Benjamin Menahem1,2,3, Jean Lubrano4,5,6, Antoine Vallois4,6, Arnaud Alves4,6. 1. Department of Digestive Surgery, University Hospital of Caen, Avenue de la Côte de Nacre, 14033, Caen Cedex, France. menahem-b@chu-caen.fr. 2. UMR INSERM U1086 Cancers et prevention, Centre François Baclesse, avenue du Général Harris, 14045, Caen Cedex, France. menahem-b@chu-caen.fr. 3. UFR de Médecine, 2 rue des Rochambelles, 14033, Caen Cedex, France. menahem-b@chu-caen.fr. 4. Department of Digestive Surgery, University Hospital of Caen, Avenue de la Côte de Nacre, 14033, Caen Cedex, France. 5. UMR INSERM U1086 Cancers et prevention, Centre François Baclesse, avenue du Général Harris, 14045, Caen Cedex, France. 6. UFR de Médecine, 2 rue des Rochambelles, 14033, Caen Cedex, France.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To perform a meta-analysis to answer the question, whether early closure (EC) of defunctioning loop ileostomy may be beneficial for patient as compared with late closure (LC) without exceeding the risk of surgical-related morbidity. DESIGN: Medline and the Cochrane Trials Register were searched for trials published up to November 2016 comparing EC (defined as ≤14 days from the index operation in which the ileostomy was performed) versus LC for stoma closure after rectal surgery. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.0. Inclusion criteria MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall morbidity rate, anastomotic leakage rate, and wound infection rate within 90 days after elective surgery. RESULTS: Six studies were included and analyzed, yielding 570 patients (252 in EC group and 318 in LC). Meta-analysis showed no significant difference in the overall morbidity rate between the EC and LC groups (OR 0.63; 95% CI, 0.22-1.78; P = 0.38). Despite a significant higher wound infection rate of stoma site (OR 3.83; 95% CI 2.14-6.86; P < 0.00001), meta-analysis showed no significant difference in the anastomotic leakage rate between the EC and LC groups (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.22-1.78; P = 0.38). Moreover, both stoma-related complications (OR 0.46; 95% CI 0.24-0.86; P = 0.02) and small bowel obstruction rates (OR 0.11; 95% CI 0.06-0.20; P < 0.00001) were significantly lower in the EC group than in the LC group, respectively. LIMITATIONS: Heterogeneity of the studies CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggests that EC of a defunctioning loop ileostomy is effective and safe in careful selected patients without increasing overall postoperative complications. This promising strategy should be proposed in patients in order to reduce stoma-related complications.
OBJECTIVE: To perform a meta-analysis to answer the question, whether early closure (EC) of defunctioning loop ileostomy may be beneficial for patient as compared with late closure (LC) without exceeding the risk of surgical-related morbidity. DESIGN: Medline and the Cochrane Trials Register were searched for trials published up to November 2016 comparing EC (defined as ≤14 days from the index operation in which the ileostomy was performed) versus LC for stoma closure after rectal surgery. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.0. Inclusion criteria MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall morbidity rate, anastomotic leakage rate, and wound infection rate within 90 days after elective surgery. RESULTS: Six studies were included and analyzed, yielding 570 patients (252 in EC group and 318 in LC). Meta-analysis showed no significant difference in the overall morbidity rate between the EC and LC groups (OR 0.63; 95% CI, 0.22-1.78; P = 0.38). Despite a significant higher wound infection rate of stoma site (OR 3.83; 95% CI 2.14-6.86; P < 0.00001), meta-analysis showed no significant difference in the anastomotic leakage rate between the EC and LC groups (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.22-1.78; P = 0.38). Moreover, both stoma-related complications (OR 0.46; 95% CI 0.24-0.86; P = 0.02) and small bowel obstruction rates (OR 0.11; 95% CI 0.06-0.20; P < 0.00001) were significantly lower in the EC group than in the LC group, respectively. LIMITATIONS: Heterogeneity of the studies CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggests that EC of a defunctioning loop ileostomy is effective and safe in careful selected patients without increasing overall postoperative complications. This promising strategy should be proposed in patients in order to reduce stoma-related complications.
Authors: Anne K Danielsen; Jennifer Park; Jens E Jansen; David Bock; Stefan Skullman; Anette Wedin; Adiela Correa Marinez; Eva Haglind; Eva Angenete; Jacob Rosenberg Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: K C M J Peeters; R A E M Tollenaar; C A M Marijnen; E Klein Kranenbarg; W H Steup; T Wiggers; H J Rutten; C J H van de Velde Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 6.939
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: 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: Fateme Rajabiyazdi; Marylise Boutros; Natasha G Caminsky; Jeongyoon Moon; Nancy Morin; Karim Alavi; Rebecca C Auer; Liliana G Bordeianou; Sami A Chadi; Sébastien Drolet; Amandeep Ghuman; Alexander Sender Liberman; Tony MacLean; Ian M Paquette; Jason Park; Sunil Patel; Scott R Steele; Patricia Sylla; Steven D Wexner; Carol-Ann Vasilevsky Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2022-10-04 Impact factor: 3.453
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