Does the timing of loop ileostomy closure affect outcome: A case-matched study

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.

Clinical Outcomes of Ileostomy Closure during versus after Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients with Rectal Cancer

Background

Protective ileostomy can effectively prevent severe anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery; however, the optimal timing for ileostomy closure during adjuvant chemotherapy remains unclear. This study aimed to explore the safety and long-term outcomes of early ileostomy closure during adjuvant chemotherapy.

Method

Patients who underwent laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery combined with protective ileostomy and adjuvant chemotherapy between April 2017 and April 2021 were retrospectively evaluated. Patients were divided into an early closure group during chemotherapy (group A) and a late closure group after chemotherapy (group B).

Results

A total of 215 patients were included in this study, with 115 in group A and 100 in group B. There were no significant differences in demographic and clinical characteristics between the two groups. In group A, durations of stoma status (p < 0.001) and low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) (p < 0.001) were shorter, and rectal stenosis (p=0.036) and stoma-related complications (p=0.007), especially stoma stenosis (p=0.041), were less common. However, compliance with chemotherapy was worse (p=0.009). There were no significant differences in operative time, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, incidence and severity of LARS, disease-free survival, or overall survival between groups.

Conclusion

Early ileostomy closure can effectively reduce the duration of stoma status, duration of LARS, rectal stenosis, and stoma-related complications while not affecting surgical complications and oncological outcomes. Ileostomy closure should not be delayed because of adjuvant chemotherapy. However, follow-up should be strengthened to increase compliance and integrity with chemotherapy.

Comparison of hand-sewn anterior repair, resection and hand-sewn anastomosis, resection and stapled anastomosis techniques for the reversal of diverting loop ileostomy after low anterior rectal resection: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Low anterior resection in patients with rectal cancer may require a defunctioning loop ileostomy formation that requires closure after a period of time. There are three common techniques for ileostomy closure: anterior repair (AR or fold-over closure), resection and hand-sewn anastomosis (RHA), and resection and stapled anastomosis (RSA). We aimed to compare them on the basis of operative and postoperative features.

METHODS

Patients with rectal cancer who underwent low anterior resection without complications were included in this study and randomly assigned to three parallel groups to undergo loop ileostomy closure via either AR, RHA, or RSA. Early and late outcomes were gathered from all included patients.

RESULTS

Among 93 patients with a mean age of 56.21 ± 11.78 years, consisting of 58 (62.4%) men, 31 patients underwent AR, 30 patients RHA, and 32 patients RSA. There was no significant difference among the groups regarding the frequency and location of intraoperative injuries (P = 0.157). The AR groups demonstrated significantly less consumption of gauzes following intraoperative bleeding compared to the two others groups. The results showed that the duration of surgery in the RSA was significantly shorter than in the AR or RHA group (both P < 0.001). Regarding postoperative course, only one case of hematoma and two cases of surgical wound infection occurred in the RHA group. Anastomotic leakage and complete or partial obstruction did not occur in any group of patients. Latent postoperative complications did not occur in any group of patients. The median time between surgery and discharge as well as the interval until first gas passage, first defecation, oral tolerated liquid diet, as well as oral tolerated soft and regular diet in the AR group were significantly lower than in the two other groups (both P < 0.001). However, there was no statistical difference in these intervals between the RHA and RSA groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Resection and stapled anastomosis had the shortest duration among the three techniques; however, anterior repair had faster recovery, including earlier tolerated oral diet, gas passing and defecation, and discharge, in comparison with the other techniques.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial registration number IRCT20120129008861N5.

Effectiveness of Pelvic Floor Muscle Training for Patients Following Low Anterior Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review was to identify the effects of pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) on bowel function and health-related quality of life among patients who have undergone low anterior resection.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of pooled findings was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A literature search was completed using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and CINAHL electronic databases; we searched studies published in English and Korean languages. Two reviewers independently selected relevant studies, evaluated their methodological quality, and extracted data. Meta-analysis was conducted of pooled findings.

