Bowel stimulation before loop ileostomy closure to reduce postoperative ileus: a multicenter, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial

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.

Timing of Loop Ileostomy Closure Does Not Play a Pivotal Role in Terms of Complications-Results of the Liquidation of iLEOstomy (LILEO) Study

Loop ileostomy is commonly performed by colorectal and general surgeons to protect newly created large bowel anastomoses. The optimal timing for ileostomy closure remains debatable. Defining the timing associated with the best postoperative outcomes can significantly improve the clinical results for patients undergoing ileostomy closure. The LILEO study was a prospective multicenter cohort study conducted in Poland from October 2022 to December 2023. Full data analysis involved 159 patients from 19 surgical centers. Patients were categorized based on the timing of ileostomy reversal: early (<4 months), standard (4-6 months), and delayed (>6 months). Data on demographics, clinical characteristics, and perioperative outcomes were analyzed for each group separately and compared. No significant differences were observed in length of hospital stay (p = 0.22), overall postoperative complications (p = 0.43), or 30-day reoperation rates (p = 0.28) across the three groups. Additional analysis of Clavien-Dindo complication grades was performed and did not show significant differences in complication severity (p = 0.95), indicating that the timing of ileostomy closure does not significantly impact perioperative complications or hospital stay. Decisions on ileostomy reversal timing should be personalized and should consider individual clinical factors, including the type of adjuvant oncological treatment and the preventive measures performed for common postoperative complications.

Loop Ileostomy Closure as a 23-Hour Stay Procedure With Preoperative Efferent Limb Enteral Stimulation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Loop ileostomy closure is a common procedure in colorectal surgery. Often seen as a simple operation associated with a low complication rate, it still leads to lengthy hospitalizations. Reducing postoperative complications and ileus rates could lead to a shorter length of stay and even ambulatory surgery.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess the safety and feasibility of ileostomy closure performed in a 23-hour hospitalization setting using a standardized enhanced recovery pathway.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

SETTINGS

Two high-volume colorectal surgery centers.

PATIENTS

Healthy adults undergoing elective ileostomy closure from July 2019 to January 2022.

INTERVENTION

All patients were enrolled in a standardized enhanced recovery pathway specific to ileostomy closure, including daily irrigation of efferent limb with a nutritional formula for 7 days before surgery. Patients were randomly allocated to either conventional hospitalization (n = 23) or a 23-hour stay (n = 24).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome was total length of stay and secondary outcomes were 30-day rates of readmission, postoperative ileus, surgical site infections, and postoperative morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 47 patients were ultimately randomly allocated. Patients in the 23-hour hospitalization arm had a shorter median length of stay (1 vs 2 days, p = 0.02) and similar rates of readmission (4% vs 13%, p = 0.35), postoperative ileus (none in both arms), surgical site infection (0% vs 4%, p = 0.49), postoperative morbidity (21% vs 22%, p = 1.00), and mortality (none in both arms).

LIMITATIONS

Due to coronavirus disease 2019, access to surgical beds was greatly limited, leading to a shift toward ambulatory surgery for ileostomy closure. The study was terminated early, which affected its statistical power.

CONCLUSION

Loop ileostomy closures as 23-hour stay procedures are feasible and safe. Ileus rate might be reduced by preoperative intestinal stimulation with nutritional formula through the stoma's efferent limb, although specific randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm this association. See Video Abstract .

CIERRE DE ILEOSTOMA EN ASA COMO PROCEDIMIENTO AMBULATORIO DE HORAS CON ESTMULO PREOPERATORIO ENTERAL EFERENTE ESTUDIO ALEATORIO CONTROLADO

