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

Predicting bowel function after diverting stoma closure in patients with rectal cancer

Background

Patients with rectal cancer undergoing laparoscopic anterior resection and diverting stomas often suffer from bowel dysfunction after stoma closure, impairing their quality of life. This study aims to develop a machine learning tool to predict bowel function after diverting stoma closure.

Methods

Clinicopathological data and post-operative follow-up information from patients with mid-low rectal cancer after diverting stoma closure were collected and analyzed. Patients were randomly divided into training and test sets in a 7:3 ratio. A machine learning model was developed in the training set to predict major low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) and evaluated in the test set. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to assess clinical utility.

Results

The study included 396 eligible patients who underwent laparoscopic anterior resection and diverting stoma in Tongji Hospital affiliated with Huazhong University of Science and Technology from 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2020. The interval between stoma creation and closure, neoadjuvant therapy, and body mass index were identified as the three most crucial characteristics associated with patients experiencing major LARS in our cohort. The machine learning model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.78 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.74-0.83] in the training set (n=277) and 0.74 (95% CI: 0.70-0.79) in the test set (n=119), and area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) of 0.73 and 0.69, respectively, with sensitivity of 0.67 and specificity of 0.66 for the test set. DCA confirmed clinical applicability.

Conclusions

This study developed a machine learning model to predict major LARS in rectal cancer patients after diverting stoma closure, aiding their decision-making and counseling.

Early diverting stoma closure is feasible and safe: results from a before-and-after study on the implementation of an early closure protocol at a tertiary referral center

BACKGROUND

Evidence on early closure (EC) of defunctioning stoma (DS) after colorectal surgery shows a favorable effect when patients are carefully selected. Therefore, a clinical pathway adapted to the implementation of an EC strategy was developed in our center. The aim of this study was to carry out a comparative analysis of time until DS closure and DS-related morbidity before and after the implementation of an EC protocol (ECP).

METHODS

This study is a before-and-after comparative analysis. Patients were divided into two cohorts according to the observational period: patients from the period before the ECP implementation (January 2015-December 2019) [Period 1] and those from the period after that (January 2020-December 2022) [Period 2]. All consecutive patients subjected to elective DS closure within both periods were eligible. Early closure was defined as the reversal within 30 days from DS creation. Patients excluded from EC or those not closed within 30 days since primary surgery were analyzed as late closure (LC). Baseline characteristics and DS-related morbidity were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 145 patients were analyzed. Median time with DS was shorter in patients after ECP implementation [42 (21-193) days versus 233 (137-382) days, p < 0.001]. This reduction in time to closure did not impact the DS closure morbidity and resulted in less DS morbidity (68.8% versus 49.2%, p = 0.017) and fewer stoma nurse visits (p = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

The ECP was able to significantly reduce intervals to restoration of bowel continuity in patients with DS, which in turn resulted in a direct impact on the reduction of DS morbidity without negatively affecting DS closure morbidity.

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.

Impact of ileostomy in the adjuvant treatment and outcome of colon cancer

BACKGROUND

After tumor resection, a preventive diverting loop ileostomy creation is a routine surgical procedure to prevent anastomotic leakage and infections and to preclude secondary surgeries. Despite its benefits, several studies have proposed potential complications that extend the disease course by impairing the feasibility of adjuvant chemotherapy and adherence.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of ileostomy complications on the adherence to adjuvant treatment and overall survival (OS) of colon cancer (CC) patients.

METHODS

Retrospective, observational study. Patients diagnosed with colon adenocarcinoma were treated between January 2010 and December 2020 at the National Cancer Institute in Mexico.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

χ² and t-test, Kaplan-Meier, log-rank, and Cox regression. Statistical significance differences were assessed when p was bilaterally < 0.05.

RESULTS

The most frequent complications of loop-derived ileostomy were hydro-electrolytic dehydration (50%), acute kidney injury (AKI) (26%), grade 1-2 diarrhea (28%), and grade 3-4 diarrhea (21%) (p = 0.001). Patients with complete chemotherapy did not reach the median OS. In contrast, the median OS for patients with non-complete chemotherapy was 56 months (p = 0.023). Additionally, 5-year OS reached to 100% in the early restitution group, 85% in the late restitution group, and 60% in the non-restitution group (p = 0.016). Finally, AKI (p = 0.029; 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.348 [1.133-9.895]), complete chemotherapy (p = 0.028; 95% CI 0.376 [0.105-0.940]), and reversed ileostomy (p = 0.001; 95% CI 0.125 [0.038-0.407]) remained as predictors of overall survival for patients with CC treated with a loop ileostomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results emphasize the early stoma reversal restitution as a safe and feasible alternative to prevent severe complications related to ileostomies which improve chemotherapy adherence and overall survival of colon cancer patients. This is one of the pioneer studies analyzing the impact of ileostomy on treatment adherence and outcome of Latin American patients with colon cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Retrospective study No. 2021/045, in April 2021.

