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

Global, regional, and national burden of disease analysis on paralytic ileus and intestinal obstruction in adults aged 65 and over from 1990 to 2021, with projections for 2030: a Global Burden of Disease Study 2021 analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the burden and trends of paralytic ileus and bowel obstruction in individuals aged ≥ 65 years, offering insights into prevention, treatment, and healthcare policy.

METHODS

Data from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021 were used to analyze paralytic ileus and intestinal obstruction by demographics, year, country/region, and Socio-Demographic Index (SDI). The statistical methods included Joinpoint regression, decomposition analysis, and Bayesian Age-Period-Cohort modeling.

RESULTS

In 2021, the global age-standardized incidence of paralytic ileus and intestinal obstruction among the elderly was 643.45 cases per 100,000 individuals. The corresponding prevalence was 24.05 per 100,000 individuals, with disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) of 294.01 per 100,000 person-years and a mortality rate of 20.55 per 100,000 individuals. Between 1990 and 2021, the age-standardized incidence and prevalence of paralytic ileus and intestinal obstruction in the elderly gradually increased, while age-standardized DALYs and mortality consistently declined. Despite similar trends observed across both genders, the disease burden increased with age and was more pronounced in males than in females. Furthermore, the age-standardized incidence and prevalence of these conditions increased with SDI, whereas mortality and DALYs decreased. By 2030, the incidence and prevalence are expected to continue increasing, whereas mortality and DALYs are expected to decrease.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the consistent decrease in mortality and DALYs associated with paralytic ileus and bowel obstruction in the elderly population aged ≥ 65 years, their incidence and prevalence continue to increase annually. This underscores the importance of improving preventive measures, early screening, and treatment efforts to address this pressing public health challenge.

Timing and morbidity of loop ileostomy closure after rectal cancer resection: a prospective observational multicentre snapshot study from Multidisciplinary Italian Study group for STOmas (MISSTO)

PURPOSE

Time to closure and morbidity are significant issues associated with ileostomy reversal after rectal cancer resection. This study aimed to investigate the rate, time, and morbidity associated with ileostomy closure procedure.

METHODS

Between February and December 2022, patients who underwent protective ileostomy after rectal cancer surgery across 45 Italian surgical centres were prospectively included. Data on ileostomy closure times, surgical methods, and complications were collected and analyzed. Both univariate and multivariate statistical tests were employed to assess stoma closure rates and the occurrence of post-operative complications.

RESULTS

A total of 287 patients participated in the study. Ileostomy closure was achieved in 241 patients, yielding overall and 6-month closure rates of 84% and 62%, respectively. The median time for ileostomy closure was 146 days. Direct sutures were used to close approximately 70% of skin defects, while purse-string sutures were applied in around 20%. The overall morbidity rate was 17%, with complications including skin suture dehiscence (7%), small bowel obstruction (6%), and anastomotic leakage (2%). Multivariate analysis revealed that an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score > 2 (p = 0.028), advanced age (p = 0.048), and previous stoma complications (p = 0.048) were independently linked to failure of stoma closure; hypertension (p = 0.036) was found to be a significant independent risk factor for post-operative complications.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that a delay and a significant no-closure rate exist in ileostomy reversal after rectal cancer surgery. Post-operative complications remain high but can be prevented with adequate pre-operative assessment and post-operative care.

Early versus late closure of protective loop ileostomy: functional significant results in a preliminary analysis

BACKGROUND

Protective loop ileostomy (PLI), commonly performed in rectal cancer surgery, is one of the most reliable methods to reduce the risk of sepsis associated with anastomotic complications. The correct timing of PLI closure is not well defined. Recently, most surgeons proposed to close early the PLI. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the timing of stoma closure on postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

We analyzed prospectively data of patients who received PLI anterior resection for rectal cancer between January 2020 to June 2022. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the timing of stoma closure, until four weeks (EC group) and more than four weeks (LC group). Outpatient clinic follow-up, perioperative data, postoperative complications and evidence of anterior resection syndrome with the Low-Anterior Resection Score (LARS) score were recorded.

