Quality of life in a randomized trial of early closure of temporary ileostomy after rectal resection for cancer (EASY trial)

Machine learning prediction model of prolonged delay to loop ileostomy closure after rectal cancer surgery: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Delayed closure of a temporary ileostomy in patients with rectal cancer may cause psychological, physiological, and socioeconomic burdens to patients.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to develop and validate a machine learning-based model to predict the delayed ileostomy closure after surgery in patients with rectal cancer.

DESIGN

A retrospective study.

METHODS

LASSO regression was used for feature screening, and XGBoost was used for machine learning model construction. Model performance was assessed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, calibration curve analysis, clinical decision curve analysis, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and F1 score. The SHAP method was used to interpretate the results of the machine learning model.

RESULTS

A total of 442 rectal cancer patients who received a loop ileostomy were included in this study, and 305 experienced delayed closure (69%). The XGBoost model area under the ROC curve (AUC) of the training set was 0.744 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.686-0.806) and of the test set was 0.809 (95% CI: 0.728-0.889). The importance of each variable, in descending order was body mass index (BMI), postoperative chemotherapy, distance from tumor to anal margin, depth of tumor infiltration, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, and anastomotic stenosis. The importance of SHAP variables in the model from high to low was: 'BMI' 'postoperative chemotherapy' 'distance of the tumor from the anal verge' 'depth of tumor infiltration' 'neoadjuvant radiotherapy' 'anastomotic stenosis'.

CONCLUSION

The XGBoost machine learning model we constructed showed good performance in predicting delayed closure of loop ileostomy in rectal cancer patients. In addition, the SHAP method can help better understand the results of machine learning models.

Does timing of ileostomy closure impact postoperative morbidity?

AIM

Reversal of diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) traditionally occurs at ≥12 weeks after formation. Early closure has been performed in attempts to reduce DLI-associated morbidity. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine whether time to stoma reversal impacts postoperative morbidity.

METHOD

A retrospective review was conducted using institutional-level American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data for adult patients who underwent DLI closure between January 2012 and December 2021 across a multistate health system. Time to DLI closure was stratified into three groups: ≤12, 12-24 or 24-36 weeks. Additional data were obtained from the electronic medical record. The primary outcome was major morbidity after DLI closure.

RESULTS

A total of 482 patients underwent DLI closure. Eighty four patients underwent closure at ≤12 weeks (17.4%), 300 at 12-24 weeks (62.2%) and 98 at 24-36 weeks (20.3%). The most common diagnosis at DLI formation was cancer (n = 211, 43.8%). Patients in the ≤12 weeks closure group more commonly had ulcerative colitis or diverticular disease and a lower American Society of Anesthesiologists class than patients with closure at 24-36 weeks (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in complication severity, overall major morbidity or its individual components amongst the time to DLI closure groups. There were no differences in anastomotic leaks or need for laparotomy. On multivariable analysis, immunosuppressive therapy and preoperative haematocrit <30% were significant risk factors for major morbidity after DLI closure.

CONCLUSION

Major morbidity did not differ by time to DLI closure group, indicating that closure at ≤12 weeks is safe in selected patients.

Timing and morbidity of loop ileostomy closure after rectal cancer resection: a prospective observational multicentre snapshot study from Multidisciplinary Italian Study group for STOmas (MISSTO)

PURPOSE

Time to closure and morbidity are significant issues associated with ileostomy reversal after rectal cancer resection. This study aimed to investigate the rate, time, and morbidity associated with ileostomy closure procedure.

METHODS

Between February and December 2022, patients who underwent protective ileostomy after rectal cancer surgery across 45 Italian surgical centres were prospectively included. Data on ileostomy closure times, surgical methods, and complications were collected and analyzed. Both univariate and multivariate statistical tests were employed to assess stoma closure rates and the occurrence of post-operative complications.

RESULTS

A total of 287 patients participated in the study. Ileostomy closure was achieved in 241 patients, yielding overall and 6-month closure rates of 84% and 62%, respectively. The median time for ileostomy closure was 146 days. Direct sutures were used to close approximately 70% of skin defects, while purse-string sutures were applied in around 20%. The overall morbidity rate was 17%, with complications including skin suture dehiscence (7%), small bowel obstruction (6%), and anastomotic leakage (2%). Multivariate analysis revealed that an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score > 2 (p = 0.028), advanced age (p = 0.048), and previous stoma complications (p = 0.048) were independently linked to failure of stoma closure; hypertension (p = 0.036) was found to be a significant independent risk factor for post-operative complications.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that a delay and a significant no-closure rate exist in ileostomy reversal after rectal cancer surgery. Post-operative complications remain high but can be prevented with adequate pre-operative assessment and post-operative care.

Impact of the laparoscopic approach, early closure and preoperative stimulation on outcomes of ileostomy closure after rectal resection

AIM

To evaluate the clinical outcome of early closure of a protective ileostomy and preoperative stimulation of the efferent limb in a cohort of patients with rectal cancer treated surgically, primarily using the laparoscopic approach.

METHODS

We performed an observational retrospective cohort study in a prospectively recorded series of patients with rectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic surgery with a protective loop ileostomy between 2017 and 2022. Ileostomy closure was programmed for within 3 months after surgery. All patients underwent stimulation of the efferent limb. Primary outcomes were morbidity and mortality, length of stay (LOS), and re-admission.

RESULTS

Between 2017 and 2022, 108 patients underwent resection for rectal cancer and protective ileostomy. The laparoscopic approach was performed in 84.3% of patients (n = 91). Permanent ileostomy was performed in 5 patients (4.6%). Ileostomy closure was thus performed in 95.4% of patients (n = 103). Median time to closure was 74.5 days (range 57-113). In 63.1% (n = 65) of patients, reconstructive surgery was performed within 90 days. Prior to closure, efferent limb stimulation was performed in 77.8% (n = 84) of patients. Global morbidity was 26.2% (n = 27) (85.19%, n = 23 Clavien-Dindo I and 7.41%, n = 2 Clavien-Dindo II). The main causes of morbidity were postoperative ileus (10.7%, n = 11) and rectal bleeding (8.7%, n = 9). Anastomosis leakage occurred in 2 patients. Median hospital stay was 6 days (5-7). Readmission was needed in 6.8% (n = 7) of patients.

