Randomized controlled trial: comparison of two surgical techniques for closing the wound following ileostomy closure: purse string vs direct suture

The Outcome of Purse-string Versus Conventional Wound Closure Techniques in Patients Undergoing Stoma Reversal: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing stoma reversal may experience surgical site infections and poor scarring. A purse-string closure approach may lower the incidence of surgical site infections due to its inherent ability to drain wound exudates. This study compared the frequency of surgical site infections and the cosmetic outlook of the scar among patients undergoing stoma reversal with linear and purse-string skin closure techniques.

SETTING AND DURATION

Department of Pediatric Surgery, University of Child Health Sciences Lahore with a duration of one year (June 2021 to June 2022).

METHODS

This randomized controlled trial (TCTR20210417001) was conducted with IRB approval. A total of 124 patients undergoing stoma reversal were randomly assigned to two groups (62 in each): Group A received conventional linear skin closure, while Group B received purse-string wound closure. The study evaluated surgical site infection, cosmetic outcome, and length of stay.

RESULTS

Both groups had similar age, gender ratio, indication for surgery, and length of stay. The purse-string group had a significantly lower incidence of SSI (38.7 % vs. 14.5 %; p = 0.002) and better scar quality (Manchester scar scale showed 'good' scar quality in 63 % of patients vs. 22.6 % in the linear closure group, p-value <0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The purse-string technique for skin closure resulted in fewer surgical site infections and improved scar appearance.

Comparison of purse-string technique vs linear suture for skin closure after ileostomy reversal. A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Protective stoma after rectal surgery has been associated with important complications. The most common is surgical site infection (SSI) high rates after stoma reversal reported in literature. Our study compared the rate of SSI of two skin closure techniques, linear closure, and purse string closure.

METHODS

We carried out a single center, prospective, randomized controlled trial in the Department of Colorectal Surgery of Fondazione Policlinico Campus Bio-Medico of Rome between January 2018 through December 2021, to compare LC vs PS closure of ileostomy sites.

RESULTS

A total of 117 patients (53.84% male) with a mean age of 65.68 ± 14.33 years were finally evaluated in the study. 58 patients were included in the PS group and 59 patients in the LC one. There was a marked difference in the SSI rate between the two arms of the study: 3 of 58 patients in the purse-string arm versus 11 of 59 in the control arm (p = 0.043). The outcome of cosmesis was also higher in PS, with a statistical significance (mean ± DS 4,01 ± 0,73 for PS group vs mean ± DS 2,38 ± 0,72 for LC group, p < 0,001).

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated that the PS technique had a significantly lower incidence of stoma site SSI compared with LC technique. Our findings are in line with other randomized studies and suggest that PS closure could be considered as standard of care for wound closure after ileostomy reversal.

Purse-string skin closure versus linear skin closure in people undergoing stoma reversal

BACKGROUND

Stoma reversal is associated with a relatively high risk of surgical site infection (SSI), occurring in up to 40% of cases. This may be explained by the presence of microorganisms around the stoma site, and possible contamination with the intestinal contents during the open-end manipulation of the bowel, making the stoma closure site a clean-contaminated wound. The conventional technique for stoma reversal is linear skin closure (LSC). The purse-string skin closure (PSSC) technique (circumferential skin approximation) creates a small opening in the centre of the wound, enabling free drainage of contaminants and serous fluid. This could decrease the risk of SSI compared with LSC.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of purse-string skin closure compared with linear skin closure in people undergoing stoma reversal.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases, and three trials registers on 21 December 2022. We also checked references, searched for citations, and contacted study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PSSC and LSC techniques in people undergoing closure of stoma (loop ileostomy, end ileostomy, loop colostomy, or end colostomy) created for any indication.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected eligible studies, extracted data, evaluated the methodological quality of the included studies, and conducted the analyses. The most clinically relevant outcomes were SSI, participant satisfaction, incisional hernia, and operative time. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, each with its corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). We used the GRADE approach to rate the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine RCTs involving 757 participants were eligible for inclusion. Eight studies recruited only adults (aged 18 years and older), and one study included people aged 12 years and older. The participants underwent elective reversal of either ileostomy (82%) or colostomy (18%). We considered all studies at high risk of performance and detection bias (lack of blinding) and four studies at unclear risk of selection bias related to random sequence generation. PSSC compared with LSC likely reduces the risk of SSI (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.29; I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 757 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The anticipated absolute risk of SSI is 52 per 1000 people who have PSSC and 243 per 1000 people who have LSC. The likelihood of being very satisfied or satisfied with stoma closure may be higher amongst people who have PSSC compared with people who have LSC (100% vs 89%; OR 20.11, 95% CI 1.09 to 369.88; 2 studies, 122 participants; low-certainty evidence). The results of the analysis suggest that PSSC compared with LSC may have little or no effect on the risk of incisional hernia (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.07 to 3.70; I2 = 49%; 4 studies, 297 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and operative time (MD -2.67 minutes, 95% CI -8.56 to 3.22; I2 = 65%; 6 studies, 460 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

PSSC compared with LSC likely reduces the risk of SSI in people undergoing reversal of stoma. People who have PSSC may be more satisfied with the result compared with people who have LSC. There may be little or no difference between the skin closure techniques in terms of incisional hernia and operative time, though the evidence for these two outcomes is very uncertain.

Risk factors for surgical site infections and trends in skin closure technique after diverting loop ileostomy reversal: A multi-institutional analysis

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are one of the most common complications following diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) closures. This study assesses SSIs after DLI closure and the temporal trends in skin closure technique.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database for adult patients who underwent a DLI closure between 2012 and 2021 across a multistate health system. Skin closure technique was categorized as primary, primary ​+ ​drain, or purse-string closure. The primary outcome was SSI at the former DLI site.

RESULTS

A SSI was diagnosed in 5.7% of patients; 6.9% for primary closure, 5.7% for primary closure ​+ ​drain, and 2.7% for purse-string closure (p ​= ​0.25). A diagnosis of Crohn's disease, diverticular disease, and increasing operative time were significant risk factors for SSIs. There was a positive trend in the use of purse-string closure over time (p ​< ​0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified a low SSI rate after DLI closure which did not vary significantly based on skin closure technique. Utilization of purse-string closure increased over time.

