Jill H Tseng1, Rudy S Suidan1, Oliver Zivanovic2, Ginger J Gardner2, Yukio Sonoda2, Douglas A Levine2, Nadeem R Abu-Rustum2, William P Tew3, Dennis S Chi2, Kara Long Roche4. 1. Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 2. Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA. 3. Gynecologic Medical Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA. 4. Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: longrock@mskcc.org.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the use, as well as postoperative and long-term oncologic outcomes of diverting loop ileostomy (DI) during primary debulking surgery (PDS) for ovarian cancer. METHODS: Patients with stage II-IV ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma who underwent colon resection during PDS from 1/2005-1/2014 were identified. Demographic and clinical data were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 331 patients, 320 (97%) had stage III/IV disease and 278 (84%) had disease of high-grade serous histology. Forty-four (13%) underwent a DI. There were no significant differences in age, comorbidity index, smoking status, serum albumin, or attending surgeon between the DI and non-DI groups. Operative time (OR=1.21; 95% CI, 1.03-1.42; p=0.02) and length of rectosigmoid resection (OR=1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08; p=0.02) were predictors of DI on multivariable analysis. The overall anastomotic leak rate was 6%. A comparison of groups (DI vs non-DI) showed no significant differences in major complications (30% vs 23%; p=0.41), anastomotic leak rate (5% vs 7%; p=0.60), hospital length of stay (10 vs 9days; p=0.25), readmission rate (23% vs 17%; p=0.33), or interval to postoperative chemotherapy (41 vs 40days; p=0.20), respectively. Ileostomy reversal was successful in 89% of patients. Median follow-up was 52.6months. There were no differences in median progression-free (17.9 vs 18.6months; p=0.88) and overall survival (48.7 vs 63.8months; p=0.25) between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing PDS, those with longer operative time and greater length of rectosigmoid resection more commonly underwent DI. DI does not appear to compromise postoperative outcomes or long-term survival.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the use, as well as postoperative and long-term oncologic outcomes of diverting loop ileostomy (DI) during primary debulking surgery (PDS) for ovarian cancer. METHODS:Patients with stage II-IV ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma who underwent colon resection during PDS from 1/2005-1/2014 were identified. Demographic and clinical data were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 331 patients, 320 (97%) had stage III/IV disease and 278 (84%) had disease of high-grade serous histology. Forty-four (13%) underwent a DI. There were no significant differences in age, comorbidity index, smoking status, serum albumin, or attending surgeon between the DI and non-DI groups. Operative time (OR=1.21; 95% CI, 1.03-1.42; p=0.02) and length of rectosigmoid resection (OR=1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08; p=0.02) were predictors of DI on multivariable analysis. The overall anastomotic leak rate was 6%. A comparison of groups (DI vs non-DI) showed no significant differences in major complications (30% vs 23%; p=0.41), anastomotic leak rate (5% vs 7%; p=0.60), hospital length of stay (10 vs 9days; p=0.25), readmission rate (23% vs 17%; p=0.33), or interval to postoperative chemotherapy (41 vs 40days; p=0.20), respectively. Ileostomy reversal was successful in 89% of patients. Median follow-up was 52.6months. There were no differences in median progression-free (17.9 vs 18.6months; p=0.88) and overall survival (48.7 vs 63.8months; p=0.25) between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing PDS, those with longer operative time and greater length of rectosigmoid resection more commonly underwent DI. DI does not appear to compromise postoperative outcomes or long-term survival.
Authors: Eleftheria Kalogera; Sean C Dowdy; Andrea Mariani; Amy L Weaver; Giovanni Aletti; Jamie N Bakkum-Gamez; William A Cliby Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2013-04-08 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Lea A Moukarzel; Maureen E Byrne; Stephanie Leiva; Michelle Wu; Qin C Zhou; Alexia Iasonos; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Yukio Sonoda; Ginger Gardner; Mario M Leitao; Vance A Broach; Dennis S Chi; Kara Long Roche; Oliver Zivanovic Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2020-05-24 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Barbara Costantini; Virginia Vargiu; Francesco Santullo; Andrea Rosati; Matteo Bruno; Valerio Gallotta; Claudio Lodoli; Rossana Moroni; Fabio Pacelli; Giovanni Scambia; Anna Fagotti Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2022-04-18 Impact factor: 4.339
Authors: I Vogel; M Shinkwin; S L van der Storm; J Torkington; J A Cornish; P J Tanis; R Hompes; W A Bemelman Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2022-02-22 Impact factor: 3.699