Routine use of gastrograffin enema prior to the reversal of a loop ileostomy

Factors affecting timing of loop ileostomy closure: a regional centre's experience with 106 patients

INTRODUCTION

The burden of defunctioning ileostomy is significant with up to two thirds of patients reporting stoma-related morbidity. While timely reversal is safe and cost-effective, the time to reversal in regional Australian hospitals is not well described in professional publications. We aim to assess the current timeliness of ileostomy closure and identify possible reasons for delaying closure.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of loop ileostomies created and reversed in Launceston General Hospital for both rectal cancer surgery and other benign indications was undertaken. Patients with loop ileostomy created between 2010 and 2020 were included. Clinical data of timing of events, complications, readmission and stoma follow-up were recorded; and analysed using multivariate regression analyses to identify clinically relevant risk factors for delayed closure.

RESULTS

A total of 123 patients underwent loop-ileostomy formation during the study period, of which 106 patients (86.2%) were reversed. Median time to closure was 8.5 months (IQR 5.2-12.4) for patients with rectal cancers, compared to 5.2 months (IQR 3.6-9.3) for patients who did not have rectal cancer, with a difference of 3.4 months (95% CI 0.9, 5.9; P = 0.008). Adjuvant chemotherapy and unexpected readmission to hospital were associated with delayed reversal (P = 0.0081 and P = 0.0005, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Stoma reversal is often scheduled 3-6 months after creation. More than two-thirds of patients experienced delays due to changing clinical concerns and non-clinical factors, such as unexpected delays at each stage of surgical planning. Early placement on the waiting list and better-coordinated follow-ups may expedite reversal surgery and reduce associated morbidities.

Early vs. standard reversal ileostomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Formation of a defunctioning loop ileostomy is common after mid and low rectal resection. Historically, they were reversed between 3 and 6 months after initial resection. Recently, earlier closure (< 14 days) has been suggested by some current randomised controlled trials. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of early stoma closure on surgical and patient outcomes.

Methods

A systematic review of the current randomised controlled trial literature comparing early and standard ileostomy closure after rectal surgery was performed. Specifically, we examined surgical outcomes including; morbidity, mortality and quality of life.

Results

Six studies met the predefined criteria and were included in our analysis. 275 patients underwent early stoma closure compared with 259 patients having standard closure. Overall morbidity was similar between both groups (25.5% vs. 21.6%) (OR, 1.47; 95% CI 0.75–2.87). However, there tended to be more reoperations (8.4 vs. 4.2%) (OR, 2.02, 95% CI 0.99–4.14) and small bowel obstructions/postoperative ileus (9.3% vs. 4.4%) (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.22–0.90) in the early closure group, but no difference across the other domains.

Conclusions

Early closure appears to be a feasible in highly selective cases after good perioperative counselling and shared decision-making. Further research on quality of life outcomes and long term benefits is necessary to help define which patients are suitable candidates for early closure.

The management of asymptomatic radiological anastomotic leakage following anterior resection

BACKGROUND

The evidence to guide the management of asymptomatic radiologically-detected anastomotic leakages (ARAL) following anterior resection (AR) with diverting ileostomy is deficient. This study describes the outcomes of managing ARAL one of the UK teaching hospitals.

METHOD

The study included all patients diagnosed with ARAL following AR during 8 years period (2012-2020). The following data were retrospectively collected: patient demographics, surgical indication, anastomotic technique, tumour staging, neoadjuvant therapy, how ARAL was managed, the outcomes and duration to heal and ileostomy reversal.

RESULTS

A total of 35 patients (M = 24) who developed ARAL during the study period were included. In 32 patients, AR was performed for rectal cancer. All patients with ARAL were treated conservatively and in 31 (89%) patients, there was complete resolution of the leakage within a median duration of 6 months. Covering loop ileostomies were reversed in 26 (74%) patients with a median interval to reversal of 10 months.