Wound Infection After Ileostomy Closure: An Interim Analysis of a Prospective Randomized Study Comparing Primary Versus Circumferential Subcuticular Closure Techniques

Background: Circumferential subcuticular wound approximation (CSWA) of round shaped skin wounds after ileostomy take down is believed to lower the rates of surgical site infection (SSI). We performed this randomized trial to compare the rates of SSI and other short-term outcomes among primary linear skin closure (PC) and CSWA groups of patients. Patients and Methods: All patients undergoing ileostomy reversal during the study period were randomly assigned to either PC or CSWA. The primary outcome was the incidence of SSI as assessed by ASEPSIS scoring system. The secondary outcomes included healing time, length of post-operative hospital stay, and patients' satisfaction regarding cosmetic outcome, expectations, pain, time of healing, wound care, and activity on a five-point Likert scale. Results: Thirty-one patients (PC = 15; CSWA = 16) underwent ileostomy reversal during the study period. There was no SSI in the PC group whereas three patients developed SSI in the CSWA group but the result was not statistically significant (p = 0.23). The scores for time of healing (p < 0.001), wound care (p = 0.007), and activity (p < 0.001) were significantly better for PC compared with CSWA whereas there was no significant difference in the scores for cosmetic outcome, expectations, and pain. Healing time was shorter in the PC group (6.7 vs. 34.2 days; p < 0.001) whereas the post-operative length of stay was comparable (6.3 vs. 7 days; p = 0.27). Conclusions: Although there was no difference in the incidence of SSI among the two groups, the PC group fared better in terms of mean time to healing and requirement of wound care.

Complications of preventive loop ileostomy versus colostomy: a meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis, and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Preventive colostomy is required for colorectal surgery, and the incidence of complications associated with ileostomy and colostomy remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the incidence of postoperative complications between ileostomy and colostomy procedures.

METHODS

Data analysis was conducted on 30 studies, and meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) were performed on five studies. The basic indicators, such as stoma prolapse, leak, wound infection, ileus, and a series of other indicators, were compared.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were observed with complications other than stoma prolapse. Meta-analysis and TSA showed that the incidence of ileostomy prolapse was lower than that of colostomy prolapse, and the difference was statistically significant. Apart from the four complications listed above, the general data analysis showed differences in incidence between the two groups. The incidence of skin irritation, parastomal hernia, dehydration, pneumonia, and urinary tract infections was higher with ileostomy than with colostomy. In contrast, the incidence of parastomal fistula, stenosis, hemorrhage, and enterocutaneous fistula was higher with colostomy than with ileostomy.

CONCLUSIONS

There were differences in the incidence of ileostomy and colostomy complications in the selected studies, with a low incidence of ileostomy prolapse.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022303133.

Comparison of modified gunsight suture technique and traditional interrupted suture in enterostomy closure

BACKGROUND

Prophylactic enterostomy surgery is a common surgical approach used to reduce the risk of anastomotic leakage in patients who have undergone partial intestinal resection due to trauma or tumors. However, the traditional interrupted suturing technique used in enterostomy closure surgery has several issues, including longer surgical incisions and higher incision tension, which can increase the risk of postoperative complications. To address these issues, scholars have proposed the use of a "gunsight suture" technique. This technique involves using a gunsight incision instead of a traditional linear incision, leaving a gap in the center for the drainage of blood and fluid to reduce the risk of infection. Building on this technique, we propose an improved gunsight suture technique. A drainage tube is placed at the lowest point of the incision and close the gap in the center of the gunsight suture, which theoretically facilitates early postoperative mobility and reduces the burden of dressing changes, thereby reducing the risk of postoperative complications.

AIM

To compare the effectiveness of improved gunsight suture technique with traditional interrupted suture in closing intestinal stomas.

METHODS

In this study, a retrospective, single-center case analysis was conducted on 270 patients who underwent prophylactic ileostomy closure surgery at the Department of Colorectal Surgery of Qilu Hospital from April 2017 to December 2021. The patients were divided into two groups: 135 patients received sutures using the improved gunsight method, while the remaining 135 patients were sutured with the traditional interrupted suture method. We collected data on a variety of parameters, such as operation time, postoperative pain score, body temperature, length of hospital stays, laboratory indicators, incidence of incisional complications, number of wound dressing changes, and hospitalization costs. Non-parametric tests and chi-square tests were utilized for data analysis.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in general patient information between the two groups, including the interval between the first surgery and the stoma closure [132 (105, 184) d vs 134 (109, 181) d, P = 0.63], gender ratio (0.64 vs 0.69, P = 0.44), age [62 (52, 68) years vs 60 (52, 68) years, P = 0.33], preoperative body mass index (BMI) [23.83 (21.60, 25.95) kg/m² vs 23.12 (20.94, 25.06) kg/m², P = 0.17]. The incidence of incision infection in the improved gunsight suture group tended to be lower than that in the traditional interrupted suture group [ (n = 2/135, 1.4%) vs (n = 10/135, 7.4%), P < 0.05], and the postoperative hospital stay in the improved gunsight suture group was significantly shorter than that in the traditional interrupted suture group [5 (4, 7) d vs 7 (6, 8) d, P < 0.05]. Additionally, the surgical cost in the modified gunsight suture group was slightly lower than that in the traditional suture group [4840 (4330, 5138) yuan vs 4980 (4726, 5221) yuan, P > 0.05], but there was no significant difference in the total hospitalization cost between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

In stoma closure surgery, the improved gunsight technique can reduce the incision infection rate, shorten the postoperative hospital stay, reduce wound tension, and provide better wound cosmetic effects compared to traditional interrupted suture.

COMPARISON BETWEEN OSTOMY CLOSURE USING PURSE-STRING VERSUS LINEAR IN CHILDREN

BACKGROUND

Type of ostomy closure has connection with some complications and also cosmetic effects.

AIMS

This study aimed to compare result of colostomy closure using purse-string method versus linear method in terms of surgical site infection, surgical time, and patient satisfaction.