CONCLUSION

A previous laparoscopic approach, early closure and stimulation of the efferent limb could be a useful strategy to reduce the morbidity and mortality of temporary ileostomy closure.

Long-Term Functional Outcome After Early vs. Late Stoma Closure in Rectal Cancer Surgery: Sub-analysis of the Multicenter FORCE Trial

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of early stoma closure on bowel function after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients participating in the FORCE trial who underwent LAR with protective stoma were included in this study. Patients were subdivided into an early closure group (< 3 months) and late closure group (> 3 months). Endpoints of this study were the Wexner Incontinence, low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), EORTC QLQ-CR29, and fecal incontinence quality of life (FIQL) scores at 1 year.

RESULTS

Between 2017 and 2020, 38 patients had received a diverting stoma after LAR for rectal cancer and could be included. There was no significant difference in LARS (31 vs. 30, p = 0.63) and Wexner score (6.2 vs. 5.8, p = 0.77) between the early and late closure groups. Time to stoma closure in days was not a predictor for LARS (R2 = 0.001, F (1,36) = 0.049, p = 0.83) or Wexner score (R2 = 0.008, F (1,36) = 0.287, p = 0.60) after restored continuity. There was no significant difference between any of the FIQL domains of lifestyle, coping, depression, and embarrassment. In the EORTC QLQ-29, body image scored higher in the late closure group (21.3 vs. 1.6, p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

Timing of stoma closure does not appear to affect long-term bowel function and quality of life, except for body image. To improve functional outcome, attention should be focused on other contributing factors.

A comprehensive evaluation of 80 consecutive robotic low anterior resections: impact of not mobilizing the splenic flexure alongside low-tie vascular ligation as a standardized technique

Rectal cancer surgery represents challenges due to its location. To overcome them and minimize the risk of anastomosis-related complications, some technical maneuvers or even a diverting ileostomy may be required. One of these technical steps is the mobilization of the splenic flexure (SFM), especially in medium/low rectal cancer. High-tie vascular ligation may be another one. However, the need of these maneuvers may be controversial, as especially SFM may be time-consuming and increase the risk of iatrogenic. The objective is to present the short- and long-term outcomes of a low-tie ligation combined with no SFM in robotic low anterior resection (LAR) for mid- and low rectal cancer as a standardized technique. A retrospective observational single-cohort study was carried out at Reina Sofia University Hospital, Cordoba, Spain. 221 robotic rectal resections between Jul-18th-2018 and Jan-12th-2023 were initially considered. After case selection, 80 consecutive robotic LAR performed by a single surgeon were included. STROBE checklist assessed the methodological quality. Histopathological, morbidity and oncological outcomes were assessed. Anastomotic stricture occurrence and distance to anal verge were evaluated after LAR by rectosigmoidoscopy. Variables related to the ileostomy closure such as time to closure, post-operative complications or hospital stay were also considered. The majority of patients (81.2%) presented a mid-rectal cancer and the rest, lower location (18.8%). All patients had adequate perfusion of the anastomotic stump assessed by indocyanine green. Complete total mesorectal excision was performed in 98.8% of the patients with a lymph node ratio < 0.2 in 91.3%. The anastomotic leakage rate was 5%. One patient (1.5%) presented local recurrence. Anastomosis stricture occurred in 7.5% of the patients. The limitations were small cohort and retrospective design. The non-mobilization of the splenic flexure with a low-tie ligation in robotic LAR is a feasible and safe procedure that does not affect oncological outcomes.

Early closure compared to late closure of temporary ileostomy in rectal cancer: a randomized controlled trial study

BACKGROUND

A temporary loop ileostomy is one of the most common methods for the prevention of anastomotic leakage in rectal cancer patients who underwent low anterior resection. However, the optimal timing of loop ileostomy reversal remains unknown. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the debilitating complications caused by early closure of ileostomy in comparison with late closure in rectal cancer patients.

DESIGN

A randomized, controlled, unblinded, and monocentric trial.

METHODS

A total of 104 rectal cancer patients were randomly assigned to the case group of early closure of ileostomy (n = 50) and the control group of late closure of ileostomy (n = 54). This trial was undertaken in a single colorectal institution, a university-affiliated teaching hospital in Tehran, Iran. Randomization and allocation to the trial group were conducted by using variable block randomization based on quadruple numbers. The primary endpoint of this trial was determined by the complications of early ileostomy closure versus those of late closure in rectal cancer patients who had undergone low anterior resection. In early closure, loop ileostomy is reversed 2-3 weeks after the first two courses of adjuvant chemotherapy, while in late closure, the ileostomy is reversed 2-3 weeks after the last course of adjuvant chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Follow-up of 1 year demonstrated a reduction in the risk of complications and an improved quality of life in patients with rectal cancer following low anterior resection and chemotherapy (neoadjuvant and adjuvant) in the case group but did not reach a significant difference (p = 0.555). In addition, there was no significant difference in perioperative outcomes, such as blood loss, operative time, readmission, and reoperation; also, no statistically significant differences were reported between the groups in patients' quality of life or LARS score.

CONCLUSION

In summary, it seems that early closure of ileostomy is not better than late closure in improving patients' quality of life with rectal cancer following low anterior resection and chemotherapy (neoadjuvant and adjuvant); no statistical difference was observed for reduction of risk of ostomy complications. Thus, neither of these methods (early closure versus late closure) is superior to the other, and controversy still exists.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND DATE OF REGISTRATION

IRCT20201113049373N1.

A novel nomogram to predict low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) after ileostomy reversal for rectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) in patients undergoing low or ultra-low anterior resection (LAR) is a common problem and significantly impacts the quality of life. Patients with an ileostomy after LAR are more likely to develop LARS. However, there hasn't been a model predicting LARS occurrence in these patients. This study aims to construct a nomogram to predict the probability of LARS occurrence in patients with temporary ileostomy and guide preventive strategies before reversal.