CONCLUSION

Most asymptomatic radiologically-detected anastomotic leakages after anterior resection heal with conservative treatment in the presence of a covering loop ileostomy with an expected average delay of 6 months for the leakage to heal before covering ileostomies can be reversed.

Improving the time to ileostomy closure following an anterior resection for rectal cancer in the UK

AIM

Delayed closure of ileostomy following an anterior resection for rectal cancer in the UK is common. The aims of this study were (i) to investigate the variation in patient pathways between hospitals, (ii) to identify the key learning points from units with the shortest time to closure and (iii) to develop guidance for a pathway to minimize delay in ileostomy closure.

METHOD

This was a mixed methods study. Thirty-eight colorectal units in the UK completed a short online survey. Nine colorectal units in Wales filled in an additional, expanded version of the survey. Semi-structured interviews were performed with clinicians from the six best performing units in terms of timely ileostomy closure. The optimal pathway suggested is based on the best evidence available and the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland guidelines.

RESULTS

Qualitative analysis revealed that 5% of units (n = 2) have a local target time for ileostomy closure. Of all units, 90% (n = 34) would consider implementing a pathway if guidelines were developed. In-depth interviews highlighted the importance of a multidisciplinary approach, a dedicated coordinator to facilitate timely booking, and consensus on whether closure should be performed before or after adjuvant chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

There is a lack of national guidance in timing of contrast studies and ileostomy closure. Key aspects to consider are better information at consent regarding stoma closure timing, a dedicated person to track patients and the planning of contrast studies at discharge from initial surgery. With a dedicated approach closure of ileostomy within 10-12 weeks is feasible for most units.

Contrast-enhanced abdominal computed tomography to evaluate anastomotic integrity before ileostomy closure in postoperative colorectal cancer patients

PURPOSE

To investigate the usefulness of contrast-enhanced abdominal computed tomography (CECT) to predict clinically significant anastomotic leakage (CSAL) in patients who received colorectal cancer surgery with diverting ileostomy.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, patients who underwent colorectal cancer surgery with diverting ileostomy from January 2014 to May 2018 and postoperative CECT were included. The performance of significant CECT features, identified using multivariable logistic regression, to predict CSAL was calculated. In subgroup analysis, the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCs) were compared between CECT and water-soluble contrast enema (WSCE) using DeLong's method.

RESULTS

Of 325 patients (median age, 58 years; 213 men), CECT was routinely performed to evaluate cancer status in 307 (94.5%), and CSAL was observed in 28 (8.6%). After multivariable adjustment, anastomotic mural defect (odds ratio [OR] 5.24; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.77-15.51; p = 0.003), perianastomotic air (OR 7.28; 95% CI 1.82-29.17; p = 0.007) and ischemic colitis (OR 3.30; 95% CI 1.13-9.61; p = 0.029) were significantly associated with CSAL. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values of significant CECT features were 60.7%, 88.2%, 85.9%, 32.7%, and 96.0%, respectively. In subgroup analysis of 144 patients, the AUROC using significant CECT features (optimal sensitivity/specificity, 50.0%/90.4%) was comparable to that using WSCE (optimal sensitivity/specificity, 12.5%/97.8%) to predict CSAL (0.704 vs. 0.552, p = 0.085).

CONCLUSION

CECT performed after colorectal cancer surgery may be useful to assess anastomotic integrity before ileostomy closure, especially to negatively predict CSAL. In the presence of anastomotic mural defect, perianastomotic air, or ischemic colitis, WSCE may be recommended to exclude CSAL.

Out of the Loop: The Value of a Preoperative Loopogram for Colostomy Reversal in Trauma

BACKGROUND

Stoma is occasionally fashioned during trauma surgery. A loopogram is routinely conducted in the surgical planning for stoma reversal. This is associated with medical and cost implications. A study was undertaken to evaluate the influence of loopograms on the management of trauma patients at a Johannesburg hospital.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of records in the stoma database (January 2013 to December 2018) was conducted. The patient demographics, method of injury, stoma-type, loopogram findings and post-operative courses were analysed.