METHODS

In this study, 50 patients who underwent purse-string ostomy closure and 50 patients who underwent linear closure were included. Two groups were compared for surgical time, wound infection, patient satisfaction, scar length. A p-value <0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Wound infection was not reported among purse-string group compared to 10% in linear group (p=0.022). Scar length was 24.09±0.1 mm in purse string and 52.15±1.0 mm in linear group (p=0.033). Duration of hospital admission was significantly shorter in purse-string group (6.4±1.1 days) compared to linear (15.5±4.6 days, p=0.0001). The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale scale for observer (p=0.038) and parents (p=0.045) was more favorable among purse-string group compared to linear.

CONCLUSION

Purse-string technique has the less frequent surgical site infection, shorter duration of hospital admission, less scar length, and more favorable cosmetic outcome, compared to linear technique.

Comparison of clinical safety and feasibility between reduced-port laparoscopic radical gastrectomy and conventional laparoscopic radical gastrectomy: A retrospective study

Background

Traditional open gastric cancer surgery has evolved from porous to reduced-hole, single-hole, or even natural cavity surgery to laparoscopic surgery, due to the continuous development of minimally invasive concepts and medical technologies, as well as awareness for the concept of rapid recovery. Conventional laparoscopic radical gastrectomy is quite mature in age at the moment, but how to progress to minimally invasive surgery without increasing the difficulty of surgery while ensuring clinical safety and feasibility is worth further investigation. Therefore, the clinical safety and feasibility of reduced port laparoscopic radical gastrectomy were assessed in this study.

Methods

Information on the clinical data of patients undergoing laparoscopic radical gastric cancer surgery in a single centre between May 2020 and May 2022 was collected, and a total of 232 patients were included in this study according to the study protocol design. The clinical data of 232 patients with gastric cancer treated by two different surgical methods, namely, reduced port laparoscopic surgery (RPLS) or conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS), were retrospectively analysed. The intraoperative indices, postoperative pathological indices, and short-term postoperative complications (within 30 days) of the two different surgical methods were evaluated, as well as the surgical methods’ feasibility and short-term postoperative recovery effect.

Results

There was no significant difference between the general data of patients with RPLS and CLS (P &gt; 0.05). Compared with CLSG, the operation time, digestive tract reconstruction time and lymph node dissection time of RPLSG are shorter. The intraoperative blood loss was less, and the incision was minimally invasive (P &lt; 0.05). In the short-term postoperative effect, the level of white blood cell count on the first day, the time of getting out of bed, the time of removing drainage tube, the time of hospitalization and the VAS of pain on the first, third and fifth days after operation, RPLSG was obviously superior to CLSG (P &lt; 0.05). There was no significant difference between RPLSG and CLSG in terms of pathological indices (P &gt; 0.05).

Conclusions

The treatment of gastric cancer with RPLS has good safety, feasibility and short-term postoperative effects, which is in line with the implementation of the modern concept of rapid rehabilitation surgery.

A comparison of surgical site infections in children after stoma reversal between purse-string and linear closure

BACKGROUND

To reduce the surgical site infections (SSI), the purse-string closure technique has been widely performed and has also been recommended in adult stoma reversal. However, for children, some debate still exists. This study aims to compare the SSI rates in children between the purse-string and the linear for the skin closure of stoma reversal.

METHODS

The data were collected from pediatric patients, who had undergone either purse-string or linear closure for elective surgery of stoma reversal from two university hospitals between January 2016 and December 2019.

RESULTS

The purse-string and linear closure had been performed on 31 and 45 patients, respectively. At 30 days after surgery, three patients in the purse-string closure group had developed SSI compared to 14 patients in the linear closure group (9.7 vs. 31.1%, p = 0.028). Furthermore, there had been no significant difference in the overall post-operative complications. In multivariate analysis, the SSI had been significantly lower in patients with purse-string closure (OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.05-0.86, p = 0.029).

CONCLUSION

By employing the purse-string closure technique for skin closure of stoma reversal, there had been a significantly lower SSI rate compared to linear closure with no difference in the length of hospital stay.

Gunsight sutures significantly reduce surgical-site infection after ileostomy reversal compared with linear sutures

Background

Surgical-site infection (SSI) was one of the most common post-operative morbidities of ileostomy reversal. Although several skin-closure procedures had been developed to reduce the rate of SSI, the optimal procedure remains unclear. In this study, we compared the effect of two surgical techniques for wound closure following ileostomy reversal: gunsight suture (GS) and linear suture (LS).

Methods

A total of 233 patients who underwent loop ileostomy at the Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University between January 2015 and December 2017 were enrolled into our study. These patients were divided into two groups: the LS group and the GS group. We compared the clinical characteristics between the two groups and analyzed the data using IBM SPSS to identify risk factors for SSI.

Results

Both groups successfully underwent surgery. The rate of SSI was significantly lower in the GS group (n = 2, 0.02%) than in the LS group (n = 16, 12.00%, P = 0.007). The length of hospital stay after the operation in the GS group was significantly shorter than that in the LS group (8.1 ± 3.2 vs 10.8 ± 5.4 days, P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that GS was an independent protective risk factor for SSI (odds ratio = 0.212, P = 0.048).

Conclusions

Compared with the LS technique, the GS technique can significantly decrease the rate of SSI and shorten the length of hospital stay after surgery. The GS technique may be recommended for wound closure following ileostomy reversal.

Standardization of laparoscopic reversal of the Hartmann procedure: A single-center report

INTRODUCTION

Reestablishing continuity after the Hartmann procedure, the Hartmann reversal has been recognized as a complex procedure with a high morbidity rate. Laparoscopic reversal of the Hartmann procedure (LHR) is technically challenging, although good short-term results have been reported. We formulated this technique in 2013 and have been gradually devising and standardizing it.

