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

Introduction Defunctioning loop ileostomy (LI) and loop colostomy (LC) are used widely to protect/treat anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery. However, it is not known which surgical approach has a lower prevalence of surgical complications after low anterior resection for rectal carcinoma (LARRC). Methods We conducted a literature search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Ovid, Embase and Cochrane databases to identify studies published between 1966 and 2013 focusing on elective surgical complications related to defunctioning LI and LC undertaken to protect a distal rectal anastomosis after LARRC. Results Five studies (two randomized controlled trials, one prospective non-randomized trial, and two retrospective trials) satisfied the inclusion criteria. Outcomes of 1,025 patients (652 LI and 373 LC) were analyzed. After the construction of a LI or LC, there was a significantly lower prevalence of sepsis (p=0.04), prolapse (p=0.03), and parastomal hernia (p=0.02) in LI patients than in LC patients. Also, the prevalence of overall complications was significantly lower in those who received LIs compared with those who received LCs (p<0.0001). After closure of defunctioning loops, there were significantly fewer wound infections (p=0.006) and incisional hernias (p=0.007) in LI patients than in LC patients, but there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of overall complications. Conclusions The results of this meta-analysis show that a defunctioning LI may be superior to LC with respect to a lower prevalence of surgical complications after LARRC.