FINDINGS

Thirty-six of 453 articles retrieved were read in full and 12 articles were included in the systematic review. In addition, pooled findings from 5 studies were selected for meta-analysis. Analysis revealed that PFMT reduced bowel dysfunction (mean difference [MD] -2.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.79 to -0.99) and improved several domains of health-related quality of life: lifestyle (MD 0.49, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.82), coping (MD 0.36, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.67), depression (MD 0.46, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.70), and embarrassment (MD 0.24, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.46).

IMPLICATIONS

Findings suggested PFMT is effective for improving bowel function and enhancing multiple domains of health-related quality of life after low anterior resection. Further well-designed studies are required to confirm our conclusions and provide stronger evidence for the effects of this intervention.

Effect of Anterograde Lavage via Temporary Loop Ileostoma on the Recovery of Bowel Function in Patients Receiving Stoma Closure: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The effect of anterograde lavage in patients with rectal cancer who underwent anterior resection and plan to receive stoma closure is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the effect of anterograde lavage on postoperative bowel function recovery in patients who underwent temporary loop ileostomy and stoma closure.

DESIGN

This was a hospital-based retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at a tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

All consecutive patients who underwent anterior resection for rectal cancer and were planning to receive stoma closure from March through December 2019 were included.

INTERVENTIONS

The enrolled patients were divided into 2 groups according to whether they received anterograde lavage before stoma closure.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Short-term functional outcomes, including time to first passing of flatus, first defecation time, and recovery time to first meal, were compared between the groups. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay, total cost of hospitalization, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

A total of 222 eligible participants were included in the analysis, including 114 in the lavage group and 108 in the nonlavage group. No statistically significant differences were found in age, sex ratio, or distance between the anastomotic line and dentate line. In the lavage group, patients' time to first passing of flatus (38 vs 42 h; p = 0.006), first defecation time (42 vs 48 h; p < 0.001), recovery time to first meal (48 vs 55.5 h; p < 0.001), and length of hospital stay (5 vs 7 d; p < 0.001) were significantly shorter than those in the nonlavage group, and the total cost of hospitalization was significantly lower than that of the nonlavage group (25,000 vs 28,000 RMB; p < 0.001). No significant difference was found in the incidence of postoperative complications between the 2 groups (p = 0.067).

LIMITATIONS

This study is limited by its relatively small sample size and retrospective design with single-center participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Anterograde lavage before stoma closure is safe and noninvasive. For patients receiving anterior resection and planning to have stoma closure, this procedure can potentially help recover bowel function more rapidly. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C51.

EFECTO DEL LAVADO ANTERGRADO MEDIANTE ILEOSTOMA TEMPORAL EN ASA SOBRE LA RECUPERACIN DE LA FUNCIN INTESTINAL EN PACIENTES QUE RECIBEN CIERRE DE ESTOMA UN ESTUDIO DE COHORTE RETROSPECTIVO