RESULTS

112 records were obtained. 9 (8%) patients were excluded for pending investigations or surgery. 13 (11.6%) patients were excluded for incomplete data. The remaining 90 (80.3%) patients, with a mean age of 32.9 had non-contributory loopograms and underwent a reversal procedure. 43 (47.8%) had a loop colostomy while 47 (52.2%) had undergone a Hartmann's procedure. Mechanism of injury was stab wounds (81.4%L; 61.7%H); gunshot wounds (13.9%L; 29.7%H) and blunt trauma (L5% and 9%H). The post-operative complication rate was 30% for the loop group (2.3% ≥ Clavien-Dindo 3) and 25.5% for the Hartmann's group (4% ≥ Clavien-Dindo 3). The average timing to reversal was 38 weeks (range 12-60) in the Hartmann's group and 22 weeks (range 12-32) the loop colostomy group.

CONCLUSION

Significant findings are infrequent on loopogram for trauma patients. When these findings are detected, the effect on management is questionable. They are not without complications and have cost and time implications. Loopograms are helpful in selective cases rather than as a routine investigation, particularly in resource-limited settings.

Evaluation of Pelvic Anastomosis by Endoscopic and Contrast Studies Prior to Ileostomy Closure: Are Both Necessary? A Single Institution Review

Contrast enema is the gold standard technique for evaluating a pelvic anastomosis (PA) prior to ileostomy closure. With the increasing use of flexible endoscopic modalities, the need for contrast studies may be unnecessary. The objective of this study is to compare flexible endoscopy and contrast studies for anastomotic inspection prior to defunctioning stoma reversal. Patients with a protected PA undergoing ileostomy closure between July 2014 and June 2019 at our institution were retrospectively identified. Demographics and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing preoperative evaluation with endoscopic and/or contrast studies were analyzed. We identified 207 patients undergoing ileostomy closure. According to surgeon's preference, 91 patients underwent only flexible endoscopy (FE) and 100 patients underwent both endoscopic and contrast evaluation (FE + CE) prior to reversal. There was no significant difference in pelvic anastomotic leak (2.2% vs. 1%), anastomotic stricture (1.1% vs. 6%), pelvic abscess (2.2% vs. 3.0%), or postoperative anastomotic complications (4.4% vs. 9%) between groups FE and FE + CE (P > .05). Flexible endoscopy alone appears to be an acceptable technique for anastomotic evaluation prior to ileostomy closure. Further studies are needed to determine the effectiveness of different diagnostic modalities for pelvic anastomotic inspection.

Less is more-the best test for anastomotic leaks in rectal cancer patients prior to ileostomy reversal

PURPOSE

No clear consensus exists on how to routinely assess the integrity of the colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal. The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of contrast enema, endoscopic procedures, and digital rectal examination in rectal cancer patients in this setting.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed. Studies assessing at least one index test for which a 2 × 2 table was calculable were included. Hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated and used for test comparison. Paired data were used where parameters could not be calculated. Methodological quality was assessed with the QUADAS-2 tool.

RESULTS

Two prospective and 11 retrospective studies comprising 1903 patients were eligible for inclusion. Paired data analysis showed equal or better results for sensitivity and specificity of both endoscopic procedures and digital rectal examination compared to contrast enema. Subgroup analysis of contrast enema according to methodological quality revealed that studies with higher methodological quality reported poorer sensitivity for equal specificity and vice versa. No case was described where a contrast enema revealed an anastomotic leak that was overseen in digital rectal examination or endoscopic procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopy and digital rectal examination appear to be the best diagnostic tests to assess the integrity of the colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal. Accuracy measures of contrast enema are overestimated by studies with lower methodological quality. Synopsis of existing evidence and risk-benefit considerations justifies omission of contrast enema in favor of endoscopic and clinical assessment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42019107771.

