Anne K Danielsen1, Jennifer Park, Jens E Jansen, David Bock, Stefan Skullman, Anette Wedin, Adiela Correa Marinez, Eva Haglind, Eva Angenete, Jacob Rosenberg. 1. *Department of Gatroenterology, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Herlev Ringvej, Herlev, Denmark †Department of Surgery, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Scandinavian Surgical Outcomes Research Group, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Östra, Gothenburg, Sweden ‡Department of Surgery, Nordsjællands Hospital, Denmark §Department of Surgery, Skaraborgs Sjukhus Skovde, Sweden.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to study morbidity and mortality associated with early closure (8-13 days) of a temporary stoma compared with standard procedure (closure after > 12 weeks) after rectal resection for cancer. BACKGROUND: A temporary ileostomy may reduce the risk of pelvic sepsis after anastomotic dehiscence. However, the temporary ileostomy is afflicted with complications and requires a second surgical procedure (closure) with its own complications. Early closure of the temporary ileostomy could reduce complications for rectal cancer patients. METHODS: Early closure (8-13 days after stoma creation) of a temporary ileostomy was compared with late closure (>12 weeks) in a multicenter randomized controlled trial, EASY (www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01287637) including patients undergoing rectal resection for cancer. Patients with a temporary ileostomy without signs of postoperative complications were randomized to closure at 8 to 13 days or late closure (>12 weeks after index surgery). Clinical data were collected up to 12 months. Complications were registered according to the Clavien-Dindo Classification of Surgical Complications, and Comprehensive Complication Index was calculated. RESULTS: The trial included 127 patients in eight Danish and Swedish surgical departments, and 112 patients were available for analysis. The mean number of complications after index surgery up to 12 months follow up was significantly lower in the intervention group (1.2) compared with the control group (2.9), P < 0.0001. CONCLUSIONS: It is safe to close a temporary ileostomy 8 to 13 days after rectal resection and anastomosis for rectal cancer in selected patients without clinical or radiological signs of anastomotic leakage.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to study morbidity and mortality associated with early closure (8-13 days) of a temporary stoma compared with standard procedure (closure after > 12 weeks) after rectal resection for cancer. BACKGROUND: A temporary ileostomy may reduce the risk of pelvic sepsis after anastomotic dehiscence. However, the temporary ileostomy is afflicted with complications and requires a second surgical procedure (closure) with its own complications. Early closure of the temporary ileostomy could reduce complications for rectal cancerpatients. METHODS: Early closure (8-13 days after stoma creation) of a temporary ileostomy was compared with late closure (>12 weeks) in a multicenter randomized controlled trial, EASY (www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01287637) including patients undergoing rectal resection for cancer. Patients with a temporary ileostomy without signs of postoperative complications were randomized to closure at 8 to 13 days or late closure (>12 weeks after index surgery). Clinical data were collected up to 12 months. Complications were registered according to the Clavien-Dindo Classification of Surgical Complications, and Comprehensive Complication Index was calculated. RESULTS: The trial included 127 patients in eight Danish and Swedish surgical departments, and 112 patients were available for analysis. The mean number of complications after index surgery up to 12 months follow up was significantly lower in the intervention group (1.2) compared with the control group (2.9), P < 0.0001. CONCLUSIONS: It is safe to close a temporary ileostomy 8 to 13 days after rectal resection and anastomosis for rectal cancer in selected patients without clinical or radiological signs of anastomotic leakage.
Authors: A d'Alessandro; N Kari; A Alameh; N Pasquier; A Tarhini; B Vinson Bonnet; R Noun; E Chouillard Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2018-03-06 Impact factor: 3.781
Authors: Anna Serracant; Xavier Serra-Aracil; Laura Mora-López; Anna Pallisera-Lloveras; Sheila Serra-Pla; Alba Zárate-Pinedo; Salvador Navarro-Soto Journal: World J Surg Date: 2019-07 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Mauro Podda; Patricia Sylla; Gianluca Baiocchi; Michel Adamina; Vanni Agnoletti; Ferdinando Agresta; Luca Ansaloni; Alberto Arezzo; Nicola Avenia; Walter Biffl; Antonio Biondi; Simona Bui; Fabio C Campanile; Paolo Carcoforo; Claudia Commisso; Antonio Crucitti; Nicola De'Angelis; Gian Luigi De'Angelis; Massimo De Filippo; Belinda De Simone; Salomone Di Saverio; Giorgio Ercolani; Gustavo P Fraga; Francesco Gabrielli; Federica Gaiani; Mario Guerrieri; Angelo Guttadauro; Yoram Kluger; Ari K Leppaniemi; Andrea Loffredo; Tiziana Meschi; Ernest E Moore; Monica Ortenzi; Francesco Pata; Dario Parini; Adolfo Pisanu; Gilberto Poggioli; Andrea Polistena; Alessandro Puzziello; Fabio Rondelli; Massimo Sartelli; Neil Smart; Michael E Sugrue; Patricia Tejedor; Marco Vacante; Federico Coccolini; Justin Davies; Fausto Catena Journal: World J Emerg Surg Date: 2021-07-02 Impact factor: 5.469