ANTECEDENTES:No está claro el efecto del lavado anterógrado en pacientes con cáncer de recto con resección anterior que planean recibir el cierre del estoma.OBJETIVO:Investigar el efecto del lavado anterógrado en la recuperación de la función intestinal posoperatoria en pacientes que se sometieron a ileostomía en asa temporal y cierre de estoma.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo basado en el hospital.AJUSTES:Centro de referencia terciario.PACIENTES:Todos los pacientes que se sometieron a una resección anterior por cáncer de recto y que planeaban recibir el cierre del estoma desde marzo hasta diciembre de 2019.INTERVENCIONES:Los pacientes inscritos se dividieron en dos grupos según si recibieron lavado anterógrado antes del cierre del estoma.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los resultados funcionales a corto plazo, incluido el tiempo de la primera evacuación de flatos, tiempo de la primera defecación y tiempo de recuperación hasta la primera comida, se compararon entre los grupos. Resultados secundarios incluyeron duración de la estancia hospitalaria, costo total de la hospitalización y complicaciones posoperatorias.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron en el análisis un total de 222 participantes elegibles, incluidos 114 en el grupo de lavado y 108 en el grupo de no lavado. No hubo diferencias estadísticamente significativas en la edad, la proporción de sexos o la distancia entre la línea de anastomosis y la línea dentada. En el grupo de lavado, el tiempo de la primera evacuación de flatos de los pacientes (38 vs 42 h; p = 0,006), el tiempo de la primera defecación (42 vs 48 h; p < 0,001), el tiempo de recuperación hasta la primera comida (48 vs 55,5 h; p < 0,001) y la duración de la estancia hospitalaria (5 vs 7 días; p < 0,001) fueron significativamente más cortos que los del grupo de no lavado, y el costo total de la hospitalización fue significativamente menor que el del grupo de no lavado (25000 vs 28000 RMB; p < 0,001). No hubo diferencia significativa en la incidencia de complicaciones postoperatorias entre los dos grupos (p = 0,067).LIMITACIONES:Este estudio está limitado por su tamaño de muestra relativamente pequeño y su diseño retrospectivo con participantes de un solo centro.CONCLUSIONES:El lavado anterógrado antes del cierre del estoma es seguro y no invasivo. Para los pacientes que se someten a una resección anterior y planean cerrar el estoma, este procedimiento puede ayudar potencialmente a recuperar la función intestinal más rápidamente. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C51. (Traducción-Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon).

Timing of Closure of a Protective Loop-Ileostomy Can Be Crucial for Restoration of a Functional Digestion

Introduction

Protective loop-ileostomy is one of the most common interventions in abdominal surgery to provide an alternative intestinal outlet until sufficient healing of a distal anastomosis has occurred. However, closure of a loop-ileostomy is also associated with complications. Thus, knowledge of the optimal time interval between primary and secondary surgery is crucial.

Methods

Data from 409 patients were retrospectively analyzed regarding complications and risk factors in closure-associated morbidity and mortality. A modified Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications was used to evaluate the severity of complications.

Results

A total of 96 (23.5%) patients suffered from postoperative complications after the closure of the loop-ileostomy. Early closure within 150 days from enterostomy (n = 229) was associated with less complications (p < 0.001^**). Looking at the severity of complications, there were significantly more (p = 0.014^*) mild postoperative complications in the late closure group (>150 days). Dysfunctional digestive problems—either (sub-) ileus (p = 0.004^*), diarrhea or stool incontinence (p = 0.003^*)—were the most frequent complications associated with late closure. Finally, we could validate in a multivariate analysis that “time to closure” (p = 0.002^*) is independently associated with the development of complications after closure of a protective loop-ileostomy.

Conclusion

Late closure (>150 days) of a loop-ileostomy is an independent risk factor in post-closure complications in a multivariate analysis. Nevertheless, circumstances of disease and therapy need to be considered when scheduling the closure procedure.

Prognostic factors for complications after loop ileostomy reversal

BACKGROUND

Defunctioning ileostomy creation and closure are both associated with morbidity. There is little data available about complications after ileostomy closure. The aim of this study was to evaluate morbidity related to loop ileostomy closure (LIC) and to determine if patients with postoperative complications in primary surgery suffer from more postoperative complications during stoma closure.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study on prospectively registered consecutive patients undergoing elective LIC in a single centre in Spain between April 2010 and December 2017. Baseline characteristics, postoperative complications after primary surgery and after stoma closure were recorded. Primary surgery included any colorectal resection, elective or urgent associated with a diverting loop ileostomy either as a protective stoma or rescue procedure. A logistic regression model was used to assess the effects of baseline variables and postoperative complications after primary surgery on the existence of postoperative complications related to LIC.

RESULTS

Four hundred and twenty-eight patients (288 men, median age 64.5 years [IQR 55.1-72.3 years]) were included in the study, and 37.4%, developed complications after LIC. The most common was paralytic ileus. Only chronic kidney disease (OR 2.31; 95% CI 1.03-5.33, p = 0.043), existence of postoperative complications after primary surgery (OR 2.25; 95% CI 1.41-3.66, p =  < 0.001) and ileostomy closure later than 10 months after primary surgery (OR 1.52; 95% CI 1.00-2.33, p = 0.049) were statistically significant in the multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with chronic kidney disease, those who had any complication after primary surgery and those who had LIC > 10 months after primary surgery have a significantly higher risk of developing postoperative complications.