METHODS

168 patients undergoing LAR with ileostomy from one center were enrolled as the training cohort, and 134 patients of the same inclusion criteria from another center were enrolled as the validation cohort. The training cohort was screened for risk factors for major LARS using univariate and multivariate logistic regression. The nomogram was constructed using the filtered variables, the ROC curve was used to describe the model's discrimination, and the calibration was used to describe the accuracy.

RESULTS

The optimal cut-off value for stoma closure time was 128 days. Three risk factors were identified using logistic regression analysis: preoperative radiotherapy (OR = 3.038, [95%CI 1.75-5.015], P = 0.005), stoma closure time (OR = 2.298, [95%CI 1.088-4.858], P = 0.029) and pN stage (OR = 1.739, [95%CI 1.235-3.980], P = 0.001). A nomogram was constructed based on these three variables and showed good performance predicting major LARS after stoma reversal. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.827 in the training group and 0.821 in the validation group; The calibration curve suggested good precision in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This novel nomogram can accurately predict the probability of major LARS occurrence after ileostomy reversal for rectal cancer patients. This model can help screen ileostomy patients with high risks and guide individualized preventive strategies before stoma reversal.

Costs Related to Diverting Ileostomy After Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Population-Based Healthcare Cost Analysis Based on Nationwide Registers

Low anterior resection for rectal cancer often includes a diverting loop-ileostomy to avoid the severe consequences of anastomotic leakage. Reversal of the stoma is often delayed, which can incur health-care costs on different levels. The aim is to, on population basis, determine stoma-related costs, and to investigate habitual and socioeconomic factors associated to the level of cost. Multi-register design with data from the Swedish Rectal Cancer Registry, the National Prescribed Drug Register, Statistics Sweden and cost-administrative data from the National Board of Health and Welfare. Data was gathered for 3564 patients with rectal cancer surgery 2007 to 2013, for 3 years following the surgery. Factors influencing the cost of inpatient care and stoma-related consumables were assessed with linear regression analyses. All monthly costs were higher for females (consumables P < .001 and in-patient care P = .031). Post-secondary education (P = .003) and younger age (P = .020) was associated with a higher cost for consumables while suffering a surgical complication was associated with increased cost for inpatient care (P < .001). Patients who had their stoma longer had lower monthly costs (consumables P < .001 and in-patient care P < .001). Female gender, longer duration of stoma, young age, and higher education are associated with higher costs for the care of a diverting stoma after rectal cancer surgery. This study does not allow for analyses of causality but the results together with deepened analyses of underlying reasons form a proper basis for decisions in health care planning and allocation of resources. These findings may have implications on the debate of equal care for all.

Can physiological stimulation prior to ileostomy closure reduce postoperative ileus? A prospective multicenter pilot study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the impact of ileostomy closure following preoperative physiological stimulation (PPS) on postoperative ileus (POI) in patients with loop ileostomy after low anterior resection for rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients who underwent ileostomy closure between January 2017 and February 2020 in two tertiary referral centers were prospectively included. PPS stimulation was compared to standard treatment. Stimulation was carried out daily during the 15 days prior to ileostomy closure by the patient's self-instillation of 200 ml of fecal contents from the ileostomy bag via the efferent loop, using a rectal catheter. Standard treatment (ST) consisted of observation. Outcomes measures were POI, morbidity, stimulation feasibility, and predictors to ileus.

RESULTS

A total of 58 patients were included [42 males and 16 females, median age 67 (43-85) years]. PPS was used in 24 patients, who completed the entire stimulation process, and ST in 34 patients. No differences in preoperative factors were found between the two groups. POI was significantly lower in the PPS group (4.2%) vs the ST group (32.4%); p < 0.01, OR: 0.05 (CI 95% 0.01-0.65). The PPS group had a shorter time to restoration of bowel function (1 day vs 3 days) p = 0.02 and a shorter time to tolerance of liquids (1 day vs 2 days), p = 0.04. Age (p = 0.01), open approach at index surgery, p = 0.03, adjuvant capecitabine (p = 0.01). and previous abdominal surgeries (p = 0.02) were associated with POI in the multivariate analysis. C-reactive-protein values on the 3rd (p = 0.02) and 5th (p < 0.01) postoperative day were also associated with POI.

CONCLUSIONS

PPS for patients who underwent ileostomy closure after low anterior resection for rectal cancer is feasible and might reduce POI.

Early versus delayed defunctioning ileostomy closure after low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of safety and functional outcomes

PURPOSE

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis (TSA) to answer whether early closure of defunctioning ileostomy may be suitable after low anterior resection.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched, up to October 2021, for RCTs comparing early closure (EC ≤ 30 days) and delayed closure (DC ≥ 60 days) of defunctioning ileostomy. The risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI was calculated for dichotomous variables and the mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous variables. The GRADE methodology was implemented for assessing Quality of Evidence (QoE). TSA was implemented to address the risk of random error associated with sparse data and/or multiple testing.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs were included for quantitative synthesis. 599 patients were allocated to either EC (n = 306) or DC (n = 293). EC was associated with a higher rate of wound complications compared to DC (RR 2.56; 95% CI 1.33 to 4.93; P = 0.005; I2 = 0%, QoE High), a lower incidence of postoperative small bowel obstruction (RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.24 to 0.89; P = 0.02; I2 = 0%, QoE moderate), and a lower rate of stoma-related complications (RR 0.26; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.42; P < 0.00001; I2 = 0%, QoE moderate). The rate of minor low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) (RR 1.13; 95% CI 0.55 to 2.33; P = 0.74; I2 = 0%, QoE low) and major LARS (RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.59 to 1.09; P = 0.16; I2 = 0%, QoE low) did not differ between the two groups. TSA demonstrated inconclusive evidence with insufficient sample sizes to detect the observed effects.

CONCLUSION

EC may confer some advantages compared with a DC. However, TSA advocated a cautious interpretation of the results.

PROSPERO REGISTER ID

CRD42021276557.

