Lowering the incidence of stomal herniation: further follow up of the lateral rectus abdominis positioned stoma

Lateral pararectal versus transrectal stoma placement for prevention of parastomal herniation

BACKGROUND

A parastomal hernia is defined as an incisional hernia related to a stoma, and belongs to the most common stoma-related complications. Many factors, which are considered to influence the incidence of parastomal herniation, have been investigated. However, it remains unclear whether the enterostomy should be placed through, or lateral to the rectus abdominis muscle, in order to prevent parastomal herniation and other important stoma complications.

OBJECTIVES

To assess if there is a difference regarding the incidence of parastomal herniation and other stoma complications, such as ileus and stenosis, in lateral pararectal versus transrectal stoma placement in people undergoing elective or emergency abdominal wall enterostomy.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched for all types of published and unpublished randomized and non-randomized studies in four medical databases: CENTRAL, PubMed, LILACS, Science Ciation Index, and two trials registers: ICTRP Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov to 9 November 2018. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized and non-randomized studies comparing lateral pararectal versus transrectal stoma placement with regard to parastomal herniation and other stoma-related complications.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. We conducted data analyses according to the recommendations of Cochrane and the Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group (CCCG). We rated quality of evidence according to the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Randomized controlled trials (RCT)Only one RCT met the inclusion criteria. The participants underwent enterostomy placement in the frame of an operation for: rectal cancer (37/60), ulcerative colitis (14/60), familial adenomatous polyposis (7/60), and other (2/60).The results between the lateral pararectal and the transrectal approach groups were inconclusive for the incidence of parastomal herniation (risk ratio (RR) 1.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 4.48; low-quality evidence); development of ileus or stenosis (RR 2.0, 95% CI 0.19 to 20.9; low-quality evidence); or skin irritation (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.21 to 2.13; moderate-quality evidence). The results were also inconclusive for the subgroup analysis in which we compared the effect of ileostomy versus colostomy on parastomal herniation. The study did not measured other stoma-related morbidities, or stoma-related mortality, but did measure quality of life, which was not one of our outcomes of interest.Non-randomized studies (NRS)Ten retrospective cohort studies, with a total of 864 participants, met the inclusion criteria. The indications for enterostomy placement and the baseline characteristics of the participants (age, co-morbidities, disease-severity) varied between studies. All included studies reported results for the primary outcome (parastomal herniation) and one study also reported data on one of the secondary outcomes (stomal prolapse).The effects of different surgical approaches on parastomal herniation (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.75; 10 studies, 864 participants; very low-quality evidence) and the occurrence of stomal prolapse (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.85; 1 study, 145 participants; very low-quality evidence) are uncertain.None of the included studies measured other stoma-related morbidity or stoma-related mortality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The present systematic review of randomized and non-randomized studies found inconsistent results between the two compared interventions regarding their potential to prevent parastomal herniation.In conclusion, there is still a lack of high-quality evidence to support the ideal surgical technique of stoma formation. The available moderate-, low-, and very low-quality evidence, does not support or refute the superiority of one of the studied stoma formation techniques over the other.

Parastomal Hernia: Avoidance and Treatment in the 21st Century

Despite medical and surgical advances leading to increased ability to restore or preserve gastrointestinal continuity, creation of stomas remains a common surgical procedure. Every ostomy results in a risk for subsequent parastomal herniation, which in turn may reduce quality of life and increase health care expenditures. Recent evidence-supported practices such as utilization of prophylactic reinforcement, attention to stoma placement, and laparoscopic-based stoma repairs with mesh provide opportunities to both prevent and successfully treat parastomal hernias.

A pilot single-centre randomized trial assessing the safety and efficacy of lateral pararectus abdominis compared with transrectus abdominis muscle stoma placement in patients with temporary loop ileostomies: the PATRASTOM trial

AIM

Transrectal stoma placement is considered the standard technique for positioning a stoma. A prospective series using a novel method of lateral pararectal stoma placement recently revealed a remarkably low stoma herniation rate. A randomized trial was conducted to compare the lateral pararectal with the transrectal stoma position with regard to parastomal herniation, stoma-related morbidity and quality of life.