Impact of timing of reversal of loop ileostomy on patient outcomes: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Diverting loop ileostomies (DLIs) are ideally reversed 6-12 weeks after the index operation. However, reversal surgery is frequently delayed in a real-world setting, with potential implications on patient's quality of life and postoperative complications. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of timing of the reversal on patient outcomes at a tertiary referral hospital.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent elective reversal of loop ileostomy (RLI) between January 2007 and January 2019 were included. The primary outcomes were incidence of postoperative ileus (POI) and 30-day postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Of 251 eligible patients, 158 (63%) were men, the median age was 64 years (range 23-88 years), and the most common index operation was an ultra-low anterior resection in 106 (42%). The median time to reversal for the entire cohort was 7.4 months (range 1-28). RLI was performed within 6 months after the index surgery in 89 patients (35%, early group), 6-12 months in 120 (48%, middle group) and after more than 12 months in 42 (17%, late group) patients. A significantly lower incidence of postoperative ileus (13.5% vs. 25.8% vs. 38.1%, p = 0.006), and 30-day postoperative complications (29.2% vs 41.7% vs. 57.1%, p = 0.011) were seen in the early group compared to the middle and late groups, respectively. There was no difference in the return to theater, length of hospital stay, and readmission rate between groups.

CONCLUSION

Delayed RLI is associated with increased risk of postoperative complications.

Investigations and time trends in loop ileostomy reversals following anterior resections: a single Australian institution seven-years' experience

BACKGROUND

Currently no consensus exists regarding what pre-reversal investigations are required to assess integrity of the rectal anastomosis. The objective of this study was to compare pre-reversal assessments of anastomotic integrity and to evaluate trends that might have influenced timings for reversal.

METHODS

From a prospectively maintained database, patients with colorectal cancer resections between March 2012 and October 2019 were identified. Patient characteristics, pre-reversal contrast enema and flexible sigmoidoscopy findings were recorded, and management of complications were recorded. Time-to-ileostomy reversal and time series for trends were analysed.

RESULTS

There were 154 patients included. Pre-reversal contrast enema or sigmoidoscopy detected a possible stricture or leak at the rectal anastomotic site in 11% (15/132) and 15% (18/112), respectively. When both modalities were used there was concordance of 86.1% and a positive likelihood ratio of 5.73. Of 125 (81.2%) ileostomies reversed, the median time-to-reversal was 11.99 months; time series analysis over the 7-year period showed no significant trend for average patient-days from booking to reversal (P = 0.60). Cox regression modelling did not identify any influential risk factors for the times taken to reversal.

CONCLUSION

This study supports the use of both contrast enema and flexible sigmoidoscopy in the assessment of rectal anastomosis integrity. Most patients with complications can have their ileostomies reversed. Patients who have adjuvant chemotherapy have a prolonged time to reversal.

A Systematic Review of Early versus Late Closure of Loop Ileostomy

Introduction

A Loop ileostomy is one of the most common techniques used in colorectal surgery to establish a reversible faecal diversion and bypass the large bowels, in order to protect either a downstream colorectal anastomosis or a coloanal anastomosis. However, it is a procedure that can cause a plethora of complications including long term ones such as the psychological effects. Currently, there is no consensus regarding the optimal time to perform closure of a loop ileostomy. Some studies suggested the early reversal of ileostomy procedure as a solution to reduce these complications. This study aims to review the available literature in order to ascertain the benefits behind early closure of loop ileostomy.

