Is it safe the reversal of a diverting stoma during adjuvant chemotherapy in elderly rectal cancer patients?

Association of Frailty With Post-Operative Outcomes of Older Adults Undergoing Elective Ostomy Reversal

BACKGROUND

Ostomy reversal is a common surgical procedure; however, it is not without associated risks. Patient selection for this elective procedure is therefore critically important. Elderly patients represent a growing population and a substantial proportion of patients that present for evaluation after ostomy creation due to the most common etiologies. This study aims to assess the impact of frailty on the outcomes of ostomy reversal among older adults.

METHODS

Patients ≥65 years who underwent ostomy reversal from 2015 to 2019 were identified in the NSQIP database. Frailty was calculated using the 5-item Modified Frailty Index (MFI). Multivariate regression was performed to evaluate the association of frailty with post-operative 30-day mortality, 30-day serious complications, discharge to a facility, and 30-day readmission.

RESULTS

A total of 13,053 patients were included, of which 18.7% were frail (MFI ≥ 2). Patients who underwent colostomy reversal had higher rates of serious complications (P < .0001) and discharge to facility (P < .0001) compared to other reversals. In multivariate analysis, frailty was associated with increased odds of serious complications (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.31-1.77), discharge to facility (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.79-2.57), and readmission (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.04-1.46), but not mortality. Frail patients had predicted probabilities 1.4 times higher for serious complications and 1.7-2.2 times greater for discharge to facility than non-frail patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Among older adults undergoing elective ostomy reversal, frailty is independently associated with increased odds of 30-day serious complications, discharge to facility, and 30-day readmission. As a potentially modifiable risk factor, identification of frailty offers the opportunity for shared decision-making and prehabilitation.

Impact of chemotherapy on surgical outcomes in ileostomy reversal: a propensity score matching study from a single centre

PURPOSE

In patients with chemotherapy, there is no consensus on the timing of ileostomy closure. Ileostomy reversal could improve the quality of life and minimise the long-term adverse events of delayed closure. In this study, we evaluated the impact of chemotherapy on ileostomy closure and searched for the predictive factors for complications.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed 212 patients with rectal cancer who underwent ileostomy closure surgery during and without chemotherapy and were consecutively enrolled between 2010 and 2016. As a result of the heterogeneity of the two groups, propensity score matching (PSM) was performed with a 1:1 PSM cohort.

RESULTS

A total of 162 patients were included in the analysis. The overall stoma closure-related complications (12.4% vs. 11.1%, p = 1.00) and major complications (2.5% vs. 6.2%, p = 0.44) were not significantly different between the two groups. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that chronic kidney disease and bevacizumab use are risk factors for major complications.

CONCLUSION

Patients with oral or intravenous chemotherapy can safely have ileostomy closure with an adequate time delay from chemotherapy. When patients use bevacizumab, major complications related to ileostomy closure should still be cautioned.

Comparison of clinical outcomes of stoma reversal during versus after chemotherapy for rectal cancer patients

PURPOSE

The optimal timing of stoma closure during or after adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer patients undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery remains unknown. This study aimed to investigate the influence of clinical and oncological outcomes depending on the timing of stoma closure.

METHODS

Between January 2006 and December 2015, we enrolled 244 consecutive rectal cancer patients who underwent curative-intent sphincter-preserving surgery with diverting transverse colostomy and adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients with stoma closure during (During group) adjuvant chemotherapy were compared to those who had stoma closure after adjuvant chemotherapy (After group).

RESULTS

Parastomal hernia occurred more frequently in the after group than in the during group. (10% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.028). Overall, no significant difference was observed in overall survival (OS) or disease-free survival (DFS) between the two groups (p = 0.911 for OS, p = 0.505 for DFS). However, an inferior OS occurred if reopen surgery was performed within 30 days of stoma closure in the during group, as compared with the after group (p = 0.004). In addition, a marginally poor DFS was observed in the group of patients who received further operations due to 30-day stoma closure complications compared to the other patients (p = 0.07).

CONCLUSIONS

For rectal cancer patients who underwent sphincter-preserving surgery, attention should be given to avoid 30-day major complications after stoma reversal because patients who require reoperation during adjuvant chemotherapy may have poor long-term survival.

Relationship between diverting stoma and adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with rectal cancer: a nationwide study using the National Database of Health Insurance Claims and Specific Health Checkups of Japan

BACKGROUND

Patients at risk of recurrence after curative surgery for rectal cancer usually receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Postoperative recovery after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer can be improved by placement of a diverting stoma to reduce anastomotic leakage. However, it remains unclear how a diverting stoma affects administration of adjuvant chemotherapy in these patients.

