S Farag1, S Rehman1, P Sains1, M K Baig2, M S Sajid1. 1. Department of General, Endoscopic and Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery, Brighton and Sussex University Hospital NHS Trust, Brighton, UK. 2. Department of General, Endoscopic and Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery, Western Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust, Worthing Hospital, Worthing, UK.
Abstract
AIMS: The objective of this study was to evaluate the surgical outcomes and feasibility of early loop defunctioning ileostomy closure, within 2 weeks of index surgery, in patients undergoing distal colorectal resection. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature on published randomized controlled trials reporting the feasibility and outcomes on early vs delayed closure of loop defunctioning ileostomy in patients undergoing distal colorectal resection using the principles of meta-analysis on RevMan 5.4 statistical software was undertaken. RESULTS: Four randomized, controlled trials on 446 patients evaluating the feasibility and outcomes on early vs delayed closure of loop defunctioning ileostomy in patients undergoing low colorectal resection were analysed. There were 176 patients in the early closure group and 270 patients in the delayed closure group. The risk of anastomotic leak [risk ratio 0.37 (CI: 0.10-1.42), P = 0.15], anastomotic stenosis [risk ratio 4.79 (CI: 0.23-98.47), P = 0.31] and postoperative complications [risk ratio 0.75 (CI: 0.48-1.16), P = 0.19] was similar in both groups. In addition, there was no significant difference between the groups with regard to the duration of operation [standardized mean difference -0.49 (CI: -01.09, -0.12), P = 0.12] and length of hospitalization [standardized mean difference -0.04 (CI: -0.25, -0.18), P = 0.75]. CONCLUSIONS: Early closure of loop defunctioning ileostomy in patients undergoing distal colorectal resection is feasible with comparable outcomes to delayed closure. Colorectal Disease
AIMS: The objective of this study was to evaluate the surgical outcomes and feasibility of early loop defunctioning ileostomy closure, within 2 weeks of index surgery, in patients undergoing distal colorectal resection. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature on published randomized controlled trials reporting the feasibility and outcomes on early vs delayed closure of loop defunctioning ileostomy in patients undergoing distal colorectal resection using the principles of meta-analysis on RevMan 5.4 statistical software was undertaken. RESULTS: Four randomized, controlled trials on 446 patients evaluating the feasibility and outcomes on early vs delayed closure of loop defunctioning ileostomy in patients undergoing low colorectal resection were analysed. There were 176 patients in the early closure group and 270 patients in the delayed closure group. The risk of anastomotic leak [risk ratio 0.37 (CI: 0.10-1.42), P = 0.15], anastomotic stenosis [risk ratio 4.79 (CI: 0.23-98.47), P = 0.31] and postoperative complications [risk ratio 0.75 (CI: 0.48-1.16), P = 0.19] was similar in both groups. In addition, there was no significant difference between the groups with regard to the duration of operation [standardized mean difference -0.49 (CI: -01.09, -0.12), P = 0.12] and length of hospitalization [standardized mean difference -0.04 (CI: -0.25, -0.18), P = 0.75]. CONCLUSIONS: Early closure of loop defunctioning ileostomy in patients undergoing distal colorectal resection is feasible with comparable outcomes to delayed closure. Colorectal Disease
Authors: F Ferrara; D Parini; A Bondurri; M Veltri; M Barbierato; F Pata; F Cattaneo; A Tafuri; C Forni; G Roveron; G Rizzo Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2019-10-12 Impact factor: 3.781
Authors: R Hompes; J A Cornish; I Vogel; N Reeves; P J Tanis; W A Bemelman; J Torkington Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2021-04-01 Impact factor: 3.781
Authors: Ángela Rodríguez-Padilla; Germán Morales-Martín; Rocío Pérez-Quintero; Ricardo Rada-Morgades; Juan Gómez-Salgado; Carlos Ruiz-Frutos Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2021-06-25
Authors: Michał M Nowakowski; Mateusz Rubinkiewicz; Natalia Gajewska; Grzegorz Torbicz; Michał Wysocki; Piotr Małczak; Piotr Major; Mateusz Wierdak; Andrzej Budzyński; Michał Pędziwiatr Journal: Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne Date: 2018-07-03 Impact factor: 1.195
Authors: Mateusz Rubinkiewicz; Jan Witowski; Michał Wysocki; Magdalena Pisarska; Stanisław Kłęk; Andrzej Budzyński; Michał Pędziwiatr Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2019-10-01 Impact factor: 4.241