Methods

The literature was searched for all studies that included a comparison between the outcomes of early and late closure of loop ileostomy in terms of morbidity, mortality, or quality of life, where available. Early closure of loop ileostomy is defined as closure less than three months and late as more than three months, in accordance with conventional literature. The resultant articles were filtered using our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Finally, the remaining articles were assessed for quality and their results were compared to one another in order to draw our conclusions. Results and Discussion. The results were slightly inclined toward early closure of loop ileostomy. However, there were limitations of the studies reviewed, including the heterogenicity of studies, selection bias, lack of clear definition of measured outcomes, and small sample size. Taking that into consideration, the results of early closure of loop ileostomies in the selected patients were promising and require further investigation.

The feasibility and safety of early ileostomy reversal: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recent evidence supports the safety of early reversal of a temporary stoma, within 14 days of construction. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the post-operative morbidity and overall feasibility of early stoma reversal.

METHODS

Medline and Cochrane databases were searched for studies up to June 2019 that investigated the outcomes of early stoma reversal (EC, defined as closure ≤14 days from the index operation) versus late stoma reversal (LC, ≥8 weeks from the index operation). Meta-analysis was performed on the respective rates of post-operative morbidity, anastomotic leak, wound infection, bleeding, sepsis, small bowel obstruction and ileus.

RESULTS

Nine studies were included (667 patients analysed). Meta-analysis showed no significant difference in the post-operative morbidity rate, anastomotic leak rate, rates of small bowel obstruction, bleeding and ileus between EC and LC. However, the wound infection rate was significantly higher after EC than LC; relative difference 0.10 (95% confidence interval 0.00-0.19, P = 0.047). The stoma-related complication rate was significantly higher after LC than EC; relative difference -0.28 (95% confidence interval -0.45 to -0.11, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The concept of early stoma reversal is appealing, and this meta-analysis confirms the safety of early stoma closure with an associated reduction in stoma-related complications despite higher wound infection rates. However, the results need to be interpreted with caution due to the heterogeneity of the studies included, especially in respect of the definition of complications that were used. Further well-designed prospective studies are required prior to confident adoption of early stoma closure into clinical practice.

Ileostomy versus fecal diversion device to protect anastomosis after rectal surgery: a randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

Patients with rectal anastomosis commonly experience various ileostomy-related complications. This study aimed to elucidate the usefulness of a fecal diversion device (FDD) as an alternative to ileostomy for protecting rectal anastomosis.

METHODS

Patients with rectal anastomosis were randomly assigned to the ileostomy and FDD groups except in cases of emergency surgery. The primary endpoint was the clinical safety and effectiveness of FDD. The mean operation time, delay of diet advancement, length of hospital stay, FDD and stoma durations, and anastomotic leakage (AL) management methods were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 54 patients were enrolled in this study. No cases of mortality occurred. Overall morbidity was similar between groups (P = 0.551). Six patients (22.2%) in the FDD group and nine (29.0%) in the stoma group (P = 0.555) had AL. The mean total hospital stay was 16.4 ± 6.7 and 23.4 ± 8.7 days in the FDD and stoma groups, respectively (P = 0.002). The mean total hospital cost was 12,726.8 ± 3422.8 USD and 17,954.9 ± 9040.3 USD in the FDD and stoma groups, respectively (P = 0.008). The mean FDD and stoma durations were 21.6 ± 6.1 days and 114.9 ± 41.3 days, respectively (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated FDD safety and effectiveness. We identified the possibility of FDD as an alternative technique to conventional stoma procedures.