Flexible endoscopy is enough diagnostic prior to loop ileostomy reversal

PURPOSE

This study investigates whether contrast enema (CE) and flexible endoscopy (FE) should be performed routinely after low anterior resection (LAR) before ileostomy reversal. Additionally, the impact of previous anastomotic leakage (AL) on diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) was assessed.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected tertiary care data of two centers. Consecutive rectal cancer patients undergoing LAR with loop ileostomy formation were included. Before ileostomy reversal, all patients were assessed by CE and FE. DTA of FE and CE for asymptomatic AL in patients who had previously suffered from clinically relevant AL (group 1) compared with those without apparent AL after LAR (group 0) were assessed separately.

RESULTS

Two hundred ninety-three patients were included in the analysis, 86 in group 1 and 207 in group 0. Overall sensitivity for detection of asymptomatic AL was 76% (FE) and 60% (CE). Specificity was 100% for both tests. DTA of FE was equal or superior to CE in all subgroups. Prevalence of asymptomatic AL at the time of testing was 1.4% in group 0 and 25.6% in group 1.

CONCLUSION

Flexible endoscopy is the more accurate diagnostic test for the detection of asymptomatic anastomotic leaks prior to ileostomy reversal. Contrast enema showed no gain of information. In the group without complications after the initial rectal resection, 104 must be tested to find one leak prior to reversal. In those patients, routine diagnostic testing additional to digital rectal examination may be questioned.

Anastomotic Sinus That Developed From Leakage After a Rectal Cancer Resection: Should We Wait for Closure of the Stoma Until the Complete Resolution of the Sinus?

Purpose

The aims of this study were to identify the clinical characteristics of an anastomotic sinus and to assess the validity of delaying stoma closure in patients until the complete resolution of an anastomotic sinus.

Methods

The subject patients are those who had undergone a resection of rectal cancer from 2011 to 2017, who had a diversion ileostomy protectively or therapeutically and who developed a sinus as a sequelae of anastomotic leakage. The primary outcomes that were measured were the incidence, management and outcomes of an anastomotic sinus.

Results

Of the 876 patients who had undergone a low anterior resection, 14 (1.6%) were found to have had an anastomotic sinus on sigmoidoscopy or a gastrografin enema before their ileostomy closure. In the 14 patients with a sinus, 7 underwent ileostomy closure as scheduled, with a mean closure time of 4.1 months. The remaining 7 patients underwent ileostomy repair, but it was delayed until after the follow-up for the widening of the sinus opening by using digital dilation, with a mean closure time of 6.9 months. Four of those remaining seven patients underwent stoma closure even though their sinus condition had not yet been completely resolved. No pelvic septic complications occurred after closure in any of the 14 patients with an anastomotic sinus, but 2 of the 14 needed a rediversion due to a severe anastomotic stricture.

Conclusion

Patients with an anastomotic sinus who had been carefully selected underwent successful ileostomy closure without delay.

Contrast radiography before diverting stoma closure in rectal cancer is not necessary on a routine basis

INTRODUCTION

Diverting stomata are recommended in patients with low anterior resection and risk factors in order to reduce the severity of anastomotic leaks. Usually, a radiology study is performed prior to the closure of the stoma to detect subclinical leaks. The aim of the present study is to assess the clinical utility of the radiology study.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of patients undergoing anterior rectal resection for rectal cancer and those who underwent stoma closure without contrast enema. This study was carried out after a retrospective review of radiology study results prior to the closure of the stoma in patients operated from 2007 to 2011.

RESULTS

Eighty-six patients met the study criteria. Thirteen patients (15.1%) presented pelvic sepsis. Contrast enema before stoma closure was pathological in 8 patients (9.3%). Five out of the 13 patients with pelvic sepsis had a pathological radiological study, compared to only 3 out of the 73 patients without intra-abdominal complications after rectal resection (38.5% vs. 4.1%; P=.001). Based on these results, we conducted a prospective study omitting the contrast enema in patients with no postoperative complications. Thirty-eight patients had their stoma closed without a prior radiology study. None of the patients presented pelvic sepsis.

