Short-term Outcomes of Day-Case Stoma Closure: A Prospective, Observational Study

Purse string closure of perineal defects after abdominoperineal excision

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to describe a new technique of perineal closure following abdominoperineal excision (APE) using purse-string perineal skin closure (PSPC).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between January 2016 and May 2021, 15 consecutives patients who had an APE procedure were included in this retrospective single-center study. All indications of APE were considered, as well as all types of APE. We analyzed the patient characteristics and peri-operative features, including overall (Clavien 1 to 5) and severe (Clavien 3 and 4) postoperative morbidity, length of stay (LOS), and long-term results (median time to perineal wound closure and rate of perineal incisional hernia).

RESULTS

The patients included 11 men and four women, with a mean age of 64 ± 13 [33-80] years. The indication of APE was an epidermoid carcinoma of the anal canal (n = 5) or an adenocarcinoma of the rectum (n = 10). The mean operating time was 220 ± 88.64 [70-360] min. The overall morbidity rate was 60%, the severe morbidity rate 26%, and reoperation rate 26%. The median length of stay was 9 ± 6.5 days. After a mean follow-up of 23.5 ± 20.3 months, the median time to perineal wound closure was 96 ± 60 days, the persistent perineal sinus rate was 6% (n = 2), and one patient developed a perineal incisional hernia.

CONCLUSION

Purse-string closure of perineal wounds is a safe and effective technique for perineal wound closure after APE. The short LOS allowed an early return home.

Short-stay compared to long-stay admissions for loop ileostomy reversals: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Short-stay admissions, with lengths of stay less than 24 h, are used for various surgeries without increasing adverse events. However, it is unclear if short-stay admissions would be safe for loop ileostomy reversals. This review aimed to compare outcomes between short (≤24 hours) and long (>24 hours) admissions for adults undergoing loop ileostomy reversals.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for studies comparing short- to long-stay admissions in adults undergoing loop ileostomy reversals. Meta-analyses were conducted for mortality, reoperation, readmission, and non-reoperative complications. Quality of evidence was assessed with grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluations (GRADE) guidelines.

RESULTS

Four observational studies enrolling 24,628 patients were included. Moderate certainty evidence suggests there is no difference in readmissions between short- and long-stay admissions (relative risk (RR) 0.98, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.28, p 0.86). Low certainty evidence demonstrates that short stays may reduce non-reoperative complications (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.62, p < 0.01). Very low certainty evidence demonstrates that there is no difference in reoperations between short and long stays (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.26 to 5.04, p 0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate certainty evidence demonstrates that there is no difference in readmission rates between short- and long-stay admissions for loop ileostomy reversals. Less robust evidence suggests equivalence in reoperations and a decrease in non-reoperative complications. Future prospective trials are required to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of short-stay admissions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=307381 Prospero (CRD42022307381), January 30, 2022.

Bowel stimulation before loop ileostomy closure to reduce postoperative ileus: a multicenter, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial

Introduction

The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of preoperative bowel stimulation on the development of postoperative ileus (POI) after loop ileostomy closure.

Methods

This was a multicenter, randomized controlled trial (NCT025596350) including adult (≥ 18 years old) patients who underwent elective loop ileostomy closure at 7 participating hospitals. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using a centralized computer-generated sequence with block randomization to either preoperative bowel stimulation or no stimulation (control group). Bowel stimulation consisted of 10 outpatient sessions within the 3 weeks prior to ileostomy closure and was performed by trained Enterostomal Therapy nurses. The primary outcome was POI, defined as an intolerance to oral food in the absence of clinical or radiological signs of obstruction, on or after postoperative day 3, that either (a) required nasogastric tube insertion; or (b) was associated with two of the following: nausea/vomiting, abdominal distension, or the absence of flatus.

Results

Between January 2017 and November 2020, 101 patients were randomized, and 5 patients never underwent ileostomy closure; thus, 96 patients (47 stimulated vs. 49 control) were analyzed according to a modified intention-to-treat protocol. Baseline characteristics were well balanced in both groups. The incidence of POI was lower among patients randomized to stimulation (6.4% vs. 24.5%, p = 0.034; unadjusted RR: 0.26, 95% CI 0.078–0.87). Stimulated patients also had earlier median time to first flatus (2.0 days (1.0–2.0) vs. 2.0 days (2.0–3.0), p = 0.025), were more likely to pass flatus on postoperative day 1 (46.8% vs. 22.4%, p = 0.022), and had a shorter median postoperative hospital stay (3.0 days (2.0–3.5) vs. 4.0 days (2.0–6.0), p = 0.003).

Conclusions

Preoperative bowel stimulation via the efferent limb of the ileostomy reduced POI after elective loop ileostomy closure.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-022-09510-5.

Natural history of anastomotic leakage after elective stoma closure

INTRODUCTION

Elective stoma closure (ESC) is a common procedure. The main complication of ESC is anastomotic leakage, which can be revealed by peritonitis or an enterocutaneous fistula (ECF). The objective of the present study was to describe the natural history of AL after ESC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between January 2015 and March 2020, all patients having undergone AL after loop or double-barreled ESC were included in a retrospective, single-center study. The rate of ECF and peritonitis at presentation, the success rate of a conservative treatment and the factors associated with the success of healing of ECF were evaluated.

RESULTS

From January 2015 to March 2020, 619 patients underwent a loop or double-barreled ESC in our department. The AL rate was 6.3% (n=39). The leakage was revealed by an ECF in 72% of cases (n=28). The mean±standard deviation time between the stoma closure and the diagnosis of the AL was 6±4 days. Conservative treatment was successful in 24 (85%) of the 28 patients with ECF, with a mean±SD time to recovery of 6.6±9.4 months. In a univariate analysis, none of the conservative treatments was significantly associated with healing of the ECF.

CONCLUSION

AL is not rare and is mainly revealed by an ECF. Although the fistula heals in most cases, both the surgeon and the patient must be aware that the time to recovery is long.