[Nursing interventions in stoma reversal: an integrative reviewIntervenções de enfermagem na inversão do estoma intestinal: uma revisão integrativa]

Introduction

Intestinal stomas have a significant impact on people's quality of life. However, these should be reversed after gastrointestinal transit has been restored or the initial inflammatory response has gone. In addition, patients may refuse to reverse them due to a lack of information and guidance from healthcare professionals. Therefore, it is important to identify nursing interventions in caring for patients with stoma reversal.

Materials and Methods

An integrative literature review was conducted in WOS, PubMed, Scopus, SciELO and Cochrane databases published between 2015 and 2020. 36 articles were selected based on inclusion and exclusion criteria with their methodological analysis.

Results

The following nursing interventions were identified: preoperative assessment, bowel preparation and follow-up of comorbidities in the preoperative period; prophylaxis, skin preparation, surgical technique and abdominal wall closure in the intraoperative period; surgical wound care, quality of life and education in the postoperative period.

Discussion

It is essential to reflect on reversal time, surgical technique and the importance of nursing interventions.

Conclusions

Nursing plays an important role in stoma reversal not only because of physical care and education provided, but also the interventions applicable to social and emotional contexts affecting the patient's lifestyle.

Early Postoperative Complications and Surgical Anatomy After Ileostomy Reversal Among the Population of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

Objective

To assess the frequency of early postoperative complications and surgical anatomy after ileostomy reversal among the population of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.

Materials and methods

In the current study, a total of 241 patients were assessed. Sufficient urine output, usual serum electrolytes and urea were indicators of a sufficient recovery. All patients remained in the ward for a minimum of seven days after surgery to detect early postoperative complications like surgical site infection (SSI), wound dehiscence, small bowel obstruction, and anastomotic leak.

Results

In the present study, 113 (47%) were in age 18-40 years, while 128 (53%) patients were in age 41-60 years. The mean age was 40±10.05. One hundred twenty-three (51%) were male, and 118 (49%) patients were female. One hundred seventy-one (71%) had ileostomy closure in ≤3 months, 70 (29%) had ileostomy closure in >3 months. The mean duration of closure was 03±3.70 months. One hundred and six (44%) had enteric perforation, 87 (36%) had blunt trauma, 48 (20%) had tuberculous abdomen. Moreover, the frequency of early complications of ileostomy closure was analyzed as 19 (8%) had surgical site infection, 14 (6%) patients had wound dehiscence, 12 (5%) patients had small bowel obstruction, and three (1%) patients had anastomotic leakage.

Conclusions

Our study concluded that early postoperative complications and surgical anatomy after ileostomy reversal among the population of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan were surgical site infection (8%), wound dehiscence (6%), small bowel obstruction (5%), and anastomotic leak was (1%).

Low Anterior Resection Syndrome: Predisposing Factors and Treatment

Bowel dysfunction after restorative proctectomy, commonly referred to as Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS), is a common long-term sequela of rectal cancer treatment that has a significant impact on quality of life. While the pathophysiology of LARS is poorly understood, its underlying cause is likely multifactorial, and there are numerous patient, tumor, and treatment-level factors associated with its development. In accordance with these risk factors, several strategies have been proposed to mitigate LARS postoperatively, including modifications in the technical approach to restorative proctectomy and advancements in the multidisciplinary care of rectal cancer. Furthermore, a clinically applicable pre-operative nomogram has been developed to estimate the risk of LARS postoperatively, which may help in counseling patients before surgery. The management of LARS begins with identifying those who manifest symptoms, as postoperative bowel dysfunction often goes unrecognized. This goal is best achieved with the systematic screening of patients using validated Patient-Reported Outcome Measures. Once a patient with LARS is identified, conservative management strategies should be implemented. When available, a dedicated LARS nurse and/or multidisciplinary team can be an invaluable resource in engaging patients and educating them regarding LARS self-care. If symptoms of LARS persist or worsen over time despite conservative measures, second-line interventions, such as transanal irrigation or pelvic floor rehabilitation, can be initiated. A small proportion of patients will ultimately require an intervention such as sacral neuromodulation or permanent colostomy for refractory, major LARS symptoms.

Closure of Temporary Ileostomy 2 Versus 12 Weeks After Rectal Resection for Cancer: A Word of Caution From a Prospective, Randomized Controlled Multicenter Trial

BACKGROUND

The optimum timing for temporary ileostomy closure after low anterior resection is still open.

OBJECTIVE

This trial aimed to compare early (2 wk) versus late (12 wk) stoma closure.

DESIGN

The study included 2 parallel groups in a multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at 3 Swiss hospitals.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing low anterior resection and temporary ileostomy for cancer were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomly allocated to early or late stoma closure. Before closure, colonic anastomosis was examined for integrity.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary efficacy outcome was the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index 6 weeks after resection. Secondary end points included safety (morbidity), feasibility, and quality of life 4 months after low anterior resection.

RESULTS

The trial was stopped for safety concerns after 71 patients were randomly assigned to early closure (37 patients) or late closure (34 patients). There were comparable baseline data between the groups. No difference in quality of life occurred 6 weeks (mean Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index: 99.8 vs 106.0; p = 0.139) and 4 months (108.6 vs 107.1; p = 0.904) after index surgery. Intraoperative tendency of oozing (visual analog scale: 35.8 vs 19.3; p = 0.011), adhesions (visual analog scale: 61.3 vs 46.2; p = 0.034), leak of colonic anastomosis (19% vs 0%; p = 0.012), leak of colonic or ileal anastomosis (24% vs 0%; p = 0.002), and reintervention (16% vs 0%; p = 0.026) were significantly higher after early closure. The concept of early closure failed in 10 patients (27% vs 0% in the late closure group (95% CI for the difference, 9.4%-44.4%)).

LIMITATIONS

The trial was prematurely stopped because of safety issues. The aimed group size was not reached.

CONCLUSIONS

Early stoma closure does not provide better quality of life up to 4 months after low anterior resection but is afflicted with significantly adverse feasibility and higher morbidity when compared with late closure. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B665.