CONCLUSIONS

Radiology studies of the colorectal anastomosis before reconstruction can safely be omitted in patients without pelvic sepsis after the previous rectal resection.

Considerations in Stoma Reversal

Temporary stomas are frequently used in the management of diverticulitis, colorectal cancer, and inflammatory bowel disease. These temporary stomas are used to try to mitigate septic complications from anastomotic leaks and to avoid the need for reoperation. Once acute medical conditions have improved and after the anastomosis has been proven to be healed, stomas can be reversed. Contrast enemas, digital rectal examination, and endoscopic evaluation are used to evaluate the anastomosis prior to reversal. Stoma reversal is associated with complications including anastomotic leak, postoperative ileus, bowel obstruction, enterocutaneous fistula, and, most commonly, surgical site infection. Furthermore, many stomas, which were intended to be temporary, may not be reversed due to postoperative complications, adjuvant therapy, or prohibitive comorbidities.

The novel appearance of low rectal anastomosis on contrast enema following laparoscopic anterior resection: discriminating anastomotic leaks from "dog-ears" on water-soluble contrast enema and flexible sigmoidoscopy

PURPOSE

Interpretation of water-soluble contrast enema following laparoscopic low anterior resection can be very challenging for both radiologists and colorectal surgeons. Discriminating the radiological appearances secondary to anastomotic configuration from those caused by actual anastomotic dehiscence is a common problem and may be made worse with the advent of laparoscopic surgery. The aim of this study is to identify potential novel appearances of the water-soluble contrast enema (WSCE) images of rectal anastomosis following laparoscopic low anterior resection to radiologists and surgeons.

METHODS

We enrolled 45 patients who underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection with proximal de-functioning loop ileostomy within a specialized colorectal unit. The water-soluble contrast enema reports were reviewed. Two blinded colorectal radiologists independently reviewed the images of patients suspected of anastomotic leak. All of these patients also underwent a flexible sigmoidoscopy to confirm or exclude anastomotic leak before reversal of loop ileostomy. Inter-observer concordance was calculated.

RESULTS

Seven out of eighteen patients (38.9%) were found to have true anastomotic leaks on flexible sigmoidoscopy (15% overall leak rate). In the remaining eleven patients the image appearances were attributed to the appearance of the anastomotic 'dog-ear effect', created by the anastomotic configuration due to multiple firing of the intra-corporeal laparoscopic stapling device. Radiologist inter-observer concordance was 83%. Sensitivity was 100%, specificity 71%, positive-predictive value (38.9%) and negative-predictive value (100%).

CONCLUSIONS

The novel appearances of laparoscopic-stapled rectal anastomoses in WSCE can be mistaken for anastomotic leak. To avoid delay in reversal of ileostomy, a flexible sigmoidoscopy can be used to confirm or exclude a leak.

Water-Soluble Enema Prior to Ileostomy Closure in Patients Undergoing Low Anterior Resection: Is It Necessary?

BACKGROUND

Diverting ileostomy is recommended in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and low anterior resection for low-rectal cancer. Prior to ileostomy reversal, water-soluble enema is performed to assess the low colorectal anastomosis. The aim of this study was to assess whether performance of routine water-soluble enema prior to ileostomy takedown is necessary.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All mid-low rectal cancer patients who underwent low anterior resection with temporary diverting ileostomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, between 2006 and 2013, were identified, retrospectively. The colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy takedown was evaluated by digital rectal exam, rigid proctoscopy, and water-soluble enema. The rectal exam and proctoscopy findings were compared to those of the water-soluble enema. The efficacy of routine water-soluble enema was assessed.