MATERIAL AND SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

Ten patients who had undergone the Hartmann procedure from January 2013 to December 2019 and subsequently LHR were retrospectively examined. During the procedure, a circular incision was made at the original site of the colostomy to safely reach the abdominal cavity, and pneumoperitoneum was performed using the glove technique. Next, pelvic adhesions and the descending colon were dissected. If the rectal stump was difficult to identify, an intraoperative endoscope was used. Finally, either a Gambee or stapled anastomosis without tension was performed. The median surgical time was 265 minutes (range, 160-435 minutes), and the median blood loss was 100 mL (range, 10-700 mL). The median postoperative hospital stay was 11 days (range, 8-14 days). In one case, laparotomy was performed because of severe intra-abdominal adhesion.

DISCUSSION

No major complication was observed during or after surgery. Therefore, LHR can be performed safely. Standardizing this procedure could render it minimally invasive, although a high level of evidence is needed.

Gunsight Procedure Versus the Purse-String Procedure for Closing Wounds After Stoma Reversal: A Multicenter Prospective Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Stoma reversal is associated with a high risk of wound infection. The gunsight and purse-string closure techniques are both effective alternatives for stoma reversal, but comparative studies are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the gunsight procedure with the purse-string closure technique when closing wounds after loop stoma reversal.

DESIGN

This was a nonblinded, multicenter prospective randomized study (clinicaltrials.gov No. NCT02053948).

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a general surgery unit of 7 tertiary academic medical centers.

PATIENTS

A total of 143 patients undergoing loop stoma reversal were included in the study (72 in the gunsight group and 71 in the purse-string group) between November 2013 and December 2017.

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomly assigned to undergo either gunsight or purse-string closure procedure.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome was wound healing time. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of surgical site infection, morbidity, and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

No differences were found between the 2 groups in terms of surgical site infection, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative hospital stay. The gunsight procedure had a shorter wound healing time compared with the purse-string procedure (17 vs 25 d; p < 0.001). A patient satisfaction questionnaire showed that the gunsight group had a higher score level of patient satisfaction with respect to wound healing time (p < 0.001) and total patient satisfaction score (p = 0.01) than the purse-string group.

LIMITATIONS

Treatment teams were not blinded, and there was operator dependence of techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

The gunsight and purse-string techniques are effective procedures for stoma reversal and both have a low incidence of surgical site infection. The gunsight technique is associated with shorter wound healing time, higher levels of patient satisfaction with regard to healing time, and overall final score and is recommended as the closure technique of choice. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B319. EL PROCEDIMIENTO DE GUNSIGHT VERSUS EL PROCEDIMIENTO DE JARETA, PARA EL CIERRE DE HERIDAS, DESPUéS DE REVERSIóN DE ESTOMA: UN ENSAYO, MULTICéNTRICO, PROSPECTIVO Y RANDOMIZADO: La reversión de estoma está asociada con un alto riesgo de infección de la herida. Las técnicas de gunsight y de jareta, son eficaces alternativas en la reversión de estoma, pero faltan estudios comparativos.Comparar el procedimiento de gunsight con la técnica de jareta, después de la reversión de estoma en asa.Estudio multicéntrico, prospectivo y randomizado ciego (NCT02053948).Realizado en la unidad de cirugía general, de siete centros médicos académicos terciarios.Se incluyeron en el estudio, un total de 143 pacientes sometidos a reversión de estoma de asa (72 en el grupo de gunsight y 71 en el grupo de jareta) entre noviembre de 2013 y diciembre de 2017.Los pacientes fueron asignados aleatoriamente, para someterse a un procedimiento de cierre de gunsight o de jareta.El resultado primario fue el tiempo de cicatrización de la herida. Los resultados secundarios fueron la incidencia de infección del sitio quirúrgico, morbilidad y satisfacción del paciente.No se encontraron diferencias entre los dos grupos en términos de infección del sitio quirúrgico, pérdida de sangre intraoperatoria o estadía hospitalaria postoperatoria. El procedimiento de gunsight tuvo un tiempo más corto en la cicatrización de la herida, en comparación con el procedimiento de jareta (17 días frente a 25 días, p <0,001). Un cuestionario de satisfacción del paciente, mostró que el grupo de gunsight tenía una puntuación más alta en relación al tiempo de cicatrización de la herida (p <0.001) y la puntuación total en satisfacción del paciente (p = 0.01), que en el grupo de jareta.Los equipos de tratamiento quirúrgico, no fueron cegados y hubo en los cirujanos, dependencia en las técnicas.Las técnicas de gunsight y de jareta son procedimientos efectivos para la reversión de estoma y ambas tienen una baja incidencia de infección en el sitio quirúrgico. La técnica de gunsight está asociada con un tiempo más corto en cicatrización de heridas, mejores niveles en satisfacción del tiempo de cicatrización y en la puntuación general final. Se recomienda como la técnica de cierre de elección. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B319. (Traducción-Dr Fidel Ruiz Healy).

Evidence-based adoption of purse-string skin closure for stoma wounds

Background

Opinion is divided on the optimal technique of skin closure after stoma reversal as most conventional techniques compromise either on speed/neatness of wound apposition or on the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI). Evidence suggests that purse-string skin closure (PSSC) may achieve both objectives. This study aims to compare conventional primary closure (PC) with PSSC to determine the efficacious technique for stoma wound closure.

Methods

Patients undergoing stoma reversal between April 2015 and September 2017 were prospectively studied. Patients were divided into two groups based on the technique of skin closure (PC or PSSC). The following parameters were assessed: SSI, hospital stay, additional outpatient visit, wound healing time and patient satisfaction based on a standardised questionnaire.

Results

Forty one patients underwent stoma reversal (20 PSSC vs 21 PC). Wound infection, need for wound care, length of hospital stay, healing time and scar size were significantly less, whereas average patient wound satisfaction scores were significantly more in the PSSC group.

Conclusion

Purse-string skin closure (PSSC) proves efficacious and hence merits adoption as the technique of choice for closure of stoma wounds.

Meta-analysis and single-center experience on the protective effect of negative suction drains on wound healing after stoma reversal

BACKGROUND

Compromised wound healing following stoma reversal is a frequent problem. The use of negative suction drainage for reduction of complications remains controversial.