Early versus late reversal of diverting loop ileostomy in rectal cancer surgery: a multicentre randomized controlled trial

Diverting loop ileostomy has become routine in low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer. The optimal time for stoma reversal is controversial. The aim of the present study was to compare the results after planned early (within 8-12 days) versus late (> 3 months) stoma reversal. The primary outcomes were morbidity and mortality, as measured by the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) within 30 days after stoma reversal, and the secondary outcomes were morbidity and mortality within 90 days after LAR. This was a multicentre trial including all patients scheduled for anterior low resection for rectal cancer with curative intent. Inclusion period was from April 2011 to December 2018. All patients were randomized 1:1 prior to surgery. Among 257 consecutive and eligible patients, a total of 214 patients were randomized: 107 patients to early stoma reversal and 107 to late reversal. A total of 68 patients were excluded for various reasons, and 146 patients completed the study, with 77 in the early reversal group and 69 in the late reversal group. The patients were asked to complete the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index before surgery (baseline) and at 6 and 12 months after LAR. Ostomy-related complications were evaluated by dedicated ostomy staff using the validated DET score. ClinicalTrials Identifier: NCT01865071. Fifty-three patients (69%) in the early reversal group and 60 patients (87%) in the late reversal group received the intended treatment. There were no significant differences in CCI within 90 days after index surgery with the LAR and within 30 days after stoma reversal between the two groups. There were no differences in patient-reported quality of life but significantly more stoma-related complications in the late reversal group. A total of 5 patients experienced anastomotic leakage (AL) after stoma reversal, 4 in the early reversal group and one in the late reversal group. Early and late stoma reversal showed similar outcomes in terms of overall complications and quality of life. The risk of developing anastomotic leakage after early ostomy reversal is a concern.

A phase III randomized trial evaluating the quality of life impact of a tailored versus systematic use of defunctioning ileostomy following total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer-GRECCAR 17 trial protocol

AIM

The systematic use of a defunctioning ileostomy for 2-3 months postoperatively to protect low colorectal anastomosis (<7 cm from the anal verge) has been the standard practice after total mesorectal excision (TME). However, stoma-related complications can occur in 20%-60% of cases, which may lead to prolonged inpatient care, urgent reoperation and long-term definitive stoma. A negative impact on quality of life (QoL) and increased healthcare expenses are also observed. Conversely, it has been reported that patients without a defunctioning stoma or following early stoma closure (days 8-12 after TME) have a better functional outcome than patients with systematic defunctioning stoma in situ for 2-3 months.

METHOD

The main objective of this trial is to compare the QoL impact of a tailored versus systematic use of a defunctioning stoma after TME for rectal cancer. The primary outcome is QoL at 12 months postoperatively using the European Organization for. Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL questionnaire QLQ-C30. Among 29 centres of the French GRECCAR network, 200 patients will be recruited over 18 months, with follow-up at 1, 4, 8 and 12 months postoperatively, in an open-label, randomized, two-parallel arm, phase III superiority clinical trial. The experimental arm (arm A) will undergo a tailored use of defunctioning stoma after TME based on a two-step process: (i) to perform or not a defunctioning stoma according to the personalized risk of anastomotic leak (defunctioning stoma only if modified anastomotic failure observed risk score ≥2) and (ii) if a stoma is fashioned, whether to perform an early stoma closure at days 8-12, according to clinical (fever), biochemical (C-reactive protein level on days 2 and 4 postoperatively) and radiological postoperative assessment (CT scan with retrograde contrast enema at days 7-8 postoperatively). The control arm (arm B) will undergo systematic use of a defunctioning stoma for 2-3 months after TME for all patients, in keeping with French national and international guidelines. Secondary outcomes will include comprehensive analysis of functional outcomes (including bowel, urinary and sexual function) again up to 12 months postoperatively and a cost analysis. Regular assessments of anastomotic leak rates in both arms (every 50 randomized patients) will be performed and an independent data monitoring committee will recommend trial cessation if this rate is excessive in arm A compared to arm B.