ANTECEDENTES:El cierre de la ileostomía en asa es un procedimiento común en la cirugía colorrectal. A menudo vista como una operación simple asociada con bajas tasas de complicaciones, aún conduce a largas hospitalizaciones. La reducción de las complicaciones postoperatorias y las tasas de íleo podría conducir a una estadía hospitalaria más corta o incluso a una cirugía ambulatoria.OBJETIVOS:El presente estudio pretende evaluar la seguridad y la viabilidad del cierre de ileostomía realizadas en un entorno de hospitalización de 23 horas utilizando una vía de recuperación mejorada y estandarizada.DISEÑO:Estudio aleatorio controladoAJUSTES:Dos centros de cirugía colorrectal de gran volúmenPACIENTES:Adultos sanos sometidos a cierre electivo de ileostomía, desde Julio de 2019 hasta Enero de 2022.INTERVENCIÓN:Todos los pacientes fueron inscritos en una vía de recuperación mejorada y estandarizada específica para el cierre de la ileostomía, incluyendo la irrigación diaria de la extremidad eferente del intestino asociada a una fórmula nutricional durante 7 días previos a la cirugía. Los pacientes fueron asignados aleatoriamente en hospitalización convencional (n = 23) o a una estadía de 23 horas (n = 24).PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado primario fue la duración total de la estadía hospitalaria y los resultados secundarios fueron las tasas de reingreso a los 30 días, el íleo postoperatorio, las infecciones de la herida quirúrgica, la morbilidad y mortalidad postoperatorias.RESULTADOS:Finalmente fueron randomizados un total de 47 pacientes. Aquellos que se encontraban en el grupo de hospitalización de 23 horas tuvieron una estadía media más corta (1 día versus 2 días, p = 0,02) y tasas similares de reingreso (4% vs 13%, p = 0,35), de íleo postoperatorio (ninguno en ambos brazos), de infección del sitio quirúrgico (0 vs 4%, p = 0,49), de morbilidad postoperatoria (21% vs 22%, p > 0,99) y de mortalidad (ninguna en ambos brazos).LIMITACIONES:Debido a la pandemia SARS CoV-2, el acceso a las camas quirúrgicas fue muy limitado, lo que llevó a un cambio hacia la cirugía ambulatoria para el cierre de ileostomías. El estudio finalizó anticipadamente, lo que afectó su poder estadístico.CONCLUSIÓN:Los cierres de ileostomía en asa como procedimientos de estadía de 23 horas son factibles y seguros. La tasa de íleo podría reducirse mediante la estimulación intestinal preoperatoria a través de la rama eferente del estoma asociada a fórmulas nutricionales, por lo que se necesitan estudios randomizados específicos para confirmar esta asociación. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo ).

Postoperative Ileus after Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery: A Summary of Current Strategies for Prevention and Management

BACKGROUND

Postoperative ileus (POI) is one of the most common postoperative complications after colorectal surgery and prolongs hospital stays. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has reduced POI, but it remains common. This review explores the current methods for preventing and managing POI after MIS.

SUMMARY

Preoperative interventions, including optimising nutrition, preoperative medicationn, and mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics, may have a role in preventing POI. Transversus abdominis plane blocks and lidocaine could replace epidural analgesia in MIS. Fluid overload should be avoided; in some cases, goal-directed fluid therapy may aid in achieving this. Pharmacological agents, such as prucalopride and dexmedetomidine, could target mechanisms underlying POI. New strategies to stimulate vagal nerve activity may promote postoperative gastrointestinal motility. Preoperative bowel stimulation could potentially reduce POI following loop ileostomy closure. However, the evidence base for several interventions remains weak and requires further corroboration with robust studies.

KEY MESSAGES

Despite the increasing use of MIS, POI remains a major issue following colorectal surgery. Further strategies to prevent POI are rapidly emerging. Studies using standardised definitions and perioperative care will help validate these interventions and remove barriers to accurate meta-analysis. Future studies should focus on establishing the impact of these interventions on POI after MIS specifically.

Efferent limb stimulation prior to loop ileostomy closure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postoperative ileus (POI) remains a common phenomenon following loop ileostomy closure. Our aim was to determine whether preoperative physiological stimulation (PPS) of the efferent limb reduced POI incidence.

METHODS

A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis searching PubMed, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases was performed. The last search was carried out on 30 January 2023. All randomized studies comparing PPS versus no stimulation were included. The primary endpoint was POI incidence. Secondary endpoints included the time to first passage of flatus/stool, time to resume oral diet, need for nasogastric tube (NGT) placement postoperatively, length of stay (LOS) and other complications. Random effects models were used to calculate pooled effect size estimates. Trial sequential analyses (TSA) were also performed.

RESULTS

Three randomized studies capturing 235 patients (116 PPS, 119 no stimulation) were included. On random effects analysis, PPS was associated with a quicker time to resume oral diet (MD - 1.47 days, 95% CI - 2.75 to - 0.19, p = 0.02), shorter LOS (MD - 1.47 days, 95% CI - 2.47 to - 0.46, p = 0.004) (MD - 1.41 days, 95% CI - 2.32 to - 0.50, p = 0.002, I2 = 56%) and fewer other complications (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.01, p = 0.05). However, there was no difference in POI incidence (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.21, p = 0.10), the requirement for NGT placement (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.20, p = 0.12) or time to first passage of flatus/stool (MD - 0.60 days, 95% CI - 1.95 to 0.76, p = 0.39). TSA revealed imprecise estimates for all outcomes (except LOS) and further studies are warranted to meet the required information threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

PPS prior to stoma closure may reduce LOS and postoperative complications albeit without a demonstrable beneficial effect on POI. Further high-powered studies are required to confirm or refute these findings.