METHODS

The patient database of our center was reviewed for patients with ileostomy reversal between 2007 and 2017. Risk factors for wound complications were analyzed using multivariate regression analysis. Systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Ultimately, results of this study were integrated into meta-analysis to assess the effect of drainage placement on wound healing.

RESULTS

In our institutional analysis, a total of 406 patients with ileostomy reversal were included (n = 240 (59.1%) with drainage vs. n = 166 (40.8%) without drainage). In multivariate analysis, body mass index (BMI) was a risk factor for wound complications (odds ratio (95% CI) 1.06 (1.02-1.12)). Patients with drainage needed significantly fewer interventions than those without drainage (17.1% vs. 28.9%, p = 0.005). Placement of drainage significantly reduced the risk of wound complications even in the group with elevated BMI (odds ratio (95% CI) 0.462 (0.28-0.76), p = 0.003). Meta-analysis identified 6 studies with a total of 1180 patients eligible for further analysis (2 prospectively randomized trials; 4 retrospective cohort studies). Overall analysis revealed a significantly beneficial effect of wound drainage following ileostomy reversal (RR (95% CI) 0.47 (0.34, 0.66); p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

In our institutional analysis as well as meta-analysis, the use of subcutaneous suction drains was beneficial for prevention of wound healing complications following ostomy reversal. Drainage placement is especially valuable in high-risk situations such as in obese patients.

Patient and Physician Assessment of Surgical Scars: A Systematic Review

Importance

Surgical scarring affects patients by distracting the gaze of onlookers, disrupting social interactions, and impairing psychosocial health. Patient and physician agreement regarding ideal scar characteristics is important in developing congruent expectations after surgery.

Objective

To summarize published studies assessing patient and physician ratings of surgical scars, rates of patient and physician agreement in scar assessment, and elements of cutaneous scar assessment that differ between patients and physicians.

Evidence Review

A literature search of Ovid/Medline, PubMed, and EMBASE was conducted from January 1, 1972, to August 1, 2015. Prospective studies comparing scars from different surgical techniques using at least 1 physician-reported and patient-reported scar measure were included. Strength of studies was graded according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine guidelines.

Findings

The review identified 29 studies comprising 4485 patients. Of the 29 included studies, 20 (69%) were randomized clinical trials (RCTs), 5 (17%) were prospective, nonrandomized studies, and 4 (14%) were descriptive studies. Disagreement between patients and physician evaluation of scars occurred in 28% (8 of 29) studies, with only patients rating scar difference in 75% (6 of 8) of these cases. Patients were more likely to value scar depth while physicians were more likely to value scar pigmentation and relief.

Conclusions and Relevance

Methodologically rigorous studies that include clinician- and patient-reported scar outcomes are uncommon. Studies that incorporate subjective and objective scar grading reveal disagreement between patients and clinicians. Of the incision and wound closure techniques assessed, few affected patient- and clinician-reported outcomes, but the evidence remains weak and future studies are recommended.

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.

The Effectiveness of Contralateral Drainage in Reducing Superficial Incisional Surgical Site Infection in Loop Ileostomy Closure: Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Loop ileostomy reduces the rates of morbidity due to colorectal anastomotic dehiscence. For its part, ileostomy closure is associated with low mortality (0-4%) but substantial morbidity (11-37%). Incisional surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most frequent complications (2-40%).

METHODS

A single-center, prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial of two study groups: control (conventional primary skin closure) and experimental (primary skin closure with a contralateral Penrose^® drain).

RESULTS

Seventy patients undergoing loop ileostomy closure between April 2013 and June 2017 were included (35 per branch). Four were later removed from the study. Six of the remaining 66 patients (per protocol analysis) were diagnosed with incisional SSI (9.1%); there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups (control group: 9.7%; experimental group: 8.6%) or between the risk factors associated with incisional SSI. Rates of overall and relevant morbidity (Clavien ≥ III) were considerable (28.1% and 9.1%, respectively), and there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups. No patients died.

CONCLUSION

Contralateral drainage does not significantly affect the results of primary ileostomy closure. The rate of incisional SSI was similar in the drainage and non-drainage groups, and the overall rate of 9.1% was in the low range of those reported in the literature. The absence of mortality (0%) and the non-negligible rates of overall and relevant morbidity (28.1% and 9.1%, respectively) in our series suggest that loop ileostomy is a safe procedure. However, the bowel reconstruction involves risks that must be borne in mind.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered and approved by the clinical research ethics committee of the study center (reference number 2012076). Clinical trial was registered in ClinicalTrial.gov (identification number NCT02574702 and reference: ILEOS-ISS_2013).

Quality of life following ostomy reversal with purse-string vs linear skin closure: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The importance of the defunctioning stoma on minimizing anastomotic leak in colorectal surgery is well established. However, a defunctioning stoma can substantially impact on quality of life (QoL). Circumferential purse-string approximation (PSA) and linear skin closure (LSC) are the most commonly performed surgical technique for reversal of stoma. The aim of this review was to systemically review and meta-analyze available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PSA and LSC.

METHODS

An electronic systematic search using MEDLINE databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science) of RCTs comparing PSA and LSC was performed. Eight RCTs totalling 647 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in this meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Patient's satisfaction is significantly lower in PSA group during the first postoperative week, but it sharply improves afterwards and no difference were noted at 1 and 6 months between the two groups. Relative risk (RR) of developing a SSI is significantly lower in PSA compared to LSC group (RR 0.16 95% CI 0.09; 0.30; p = 0.0001), whereas incisional hernia (RR 0.53 95% CI 0.08; 3.53; p = 0.512), operative time (MD - 0.06 95% CI - 0.30; 0.17; p = 0.593), and hospital stay (MD - 0.09 (95% CI - 0.29-0.11; p = 0.401) remain similar.

DISCUSSION

QoL was similar in both patients groups after the first postoperative week. PSA significantly reduced SSI rate. No difference was observed in incisional hernia rate, operative time, or length of hospital stay.

Postoperative Outcomes of Stoma Takedown: Results of Long-term Follow-up

PURPOSE

Stoma takedown is a frequently performed procedure with considerable postoperative morbidities. Various skin closure techniques have been introduced to reduce surgical site infections. The aim of this study was to assess postoperative outcomes after stoma takedown during a long-term follow-up period.