CONCLUSION

The GRECCAR 17 trial is the first randomized trial to assess a tailored, patient-specific approach to decisions regarding defunctioning stoma use and closure after TME according to personalized risk of anastomotic leak. The results of this trial will describe, for the first time, the QoL and morbidity impact of selective use of a defunctioning ileostomy and the potential health economic effect of such an approach.

Causes and costs of delayed closure of ileostomies in rectal cancer patients in Australasian units

BACKGROUND

Defunctioning loop ileostomies (DLIs) are a frequent adjunct to rectal cancer surgery. Delayed closure of DLIs is common and associated with increased morbidity. The reasons for delayed DLI closure are often unknown. The economic burden of delayed DLI closure is not quantified. The present study aimed to determine the reasons for, and economic burden of, delayed DLI closure.

METHODS

Clinical and economic data were audited from a prospective database of patients in two Australasian colorectal cancer centres. Patients treated at each unit with low/ultra-low anterior resection for rectal cancer with formation of DLI between January 2014 and December 2019 were included. Post-operative complication rate, stoma-related complication rate and costs of hospital admissions and stoma care were recorded and analysed. Multivariate linear regression analysis was used to investigate risk factors for delay to closure.

RESULTS

146 patients underwent low/ultra-low anterior resection with DLI; 135 patients (92.5%) underwent reversal. The median duration to reversal was 7 months (IQR 4.5-9.5). Sixty-six percent of patients underwent reversal >6 months after their index surgery. Neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy were associated with delayed reversal (P < 0.001). Non-English speakers waited longer for DLI closure (P = 0.028). The costs of outpatient stoma care (P < 0.001), post-operative care (P = 0.004), and total cost of treatment (P = 0.014) were significantly higher in the delayed closure group, with a total cost of treatment difference of $3854 NZD per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Causes of delay include systemic factors and demographic factors that can be addressed directly, addressing such causes may alleviate a significant economic burden.

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.

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.

Low anterior resection syndrome: can it be prevented?

Surgery remains the cardinal treatment in colorectal cancers but changes in bowel habits after rectal cancer surgery are common and disabling conditions that affect patients' quality of life. Low anterior resection syndrome is a disorder of bowel function after rectal resection resulting in a lowering of the QoL and recently has been defined by an international working group not only by specified symptoms but also by their consequences. This review aims to explore an extensive bibliographic research on preventive strategies for LARS. All "modifiable variables," quantified by the LARS Score, such as type of anastomosis, neoadjuvant therapy, surgical strategy, and diverting stoma, were evaluated, while "non-modifiable variables" such as age, sex, BMI, ASA, preoperative TMN, tumor height, and type of mesorectal excision were excluded from the comparative analysis. The role of defunctioning stoma, local excision, neoadjuvant radiotherapy, and non operative management seems to significantly affect risk of LARS, while type of anastomosis and surgical TME approach do not impact on LARS incidence or gravity in the long term period. Although it is established that some variables are associated with a greater onset of LARS, in clinical practice, technical difficulties and oncological limits often make difficult the application of some prevention plans. Transtomal irrigations, intraoperative neuromonitoring, pelvic floor rehabilitation before stoma closure, and early transanal irrigation represent new arguments of study in preventive strategies which could, if not eliminate the symptoms, at least mitigate them.

Delayed coloanal anastomosis as a stoma-sparing alternative to immediate coloanal anastomosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recent clinical trials have demonstrated favorable outcomes associated with trans-anal colonic pull-through for rectal resection followed by delayed coloanal anastomoses (DCA), resulting in a resurgence in popularity of the technique. This meta-analysis aims to review existing literature to evaluate the postoperative complications associated with DCA, and to make comparisons with immediate coloanal anastomoses (ICA) after colorectal resection to assess the suitability of DCA as an alternative form of surgical treatment.

METHODS

Medline and Embase databases were reviewed from inception until 31 July 2020 in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Single-arm studies that involved patients undergoing DCA for benign or malignant causes were selected, and meta-analysis of proportions was conducted to determine the prevalence of postoperative complications following DCA. Comparative studies comparing postoperative outcomes between DCA and ICA were also included for comparative meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing DCA were significantly less likely to require diverting stoma construction as compared to ICA (odds ratio [OR] = 0.04; confidence interval [CI]: 0.02-0.07; P < 0.001). Overall postoperative morbidity (OR = 0.50; 95% CI: 0.23-1.12; P = 0.09) and mortality (OR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.12-1.98; P = 0.32) was comparable between DCA and ICA groups. No significant differences in perioperative complications, such as anastomotic leakage (OR = 0.42; 95% CI: 0.11-1.64; P = 0.21), postoperative ileus, pelvic abscesses, or sepsis, were noted between DCA and ICA.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows no differences in complications or functional outcomes between DCA and ICA. Pooled analysis expectedly revealed a lower rate of diverting stoma in patients undergoing DCA. DCA is thus a safe alternative to current surgical practices where avoidance of a stoma is desired.

