Literature DB >> 21845418

Postoperative complications after closure of a diverting ileostoma--differences according to closure technique.

Kajsa Gustavsson1, Ulf Gunnarsson, Pia Jestin.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare three methods for closure of a diverting ileostoma according to development of postoperative small-bowel obstruction (SBO) and anastomotic leakage (AL).
METHODS: Complications arising within 30 days after closure of a defunctioning loop ileostomy in 351 patients during the period 1999-2006 were studied retrospectively by evaluation of case records. The techniques employed were: hand-sewn anastomosis without bowel resection, hand-sewn anastomosis with bowel resection and stapled anastomosis.
RESULTS: Of the 351 patients, 149 had a hand-sewn anastomosis without bowel resection (HS), 70 had a hand-sewn anastomosis with bowel resection (HSR) and 132 patients had a stapled anastomosis (S). The total number of SBOs was 44 patients (12.5%). In the two hand-sewn groups, 15.5% (34 patients) suffered postoperative SBO compared to 7.6% (10 patients) in the stapled group (p = 0.029). No difference in AL could be found between the groups, where the overall frequency was 2.8% (10 patients). Median hospital stay was 6 days in the HS group, 5 days in the HSR group and 4 days in the S group (p = 0.001).
CONCLUSION: In the present study, stapled anastomosis was associated with a lower frequency of postoperative SBO and a shorter hospital stay compared to sutured anastomosis (either with or without a short small-bowel resection) after closure of a diverting ileostoma.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21845418     DOI: 10.1007/s00384-011-1287-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis        ISSN: 0179-1958            Impact factor:   2.571


  15 in total

1.  Techniques and complications of ileostomy takedown.

Authors:  P T Phang; J M Hain; J J Perez-Ramirez; R D Madoff; B T Gemlo
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 2.565

Review 2.  Complications of construction and closure of temporary loop ileostomy.

Authors:  Orit Kaidar-Person; Benjamin Person; Steven D Wexner
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2005-09-06       Impact factor: 6.113

3.  Loop ileostomy closure after restorative proctocolectomy: outcome in 1,504 patients.

Authors:  Kutt-Sing Wong; Feza H Remzi; Emre Gorgun; Susana Arrigain; James M Church; Miriam Preen; Victor W Fazio
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 4.585

4.  Complications following closure of loop ileostomy.

Authors:  L J Mann; P J Stewart; R J Goodwin; P H Chapuis; E L Bokey
Journal:  Aust N Z J Surg       Date:  1991-07

5.  Closure of loop ileostomy.

Authors:  D P Berry; J H Scholefield
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 6.939

6.  A prospective audit of the complications of loop ileostomy construction and takedown.

Authors:  S A García-Botello; J García-Armengol; E García-Granero; A Espí; C Juan; F López-Mozos; S Lledó
Journal:  Dig Surg       Date:  2005-01-19       Impact factor: 2.588

7.  The outcome of loop ileostomy closure in 293 cases.

Authors:  H D van de Pavoordt; V W Fazio; D G Jagelman; I C Lavery; F L Weakley
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  1987-11       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  Stapled versus sutured closure of loop ileostomy: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  H Hasegawa; S Radley; D G Morton; M R Keighley
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 12.969

9.  Complications of loop ileostomy.

Authors:  S M Feinberg; R S McLeod; Z Cohen
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1987-01       Impact factor: 2.565

10.  Proctocolectomy and pelvic pouch--is a diverting stoma dangerous for the patient?

Authors:  U Gunnarsson; U Karlbom; M Docker; Y Raab; L Påhlman
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 3.788

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  Hand suture versus stapler for closure of loop ileostomy--a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Thorsten Löffler; Inga Rossion; Käthe Gooßen; Daniel Saure; Jürgen Weitz; Alexis Ulrich; Markus W Büchler; Markus K Diener
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2014-12-25       Impact factor: 3.445

2.  Incidence and predictors of postoperative ileus after loop ileostomy closure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Richard Garfinkle; Paul Savage; Marylise Boutros; Tara Landry; Pauline Reynier; Nancy Morin; Carol-Ann Vasilevsky; Kristian B Filion
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-04-17       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 3.  Considerations in Stoma Reversal.

Authors:  Karen L Sherman; Steven D Wexner
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2017-05-22

Review 4.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of published, randomized, controlled trials comparing suture anastomosis to stapled anastomosis for ileostomy closure.

Authors:  M S Sajid; L Craciunas; M K Baig; P Sains
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2013-05-17       Impact factor: 3.781

5.  Complications after Loop Ileostomy Closure: A Retrospective Analysis of 132 Patients.

Authors:  Eligijus Poskus; Edvinas Kildusis; Edgaras Smolskas; Marijus Ambrazevicius; Kestutis Strupas
Journal:  Viszeralmedizin       Date:  2014-08

6.  Modified Colon Leakage Score to Predict Anastomotic Leakage in Patients Who Underwent Left-Sided Colorectal Surgery.

Authors:  Seung Up Yang; Eun Jung Park; Seung Hyuk Baik; Kang Young Lee; Jeonghyun Kang
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2019-09-12       Impact factor: 4.241

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.