METHOD

Adult patients undergoing elective placement of a temporary loop ileostomy were eligible for inclusion. Patients were intra-operatively randomized to undergo either a lateral pararectal or a transrectal ileostomy. The primary end-point was the rate of parastomal herniation. Secondary end-points included other stoma-related complications and quality of life. Sample size calculation resulted in 54 patients having to be analysed to detect a difference of parastomal herniation of 30% with an 80% power and a 5% significance level. The trial was registered with the German Clinical Trials Register (registration number DRKS00003534).

RESULTS

Between April 2012 and April 2014, 30 patients were randomized to each group. The incidence of parastomal herniation did not differ between the lateral pararectal (5 of 27) and the transrectal group (4 of 29; P = 0.725). There was also no significant difference regarding other stoma-related complications and the EORTC quality of life scales C30 and CR29.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of parastomal herniation and other stoma-related complications did not differ between the groups. However, due to the limited sample size a small difference in favour of one of the two stoma placement techniques cannot be entirely ruled out.

A case-controlled pilot study assessing the safety and efficacy of the Stapled Mesh stomA Reinforcement Technique (SMART) in reducing the incidence of parastomal herniation

BACKGROUND

Parastomal hernias (PH) are frequent with a high morbidity. Three randomised controlled trials have shown that prophylactic mesh stoma reinforcement significantly reduces their incidence. Implantation and fixation of mesh can be time-consuming, difficult to perform laparoscopically and does not deal with the excessive stretching of the trephine and the creation of an oversized defect. The Stapled Mesh stomA Reinforcement Technique (SMART) obviates these technical problems. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of a novel surgical technique called SMART in preventing parastomal herniation.

METHOD

SMART uses a purpose designed circular stapling gun (Compact™, Frankenman International Limited) of various diameters to create a precise trephine and simultaneously fixes a mesh sub-peritoneally and circumferentially to the trephine. Recruited patients were deemed to be high risk for parastomal herniation and randomisation in a controlled trial was contraindicated. Incidence of parastomal related symptoms and recurrences were documented at clinic visits and radiological confirmation of recurrences, when available, was used for final analysis. A control group of patients who underwent stoma resiting without mesh reinforcement for parastomal herniation was used for comparative purposes.

RESULTS

22 patients (16 F:6 M, mean age 49 ± 16 years, BMI 33.0 ± 7.0) underwent SMART (18 open, 4 laparoscopic). There were no intra-operative or early stoma complications. During a median FU of 21 months (range 12-24), four patients (19%) were diagnosed with recurrent parastomal herniation, one of which required re-operation. The parastomal herniation rate (73%) in the control group (6 F:5 M) was significantly higher (p = 0.003) although patients had similar age (59 ± 15 years, p = 0.1) and body-mass index (29.0 ± 3.0, p = 0.1).

CONCLUSION

SMART is a new and simple technique of precisely creating a reinforced stoma trephine at both open and laparoscopic surgery. It obviates the technical disadvantages of traditional stoma formation. This pilot study, in a selected group of patients at high risk for parastomal herniation, indicates that the procedure is clinically safe but randomised controlled trials are required to determine its efficacy in reducing parastomal herniation in all patients undergoing elective stoma formation.

Stoma siting and the 'arcuate line' of Douglas: might it be of relevance to later herniation?

AIM

Preoperative stoma site marking aims to select an appropriate location for stoma positioning but there are no fixed anatomical points of reference. A stoma raised below the arcuate line (AL) of the posterior rectus sheath may be a contributing factor to later herniation.

METHOD

The patients' preferred position for a stoma was marked preoperatively by a nurse stomatherapist in 75 unselected cases. The position of the AL was determined in relation to standard anatomical landmarks (umbilicus, xiphoid process, pubic symphysis and the anterior superior iliac spines).

RESULTS

The proportion of patients whose stoma trephine was sited below the AL varied with the anatomical landmark examined. Measurements of symphysis pubis to xiphoid process or height above the iliac spines revealed 36-41% of chosen sites were at or below the AL. In 16 of 29 (55%) women the marked sites were at or below the AL. Of 44 patients who had their site marked above the AL, 23 (53%) were within 2 cm of the AL. In obese patients and those with a waist circumference greater than 100 cm over 50% had their site marked at or within 2 cm of the AL.

