Protective stoma in anterior resection of the rectum: when, how and why?

'Dumpling suture method' versus traditional suture method of protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic anterior rectal resection with specimen extraction through stoma incision: a retrospective comparative cohort study

BACKGROUND

A diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) is performed in laparoscopic anterior rectal resection (LAR) surgery at high risk of anastomotic fistula. Minimally invasive surgery promotes postoperative recovery and cosmetics. To reduce abdominal trauma, specimen extraction through stoma incision (EXSI) is usually performed to avoid auxiliary abdominal incision with enlarged stomal incision. The traditional suture method (TSM) reduces the incision size by suturing the ends of the enlarged incision, leading to peristomal incisions and a higher risk of stomal complications. The study aimed to introduce the dumpling suture method (DSM) of PLI and compare this new method with TSM.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The authors propose a novel stoma suture technique, which utilized a method of skin folding suture to reduce the enlarged incision size. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 71 consecutive patients with rectal cancer who underwent LAR-DLI with EXSI, and the intraoperative details and postoperative outcomes of the two groups were measured.

RESULTS

The DSM group showed a lower stomal complication rate (10.3 vs. 35.7%, P=0.016) than that of the TSM group. The scores of DET (Discoloration, Erosion, Tissue overgrowth), stomal pain, quality of life were all significantly lower in DSM group than in TSM group. In multivariate analysis, DSM was an independent protective factor for stoma-related complications. Operative time, time to first flatus, defecation and eat, nonstomal related postoperative complications were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

DSM utilizes a method of skin folding suture to reduce the enlarged incision size, which is safe and effective in reducing the incidence of peristomal skin infections and stomal complications. This procedure offers a novel suturing approach for loop ileostomy with enlarged incision, effectively reducing the postoperative trauma and incidence of stomal complications.

Impact of ileostomy on postoperative wound complications in patients after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: A meta-analysis

To prevent anastomotic leakage and other postoperative complications after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery, a protective ileostomy is often used. However, the necessity of performing ileostomy after laparoscopic rectal cancer remains controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the benefit of ileostomy on wound infection after laparoscopic rectal cancer. The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, and PubMed were used to retrieve all related documents up to September 2023. Completion of the trial literature was submitted once the eligibility and exclusion criteria were met and the literature quality assessment was evaluated. This study compared the post-operative post-operative complications of an ileostomy with that of non-ileostomy in a laparoscope. We used Reman 5.3 to analyse meta-data. Controlled studies were evaluated with ROBINS-I. The meta-analyses included 525 studies, and 5 publications were chosen to statistically analyse the data according to the classification criteria. There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of postoperative wound infections among ostomate and nonostomate (odds ratio [OR], 1.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66, 4.84; p = 0.25). In 5 trials, the incidence of anastomotic leak was increased after surgery in nonostomate patients (OR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.12, 0.57; p = 0.0009). Two studies reported no significant difference in the length of operation time when nonstomal compared to stomal operations in patients with rectal cancer (mean difference, 0.87; 95% CI, -2.99, 4.74; p = 0.66). No significant difference was found in the rate of wound infection and operation time after operation among the two groups, but the incidence of anastomosis leak increased after operation. Protective ileostomy after laparoscopic rectal cancer was effective in reducing the risk of anastomotic leakage in patients, and we found no additional risk of infection. We cautiously conclude that protective ileostomy is active and necessary for patients with a high risk of anastomotic leakage after surgery, which needs to be further confirmed by high-quality studies with larger samples.

Defunctioning ileostomy reduces leakage rate in rectal cancer surgery - systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives

The role of a defunctioning ileostomy in every anterior rectal resection with total mesorectal excision (TME) is still controversial. In this study, we aimed to review the current literature to determine the impact of ileostomy creation on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing anterior rectal resection with TME.

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched for eligible studies. We analyzed data up to October 2017. Eligible studies had to compare patients with vs. without a defunctioning ileostomy in rectal cancer surgery and comprise data on anastomotic leakage in both groups. The primary outcome was anastomotic leakage. Secondary outcomes included the complication rate, mortality, reoperation rate, length of hospital stay and 30-day readmission.

Results

Initial search yielded 1,966 articles. Thorough evaluation resulted in 13 eligible articles which were analyzed. Leakage rate (RR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.28-0.67) and the number of reoperations (RR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.40-0.94) were significantly lower in the defunctioning stoma group. Morbidity was significantly higher in the stoma group (RR = 1.32, 95% CI 1.05–1.65). Analysis of mortality, length of hospital stay and readmission rate did not show any significant differences.