METHODS

Between October 2006 and December 2015, 84 consecutive patients underwent a colostomy or ileostomy takedown at our institution. Baseline characteristics and perioperative outcomes were analyzed through retrospective reviews of medical records.

RESULTS

The proportion of male patients was 60.7%, and the mean age of the patients was 59.0 years. The overall complication rate was 28.6%, with the most common complication being prolonged ileus, followed by incisional hernia, anastomotic leakage, surgical site infection, anastomotic stenosis, and entero-cutaneous fistula. The mean follow-up period was 64.3 months. The univariate analysis revealed no risk factors related to overall complications or prolonged ileus.

CONCLUSION

The postoperative clinical course and long-term outcomes following stoma takedown were acceptable. Stoma takedown is a procedure that can be performed safely.

Purse-string skin closure versus linear skin closure techniques in stoma closure: a comprehensive meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of randomised trials

OBJECTIVES

To compare purse-string skin closure (PSC) and linear skin closure (LSC) techniques in patients undergoing stoma closure METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of literature and meta-analysis of outcomes according to PRISMA statement standards to compare PSC and LSC techniques in stoma closure. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed to assess the possibility of type I or II error and compute the information size required for conclusive meta-analysis.

RESULTS

We identified six randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and eight observational studies, enrolling a total of 1102 patients. The included populations in the PSC and LSC groups were comparable in terms of baseline characteristics. The risk of surgical site infection (SSI) was significantly lower in the PSC group (OR 0.10; 95% CI 0.06, 0.18; P < 0.00001). There was no difference between the two groups in terms of operative time (MD 1.80; 95% CI - 1.35, 4.96; P = 0.26), anastomotic leak (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.21, 2.48; P = 0.61), incisional hernia (OR 0.59; 95% CI 0.25, 1.37; P = 0.22), small bowel obstruction (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.50, 1.86; P = 0.91), and length of hospital stay (MD - 0.04; 95% CI - 0.51, 0.42; P = 0.86). Patient satisfaction was higher in the PSC group. TSA showed that the risk of type 1 error was minimal and meta-analysis was conclusive.

CONCLUSIONS

PSC is associated with significantly lower risk of SSI and better patient satisfaction compared with LSC in closure of stomas and should be the closure technique of choice. The current available evidence is robust and conclusive highlighting that the results of the current study should be incorporated into clinical practice without a need for further trial data.

Purse-string closure versus conventional primary closure of wound following stoma reversal: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most frequent complications after stoma closure and the optimal skin closure technique is still not clear. The goal of this review was to compare outcomes with purse-string closure technique (PSC) versus conventional closure technique (CCT) for skin closure after stoma reversal.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare SSI rate within 30 days, operative time, hospital stay, incisional hernia and intestinal obstruction rates between PSC and CCT.

RESULTS

The pooled analysis of 5 studies showed a statically significant lower rate of SSI in favor of PSC compared to CCT (OR -0.24; 95% CI -0.32, - 0.15; p < 0.00001). No statistically significant differences were observed in the operative time (OR -0.05; 95% CI -3.95, 3.84; p = 0.98) and in the length of hospital stay (OR -0.20; 95% CI -0.76, 0.36; p = 0.48), between the two techniques. Additionally, two out of the five studies provided data on incisional hernia and intestinal obstruction and the pooled analysis revealed no statistically significant differences between PSC and CCT techniques: incisional hernia (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.27-2.47; p = 0.71) and intestinal obstruction (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.41-2.84; p = 0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis of 5 RCTs showed that SSI rate is statistically significant lower when PSC is performed, compared to CCT. Whereas, no significant differences were found between the two techniques with regards to operative time, length of hospital stay, incisional hernia and intestinal obstruction rates.

Comparing Surgical Site Infection and Scar Cosmesis Between Conventional Linear Skin Closure Versus Purse-string Skin Closure in Stoma Reversal - A Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction

Stoma closure is one of the most frequently performed surgeries. The common complications are surgical site infection (SSI) and poor scar cosmesis. Purse-string sutures are expected to have less incidence of SSI due to the free drainage of secretions from the wound and possibly the early detection of a wound infection. Compared to the conventional linear closure, the purse-string closure technique is expected to have less wound infection, improved scar cosmesis, and good patient satisfaction because of a smaller size scar. Hence, a well-structured study is required to substantiate the advantage of this technique.

Methodology

This randomized control trial was carried out for two years in a tertiary care centre in Southern India. Patients with various stoma reversals, including colostomy, as well as ileostomy reversal, were included in the study. Patients were divided into Group I - conventional linear skin suturing (n = 40) and Group II - purse-string closure (n = 40). After the closure of rectus muscle, the skin is closed using the purse-string method (subcuticular) in the experimental group.

Results

Both the groups were comparable with respect to age, gender, body mass index (BMI), the presence of co-morbidities, and indication for surgery. Stomal procedures were done (26.3%) for malignant cases. The difference in mean hospital days for both groups were statistically insignificant (11.95 vs. 9.9; p = 0.927). The incidence of SSI between the groups were statistically significant (17 vs. 3; p = 0.003). The mean Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scoring (POSAS) scores between the groups (65.30 vs. 83.40; p = 0.012) were statistically significant. This proved significant improvement in scar cosmesis in purse-string skin closure. At one month postoperative, the purse-string group had better patient satisfaction (3.08 vs. 4.48; p = 0.001), which was evidenced by a mean Likert 3 scale score. The mean visual analogue scale (VAS) score did not show any significant difference in pain between the groups.

Conclusion

Purse-string skin closure for stoma reversal had significantly less incidence of SSI. The duration of antibiotic therapy was also less in purse-string skin closure patients as compared to linear skin closure patients. Purse-string skin closures significantly improved the scar outcome and patient satisfaction.