RESULTS

Three hundred and twelve (184 male) patients (mean age 62.2 ± 17 years) met the inclusion criteria. Ten patients (3 %) experienced a contained anastomotic leak in the early postoperative period, of whom six had a positive intraoperative air leak test at the index operation. At follow-up, 12 patients (4 %) presented with anastomotic stricture, which was diagnosed by rectal exam and proctoscopy. In 11 of them, water-soluble enema showed anastomotic stricture. In terms of anastomotic defects, sinus was documented in two patients (0.6 %), yet digital rectal exam and proctoscopy were normal. No late septic complications related to the colorectal anastomosis after ileostomy closure were reported. The sensitivity of rectal exam, and proctoscopy for the diagnosis of anastomotic stricture was 100 %, while its negative predictive value for the diagnosis of anastomotic defect was 99 %.

CONCLUSION

Routine water-soluble enema for the evaluation of colorectal anastomosis before ileostomy takedown does not provide additional information that changes patient management. The efficacy of this test in patients after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and low anterior resection should be reassessed.

Is the routine use of a water-soluble contrast enema prior to closure of a loop ileostomy necessary? A review of a single institution experience

Background

The aims of the study were to determine the radiological leak rate in those patients who had undergone a resection for left-sided colorectal cancer and to see if the presence of a leak can be related with the postoperative clinical period. We also aimed to identify any common factors between patients with leak.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of all patients who underwent a left-sided colorectal cancer resection with formation of a defunctioning ileostomy was undertaken. Between 2005 and 2010, 418 such patients were identified.

Results

A water-soluble contrast enema was performed in 339 patients (81.1 %). Of these, 24 (7.1 %) were reported to show an anastomotic leak. Data for these 24 patients is presented in this study.

Twenty-three (95.8 %) of the leaks occurred in patients who had undergone an anterior resection; 95.8 % of the patients with a leak were male. Fifteen (62.5 %) patients underwent neo-adjuvant radiation. The mean length of stay in those patients shown to have a subsequent radiological leak was 18.8 days (median), compared with the overall unit figures of 12 days. Only 29.2 % of the patients who had a leak identified had an uncomplicated postoperative period. Overall 87.5 % of the patients had a reversal of the ileostomy.

Conclusions

Radiological leakage is not uncommon. The majority of patients, who were shown to have a radiological leak in this study, were male, had undergone an anterior resection, had received neo-adjuvant radiation, had a longer initial length of stay and had postoperative complications. Water-soluble contrast enemas could be selectively used in patients with these characteristics.

Utility of contrast enema to assess anastomotic integrity and the natural history of radiological leaks after low rectal surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

There is no clear consensus on how to assess low rectal anastomotic integrity and patency prior to reversal of de-functioning stoma. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the utility of contrast enema (CE) in this context and to clarify the natural history of radiological leaks.

METHODS

Keyword search of electronic databases (Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar) and bibliographic cross-referencing were performed to identify appropriate studies. Data extraction and synthesis was performed with the primary outcomes being the sensitivity and specificity of CE for detecting clinically significant abnormalities. Statistical analysis was performed using Open Meta-Analyst software. Narrative review of outcomes including those of clinical and radiological leaks was also undertaken.

RESULTS

A total of 1,142 CE from 11 articles were included in the final meta-analysis. CE had high specificity (95.4; 95 % confidence interval = 92.0-97.4) and negative predictive value (98.4; 97.4-99.1) and moderate sensitivity (79.9; 63.9-89.9) and positive predictive value (64.6; 55.5-72.9) for the detection of clinically significant anastomotic problems. There was a high degree of correlation between CE and clinical examination findings (96.7 %). Occult radiological leaks were seen in 5.7 % of CE, and all but one (97 %) eventually underwent successful reversal. Only three quarters of patients with clinical leak underwent successful reversal.

CONCLUSION

CE is effective at excluding clinically significant anastomotic problems, especially after clinical anastomotic leaks. However, false positive results can be observed in asymptomatic patients, and it is unclear how much additional information CE provides over clinical assessment in the low uncomplicated anastomosis.