Loop ileostomy in rectal cancer surgery: factors predicting reversal and stoma related morbidity

PURPOSE

Loop ileostomy is performed in rectal cancer surgery to decrease the impact of anastomotic leak but it is associated with a significant complication rate. This study aimed to analyze the morbidity related to diverting ileostomy and to identify factors predictive of complications related to stoma management and reversal, as well as conversion into a permanent ileostomy.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on 112 patients submitted to oncological rectal resection and defunctioning ileostomy in a Portuguese colorectal unit between March 2012 and March 2019.

RESULTS

Loop ileostomy was responsible for 13% of index surgery morbidity and 15% of patients' readmissions due to high output, stoma stenosis and parastomal hernia. Ileostomy was reversed in 89% cases with 7% Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIb complications. An association was established between diabetes and higher stoma management morbidity (OR: 3.28 [95% CI: 1.039-10.426]. p = 0.041). Likewise, diabetes (OR: 0.17 [95% CI: 0.038; 6.90], p=0.015), oncological disease stage ≥ III (OR: 0.10 [95% CI: 0.005; 0.656], p=0.047) and index rectal surgery morbidity (OR: 0.23 [95% CI: 0.052; 0.955], p=0.041) were associated with less ileostomy closure. Complications of the index surgery also related to higher stoma reversal morbidity (OR: 5.11 [95% CI: 1.665; 16.346], p=0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetes and complications of index rectal surgery were identified as predictive of ileostomy morbidity, closure rate and associated complications. It is essential to adjust treatment decisions to patient's morbidity risk and adopt a more selective approach concerning the use of an ileostomy.

Enhancing colorectal anastomotic safety with indocyanine green fluorescence angiography: An update

Reducing anastomotic leak (AL) continues to be a main focus in colorectal research. Several new technologies have been developed with an aim to reduce this from mechanical devices to advanced imaging techniques. Fluorescence angiography (FA) with indocyanine green (ICG) in colorectal surgery is now a well-established technique and may have a role in reducing AL. By using FA, we are able to have a visual representation of perfusion which aids intraoperative decision making. The main impact is change in the level of bowel transection at the proximal side of an anastomosis and provide a more objective and confident assessment of bowel perfusion. Previous studies have shown that routine FA use is safe and reproducible. Recent results from randomized control trials and meta-analyses show that FA use reduces the rate of anastomotic leak. The main limitation of FA is its lack of ability to quantify perfusion. Novel technologies are being developed that will quantify tissue perfusion and oxygenation. Overall, FA is a safe and feasible technique which may have a role in reducing AL.

Prospective, randomised, multicentre, open-label trial, designed to evaluate the best timing of closure of the temporary ileostomy (early versus late) in patients who underwent rectal cancer resection and with indication for adjuvant chemotherapy: the STOMAD (STOMa closure before or after ADjuvant therapy) randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Temporary ileostomy is a valuable aid in reducing the severity of complications related to rectal cancer surgery. However, it is still unclear what is the best timing of its closure in relation to the feasibility of an adjuvant treatment, especially considering patient-reported outcomes and health system costs. The aim of the study is to compare the results of an early versus late closure strategy in patients with indication to adjuvant chemotherapy after resection for rectal cancer.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a prospective multicentre randomised trial, sponsored by Rete Oncologica Piemonte e Valle d'Aosta (Oncology Network of Piedmont and Aosta Valley-Italy). Patients undergone to rectal cancer surgery with temporary ileostomy, aged >18 years, without evidence of anastomotic leak and with indication to adjuvant chemotherapy will be enrolled in 28 Network centres. An early closure strategy (between 30 and 40 days from rectal surgery) will be compared with a late one (after the end of adjuvant therapy). Primary endpoint will be the compliance to adjuvant chemotherapy with and without ileostomy. Complications associated with stoma closure as well as quality of life, costs and oncological outcomes will be assessed as secondary endpoints.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial will engage the Network professional teams in a common effort to improve the treatment of rectal cancer by ensuring the best results in relation to the most correct use of resources. It will take into consideration both the patients' point of view (patient-reported outcome) and the health system perspective (costs analysis). The study has been approved by the Ethical Review Board of Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital in Turin (Italy). The results of the study will be disseminated by the Network website, medical conferences and peer-reviewed scientific journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04372992.