Temporary closure of colostomy with suture before colostomy takedown improves the postoperative outcomes

PURPOSE

Temporary loop colostomy is a common surgical procedure used to avoid complications in high-risk distal anastomosis as well as pelvic inflammation. Issues regarding postoperative outcomes of colostomy takedown have been widely discussed in the literature, wound infection especially. Temporary closure of colostomy with suture before takedown was adopted in our study, which provided excellent traction to aid mobilization of stomy and avoided stool spillage to downgrade the wound classification to "clean contamination." We aimed to determine the effects of the procedure on postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

This was a prospective case-control study at a single tertiary medical center. Patients presenting for elective colostomy takedown were included. Allis clamp (n = 50) or silk suture (n = 60) was applied to mobilize the colostomy, and results were compared. Operative time and wound infection rate were measured as primary postoperative outcomes. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to demonstrate the association between the two groups and outcomes.

RESULTS

In univariate analyses, significantly shorter operative time (median = 57 min, p = 0.003) and lower postoperative wound infection rate (3%, p = 0.03) were noted in the group receiving silk suture. Multivariate analyses results showed that silk suture was significantly associated with both operative time (B = - 8.5, p = 0.01) and wound infection (odds ratio = 0.18, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

With the advantage of enhancing traction and decreasing contamination, the temporary closure of colostomy with suture improved takedown outcomes, including a shorter operative time and lower wound infection rate.

The effect of purse-string approximation versus linear approximation of ileostomy reversal wounds on morbidity rates and patient satisfaction: the 'STOMA' trial

BACKGROUND

Ileostomy reversal is associated with surgical site infection (SSI) rates as high as 37%. Recent literature suggests that employing a purse-string approximation (PSA) of the reversal wound reduces this rate of SSI. Thus we wished to perform a randomised controlled trial to compare SSI rates in purse-string versus linear closure (PLC) wounds following ileostomy reversal.

METHODS

A randomised, controlled trial was conducted at University Hospital Limerick. Sixty-one patients undergoing ileostomy reversal were included. Thirty-four patients were randomised to PSA and 27 patients to linear closure. The primary endpoint was incidence of SSI and secondary endpoints measured were quality of life and satisfaction with cosmesis. Statistical analysis was performed on a per protocol basis using SPSS version 22.0.

RESULTS

Three patients in the PSA group developed an SSI compared to 8 in the PLC group at 30 days (8 vs 30%, p = 0.03). The mean time to SSI diagnosis was faster in the PSA group (3 vs 12.3 days, p = 0.08). Patients who developed SSI experienced a longer mean length of stay (6.8 vs 11.4 days, p = 0.012). On multivariate analysis, PLC was the only predictive factor of SSI formation (p < 0.001). There was no difference in patient satisfaction between the two study groups (p = 0.14).

CONCLUSIONS

PSA of wounds following ileostomy reversal significantly reduces SSI formation compared to linear approximation without any effect on patient satisfaction.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Loop Ileostomy Reversal: Is there an Advantage to a Minimally Invasive Approach?

BACKGROUND

Ileostomy reversals are commonly performed procedures after colon and rectal operations. Laparoscopic ileostomy reversal (LIR) with lysis of adhesions has potential benefits over conventional open surgery. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of laparoscopic and open ileostomy reversal.

METHODS

133 consecutive patients undergoing ileostomy reversal at our institution between June 2009 and August 2013 were analyzed using a retrospective database. The group comprised 53 laparoscopic cases and 80 open cases, performed by four surgeons at a single center. The data were analyzed for patient demographics, operative characteristics, postoperative outcomes, and 30-day morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

The two groups had comparable mean age, gender distribution, ASA scores, and BMI. The laparoscopic group had a significantly longer duration of surgery compared to the open reversal group (109 versus 93 min, p < 0.05). However, this group underwent more lysis of adhesions (60.4 % versus 26.3 %, p < 0.01) as well as concurrent stoma site mesh reinforcement (32.1 % versus 6.3 %, p < 0.01). In the laparoscopy group, 20.7 % of patients underwent intra-corporeal ileo-ileal anastomosis. There were no significant differences between the laparoscopic and open groups with regard to estimated blood loss (31 versus 40 ml, respectively) or mean length of stay (5.3 vs. 5.7 days, respectively). The rates of overall 30-day morbidity (16.9 % for laparoscopic vs. 21.3 % for open) as well as rates of specific complications were equivalent between groups. 30-day mortalities were not noted in either group.

CONCLUSION

LIR is safe and effective with low perioperative morbidity and mortality. The use of laparoscopy as an option in terms of concomitant hernia repair and lysis of adhesions may be considered in selected patients.

Single-Layer Continuous Versus Double-Layer Continuous Suture in Colonic Anastomoses-a Randomized Multicentre Trial (ANATECH Trial)

PURPOSE

Apart from stapling methods, single- or double-layer continuous hand sutures are established techniques for colonic anastomoses. It is unclear which hand suture technique has superior anastomotic safety. This randomized trial evaluated the incidence of postoperative complications depending on anastomosis technique.

METHODS

This multicentre randomized trial enrolled adult elective patients between February 2004 and June 2012 in four German university hospitals. Primary endpoint was incidence of clinical anastomotic leakage until 3 months postoperatively. Estimated sample size was 768 randomized patients. Main secondary endpoints were duration of anastomotic suture, postoperative morbidity and stool patterns at 3-month follow-up. Patients and postoperative outcome assessors were blinded to the group assignment. This trial is registered (NCT00996554).

RESULTS

Due to slow recruitment, the trial was stopped prematurely. Two hundred fifty-two patients (129 to single-layer suture anastomosis (SLA), 123 to double-layer suture anastomosis (DLA)) were randomized and analysed. Nine patients (3.6 %) were lost during follow-up. Exploratory primary endpoint analysis by intention-to-treat principle showed no significant difference for clinical anastomotic leakage between suturing techniques (SLA, 4 of 129 (3.1 %) vs. DLA, 6 of 123 (4.9 %), p = 0.532). Secondary endpoint analysis showed on average a 6-min shorter suture duration for SLA than DLA (18 min (4-49) vs. 24 min (8-50), p < 0.001). At 3-month follow-up, subjective well-being and stool patterns were not significantly different between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study did not reach sufficient power and cannot confirm whether both techniques might be equally or if one technique might be superior. Exploratory analysis suggests that in elective colonic resections, the single-layer continuous hand suture technique may be equally effective as the double-layer technique regarding incidence of anastomotic leakage, length of hospital stay, overall postoperative complications, subjective short-term well-being and stool patterns. Lessons learned from this trial course are summarized.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered (Trial registration: NCT00996554). Link: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00996554 .

