Comparative study between ghost ileostomy and defunctioning ileostomy in terms of morbidity and cost-effectiveness in low anterior resection for rectal cancer

Ghost Stoma Solving the Dilemma of Diversion After Anterior Resection: Surgical Technique Description and Experience from a Single Centre

Anastomotic leak is the most dreaded complication after anterior resection (AR). To do prophylactic diversion stoma or not is a matter of constant dilemma that most surgeons face. In such a situation, ghost stoma (GS) technique offers a middle path, wherein unnecessary prophylactic stomas can be avoided and at the same time ensuring that a diversion stoma can be created if need arises without the need of any major surgery or anaesthesia. Retrospective data of patients who underwent anterior resection with ghost stoma at our institute from January 2015 to December 2019 was analysed for clinical characteristics, operative outcomes and postoperative complications. Ghost stoma is fashioned by pulling up a loop of intestine up to parietal peritoneum layer of anterior abdominal wall with the help of silicone or plastic tube after anterior resection. During the study period, this technique was used in 68 patients of which 7 patients required creation of stoma under local anaesthesia for suspected or confirmed post-operative leak. One of these patients developed congestion of stoma for which the stoma was refashioned under regional anaesthesia. There were no major complications like bowel obstruction, strangulation or tube migration. However, two patients had prolonged ileus and were managed conservatively. Thus, unnecessary stoma was avoided in 89% patients of anterior resection. This is a simple, easy to learn, less time-consuming and oncologically safe procedure which can prevent patients from morbidity as well as psychological and financial burden associated with unnecessary stoma.

Outcome of early versus late ileostomy closure in patients with rectal cancers undergoing low anterior resection: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Protective loop ileostomy is performed following low anterior resection (LAR) in patients with rectal cancer to reduce the complications of primary anastomosis. The optimal timing for ileostomy closure remains controversial. The aim of the current study was to compare the effects of early (<2 weeks) versus late (≥2 months) closure of the stoma in patients with rectal cancer undergoing LAR on surgical outcome and complications rates.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study was conducted in two referral centers in Shiraz, Iran, during a 2-year period. We have consecutively and prospectively included adult patients with rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent LAR followed by protective loop ileostomy in our center during the study period. The baseline, tumor characteristics and complication as well as outcome was recorded in a 1-year follow-up and was compared between early and late ileostomy closure.

RESULTS

Overall, 69 patients (32 in early and 37 in late group) were included. The mean age of the patients was 59.40 ± 9.30 years and there were 46 (66.7%) men and 23 (33.3%) women. Patients undergoing early closure of the ileostomy had significantly shorter operation duration (p<0.001) and lower intraoperative bleeding (p<0.001) compared to late ileostomy closure. There was no significant difference between two study groups regarding the complications. Early closure was also not found to be a predictive factor of post-ileostomy closure complications.

CONCLUSION

Early closure (<2 weeks) of ileostomy after LAR in patients with rectal adenocarcinoma is a safe and feasible technique which is associated with favorable outcome.

Short-Term Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Virtual/Ghost Ileostomy or Defunctioning Ileostomy after Anterior Resection of the Rectum: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Anterior rectal resection (ARR) represents one of the most frequently performed methods in colorectal surgery, mainly carried out for rectal cancer (RC) treatment. Defunctioning ileostomy (DI) has long been chosen as a method to "protect" colorectal or coloanal anastomosis after ARR. However, DI does not rule out risks of more or less serious complications. A proximal intra-abdominal closed-loop ileostomy, the so-called virtual/ghost ileostomy (VI/GI), could limit the number of DIs and the associated morbidity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes (PRISMA) guidelines. Meta-analysis was performed by use of RevMan [Computer program] Version 5.4.

RESULTS

The five included comparative studies (VI/GI or DI) covering an approximately 20-year study period (2008-2021). All included studies were observational ones and originated from European countries. Meta-analysis indicated VI/GI as significantly associated with lower short-term morbidity rates related to VI/GI or DI after primary surgery (RR: 0.21, 95% CI: 0.07-0.64, p = 0.006), fewer dehydration (RR: 0.17, 95% CI: 0.04-0.75, p = 0.02) and ileus episodes after primary surgery (RR: 0.20, 95% CI: 0.05-0.77, p = 0.02), fewer readmissions after primary surgery (RR: 0.17, 95% CI: 0.07-0.43, p = 0.0002) and readmissions after primary surgery plus stoma closure surgery (RR: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.06-0.30, p < 0.00001) than the DI group. On the contrary, no differences were identified in terms of AL after primary surgery, short-term morbidity after primary surgery, major complications (CD ≥ III) after primary surgery and length of hospital stay after primary surgery. Conclusions: Given the significant biases among meta-analyzed studies (small overall sample size and the small number of events analyzed, in particular), our results require careful interpretation. Further randomized, possibly multi-center trials may be of paramount importance in confirming our results.

Ostomy closure rate during COVID-19 pandemic: an Italian multicentre observational study

During the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, most of the surgical procedures were performed for emergencies or oncologic reasons to the detriment of the remaining elective procedures for benign conditions. Ileostomy or colostomy creation are sequelae of oncologic or emergency colorectal surgery, but their closure does not fall within the definition of oncologic or emergency surgery. The aim of this retrospective multicentre observational study is to report the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the ostomy closure rate in Italy. Data regarding ileostomy and colostomy creation and closure from 24 Italian centres, during the study period (March 2020-February 2021) and during the control period (March 2019-February 2020) were collected. Three hospitals (12.5%) were COVID free. The number of colostomies and ileostomies created and closed in the same period was lower ( -18.8% and -30%, respectively) in the study period in comparison to the control period (p = 0.1915 and p = 0.0001, respectively), such as the ostomies closed in the analysed periods but created before (colostomy -36.2% and ileostomy -7.4%, p = 0.2211 and p = 0.1319, respectively). Overall, a 19.5% reduction in ostomies closed occurred in the study period. Based on the present study, a reduction in ostomy closure rate occurred in Italy between March 2020 and February 2021. During the pandemic, the need to change the clinical practice probably prolonged deterioration of quality of life in patients with ostomies, increasing number of stomas that will never be closed, and related management costs, even if these issues have not been investigated in this study.

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.