CONCLUSION

To ensure a stoma site is above the AL of the posterior rectus sheath its centre should be at least 4 cm above a horizontal line between the anterior superior iliac spines. This might reduce later herniation rates.

Lateral pararectal versus transrectal stoma placement for prevention of parastomal herniation

BACKGROUND

A parastomal hernia is defined as an incisional hernia related to a stoma and belongs to the most common stoma-related complications. Many factors concerning the operative technique which are considered to influence the incidence of parastomal herniation have been investigated. However, it remains unclear whether the enterostomy should be placed through or lateral to the rectus abdominis muscle in order to prevent parastomal herniation and other important stoma complications for people undergoing abdominal wall enterostomy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess if there is a difference regarding the incidence of parastomal herniation and other stomal complications, such as ileus and stenosis, in lateral pararectal versus transrectal stoma placement in people undergoing elective or emergency abdominal wall enterostomy.

SEARCH METHODS

In October and November 2012 we searched for all types of published and unpublished randomized and non-randomized studies with no restriction on language, date or country (search dates in brackets). We searched the bibliographic databases The Cochrane Library (4 October 2012), MEDLINE (1 October 2012), EMBASE (10 October 2012), LILACS (29 November 2012), and Science Citation Index Expanded (4 October 2012). We also searched the reference lists of all relevant studies and the trial registers ClinicalTrials.gov (9 October 2012), World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal (10 October 2012), as well as three additional trial registers not included in the ICTRP (27 November 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized and non-randomized studies comparing lateral pararectal versus transrectal stoma placement with regard to parastomal herniation and other stoma-related complications.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Data analyses were conducted according to the recommendations of The Cochrane Collaboration and the Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group (CCCG). Quality of evidence was rated according to GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation).

MAIN RESULTS

Nine retrospective cohort studies with a total of 761 participants met the inclusion criteria. All included studies reported results for the primary outcome (parastomal herniation), and one study also reported data on one of the secondary outcomes (stomal prolapse). None of the included studies compared the two interventions with regard to other secondary outcomes.There was neither a significant difference in terms of the risk for parastomal herniation (risk ratio (RR) 1.29; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 2.1) nor with regard to the occurrence of stomal prolapse (RR 1.23; 95% CI 0.39 to 3.85). An I² value of 65% indicated substantial statistical heterogeneity in the meta-analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The poor quality of the included evidence does not allow a robust conclusion regarding the objectives of the review. This review highlights a clear uncertainty as to the relative merits of either approach. There is a need for randomized trials to evaluate the effectiveness of the lateral pararectal versus the transrectal approach in preventing parastomal herniation and other stoma-related morbidity in people requiring enterostomy placement.

The persistent challenge of parastomal herniation: a review of the literature and future developments

AIM

The aim of this review article was to outline current evidence relating to the treatment and prevention of parastomal herniation with a view to guide surgeons dealing with patients potentially affected by this complication.

METHOD

Medline and PubMed databases were searched using the keywords 'parastomal hernia/herniation', 'stoma hernia/herniation' and 'stoma complications'. Evidence was obtained from randomized and non-randomized studies. Case reports and articles not written in English were excluded. Qualitative assessment of all included studies was performed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine 2011 levels of evidence.

RESULTS

The search revealed a total of 228 publications of which 115 fulfilled the selection criteria. Stoma formation through the rectus muscle is complicated by parastomal herniation in up to 50% of cases. There is no conclusive evidence that alternative techniques (e.g. extraperitoneal, lateral rectus abdominis positioned stoma) are superior. Open and laparoscopic parastomal hernia repair have similar recurrence rates up to 50%. The 'Sugarbaker' technique appears to be superior to the 'keyhole' technique when a laparoscopic approach is used. Prophylactic mesh reinforcement of the stoma trephine appears to reduce the herniation rate to approximately 15% and is accompanied by a decrease in symptomatic hernias requiring repair without any difference in stoma-related morbidity.

CONCLUSION

Large prospective controlled trials are required to compare surgical techniques of stoma formation in reducing the incidence of parastomal herniation. Despite limited evidence, routine prophylactic mesh reinforcement of the stoma trephine should be offered to all patients undergoing permanent stoma formation.