Conclusion

A defunctioning ileostomy may decrease the anastomotic leakage rate, additionally significantly reducing the risk of reoperations but it may also increase the overall complication rate. The presence of the protective stoma has no effect on mortality, length of hospital stay and readmission rate.

Open sphincter-preserving surgery of extraperitoneal rectal cancer without primary stoma and Fast Track Protocol

AIM

Fast track protocol (FTP) showed to improve perioperative care. The study aims to evaluate the impact of the FTP in the open extraperitoneal rectal cancer (ERC) surgical treatment without a primary derivative stoma (DS) and the QoL in patients with or without a secondary DS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

50 patients affected by ERC were enrolled and operated on with open low anterior resection without a primary DS. They were randomized in two groups: one was treated perioperativelly in the traditional way (group T), the other using a modif ed FTP (group FT). A QoL questionnaire was administered prior to discharge and at 1-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Five courses (10%) were complicated by anastomotic leakage: 3 (12%) in the FT group (2 minor and 1 maior) and 2 (8%) in the T group (1 minor and 1 maior) (p=n.s.). All the maiors and one minor were treated with a DS. Patients of the group FTP were considered dischargeable earlier that those of group T (p<0.05). Patients with DS had a significantly lower QoL score (p<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

FTP with minor modifications is feasible and safe in the ERC open surgery without using a DS. Better results were obtained without increasing complication rate. A secondary DS impacts detrimentally on QoL.

Proximal intestinal diversion is associated with increased morbidity in patients undergoing elective colectomy for diverticular disease: an ACS-NSQIP study

BACKGROUND

Elective colectomy for diverticular disease is common. Some patients undergo primary resection with proximal diversion in an effort to limit morbidity associated with potential anastomotic leak.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database was queried. All patients undergoing a single, elective resection for diverticular disease from 2005 to 2011 were analyzed. Thirty-day outcomes were reviewed. Factors predictive of undergoing diversion and the risk-adjusted odds of postoperative morbidity with and without proximal diversion were determined by multivariable logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Fifteen thousand six hundred two patients undergoing non-emergent, elective resection were identified, of whom 348 (2.2 %) underwent proximal diversion. Variables predictive for undergoing proximal diversion included age ≥65 years, BMI ≥30, current smoking status, corticosteroid use, and serum albumin <3.0 g/dL. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that diversion was associated with significantly increased risk of surgical site infection (OR = 1.68), deep venous thrombosis (OR = 5.27), acute renal failure (OR = 5.83), sepsis or septic shock (OR = 1.75), readmission (OR = 2.57), and prolonged length of stay (OR = 3.35).

CONCLUSIONS

Proximal diversion in the setting of elective segmental colectomy for diverticular disease is uncommon. A combination of preoperative factors and intraoperative factors drives the decision for diversion. Patients who undergo diversion experience increased postoperative morbidity. Surgeons should have a low index of suspicion for postoperative complications and be prepared to mitigate their effect on the patient's outcome.

The role of faecal diversion in low rectal cancer: a review of 1791 patients having rectal resection with anastomosis for cancer, with and without a proximal stoma

AIM

The morbidity of anastomotic dehiscence may be mitigated by a defunctioning stoma, but it is unclear if it is required for most low rectal anastomoses. Preoperative risk factors leading to anastomotic complications and the indications for faecal diversion have yet to be clearly defined.

METHOD

Using the American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP) participant-use file, patients were identified who underwent low anterior resection with anastomosis for cancer at the 211 participating hospitals in 2005-08.

RESULTS

A total of 1791 patients underwent low anterior resection. Patients were subdivided into two groups based on the level of the anastomosis. Of these 1266 patients had a low pelvic anastomosis (LPA) and 525 a coloanal anastomosis (CAA). In the LPA group, 606 patients had a stoma and 660 had no stoma. There were no differences in wound complications, sepsis or septic shock. Patients who had a stoma were more likely to have postoperative acute renal failure (1.7 vs 0.5%, P = 0.0485, OR 3.674). In the CAA group, 352 had a stoma and 173 had no stoma. In patients without faecal diversion, there was a significantly greater incidence of sepsis (8.7 vs 3.7%, P = 0.022, OR 2.47), septic shock (3.5 vs 0.57%, P = 0.018, OR 6.29) and need for reoperation (11 vs 1.7%, P = 0.0001, OR 7.11). Hospital length of stay was significantly longer with CAA and no stoma. On multivariate analysis, not having a stoma with a CAA was a risk factor for serious postoperative morbidity.

CONCLUSION

While a defunctioning stoma with a coloanal anastomosis seems to protect from postoperative sepsis, septic shock and need for reoperation, it is likely that it is overused in rectal cancer surgery.