CIERRE DE LA ILEOSTOMA TEMPORAL VERSUS SEMANAS POSTERIOR A LA RESECCIN RECTAL POR CNCER UNA ADVERTENCIA DE UN ESTUDIO MULTICNTRICO CONTROLADO RANDOMIZADO PROSPECTIVO

ANTECEDENTES:El momento óptimo para el cierre temporal de la ileostomía posterior a la resección anterior baja es aun controversial.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tuvo como objetivo comparar el cierre del estoma temprano (2 semanas) versus tardío (12 semanas).DISEÑO:Estudio clínico controlado, randomizado, multicéntrico, de dos grupos paralelos.ENTORNO CLINICO:El estudio se llevó a cabo en 3 hospitales suizos.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron pacientes sometidos a resección anterior baja e ileostomía temporal por cáncer.INTERVENCIONES:Los pacientes fueron asignados aleatoriamente al cierre del estoma temprano o tardío. Antes del cierre, se examinó la integridad de la anastomosis colónica.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACION:El principal resultado de eficacia fue el Índice de Calidad de Vida Gastrointestinal 6 semanas después de la resección. Los criterios secundarios incluyeron la seguridad (morbilidad), factibilidad y calidad de vida 4 meses posterior a la resección anterior baja.RESULTADOS:El estudio se detuvo por motivos de seguridad después de que 71 pacientes fueron asignados aleatoriamente a cierre temprano (37 pacientes) o cierre tardío (34 pacientes). Hubo datos de referencia comparables entre los grupos. No se produjeron diferencias en la calidad de vida 6 semanas (índice de calidad de vida gastrointestinal, media 99,8 vs. 106; p = 0,139) y 4 meses (108,6 vs 107,1, p = 0,904) después de la cirugía inicial. Tendencia intraoperatoria de supuración (escala analógica visual 35,8 vs 19,3, p = 0,011), adherencias (escala analógica visual 61,3 vs 46,2, p = 0,034), fuga de anastomosis colónica (19% vs 0%, p = 0,012), fuga de anastomosis colónica o ileal (24% vs 0%, p = 0,002) y reintervención (16% vs 0%, p = 0,026) fueron significativamente mayores después del cierre temprano. El concepto de cierre temprano fracasó en 10 pacientes (27% vs ninguno en el grupo de cierre tardío (intervalo de confianza del 95% para la diferencia: 9,4% a 44,4%)).LIMITACIONES:El estudio se detuvo prematuramente debido a problemas de seguridad. No se alcanzó el tamaño del grupo previsto.CONCLUSIÓN:El cierre temprano del estoma no proporciona una mejor calidad de vida hasta 4 meses posterior a una resección anterior baja, esto se ve afectado por efectos adversos significativos durante su realización y una mayor morbilidad en comparación con el cierre tardío. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B665.

Evaluating the longitudinal effect of colorectal surgery on health-related quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer

Background and Objectives

Surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC) negatively affects health‐related quality of life (HRQoL). Addressing shortcomings in literature, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of surgery for CRC on the course of HRQoL from baseline up to 2 years after diagnosis.

Methods

In this prospective, population‐based study patients with newly diagnosed CRC were included between 2016 and 2019. HRQoL was assessed by the EORTC QLQ‐C30 questionnaire over time both between and within subgroups of patients that underwent right‐sided colonic, left‐sided colonic, and rectal resection using linear mixed model analyses.

Results

The study included 415 patients of whom 148 patients underwent right‐sided colonic (36%), 147 left‐sided colonic (35%), and 120 rectal resection (29%). Overall, HRQoL scores restored to baseline level 1 year after diagnosis. Impact of surgery seems to be more prominent in patients who underwent rectal resection, as they experienced more pain and had worse role and social functioning scores 4 weeks after surgery. Finally, among patients who underwent left‐sided and rectal resection, physical functioning did not return to baseline level during follow‐up.

Conclusion

This study shows several differences (between‐group and within‐group) in HRQoL according to surgery type and offers perspective which patients may need additional support in the care pathway.

Effects of Evidence-Based Continuing Care Bundle on Health Outcomes in Rectal Cancer Patients With Temporary Stomas: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The patients with temporary stomas after anterior resection for rectal cancer may experience significant impact on their health outcomes, and hence continuing care is necessary and important for these patients. However, the effects of some single continuing care interventions remain unclear. Continuing care bundle may be an effective approach to address this uncertainty.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of an evidence-based continuing care bundle on selected health outcomes in patients with temporary stomas after anterior resection for rectal cancer.

METHODS

This was a multicenter randomized controlled trial. A total of 124 patients with temporary stomas after anterior resection for rectal cancer were recruited from 4 general tertiary hospitals in Guangzhou, China, and were randomly assigned to a control group or an intervention group. Both groups received usual care, whereas the intervention group additionally received evidence-based continuing care bundle. Self-efficacy, quality of life, and stoma-related complications were collected at baseline and 4 and 12 weeks after surgery. Satisfaction and outcomes of stoma reversal were collected at the end of the observation.

RESULTS

The intervention group had significantly improved the self-efficacy (F = 11.88, P = .001), quality of life (F = 17.99, P < .001) over time, satisfaction (t = 4.08, P < .001), and outcomes of stoma reversal (χ2 = 5.93, P = .015) and reduced the incidence of complications (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence-based continuing care bundle can be an effective method to improve the health outcomes among these patients.

IMPLICATION FOR PRACTICE

By using the evidence-based continuing care bundle, nurses can help these patients improve their health outcomes in stoma-specific nursing.

Multidisciplinary management of elderly patients with rectal cancer: recommendations from the SICG (Italian Society of Geriatric Surgery), SIFIPAC (Italian Society of Surgical Pathophysiology), SICE (Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery and new technologies), and the WSES (World Society of Emergency Surgery) International Consensus Project

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although rectal cancer is predominantly a disease of older patients, current guidelines do not incorporate optimal treatment recommendations for the elderly and address only partially the associated specific challenges encountered in this population. This results in a wide variation and disparity in delivering a standard of care to this subset of patients. As the burden of rectal cancer in the elderly population continues to increase, it is crucial to assess whether current recommendations on treatment strategies for the general population can be adopted for the older adults, with the same beneficial oncological and functional outcomes. This multidisciplinary experts' consensus aims to refine current rectal cancer-specific guidelines for the elderly population in order to help to maximize rectal cancer therapeutic strategies while minimizing adverse impacts on functional outcomes and quality of life for these patients.

