay.With respect to controls, use of covering stoma was significantly associated with less anastomotic leakage (RR 0.33; 95%CI [0.21, 0.53]) and less urgent reoperation (RR 0.23; 95%CI [0.12, 0.42] ). There was no significant difference in terms of mortality (RR 0.58; 95%CI [0.14, 2.33]). There was no evidence of statistical heterogeneity in any of the comparisons. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: Covering stoma seems to be useful to prevent anastomotic leakage and urgent re-operations in patients receiving low anterior resection for rectal cancer. However, covering stoma does not seems to offer advantage in term of 30 days or long term mortality.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20464746     DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006878.pub2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  58 in total

1.  Meta-analysis of elective surgical complications related to defunctioning loop ileostomy compared with loop colostomy after low anterior resection for rectal carcinoma.

Authors:  Hong Zhi Geng; Dilidan Nasier; Bing Liu; Hua Gao; Yi Ke Xu
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2015-08-14       Impact factor: 1.891

2.  Morbidity related to defunctioning loop ileostomy in low anterior resection.

Authors:  Oscar Åkesson; Ingvar Syk; Gudrun Lindmark; Pamela Buchwald
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2012-05-11       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 3.  Emerging Trends in the Etiology, Prevention, and Treatment of Gastrointestinal Anastomotic Leakage.

Authors:  Sami A Chadi; Abe Fingerhut; Mariana Berho; Steven R DeMeester; James W Fleshman; Neil H Hyman; David A Margolin; Joseph E Martz; Elisabeth C McLemore; Daniela Molena; Martin I Newman; Janice F Rafferty; Bashar Safar; Anthony J Senagore; Oded Zmora; Steven D Wexner
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2016-09-16       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Ghost ileostomy after anterior resection for rectal cancer: a preliminary experience.

Authors:  Nino Gullà; Stefano Trastulli; Carlo Boselli; Roberto Cirocchi; Davide Cavaliere; Giorgio Maria Verdecchia; Umberto Morelli; Daniele Gentile; Emilio Eugeni; Daniela Caracappa; Chiara Listorti; Francesco Sciannameo; Giuseppe Noya
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2011-04-09       Impact factor: 3.445

5.  Enhanced recovery after surgery programs hasten recovery after colorectal resections.

Authors:  Ned Abraham; Sinan Albayati
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2011-01-27

6.  Does ghost ileostomy have a role in the laparoscopic rectal surgery era? A randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Francesco Saverio Mari; Tatiana Di Cesare; Luciano Novi; Marcello Gasparrini; Giammauro Berardi; Giovanni Guglielmo Laracca; Andrea Liverani; Antonio Brescia
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-12-05       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 7.  Diverting ileostomy in colorectal surgery: when is it necessary?

Authors:  Mark H Hanna; Alessio Vinci; Alessio Pigazzi
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2015-01-30       Impact factor: 3.445

8.  Skin bridge loop ileostomy: technical details.

Authors:  U Pace; D Rega; D Scala; L Montesarchio; P Delrio
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2014-04-10       Impact factor: 3.781

9.  Morbidity and costs of diverting ileostomy in transanal total mesorectal excision with primary anastomosis for rectal cancer.

Authors:  J C Hol; F Bakker; N T van Heek; G M de Jong; F M Kruyt; C Sietses
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2021-07-22       Impact factor: 3.781

10.  Gastrointestinal ostomies and sexual outcomes: a comparison of colorectal cancer patients by ostomy status.

Authors:  J B Reese; P H Finan; J A Haythornthwaite; M Kadan; K R Regan; J M Herman; J Efron; L A Diaz; N S Azad
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2013-10-05       Impact factor: 3.603

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.