METHODS

We identified Japanese patients with rectal cancer who underwent LAR in 2014 and received adjuvant chemotherapy within 12 months of surgery in the National Database of Health Insurance Claims and Specific Health Checkups of Japan. Doses of five types of chemotherapy administered (tegafur/uracil, tegafur/gimeracil/oteracil potassium, capecitabine, 5-fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) were assessed according to the presence or absence of diverting stoma and the timing of stoma closure.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the cumulative doses of chemotherapy administered in the 12 months after LAR between patients with and without diverting stoma, but more doses were administered in the early postoperative period (0-2 months after LAR) in patients without diverting stoma. Also, more doses of chemotherapy, regardless of type, were administered in the late closure group (7-12 months after LAR) than in the early closure (≤ 6 months) and no closure groups.

CONCLUSION

Presence of a diverting stoma did not influence the dose of adjuvant chemotherapy administered within 12 months after LAR but could have delayed the start of adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients with late closure of a diverting stoma received more doses of adjuvant chemotherapy administered over 12 months.

Clinical Outcomes of Ileostomy Closure before Adjuvant Chemotherapy after Rectal Cancer Surgery: An Observational Study from a Chinese Center

Background

The optimal timing of temporary ileostomy closure with respect to the time of adjuvant chemotherapy following sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer remains unclear. The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical and oncological outcomes of ileostomy closure before, during, and after adjuvant chemotherapy following curative rectal cancer resection.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent low anterior resection and temporary loop ileostomy during May 2015 and September 2019 were retrospectively evaluated. Patients undergoing ileostomy closure before adjuvant chemotherapy (Group I) were compared to patients undergoing closure during (Group II) and after (Group III) adjuvant chemotherapy.

Results

A total of 225 patients were evaluated for eligibility, and 132 were finally selected and divided into 3 groups (24 in Group I, 53 in Group II, and 55 in Group III). No significant differences were observed in operative time, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, total adjuvant chemotherapy cycles, and low anterior resection syndrome scores among the three groups. There was no significant difference in disease-free survival (p = 0.834) and overall survival (p = 0.462) between the three groups.

Conclusion

Temporary ileostomy closure before adjuvant chemotherapy following curative rectal cancer resection can achieve a clinical and oncological safety level equal to stoma closure during or after chemotherapy in selected patients.

Meta-analysis of temporary loop ileostomy closure during or after adjuvant chemotherapy following rectal cancer resection: the dilemma remains

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate comparative outcomes of temporary loop ileostomy closure during or after adjuvant chemotherapy following rectal cancer resection.

METHODS

We systematic searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry, ClinicalTrials.gov , ISRCTN Register and bibliographic reference lists. Overall perioperative complications, anastomotic leak, surgical site infection, ileus and length of hospital stay were the evaluated outcome parameters. Combined overall effect sizes were calculated using fixed effects or random effects models.

RESULTS

We identified 4 studies reporting a total of 436 patients comparing outcomes of temporary loop ileostomy closure during (n = 185) or after (n = 251) adjuvant chemotherapy following colorectal cancer resection. There was no significant difference in overall perioperative complications (OR 1.39; 95% CI 0.82-2.36, p = 0.22), anastomotic leak (OR 2.80; 95% CI 0.47-16.56, p = 0.26), surgical site infection (OR 1.97; 95% CI 0.80-4.90, p = 0.14), ileus (OR 1.22; 95% CI 0.50-2.96, p = 0.66) or length of hospital stay (MD 0.02; 95% CI - 0.85-0.89, p = 0.97) between two groups. Between-study heterogeneity was low in all analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

The meta-analysis of the best, albeit limited, available evidence suggests that temporary loop ileostomy closure during adjuvant chemotherapy following rectal cancer resection may be associated with comparable outcomes to the closure of ileostomy after adjuvant chemotherapy. We encourage future research to concentrate on the completeness of chemotherapy and quality of life which can determine the appropriateness of either approach.

Effectiveness between early and late temporary ileostomy closure in patients with rectal cancer: A prospective study

A temporary stoma is often used in rectal cancer surgery to protect a distal anastomosis, which remains a major concern after rectal cancer surgery, particularly after low anterior resection. The temporary stoma is scheduled for closure. However, the optimal time of closure of the protecting stoma remains unclear because of sparse studies and data. We aimed to detect the efficacy between early and late temporary ileostomy closure in patients with rectal cancer during or after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. We conducted a prospective, 2-group design between early and late ileostomy closure group in patients after rectal cancer surgery with temporary stoma. Participants were recruited in a teaching hospital in Guangzhou, China. A total of 161 patients confirmed diagnosis of rectal cancer underwent curative surgery and temporary ileostomy. Participants with temporary ileostomy received closure surgery after 1 (early) or 6 (late) months were assessed by clinical parameters and quality of life. Patients in late closure group received more adjuvant chemotherapy cycles but with comparable incidence of stoma closure-related complications and length of hospital stay compared to early closure group. Participants in late closure group with standardized postoperative chemotherapy might have a better prognosis compared with those in early closure group. An increased emphasis should be given to choose the optimal closure time of patients with rectal cancer having temporary ileostomy. Colorectal nurses could provide support to physician for observation of prognosis of different closure time.