Evaluation of diverting ileostomy in laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Diverting ileostomy is believed to mitigate the effects of anastomotic complications in low anterior resections (LAR) for rectal cancer. However, there are no data about the effects of diverting ileostomy on the outcomes of laparoscopic LAR METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 77 consecutive rectal cancer patients who had undergone laparoscopic LAR with (n = 23) or without (n = 54) diverting ileostomy. The patients' data were recorded and supplemented on short-term follow-up visits and included standard demographics, operative procedure, location of the cancer, and final pathologic diagnosis. We noted length of hospitalisation, complications, and time interval from ileostomy creation to closure. Morbidity and mortality were also included.

RESULTS

Surgical intervention requiring anastomotic leakage occurred in three patients who underwent laparoscopic LAR without diverting ileostomy. The anastomosis level of patients who underwent laparoscopic LAR with diverting ileostomy was significantly lower than that of patients who underwent laparoscopic LAR without diverting ileostomy (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Anastomosis level and total mesorectal excision are the main factors for creation of diverting ileostomy in laparoscopic LAR Laparoscopic LAR without diverting ileostomy could be selectively performed. Our study provides a basis for further prospective randomised studies on the role of diverting ileostomy in LAR.

Quality of life following reversal of temporary stoma after rectal cancer treatment

PURPOSE

An examination of quality of life outcomes following reversal of a temporary stoma after rectal cancer treatment.

METHOD

An extensive search of the literature was conducted. Studies selected examine the consequences of stoma reversal on individual's lives. Methodological issues and implications for nursing practice are also considered.

RESULTS

It is clear that after stoma reversal, there is often a temporary alteration in bowel function, impacting on individuals' physical, social and psychological health for several months. There is possibility of permanent difficulties for some, significantly affecting their quality of life if left untreated. These effects can lead to more negative post-operative experiences than expected.

CONCLUSION

This review prompts discussion about how to provide appropriate support for patients following stoma reversal but also optimal pre-operative preparation, to foster realistic expectations and subsequent adaptation. It is suggested that nursing support should be targeted to the first few months post-reversal when bowel symptoms tend to be most troublesome.

Postoperative complications following surgery for rectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review was designed to determine postoperative complication rates of radical surgery for rectal cancer (abdominal perineal resection and anterior resection).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Lack of accepted complication rates for rectal cancer surgery may hinder quality improvement efforts and may impede the conception of future studies because of uncertainty regarding the expected event rates.

METHODS

All prospective studies of rectal cancer receiving radical surgery published between 1990 and August 2008 were obtained by searching Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, as well as ASCO GI, CAGS, and ASCRS meeting abstracts between 2004 and 2008. There was no language restriction. The outcomes extracted were anastomotic leak, pelvic sepsis, postoperative death, wound infection, and fecal incontinence. Summary complication rates were obtained using a random effects model; the Z-test was used to test for study heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Fifty-three prospective cohort studies and 45 randomized controlled studies with 36,315 patients (24,845 patients had an anastomosis) were eligible for inclusion. Most of the studies found were based in continental Europe (58%), followed by Asia (25%), United Kingdom (10%), North America (5%), and Australia/New Zealand. The anastomotic leak rate, reported in 84 studies, was 11% (95% CI: 10, 12); the pelvic sepsis rate, in 29 studies, was 12% (9, 16); the postoperative death rate, in 75 studies, was 2% (2, 3); and the wound infection rate, in 50 studies, was 7% (5, 8). Fecal incontinence rates were reported in too few studies and so heterogeneously that numerical summarization was inappropriate. Year of publication, use of preoperative radiation, use of laparoscopy, and use of protecting stoma were not significant variables, but average age, median tumor height, and method of detection (clinical vs. radiologic) showed significance to explain heterogeneity in anastomotic leak rates. Year of publication, study origin, average age, and use of laparoscopy were significant, but median tumor height and preoperative radiation use were not significant in explaining heterogeneity among observed postoperative death rates. With multivariable analysis, only average age for anastomotic leak and year of publication for postoperative death remained significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Benchmark complication rates for radical rectal cancer surgery were obtained for use in sample size calculations in future studies and for quality control purposes. Postoperative death rates showed improvement in recent years.

Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer

Anastomotic leakage is a common complication after anterior resection for rectal cancer. It can increase postoperative mortality rate and local tumor recurrence rate, lower long-term survival, result in long-term impairment of anorectal function and increase patients' suffering, raise treatment costs, and prolong hospital stay. A better understanding of the risk factors for AL has important clinical implications for the management of such complication.