Water soluble contrast enema examination of the integrity of the rectal anastomosis prior to loop ileostomy reversal may be superfluous

PURPOSE

Defunctioning loop ileostomy in low anterior resection (LAR) is routinely used to reduce consequences of anastomotic leakage. The purpose of this study was to analyze which examination technique is optimal for evaluating the integrity of the anastomosis prior to loop ileostomy reversal.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 95 patients who had been subjected to LAR at Helsingborg Hospital and Skåne University Hospital, Sweden, was undertaken between January 2007 and June 2009. The examination techniques of the rectal anastomosis prior to reversal and the clinical outcome after reversal were studied.

RESULTS

Radiologic anastomosis control using water soluble contrast enema, digital rectal examination (DRE), and rectoscopy were performed in 53 % (50/95), 98 % (93/95), and 69 % (66/95), respectively. In two patients, no control of the anastomosis was performed before reversal. Fifty-two percent (49/95) of the patients were examined using all techniques. Six patients demonstrated leakage detected before reversal of which two were only radiological leakages. These two patients underwent loop ileostomy reversal after delay without complications. They were the only ones where the three examination techniques did not prove coherence. Four patients had symptomatic leakage; these were detected with rectoscopy and DRE and verified with enema. Three patients developed anastomotic leakage after loop ileostomy reversal despite normal preoperative examinations. Two of these patients had rectovaginal fistulas (AVFs).

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective study indicates that contrast enema does not provide additional information if rectoscopy and DRE are normal. Despite negative examinations, three of nine leakages were diagnosed after loop ileostomy reversal. Especially, AVFs seem difficult to diagnose.

Incidence, risks and outcome of radiological leak following early contrast enema after anterior resection

INTRODUCTION

Anastomotic leak (AL) is a major complication following anterior resection for colorectal cancer. Early contrast enema may diagnose subclinical anastomotic leakage. Knowledge of factors concerning AL is vital to its detection. The aim of this study was to define the incidence, risks and outcome of radiological leak following routine early contrast enema after anterior resection.

METHODS

A cohort of 129 patients who underwent anterior resection for colorectal cancer and had an early Gastrografin enema between July 2008 and December 2012 in a tertiary referral centre was identified from a prospective database. The severity of AL was defined using the International Study Group of Rectal Cancer (ISREC) grading system.

RESULTS

Of the 129 patients, 65.1 % were male, and the mean age at surgery was 64.6 ± 1.1 years. Gastrografin enema was performed on average on post-operative day 4.8 ± 0.2. Eighteen patients (14.0 %) had a radiological leak on Gastrografin enema, and nine patients (7.0 %) had a clinical AL. On multivariate analysis, only being of male sex and having a loop ileostomy increased the risk of radiological AL. Gastrografin enema had a sensitivity of 100 % (95 % CI 66-100 %) and specificity of 93 % (95 % CI 86-97 %) for predicting clinical AL. Of the 18 patients with radiological leaks, 11 were ISREC grade A, 3 were grade B and 4 were grade C.

CONCLUSIONS

In the current series, early Gastrografin enema following anterior resection identifies a 14 % radiological leak rate and has a high sensitivity and specificity for predicting clinical AL. The majority of radiological leaks may be managed conservatively.

Should routine contrast study be a norm before stoma reversal? A retrospective study of patients with temporary ileostomy

In the developed nations, temporary ileostomies are usually made in order to protect a distal anastomosis after cancer surgery. However, in India and the neighbouring countries ileal perforation is the most common indication for creating a temporary ileostomy after emergency laparotomy. It seems logical to perform a contrast study when a stoma that was made to protect a bowel anastomosis is being reversed in order to check for anastomosis healing, leak or stenosis. Although we do not know precisely when and why we started this practice, it is customary at our institute to do a contrast study before reversal of a temporary ileostomy. At some institutes a routine contrast study is never done. The utility of this practice has not previously been studied at our institute. This study tries to correlate the surgeon's clinical and operative findings with the contrast study report in order to see if it may be reasonable to reverse the stoma without a routine contrast study in selected patients where the surgeon has clearly documented absence of any gross disease in the distal bowel and who have had an uneventful post-operative period. To our knowledge this appears to be the first such attempt from our country.

