Predictors of hernia after loop ileostomy closure: a single-center retrospective review

Predictors of complications after prophylactic ileostomy reversal for rectal cancer: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have analyzed the risk factors for complications after ileostomy reversal for rectal cancer (RC), but there were significant differences in the reported risk factors for complications after stoma reversal. No studies have analyzed the risk factors for stoma-related complications and overall postoperative complications separately.

AIM

To analyze the risk factors for overall complications and stoma-related complications after ileostomy reversal for patients with RC.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of 439 patients who underwent ileostomy reversal at a clinical center and were followed up between September 2012 and September 2022. Continuous variables are expressed as the mean ± SD and were analyzed with independent-sample t tests, while frequency variables are expressed as n (%), and the χ2 test or Fisher's exact test was used. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify predictors of overall complications and stoma-related complications.

RESULTS

The overall complication rate after ileostomy reversal was 11.4%. Patients with lower preoperative albumin concentration (P < 0.01), greater blood loss (P = 0.017), and longer operative times (P < 0.01) were more likely to experience postoperative complications. The incidence of stoma-related complications was 6.4%. Analysis of the study showed that a higher body mass index (BMI) (P < 0.01), preoperative comorbid hypertension (P = 0.049), time from primary surgery to ileostomy reversal (P < 0.01) and longer operation time (P = 0.010) were more likely to result in stoma-related complications postoperatively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that a lower preoperative albumin level (P < 0.01, OR = 0.888, 95%CI: 0.828-0.958) was an independent risk factor for overall complications. Moreover, multivariate analysis revealed that BMI (P < 0.01, OR = 1.176, 95%CI: 1.041-1.330) and time from primary surgery to ileostomy reversal (P < 0.01, OR = 1.140, 95%CI: 1.038-1.252) were independent risk factors for stoma-related complications after stoma reversal.

CONCLUSION

The preoperative albumin level was a predictor of overall complications. Preoperative BMI and the time from primary surgery to ileostomy reversal were predictors of stoma-related complications.

Risk factors associated to incisional hernia in stoma site after stoma closure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aims to identify which risk factors are associated with the appearance of an incisional hernia in a stoma site after its closure. This in the sake of identifying which patients would benefit from a preventative intervention and thus start implementing a cost-effective protocol for prophylactic mesh placement in high-risk patients.

METHODS

A systematic review of PubMed, Cochrane library, and ScienceDirect was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies reporting incidence, risk factors, and follow-up time for appearance of incisional hernia after stoma site closure were included. A fixed-effects and random effects models were used to calculate odds ratios' estimates and standardized mean values with their respective grouped 95% confidence interval. This to evaluate the association between possible risk factors and the appearance of incisional hernia after stoma site closure.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies totaling 2899 patients were included. Incidence proportion between included studies was of 16.76% (CI95% 12.82; 21.62). Out of the evaluated factors higher BMI (p = 0.0001), presence of parastomal hernia (p = 0.0023), colostomy (p = 0,001), and end stoma (p = 0.0405) were associated with the appearance of incisional hernia in stoma site after stoma closure, while malignant disease (p = 0.0084) and rectum anterior resection (p = 0.0011) were found to be protective factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic mesh placement should be considered as an effective preventative intervention in high-risk patients (obese patients, patients with parastomal hernia, colostomy, and end stoma patients) with the goal of reducing incisional hernia rates in stoma site after closure while remaining cost-effective.

An evidence map and synthesis review with meta-analysis on the risk of incisional hernia in colorectal surgery with standard closure

PURPOSE

To assess the incidence of incisional hernia (IH) across various type of incisions in colorectal surgery (CS) creating a map of evidence to define research trends, gaps and areas of future interest.

METHODS

Systematic review of PubMed and Scopus from 2010 onwards. Studies included both open (OS) and laparoscopic (LS). The primary outcome was incidence of IH 12 months after index procedure, secondary outcomes were the study features and their influence on reported proportion of IH. Random effects models were used to calculate pooled proportions. Meta-regression models were performed to explore heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Ninetyone studies were included reporting 6473 IH. The pooled proportions of IH for OS were 0.35 (95% CI 0.27-0.44) I² 0% in midline laparotomies and 0.02 (95% CI 0.00-0.07), I² 52% for off-midline. In case of LS the pooled proportion of IH for midline extraction sites were 0.10 (95% CI 0.07-0.16), I² 58% and 0.04 (95% CI 0.03-0.06), I² 86% in case of off-midline. In Port-site IH was 0.02 (95% CI 0.01-0.04), I² 82%, and for single incision surgery (SILS) of 0.06-95% CI 0.02-0.15, I² 81%. In case of stoma reversal sites was 0.20 (95% CI 0.16-0.24).

CONCLUSION

Midline laparotomies and stoma reversal sites are at high risk for IH and should be considered in research of preventive strategies of closure. After laparoscopic approach IH happens mainly by extraction sites incisions specially midline and also represent an important area of analysis.

Protective Loop Ileostomy Closure Techniques: Comparison of Three Different Surgical Techniques

Objective

Anastomotic leaks can be very dangerous in colorectal cancers. Protective loop ileostomy is life-saving in low anterior rectal tumors to prevent pelvic sepsis. The aim of this study is to compare early morbidities for stapled, handsewn closure (end to end) or handsewn closure (anterior wall only) of loop ileostomy, and to further assess efficacy and safety for each technique. 

Methods

Patients who underwent loop ileostomy closure from January 2014 and December 2019 retrospectively were analyzed. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the effect of the potential risk factors on the rate of each complication. The patients were divided into three groups based on the anastomoses. The first group included patients who had handsewn anterior closure; the second group included patients who had side-to-side anastomosis using linear stapler, and the third group included patients who had end-to-end handsewn anastomosis. The primary endpoint of the study was the postoperative 30 days. IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), version 22.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) was used for statistical analysis.

Results

A total of 198 patients underwent reversal. There was a statistical difference between the handsewn anterior wall and stapler anastomosis in terms of postoperative ileus and wound infection. The handsewn group was superior to anastomosis with stapler (p: 0.027 and p: 0.042, respectively). A statistical difference was found between handsewn anterior wall closure and handsewn end-to-end anastomosis in terms of postoperative ileus, wound infection, and postoperative hospital stay (p: 0.013, p: 0.037, and p: 0.046, respectively). When stapled anastomosis and handsewn end-to-end anastomosis techniques were compared, a statistical difference was found in terms of postoperative ileus risk (p: 0.043), but no significant difference was found in terms of postoperative wound infection and hospital stay.

Conclusions

There was no significant difference in the rate of anastomotic leakage between the handsewn and stapled techniques. The rate of small-bowel obstruction was higher in the handsewn group. As a result, in this study, it was revealed that the handsewn anterior wall closure technique is the best among all ileostomy closure techniques.