Literature DB >> 24999456

Endless arguments over diversion stomas.

Seung Chul Heo1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Year:  2014        PMID: 24999456      PMCID: PMC4079803          DOI: 10.3393/ac.2014.30.3.103

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Coloproctol        ISSN: 2287-9714


× No keyword cloud information.
See Article on Page 118-121 Diversion stoma is an anastomosis protection method frequently used in colorectal surgery. Recent increase of sphincter-preserving surgery, preoperative radiation therapy and laparoscopic surgery has the demand for a diversion ileostomy rising. Accordingly, three have been consistent and diverse arguments about the advantages and the disadvantages of the various methods in creating and restoring the diversion stoma. The typical issues are the pros and the cons for an ileostomy and a colostomy. Evidence is not sufficient to determine which is superior, an ileostomy or a colostomy [1]. Although dehydration and renal failure are concerns with an ileostomy [2, 3], it has become the preferred procedure because of its several advantages: (1) Formation of stoma in the midline of the abdomen is not necessary; (2) Adhesion with the greater omentum is less common than transverse colostomy; (3) Ileostomy is usually safe and anatomically convenient after rectosigmoid colon surgery in which diversion stoma is most commonly needed. In addition, purse-string suture (PSS) as a technique for skin closure has been reported to reduce surgical site infection (SSI) when doing an ileostomy take down [4]. However, whether the anatomical closure of the abdominal wall was performed accurately must be considered if they would compare skin closure methods. In my personal experience, SSI is not a significant problem and the stitches can usually be removed after 1 week, in case of the ileostomy formed within the rectus abdominis muscle, if the peritoneum grown up within the rectus muscle is removed and if the anterior and posterior fascia are closed separately making the naked rectus muscle belly rejoined. Therefore, more evidence is necessary through further research whether PSS which is cosmetically superior but requires laborious dressing during the discharge of 2-3 weeks is worthwhile to replace the primary closure. Cheong et al. [5] mentioned that there were no differences between the fold-over technique and the resection anastomosis technique of ileostomy take down. The fold-over technique can be simpler and be more useful when the distal loop is short. However, it can increase the risk of contamination by bowel content, and the procedure may not be possible when the distal loop has been made narrow to prevent spill over. Many investigators have identified that a randomized, large-scale study is needed in order to reach a firm conclusion, but each surgical procedure has advantages and disadvantages. And controlling all of the factors in a randomized study will not be easy. Therefore, a realistic alternative would be to choose an appropriate method depending on the situation by knowing the arguments and by understanding the advantages and the disadvantages of each procedure in creating and restoring diversion stoma.
  5 in total

1.  Meta-analysis of temporary ileostomy versus colostomy for colorectal anastomoses.

Authors:  J Chen; D R Wang; J R Zhang; P Li; G Niu; Q Lu
Journal:  Acta Chir Belg       Date:  2013 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.090

2.  Readmission for dehydration or renal failure after ileostomy creation.

Authors:  Ian M Paquette; Patrick Solan; Janice F Rafferty; Martha A Ferguson; Bradley R Davis
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 4.585

3.  Feasibility and safety of a fold-over diverting ileostomy reversal after rectal cancer surgery: case-matched comparison to the resection technique.

Authors:  Jinock Cheong; Jeonghyun Kang; Im-Kyung Kim; Nam Kyu Kim; Seung-Kook Sohn; Kang Young Lee
Journal:  Ann Coloproctol       Date:  2014-06-23

4.  Morbidity of diverting ileostomy for rectal cancer: analysis of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program.

Authors:  Mehraneh D Jafari; Wissam J Halabi; Fariba Jafari; Vinh Q Nguyen; Michael J Stamos; Joseph C Carmichael; Steven D Mills; Alessio Pigazzi
Journal:  Am Surg       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 0.688

5.  Randomized controlled trial: comparison of two surgical techniques for closing the wound following ileostomy closure: purse string vs direct suture.

Authors:  N Dusch; D Goranova; F Herrle; M Niedergethmann; P Kienle
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 3.788

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.