METHODS

The discussion among the steering group of clinical experts and methodologists from the societies' expert panel involved clinicians practicing in general surgery, colorectal surgery, surgical oncology, geriatric oncology, geriatrics, gastroenterologists, radiologists, oncologists, radiation oncologists, and endoscopists. Research topics and questions were formulated, revised, and unanimously approved by all experts in two subsequent modified Delphi rounds in December 2020-January 2021. The steering committee was divided into nine teams following the main research field of members. Each conducted their literature search and drafted statements and recommendations on their research question. Literature search has been updated up to 2020 and statements and recommendations have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. A modified Delphi methodology was implemented to reach agreement among the experts on all statements and recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2021 SICG-SIFIPAC-SICE-WSES consensus for the multidisciplinary management of elderly patients with rectal cancer aims to provide updated evidence-based statements and recommendations on each of the following topics: epidemiology, pre-intervention strategies, diagnosis and staging, neoadjuvant chemoradiation, surgery, watch and wait strategy, adjuvant chemotherapy, synchronous liver metastases, and emergency presentation of rectal cancer.

Quality of Life and Bowel Function Following Early Closure of a Temporary Ileostomy in Patients with Rectal Cancer: A Report from a Single-Center Randomized Controlled Trial

The aim of this study was to assess quality of life and bowel function in patients undergoing early vs. standard ileostomy closure. We retrospectively assessed patients from our previous randomized controlled trial. Patients with a temporary ileostomy who underwent rectal cancer surgery and did not have anastomotic leakage or other. Early closure (EC; 30 days after creation) and standard closure (SC; 90 days after creation) of ileostomy were compared. Thirty-six months (17–97) after stoma closure, we contacted patients by phone and filled in two questionnaires—The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score. This index trial was not powered to assess the difference in bowel function between the two groups. All the patients in the SC group had anastomosis <6 cm from the anal verge compared to 42 of 43 (97.7%) in the EC group. There were no statistically significant differences between EC (26 patients) and SC (25 patients) groups in the EORTC QLQ-C30 and LARS questionnaires. Global quality of life was 37.2 (0–91.7; ±24.9) in the EC group vs. 34.3 (0–100; ±16.2) in the SC (p = 0.630). Low anterior resection syndrome was present in 46% of patients in the EC and 56% in the SC group (p = 0.858). Major LARS was found more often in younger patients. However, no statistical significance was found (p = 0.364). The same was found with quality of life (p = 0.219). Age, gender, ileostomy closure timing, neoadjuvant treatment, complications had no effect of worse bowel function or quality of life. There was no difference in quality of life or bowel function in the late postoperative period after the early vs. late closure of ileostomy based on two questionnaires and small sample size. None of our assessed risk factors had a negative effect on bowel function o quality of life.

Changes to gastrointestinal function after surgery for colorectal cancer

Bowel function is increasingly considered as an important outcome for patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. Increasing technical skills and technological advances have meant fewer patients require a long-term stoma but this comes at the cost, often, of poor function. With a larger range of treatment options available for a given cancer, both function and oncology should be considered in parallel when counselling patients before surgery. In the perioperative phase, bowel function can be improved with minimally invasive surgery and enhanced recovery after surgery protocols, with limited evidence for targeted medical therapies. Early detection and sound management of surgical complications such as anastomotic leak and stricture can mitigate their adverse effects on bowel function. Long-term gastrointestinal dysfunction manifests as diarrhoea and low anterior resection syndrome for colon and rectal cancer respectively. Multi-modal strategies for low anterior resection syndrome are emerging to improve significantly quality of life after restorative rectal cancer surgery.

A Systematic Review of Early versus Late Closure of Loop Ileostomy

Introduction

A Loop ileostomy is one of the most common techniques used in colorectal surgery to establish a reversible faecal diversion and bypass the large bowels, in order to protect either a downstream colorectal anastomosis or a coloanal anastomosis. However, it is a procedure that can cause a plethora of complications including long term ones such as the psychological effects. Currently, there is no consensus regarding the optimal time to perform closure of a loop ileostomy. Some studies suggested the early reversal of ileostomy procedure as a solution to reduce these complications. This study aims to review the available literature in order to ascertain the benefits behind early closure of loop ileostomy.

Methods

The literature was searched for all studies that included a comparison between the outcomes of early and late closure of loop ileostomy in terms of morbidity, mortality, or quality of life, where available. Early closure of loop ileostomy is defined as closure less than three months and late as more than three months, in accordance with conventional literature. The resultant articles were filtered using our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Finally, the remaining articles were assessed for quality and their results were compared to one another in order to draw our conclusions. Results and Discussion. The results were slightly inclined toward early closure of loop ileostomy. However, there were limitations of the studies reviewed, including the heterogenicity of studies, selection bias, lack of clear definition of measured outcomes, and small sample size. Taking that into consideration, the results of early closure of loop ileostomies in the selected patients were promising and require further investigation.

Pre- and Post-Operative Nutrition Assessment in Patients with Colon Cancer Undergoing Ileostomy