RESULTS

In the EC group 24 patients were included while 27 patients were considered for LC group. There were no differences between the groups with respect to all parameters, except for recourse to adjuvant therapy, higher for LC group. Perioperative analyzed characteristics were similar among groups. There was no statistically significant difference between the EC group and the LC group for complication rate. LARS score was higher in the LC group for score >20 and >30.

CONCLUSIONS

Timing of PLI closure was not a significant independent predictor of post-closure complications rate. LARS incidence was significantly related to longer time of closure, with probably late recovery of motility function, but this should be confirmed by randomized studies.

Outcomes of Early Versus Standard Closure of Diverting Ileostomy After Proctectomy: Meta-analysis and Meta-regression Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare outcomes of early and standard closure of diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) after proctectomy and determine risk factors for anastomotic leak (AL) and complications.

BACKGROUND

Formation of DLI has been a routine practice after proctectomy to decrease the incidence and potential adverse sequela of AL.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared outcomes of early versus standard closure of DLI after proctectomy. Main outcome measures were postoperative complications, AL, ileus, surgical site infection, reoperation, readmission, and hospital stay following DLI closure.

RESULTS

Eleven RCTs (932 patients; 57% male) were included. Early closure group included 474 patients and standard closure 458 patients. Early closure was associated with higher odds of AL [odds ratio (OR): 2.315, P =0.013] and similar odds of complications (OR: 1.103, P =0.667), ileus (OR: 1.307, P =0.438), surgical site infection (OR: 1.668, P =0.079), reoperation (OR: 1.896, P =0.062), and readmission (OR: 3.431, P =0.206). Hospital stay was similar (weighted mean difference: 1.054, P =0.237). Early closure had higher odds of AL than standard closure when early closure was done ≤2 weeks (OR: 2.12, P =0.047) but not within 3 to 4 weeks (OR: 2.98, P =0.107). Factors significantly associated with complications after early closure were diabetes mellitus, smoking, and closure of DLI ≤2 weeks, whereas factors associated with AL were ≥ American Society of Anesthesiologists II classification and diabetes mellitus.

CONCLUSIONS

Early closure of DLI after proctectomy has a higher risk of AL, particularly within 2 weeks of DLI formation. On the basis of this study, routine early ileostomy closure cannot be recommended.

Protective ileostomy after low anterior resection for extraperitoneal rectal cancer: does the reversal surgery timing affect closure failure?

Loop ileostomy is commonly performed after LAR with TME to temporarily protect the anastomosis. Usually, defunctioning stoma is closed after 1-6 months, although sometimes it becomes definitive de facto. The aim of this study is to investigate the long-term risk of no-reversal of protective ileostomy after LAR for middle-low rectal cancer and the predictive risk factors. A retrospective analysis of a consecutive cohort of patients who underwent curative LAR with covering ileostomy for extraperitoneal rectal cancer in two colorectal units was performed. A different policy for scheduling stoma closure was applied between centers. All the data were collected through an electronic database (Microsoft Excel®). Descriptive statistical analysis was performed using Fisher's exact and Student's t test. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted. Two-hundred twenty-two patients were analysed: reversal procedure was carried out in 193 patients, in 29 cases stoma was never closed. The mean interval time from index surgery was 4.9 months (Center1: 3 vs. Center2: 7.8). At the univariate analysis, mean age and tumor stage were significantly higher in the "no-reversal" group. Unclosed ostomies were significantly lower in Center 1 than Center 2 (8% vs. 19.6%). At the multivariate analysis female gender, anastomotic leakage and Center 2 had significant higher risk of unclosed ileostomy. Currently, no clinical recommendations have been established and the policy of scheduling stoma reversal is variable. Our study suggests that an established protocol could avoid closure delay, decreasing permanent stomas. Consequently, ileostomy closure should be weighed as standardized step in cancer therapeutic pathway.

Determination of Factors Related to the Reversal and Perioperative Outcomes of Defunctioning Ileostomies in Patients Undergoing Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Regression Analysis Model

PURPOSE

Defunctioning ileostomies are often performed during rectal cancer surgery. However, stomas are sometimes associated with complications, while 20-30% of them are never reversed. Additionally, ileostomy closure can have associated morbidity, with rates as high as 45%, with the respective literature evidence being scarce and conflicting. Thus, we evaluated the stoma reversal outcomes and the risk factors for non-closure after rectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database of all patients who had a defunctioning ileostomy at the time of resection for rectal cancer. All operations were performed by the same surgical team. A multivariable regression model was implemented.