Subcutaneous vacuum drains reduce surgical site infection after primary closure of defunctioning ileostomy

PURPOSE

Surgical site infection (SSI) is the most common complication after primary closure of defunctioning ileostomy. We use a subcutaneous vacuum drain (SVD) in our institution to prevent infection. This study aimed to analyze the risk factors of SSI and to assess the utility of an SVD for preventing SSI in patients undergoing primary closure of ileostomy.

METHODS

Patients undergoing ileostomy closure in the Department of Colorectal Surgery, Peking University Cancer Hospital, from September 2006 to March 2013, were included in this study. The clinical features of these patients with or without a subcutaneous drain were reviewed, and the complication rate of SSI was analyzed. The primary endpoints were the incidence and risk factors of SSI, and the secondary endpoints were the rate of overall complications and their management.

RESULTS

A total of 245 consecutive patients were enrolled in the study. The overall incidence of SSI was 8.6%. Eighty-five (34.7%) patients received placement of an SVD. The use of SVDs was associated with a significantly lower incidence of SSI compared with primary closure (PC) without an SVD (1.2 vs. 12.5%, p = 0.001). Multivariate analyses showed that the presence of an SVD (odds ratio (OR) 0.063, p = 0.012), total operation time >90 min (OR 4.862, p = 0.002), and postoperative complications (OR 10.576, p < 0.001) were independent risk factors of SSI.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that an SVD is effective for reducing SSI in patients undergoing PC of ileostomy. Further randomized trials are required to confirm our findings and to compare SVDs with purse-string sutures.

Surgical site infections (SSIs) after stoma reversal (SR): risk factors, implications, and protective strategies

BACKGROUND

Stoma reversals (SRs) are commonly performed with potentially significant postoperative complications including surgical site infections (SSIs). Our aim was to determine the incidence and risk factors for SSIs in a large cohort of SR patients.

DESIGN

We reviewed our institutional 2006-2011 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database for 30-day SSIs in patients undergoing SR. Records were additionally reviewed for 10 non-ACS-NSQIP variables. The primary outcome was SSI after SR. Secondary outcomes were additional 30-day postoperative complications and length-of-stay. Predictors of SSIs were identified using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

From 528 SR patients, 36 patients developed a SSI (6.8 %). Most patients underwent SR for loop ileostomies (76.5 %) after index operations for ulcerative colitis (38.6 %) and colorectal cancer (27.8 %). SSI patients had fewer subcutaneous drains compared to patients with no SSI and had significantly higher rates of smoking, ASA 3-4 classification and laparotomies at SR (p < 0.05). Patients with SSI had increased length-of-stay and 30-day morbidities including sepsis and returns to the operating room (p < 0.05) compared to no-SSI patients. On multivariable analysis, subcutaneous drain placement was suggestive of SSI protection (odds ratio [OR] 0.52, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.2-1.1), but only smoking was significantly associated with an increased risk for SSI (OR 2.4, 95 % CI 1.1-5.4).

CONCLUSIONS

Smoking increased the risk of SR SSIs in patients by over twofold, and SR SSIs are associated with additional significant morbidities. Smoking cessation should be an important part of any SSI risk-reduction strategy.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials comparing purse-string vs conventional linear closure of the wound following ileostomy (stoma) closure

Objective: The objective of this article is to systematically analyse the randomized, controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of purse-string closure (PSC) of an ileostomy wound with conventional linear closure (CLC).

Methods: Randomized, controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of purse-string closure vs conventional linear closure (CLC) of ileostomy wound in patients undergoing ileostomy closure were analysed using RevMan®, and the combined outcomes were expressed as risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD).

Results: Three randomized, controlled trials, recruiting 206 patients, were retrieved from medical electronic databases. There were 105 patients in the PSC group and 101 patients in the CLC group. There was no heterogeneity among included trials. Duration of operation (SMD: −0.18; 95% CI: −0.45, 0.09; z = 1.28; P < 0.20) and length of hospital stay (SMD: 0.01; 95% CI: −0.26, 0.28; z = 0.07; P < 0.95) was statistically similar following both approaches of ileostomy wound closure. The risk of surgical site infection (OR, 0.10; 95% CI: 0.03, 0.33; z = 3.78; P < 0.0001) was significantly reduced when ileostomy wound was closed using PSC technique.

Conclusion: PSC technique for ileostomy wound is associated with a reduced risk of surgical site infection apparently without influencing the duration of operation and length of hospital stay.

A beneficial effect of purse-string skin closure after ileostomy takedown: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical benefits of purse-string skin closure (PS) in daily practice compared with conventional linear skin closure (CL) after ileostomy takedown in Korean population.

METHODS

These retrospectively collected data were based on 157 consecutive patients who underwent ileostomy takedown between November 2010 and September 2011. Before March, 2011, CL was performed in 79 patients. Thereafter, PS was performed in 78 patients. The medical records including pain score recorded daily were reviewed and the postoperative outcomes, including SSI, were analyzed.

RESULTS

PS group had a significantly lower overall complication rate than the CL group (8.97% vs. 25.32%, p = 0.010). Among complications, PS group had a significantly lower SSI rate than the CL group (0% vs. 11.39%, p = 0.003). After adjusted for other risk factors (smoking, body mass index, anastomosis method), PS method was associated significantly and independently with a lower SSI rate than CL method (adjusted odds ratio: 26.63, 95% confidence interval: 3.02-267.70, p = 0.001). And the two groups did not differ in terms of postoperative pain (p = 0.323) or pain pattern (p = 0.548).

CONCLUSION

In daily practice, PS had a beneficial effect on SSI in patients who underwent ileostomy takedown in the Korean population.