Introduction: Patients undergoing ileostomy surgery often experience electrolyte disturbances and dehydration, especially during the first post-operative period. Recently, research has also begun on how the newly constructed ileostomy affects the patient’s nutritional status. Aim: The aim of the present pilot study was to assess the nutritional status of patients before and after the construction of the ileostomy as well as nutrition-related factors. Material and Method: This was a pilot study. The sample consisted of 13 adult patients diagnosed with colorectal or colon cancer who underwent scheduled ileostomy surgery. The evaluation tool used was “Original Full Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA)”. Patients underwent nutritional assessment before the surgery (time 0), on the 7th post-operative day (time 1), and on the 20th post-operative day (time 2). The statistical significance level was set at p < 0.05. Results: All patients had a drop in MNA score on the 7th and 20th post-operative days. Factors associated with MNA were weight loss, mobility, body mass index (BMI), number of full meals consumed per day, portions of fruits and vegetables consumed per day, and mid-arm circumference, p < 0.05, respectively. Pre-operatively, 38.5%, of patients had severe weight loss (>3 kg), 23% moderate weight loss and 38.5% minimal weight loss. Pre-operatively, 92.3% of participants were able to move on their own and 69.2% on the 20th post-operatively day. Furthermore, BMI >23 kg/m² had 84.6% of participants pre-operatively and 30.8% on the 20th post-operative day. In terms of portions of fruits and vegetables consumed per day, 30.8% of patients consumed at least 2 times, pre-operatively and no one (0%) on the 20th post-operative day. Moreover, pre-operatively all participants (100%) had arm circumference >22 cm while on the 20th post-operative day, only 38.5% of participants had arm circumference >22 cm. Conclusions: In the first 20 days after the construction of an ileostomy, the nutritional status of the patients is significantly affected. Decreased patient nutrition in both quantity and ingredients and reduced fluid intake appear to adversely affect the patient’s nutritional status.

Impact of temporary ileostomy on long-term quality of life and bowel function: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Defunctioning ileostomy is widely used to protect a low colorectal anastomosis. However, the use of an ileostomy may have an impact on long-term bowel function and quality of life after anterior resection. The objectives were to compare bowel function and quality of life outcomes between patients undergoing an anterior resection for rectal cancer, with and without the formation of a diverting ileostomy, and to compare outcomes for early versus late closure of diverting ileostomy.

METHOD

A systematic literature review was performed to identify studies published between 2007 and 2018 comparing bowel function and quality of life outcomes after an anterior resection for rectal cancer in those with and without formation of a diverting ileostomy.

RESULTS

Four studies (three randomized controlled trials) reported bowel function and quality of life outcomes. Pooled analysis for 227 participants showed that having an ileostomy is associated with twice the risk of suffering from low anterior resection syndrome (odds ratio (major low anterior resection syndrome) 1.96, 95% confidence interval 1.1, 3.5; P = 0.02). There were no consistent differences in quality of life. Based on single studies there is limited evidence of some improvements in bowel function but no difference in quality of life after early compared to late closure of ileostomy.

CONCLUSION

There is some evidence for an association between low anterior resection syndrome and the use of a diverting ileostomy to protect a rectal anastomosis. Potential confounders include height of the anastomosis. Further research into the mechanisms underlying this potential association may inform methods to mitigate the harms of an ileostomy.

Diverting Ileostomy Duration Is the Main Determinant of Ileostomy-Related Complications after Surgical Treatment of Rectum Cancer

Background

This study aimed to investigate factors associated with the development of ileostomy complications in rectal cancer patients, including those who received neoadjuvant treatment.

Methods

This retrospective trial included 133 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for rectal cancer with temporary diverting ileostomy. Patients' demographic characteristics as well as the pre- and postclosure outcomes and complications were analyzed.

Results

In logistic regression analysis, longer duration of ileostomy emerged as a significant independent predictor of any complication during ileostomy. The respective odds ratios for 3–6 months and >6 months vs. <3 months of ileostomy duration were as follows: OR, 4.5 (95% CI, 1.2–16.7), p=0.023; and OR, 15.2 (95% CI, 3.1–75.2), p=0.001. An additional stepwise model also identified hypertension as a significant predictor. In stepwise logistic regression model, adjuvant chemoradiotherapy emerged as significant independent predictor of “any ileostomy-related complication after ileostomy closure”: OR, 4.5 (2.0–10.2), p < 0.001.

Conclusion

Duration of ileostomy appears to be the main determinant of ileostomy-related complications. Patients who had received neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy had longer ileostomy duration, which may be attributed to the concerns of the surgeon or to the complications themselves.

Preoperative bowel stimulation prior to ileostomy closure to restore bowel function more quickly and improve postoperative outcomes: a systematic review

AIM

Closure of a diverting ileostomy following restorative surgery is often associated with significant short-term morbidity and variable long-term bowel function. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate if preoperative stimulation of the defunctioned bowel restores bowel function more quickly after ileostomy closure and improves postoperative outcomes when compared with standard preoperative care.

METHOD

MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Google Scholar and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for studies evaluating preoperative bowel stimulation in patients with a temporary ileostomy after low anterior resection or ileal pouch-anal anastomosis, regardless of their design, publication type or language. Study selection, data extraction and study assessment were performed by one reviewer and verified by another. Study results were synthesized narratively. The GRADE approach was used to assess the quality of evidence.

RESULTS

Eight studies involving a total of 267 participants were included. The studies had a moderate to high risk of bias and were of varying methodological quality. Preoperative stimulation of the defunctioned bowel reduced the time to postoperative restoration of bowel function and the length of hospital stay when compared with standard preoperative care. Other functional outcomes and postoperative complication rates were similar to those of standard preoperative care. The overall quality of evidence was very low.

CONCLUSION

Despite these promising early results, there is insufficient high-quality evidence to recommend routine implementation of preoperative bowel stimulation in clinical practice. Nevertheless, there is no evidence suggesting that the intervention worsens outcomes or is unsafe, paving the way for rigorous assessment of effectiveness, acceptability and cost-effectiveness within the context of well-designed clinical trials.

Early versus standard closure of temporary ileostomy in patients with rectal cancer: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

A significant proportion of patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery receive a temporary ileostomy because of its benefits in case of anastomotic dehiscence. However, the best timing for closure remains unclear.

METHODS

Early closure (EC; 30 days after creation) and standard closure (SC; 90 days after creation) of ileostomy were compared in a single-center randomized controlled trial conducted at National Cancer Institute (Vilnius, Lithuania). Patients with a temporary ileostomy who underwent rectal cancer surgery and did not have anastomotic leakage or other serious complications were randomized to early or standard ileostomy closure groups. Thirty days postoperative morbidity following ileostomy closure was the primary outcome of the study.

RESULTS

The trial was prematurely terminated due to the safety reason after 86 patients were randomized to EC (43 patients) and SC (43 patients) groups. The overall 30 days postoperative morbidity rate was dramatically higher in the EC group (27.9% vs 7.9%; P = 0.024). Moreover, severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥3) were present only after EC of ileostomy in five (11.6%) patients.