Routine barium enema prior to closure of defunctioning ileostomy is not necessary

PURPOSE

The use of barium enemas to confirm the anastomotic integrity prior to ileostomy closure is still controversial. The purpose of the study was to determine the utility of routine contrast enema prior to ileostomy closure and its impact on patient management in patients with a low pelvic anastomosis.

METHODS

One hundred forty-five patients had a temporary loop ileostomy constructed to protect a low colorectal or coloanal anastomosis following low anterior resection for rectal cancer. All patients were evaluated by physical examination, proctoscopy, and barium enema prior to ileostomy closure.

RESULTS

The median time from ileostomy creation to closure was 8 months. Five (3.5%) of the 144 patients were found to have clinically relevant strictures at the colorectal anastomosis on routine barium enema. One patient (0.7%) showed anastomotic leak on their barium enema. Overall, 141 patients (97.9%) had an uncomplicated postoperative course. Postoperative complication occurred in three patients (2.1%). None of them showed abnormal barium enema finding, which suggested that routine contrast enema examination did not predict postoperative complication.

CONCLUSION

Routine barium enema evaluation of low pelvic anastomoses before loop ileostomy closure did not provide any additional information for postoperative colorectal anastomotic complication.

Chronic anastomotic sinus after low anterior resection: when can the defunctioning stoma be reversed?

AIM

Anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection may incompletely resolve, resulting in sinus tracts that persist on repeated contrast studies. This case series evaluated the factors that may contribute to sinus healing or to safe reversal of the defunctioning ileostomy.

METHOD

All patients (n = 8) who developed an anastomotic sinus after low anterior resection over an 8-year period were identified from a prospective database.

RESULTS

All patients had been treated with low anterior resections with defunctioning stomas for rectal carcinoma [median follow up 43.5 (13-84) months]. Two patients with an unhealed subclinical leak had the stoma reversed successfully. Of the six patients with clinical leakage, two healed spontaneously, one healed after application of fibrin glue, one developed an anastomotic stricture that was successfully treated by dilatation with subsequent stoma reversal, and one developed recurrent cancer and was not reversed. One patient underwent reversal, despite persistence of the sinus, followed by rectal perforation requiring laparotomy and faecal diversion. Bowel function was satisfactory where the sinus healed spontaneously, but poor where reversal was carried out without sinus healing.

CONCLUSION

Tracks that persist for longer than 1 year are unlikely to heal, but the stoma can be reversed if there had been a subclinical leak previously. A persistent anastomotic sinus leading to a cavity may not be suitable for stoma closure.

[Clinical results of loop ileostomy closures in rectal cancer surgical patients. Effect of chemotherapy in the waiting period]

INTRODUCTION

The introduction of sphincter preservation surgery in rectal cancer has led to an increase in the number of low resections protected with a loop ileostomy. This requires subsequent closure of the stoma, a surgical procedure which is not devoid of morbidity or mortality. The aims of the study were to analyse the clinical results of the passage reconstruction surgery and to find out the interval between both surgeries, as well as the role chemotherapy plays in this.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

The prospective data of patients previously operated on for rectal cancer were used retrospectively with those whose ileostomy was closed between May 2004 and September 2008. Data associated to chemotherapy indication, interval between surgeries and complications were collected and analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 54 consecutive patients with a mean age of 66 years were analysed. The mean interval between surgeries was 178 days, being significantly less in the patient group that did not receive chemotherapy (p=0.008). The post-operative stay was 6.3 days (SD=4.1). Mortality due to respiratory failure was 1.8% and the morbidity was 22.2%, with 7.4% requiring further surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The mortality and morbidity of ileostomy closures are not inconsiderable, although its advantages in the protection of the stoma justify its use. The ileostomy construction interval appears to be significantly affected by post-operative chemotherapy.