Vivian Chi Mei Man1, Hok Kwok Choi1, Wai Lun Law2, Dominic Chi Chung Foo1. 1. Division of Colorectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Queen Mary Hospital, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong. 2. Division of Colorectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Queen Mary Hospital, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong. lawwl@hkucc.hku.hk.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Low anterior resection is commonly performed for carcinoma of the distal rectum. Diverting ileostomy has been used to decrease the septic consequence of anastomotic leakage and to reduce the re-operation rate. Nevertheless, subsequent closure of ileostomy can be associated with considerable morbidities. This study aimed to evaluate the morbidities after closure of ileostomy and to identify possible risk factors associated with the morbidities. METHODS: Data of patients who underwent closure of ileostomy, after a previous low anterior resection and defunctioning ileostomy for rectal cancer, was reviewed retrospectively. Patient's demographics, coexisting morbidities, operative details, and post-operative outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: From January 2000 to September 2012, 213 patients who underwent ileostomy closure were included. Thirty-five patients developed post-operative complications. The overall complication rate was 16.4 %. The majority of complications could be managed by conservative treatment. Only one patient required re-operation due to intestinal obstruction. There was no 30-day mortality. Age >80 years was an independent risk factor for post-operative complications. Age >80 years was also an independent risk factor for developing urinary retention (p = 0.001) and prolonged ileus (p = 0.02). Closure of ileostomy with hand-sewn techniques showed a higher incidence of post-operative intestinal obstruction (p = 0.049) compared to closure using stapler. CONCLUSION: Closure of ileostomy following low anterior resection is associated with acceptable morbidities. Elderly patients tend to have a more complicated post-operative course and require more medical attention. The use of stapler is the preferred method for ileostomy closure as it is associated with less post-operative intestinal obstruction.
PURPOSE: Low anterior resection is commonly performed for carcinoma of the distal rectum. Diverting ileostomy has been used to decrease the septic consequence of anastomotic leakage and to reduce the re-operation rate. Nevertheless, subsequent closure of ileostomy can be associated with considerable morbidities. This study aimed to evaluate the morbidities after closure of ileostomy and to identify possible risk factors associated with the morbidities. METHODS: Data of patients who underwent closure of ileostomy, after a previous low anterior resection and defunctioning ileostomy for rectal cancer, was reviewed retrospectively. Patient's demographics, coexisting morbidities, operative details, and post-operative outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: From January 2000 to September 2012, 213 patients who underwent ileostomy closure were included. Thirty-five patients developed post-operative complications. The overall complication rate was 16.4 %. The majority of complications could be managed by conservative treatment. Only one patient required re-operation due to intestinal obstruction. There was no 30-day mortality. Age >80 years was an independent risk factor for post-operative complications. Age >80 years was also an independent risk factor for developing urinary retention (p = 0.001) and prolonged ileus (p = 0.02). Closure of ileostomy with hand-sewn techniques showed a higher incidence of post-operative intestinal obstruction (p = 0.049) compared to closure using stapler. CONCLUSION: Closure of ileostomy following low anterior resection is associated with acceptable morbidities. Elderly patients tend to have a more complicated post-operative course and require more medical attention. The use of stapler is the preferred method for ileostomy closure as it is associated with less post-operative intestinal obstruction.
Authors: J Ocaña; J C García-Pérez; M Labalde-Martínez; G Rodríguez-Velasco; I Moreno; A Vivas; I Clemente-Esteban; A Ballestero; P Abadía; E Ferrero; J M Fernández-Cebrián; J Die Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2022-05-21 Impact factor: 3.699
Authors: C La Raja; C Foppa; A Maroli; C Kontovounisios; N Ben David; M Carvello; A Spinelli Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2022-03-28 Impact factor: 3.699
Authors: Anuradha R Bhama; Farwa Batool; Stacey D Collins; Jane Ferraro; Robert K Cleary Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2017-10-02 Impact factor: 3.452