Incidence and predictors of postoperative ileus after loop ileostomy closure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Postoperative ileus (POI) is regarded as the most clinically significant morbidity following loop ileostomy closure; however, its incidence remains poorly understood. Our objective was therefore to determine the pooled incidence of POI after loop ileostomy closure and identify risk factors associated with its development.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE (via Ovid and PubMed), Embase, the Cochrane Library, Biosis Previews, and Scopus to identify studies reporting the incidence of POI in patients who underwent loop ileostomy closure. Two independent reviewers extracted data and appraised study quality. Cumulative incidence proportions were pooled across studies using a random-effects meta-analytic model.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven studies, including 9528 patients, met our inclusion criteria. The pooled estimate of POI was 8.0% (95% CI 6.9-9.3%; I² = 74%). The estimated incidence varied by POI definition: studies with a robust definition of POI (n = 8) demonstrated the highest estimate of POI (12.4%, 95% CI 9.2-16.5%; I² = 79%) while studies that did not report an explicit POI definition (n = 38) demonstrated the lowest estimate (6.7%, 95% CI 5.3-8.3%; I² = 61%). Small bowel anastomosis technique (hand-sewn) and interval time from ileostomy creation to closure (longer time) were the factors most commonly associated with POI after loop ileostomy closure. However, most comparative studies were not powered to examine risk factors for POI.

CONCLUSIONS

POI is an important complication after loop ileostomy closure, and its incidence is dependent on its definition. More research aimed at studying this complication is required to better understand risk factors for POI after loop ileostomy closure.

STROBE-anastomotic leakage after pull-through procedure for Hirschsprung disease

This study was undertaken to explore the causes, diagnosis, and treatment of anastomotic leakage after pull-through (PT) procedure for Hirschsprung disease (HD).A retrospective analysis of patients with anastomotic leakage after a PT procedure in the General Surgery Department of Beijing Children's Hospital from July 2013 to June 2016 was undertaken. The surgical characteristics, diagnosis, and treatment were retrospectively analyzed.Among the 213 patients who underwent PT procedures, 5 patients had a documented anastomotic leakage. The median age of these 5 patients at the time of the PT procedure was 6.8 years old, and this was higher than those without anastomotic leakage (1.7 years old). In all patients, rectal examination in the lithotomy position revealed an anastomotic dehiscence at the 6 o'clock position. The abdominal ultrasonography demonstrated retrorectal pneumatosis with or without an abscess in 4 patients. All patients were treated with ileostomies and anastomotic resuturing. The median delay to management was 4 days (range: 1-29 days). Four patients (4/5, 80%) were cured, and 1 (delay, 29 days) of these 4 patients developed postoperative ileus. The remaining patient (delay, 9 days) was required to undergo a repeat PT procedure. For the 4 cured patients, the median follow-up time was 20 months (range: 15-37 months), and these patients defecated 3 times daily at most without soiling.Older children with HD might be prone to anastomotic leakage. The findings of the rectal examination and ultrasonography were distinctive and useful for the diagnosis. Early ileostomy and resuturing of the anastomosis could be used to treat anastomotic leakage.

Clinical Efficacy of Laparoscopic Surgery for T4 Colon Cancer Compared with Open Surgery: A Single Center's Experience

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery for T4 colon cancer remains controversial according to many colorectal cancer guidelines. The aim of this study was to compare short- and long-term outcomes in patients who underwent T4 colon cancer resection by laparoscopy versus open surgery.

METHODS

Patients who underwent T4 colon cancer resection either by laparoscopy or by open surgery between January 2012 and January 2017 were included and used to perform a retrospective cohort analysis. Demographics, patient characteristics, short-term outcomes, and long-term oncological outcomes were compared between two groups. Multivariate analyses were used to define prognostic factors of overall survival.

RESULTS

Groups were comparable in terms of preoperative characteristics and demographics. Intraoperative blood loss (127.3 versus 226.1 mL, P = .001) and hospital stay (11.6 versus 14.8 days, P = .001) were significantly reduced in the laparoscopic group compared with the open group. Operative time, bowel movement, time to soft diet, and lymph nodes harvested did not significantly differ between the two groups. R0 resection achieved 100% in both the groups. Similarly, the overall survival rate and disease-free survival rate in stage II and stage III disease showed no significant differences. Multivariate analyses showed that intraoperative blood loss was a significantly independent factor related to a poor prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that laparoscopy for T4 colon cancer can be safely performed with superior short-term outcomes, such as less intraoperative blood loss and shorter time of hospital stay compared with open surgery, and with similar long-term oncological outcomes. Therefore, laparoscopic procedure could be a viable option in selected patients.