Efficacy of protective tube cecostomy after restorative resection for colorectal cancer: A randomized trial

Complications of preventive loop ileostomy versus colostomy: a meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis, and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Preventive colostomy is required for colorectal surgery, and the incidence of complications associated with ileostomy and colostomy remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the incidence of postoperative complications between ileostomy and colostomy procedures.

METHODS

Data analysis was conducted on 30 studies, and meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) were performed on five studies. The basic indicators, such as stoma prolapse, leak, wound infection, ileus, and a series of other indicators, were compared.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were observed with complications other than stoma prolapse. Meta-analysis and TSA showed that the incidence of ileostomy prolapse was lower than that of colostomy prolapse, and the difference was statistically significant. Apart from the four complications listed above, the general data analysis showed differences in incidence between the two groups. The incidence of skin irritation, parastomal hernia, dehydration, pneumonia, and urinary tract infections was higher with ileostomy than with colostomy. In contrast, the incidence of parastomal fistula, stenosis, hemorrhage, and enterocutaneous fistula was higher with colostomy than with ileostomy.

CONCLUSIONS

There were differences in the incidence of ileostomy and colostomy complications in the selected studies, with a low incidence of ileostomy prolapse.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022303133.

Temporary Tube Stoma versus Conventional Loop Stoma for the Protection of a Low Anastomosis in Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of temporary tube stoma and conventional loop stoma for the protection of a low anastomosis in colorectal cancer. A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trails. Primary outcome measures were anastomotic leakage rate, the reoperation rate for anastomotic leakage, and stoma-related complications. Secondary outcome measures were operation time, length of hospital stay, time to stoma closure, and permanent stoma rate. Four studies were carried out and 642 patients (332 with temporary tube stoma and 310 with conventional loop stoma) met the inclusion criteria. The incidences of anastomotic leakage and reoperation rate were statistically similar in tube stoma and loop stoma groups. In comparison with conventional loop stoma, temporary tube stoma was associated with a significantly less stoma-related complications (odds ratio = 0.20; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.08–0.50), and shorter operation and hospital stay time (weighted mean difference = -47.28 minutes, 95% CI: -74.68 to -19.88; and weighted mean difference = -5.22 days, 95% CI: -10.32 to -0.13, respectively). Time to stoma closure was significantly shorter in the temporary tube stoma groups (weighted mean difference = -114.58 days, 95% CI: -148.38 to -80.77). Patients receiving temporary tube stoma had lower rates of stoma-related complications, shorter operation and hospital stay time, and stoma closure time. Tube can be easily removed without second surgery in most cases. Therefore, temporary tube stoma is a feasible and effective alternative to conventional loop stoma for the protection of a low colorectal anastomosis.

Safety and efficacy of percutaneous cecostomy/colostomy for treatment of large bowel obstruction in adults with cancer

PURPOSE

To assess the safety and efficacy of image-guided percutaneous cecostomy/colostomy (PC) in the management of colonic obstruction in patients with cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-seven consecutive patients underwent image-guided PC to relieve large bowel obstruction at a single institution between 2000 and 2012. Colonic obstruction was the common indication. Patient demographics, diagnosis, procedural details, and outcomes including maximum colonic distension (MCD; ie, greatest transverse measurement of the colon on radiograph or scout computed tomography image) were recorded and retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Following PC, no patient experienced colonic perforation; pain was relieved in 24 of 27 patients (89%). Catheters with tip position in luminal gas rather than mixed stool/gas or stool were associated with greater decrease in MCD (-40%, -12%, and -16%, respectively), with the difference reaching statistical significance (P = .002 and P = .013, respectively). Catheter size was not associated with change in MCD (P = .978). Catheters were successfully removed from six of nine patients (67%) with functional obstructions and two of 18 patients (11%) with mechanical obstructions. One patient underwent endoscopic stent placement after catheter removal. Three patients required diverting colostomy after PC, and their catheters were removed at the time of surgery. One major complication (3.7%; subcutaneous emphysema, pneumomediastinum, and sepsis) occurred 8 days after PC and was successfully treated with cecostomy exchange, soft-tissue drainage, and intravenous antibiotic therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Image-guided PC is safe and effective for management of functional and mechanical bowel obstruction in patients with cancer. For optimal efficacy, catheters should terminate within luminal gas.