RESULTS

In this study, 129 patients (male: 68.2%, female: 31.8%) were included. Ileostomy formation was associated with a total of 31% complication rate. Eventually 73.6% of the stomas were reversed at a mean time to closure of 26.6 weeks, with a morbidity of 13.7%. Non-reversal of ileostomy was correlated with neoadjuvant CRT (OR: 0.093, 95% CI: 0.012-0.735), anastomotic leakage (OR: 0.107, 95% CI: 0.019-0.610), and lymph node yield (OR: 0.946, 95% CI: 0.897-0.998). Time to reversal was affected by the N status, the LNR, the need for adjuvant chemotherapy, and the histologic grade.

CONCLUSION

In patients with rectal cancer resections, defunctioning stoma closure rate and time to closure were associated with several perioperative and pathological outcomes.

Day-case loop ileostomy reversal based on the community hospital joined enhanced recovery after surgery (CHJ-ERAS) program in China: Safe and feasible

BACKGROUND

This study was performed to determine the feasibility of Day-case loop ileostomy reversal (DLIR) in China based on the community hospital joined enhanced recovery after surgery (CHJ-ERAS) program.

METHOD

Patients who underwent loop ileostomy were enrolled in the CHJ-ERAS program for DLIR after rigorous evaluation. The primary outcome was the results of short-term follow-ups.

RESULTS

From August 2017 to April 2022, 216 patients have been enrolled in the CHJ-ERAS program for DLIR. After DLIR, 14 patients (14/216, 6.5%) have recorded 17 episodes of postoperative complications within 1 month after surgery, including 10 readmission and 2 reoperation. Compared with in-patient loop ileostomy reversal, DLIR based on CHJ-ERAS did not increase the postoperative complications and reoperations.

CONCLUSION

The CMJ-ERAS program for DLIR in our center is a safe and feasible alternative option for inpatient LIR and an acceptable transitional approach for the development of day-case DLIR in developing countries.

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.

Multidisciplinary management of elderly patients with rectal cancer: recommendations from the SICG (Italian Society of Geriatric Surgery), SIFIPAC (Italian Society of Surgical Pathophysiology), SICE (Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery and new technologies), and the WSES (World Society of Emergency Surgery) International Consensus Project

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although rectal cancer is predominantly a disease of older patients, current guidelines do not incorporate optimal treatment recommendations for the elderly and address only partially the associated specific challenges encountered in this population. This results in a wide variation and disparity in delivering a standard of care to this subset of patients. As the burden of rectal cancer in the elderly population continues to increase, it is crucial to assess whether current recommendations on treatment strategies for the general population can be adopted for the older adults, with the same beneficial oncological and functional outcomes. This multidisciplinary experts' consensus aims to refine current rectal cancer-specific guidelines for the elderly population in order to help to maximize rectal cancer therapeutic strategies while minimizing adverse impacts on functional outcomes and quality of life for these patients.

METHODS

The discussion among the steering group of clinical experts and methodologists from the societies' expert panel involved clinicians practicing in general surgery, colorectal surgery, surgical oncology, geriatric oncology, geriatrics, gastroenterologists, radiologists, oncologists, radiation oncologists, and endoscopists. Research topics and questions were formulated, revised, and unanimously approved by all experts in two subsequent modified Delphi rounds in December 2020-January 2021. The steering committee was divided into nine teams following the main research field of members. Each conducted their literature search and drafted statements and recommendations on their research question. Literature search has been updated up to 2020 and statements and recommendations have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. A modified Delphi methodology was implemented to reach agreement among the experts on all statements and recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2021 SICG-SIFIPAC-SICE-WSES consensus for the multidisciplinary management of elderly patients with rectal cancer aims to provide updated evidence-based statements and recommendations on each of the following topics: epidemiology, pre-intervention strategies, diagnosis and staging, neoadjuvant chemoradiation, surgery, watch and wait strategy, adjuvant chemotherapy, synchronous liver metastases, and emergency presentation of rectal cancer.