Risk factors for small bowel obstruction after open rectal cancer resection

Background

Small bowel obstruction (SBO) is observed in around 10% of patients with prior open abdominal surgery. Rectal resection causes the highest readmission rates. The aim of this study was to investigate risk factors for readmission for SBO and causes for SBO in patients who needed surgery following rectal cancer surgery.

Methods

A population-based registry with prospectively gathered data on 752 consecutive patients with rectal cancer who underwent open pelvic surgery between January 1996 and January 2017 was used. Univariable and multivariable regression analysis was performed, and the risk of SBO was assessed.

Results

In total, 84 patients (11%) developed SBO after a median follow-up time of 48 months. Of these patients, 57% developed SBO during the 1st year after rectal cancer surgery. Surgery for SBO was performed in 32 patients (4.3%), and the cause of SBO was stoma-related in one-fourth of these patients. In the univariable analysis previous RT and re-laparotomy were found as risk factors for readmission for SBO. Re-laparotomy was an independent risk factor for readmission for SBO (OR 2.824, CI 1.129–7.065, P = 0.026) in the multivariable analysis, but not for surgery for SBO. Rectal resection without anastomoses, splenic flexors mobilization, intraoperative bleeding, operative time were not found as risk factors for SBO.

Conclusions

One-tenth of rectal cancer patients who had open surgery developed SBO, most commonly within the 1st postoperative year. The risk of SBO is greatest in patients with complications after rectal cancer resection that result in a re-laparotomy.

Early Versus Late Preventive Ileostomy Closure Following Colorectal Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Most preventive ileostomy following colorectal surgery requires a closure procedure. The intervals between primary surgery and ileostomy closure remain controversial.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare early versus late closure of preventive ileostomy following colorectal surgery.

DATA SOURCE

A systematic literature search was performed in conference papers, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and the Clinicaltrials.gov database.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials published through October 2019 comparing early versus late closure of ileostomy following colorectal surgery were selected.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Morbidity, leak of the primary anastomosis, reoperation, surgical site infection, small-bowel obstruction/postoperative ileus, total operative time, and postoperative length of hospital stay were measured. Results were synthesized using meta-analysis and were rated as firm or weak evidence by trial sequential analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 6 randomized controlled trials were included. Firm evidence from trial sequential analysis demonstrated that the early closure of ileostomy after colorectal surgery reduced the incidence of small-bowel obstruction/postoperative ileus and required less total operative time, but increased the incidence of surgical site infection, compared with late closure of ileostomy; postoperative length of hospital stay tended to be longer with early versus late closure of ileostomy. Weak evidence showed that there was no difference between early and late closure in morbidity, reoperation, or leak of the primary anastomosis.

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by some evidence rated as weak from trial sequential analysis, combined analysis of small-bowel obstruction and postoperative ileus, and exclusion of the influence of chemo- or radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In selected patients, early closure of ileostomy after colorectal surgery can be considered, with a lower incidence of postoperative small-bowel obstruction/postoperative ileus and less total operative time, but a relatively high surgical site infection rate. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020160989.

The feasibility and safety of early ileostomy reversal: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recent evidence supports the safety of early reversal of a temporary stoma, within 14 days of construction. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the post-operative morbidity and overall feasibility of early stoma reversal.

METHODS

Medline and Cochrane databases were searched for studies up to June 2019 that investigated the outcomes of early stoma reversal (EC, defined as closure ≤14 days from the index operation) versus late stoma reversal (LC, ≥8 weeks from the index operation). Meta-analysis was performed on the respective rates of post-operative morbidity, anastomotic leak, wound infection, bleeding, sepsis, small bowel obstruction and ileus.

RESULTS

Nine studies were included (667 patients analysed). Meta-analysis showed no significant difference in the post-operative morbidity rate, anastomotic leak rate, rates of small bowel obstruction, bleeding and ileus between EC and LC. However, the wound infection rate was significantly higher after EC than LC; relative difference 0.10 (95% confidence interval 0.00-0.19, P = 0.047). The stoma-related complication rate was significantly higher after LC than EC; relative difference -0.28 (95% confidence interval -0.45 to -0.11, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The concept of early stoma reversal is appealing, and this meta-analysis confirms the safety of early stoma closure with an associated reduction in stoma-related complications despite higher wound infection rates. However, the results need to be interpreted with caution due to the heterogeneity of the studies included, especially in respect of the definition of complications that were used. Further well-designed prospective studies are required prior to confident adoption of early stoma closure into clinical practice.