CONCULSION

Early closure of ileostomy at 30 days after radical rectal resection is not safe and should not be performed.

Functional outcomes from a randomized trial of early closure of temporary ileostomy after rectal excision for cancer

BACKGROUND

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) has a significant impact on postoperative quality of life. Although early closure of an ileostomy is safe in selected patients, functional outcomes have not been investigated. The aim was to compare bowel function and the prevalence of LARS in patients who underwent early or late closure of an ileostomy after rectal resection for cancer.

METHODS

Early closure (8-13 days) was compared with late closure (after 12 weeks) of the ileostomy following rectal cancer surgery in a multicentre RCT. Exclusion criteria were: signs of anastomotic leakage, diabetes mellitus, steroid treatment and postoperative complications. Bowel function was evaluated using the LARS score and the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Bowel Function Instrument (BFI).

RESULTS

Following index surgery, 112 participants were randomized (55 early closure, 57 late closure). Bowel function was evaluated at a median of 49 months after stoma closure. Eighty-two of 93 eligible participants responded (12 had died and 7 had a permanent stoma). Rates of bowel dysfunction were higher in the late closure group, but this did not reach statistical significance (major LARS in 29 of 40 participants in late group and 25 of 42 in early group, P = 0·250; median BFI score 63 versus 71 respectively, P = 0·207). Participants in the late closure group had worse scores on the urgency/soiling subscale of the BFI (14 versus 17; P = 0·017). One participant in the early group and six in the late group had a permanent stoma (P = 0·054).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing early stoma closure had fewer problems with soiling and fewer had a permanent stoma, although reduced LARS was not demonstrated in this cohort. Dedicated prospective studies are required to evaluate definitively the association between temporary ileostomy, LARS and timing of closure.

Cost analysis in a randomized trial of early closure of a temporary ileostomy after rectal resection for cancer (EASY trial)

Background

Hospital costs associated with the treatment of rectal cancer are considerable and the formation of a temporary stoma accounts for additional costs. Results from the EASY trial showed that early closure of a temporary ileostomy was associated with significantly fewer postoperative complications but no difference in health-related quality of life up to 12 months after rectal resection. The aim of the present study was to perform a cost analysis within the framework of the EASY trial.

Methods

Early closure (8–13 days) of a temporary stoma was compared to late closure (> 12 weeks) in the randomized controlled trial EASY (NCT01287637). The study period and follow-up was 12 months after rectal resection. Inclusion of participants was made after index surgery. Exclusion criteria were diabetes mellitus, steroid treatment, signs of postoperative complications or anastomotic leakage. Clinical effectiveness and resource use were derived from the trial and unit costs from Swedish sources. Costs were calculated for the year 2016 and analysed from the perspective of the healthcare sector.

Results

Fifty-five patients underwent early closure, and 57 late closure in eight Swedish and Danish hospitals between 2011 and 2014. The difference in mean cost per patient was 4060 US dollar (95% confidence interval 1121; 6999, p value < 0.01) in favour of early closure. A sensitivity analysis, taking protocol-driven examinations into account, resulted in an overall difference in mean cost per patient of $3608, in favour of early closure (95% confidence interval 668; 6549, p value 0.02). The predominant cost factors were reoperations, readmissions and endoscopic examinations.

Conclusions

The significant cost reduction in this study, together with results of safety and efficacy from the randomized controlled trial, supports the routine use of early closure of a temporary ileostomy after rectal resection for cancer in selected patients without signs of anastomotic leakage.

Clinical trial

Registered at clinicaltrials.gov, clinical trials identifier NCT01287637.

[Assessment of individualized treatment of rectal carcinoma]

Individualized and tailored treatment plays a crucial role in the rating of special operation techniques or certain treatment strategies following defined quality criteria and indicators. Deviations from clearly defined recommendations in guidelines must therefore be justified, documented and evaluated as precisely as possible. The aim of this leading article is to examine the individualized treatment of rectal cancer based on existing evidence and to discuss its role in the light of routinely used treatment algorithms. In addition to a web-based literature search the current German national S3 guidelines on colorectal cancer were also included. In the treatment of cancer in the middle and lower third of the rectum, individual, patient and tumor-related parameters are of decisive importance from the pretreatment stage to the actual surgery up to aftercare and adjuvant therapy to enable interdisciplinary decision making for optimal treatment.

Quality of life and patient-reported outcomes

The lay view

Protocol for a multicentre, dual prospective and retrospective cohort study investigating timing of ileostomy closure after anterior resection for rectal cancer: The CLOSurE of Ileostomy Timing (CLOSE-IT) study

INTRODUCTION

A defunctioning ileostomy is often formed during rectal cancer surgery to reduce the potentially fatal sequelae of anastomotic leak. Once the ileostomy is closed and bowel continuity restored, many patients can suffer poor bowel function, that is, low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). It has been suggested that delay to closure can increase incidence of LARS which is known to significantly reduce quality of life. Despite this, within the UK, time to closure of ileostomy is not subject to national targets within the National Health Service and delay to closure exceeds 18 months in one-third of patients. Clinical factors, surgeon and patient preference or service pressures may all impact time to closure, yet to date no study has investigated this. The aim of this UK-wide study is to assess time to ileostomy closure and identify reasons for delays.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A UK-wide multicentre prospective snapshot study, together with retrospective analysis of ileostomy closure through The Dukes' Club Research Collaborative including patients undergoing ileostomy closure in a 3-month period (April to June 2018) and all patients who underwent anterior resection and ileostomy formation over a historical 12-month period (2015). Time to closure and incidence of 'non-closure' will be calculated. Units will be surveyed to determine local clinical and management protocols and barriers to timely closure. Multivariate linear regression analysis will be used to determine factors significantly associated with delay to ileostomy closure.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Study approved by the South West-Exeter Research Ethics Committee and the Health Research Authority. Study results will be submitted for presentation at international conferences and for publication in peer-reviewed journals. Results will be presented to and discussed with the patient and public representatives and relevant national bodies to facilitate the development of consensus guidelines on optimum treatment pathways.