Following anterior resection for rectal cancer, defunctioning ileostomy closure may be significantly delayed by adjuvant chemotherapy: a retrospective study

Cost associated with diverting ostomy after rectal cancer surgery: a transnational analysis

BACKGROUND

Diverting ileostomy and colostomy after total mesorectal excision reduces the risk of complications related to anastomotic leakages but is associated with a reduction in health-related quality of life and long-term economic consequences that are unknown. Our objective was to estimate the lifetime costs of stoma placement after rectal cancer resection in the U.S., England, and Germany.

METHODS

Input parameters were derived from quasi-systematic literature searches. Decision-analytic models with survival from colorectal cancer-adjusted life tables and country-specific stoma reversal proportions were created for the three countries to calculate lifetime costs. Main cost items were stoma maintenance costs and reimbursement for reversal procedures. Discounting was applied according to respective national guidelines. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to explore the impact of parameter uncertainty onto the results.

RESULTS

The cohort starting ages and median survival were 63 and 11.5 years for the U.S., 69 years and 8.5 years for England, and 71 and 6.5 years for Germany. Lifetime discounted stoma-related costs were $26,311, £9512, and €10,021, respectively. All three models were most sensitive to the proportion of ostomy reversal, age at baseline, and discount rate applied.

CONCLUSION

Conservative model-based projections suggest that stoma care leads to significant long-term costs. Efforts to reduce the number of patients who need to undergo a diverting ostomy could result in meaningful cost savings.

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.

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.

Renal dysfunction occurs following ileostomy formation and is independent of readmission

BACKGROUND

Ileostomy formation may be permanent or intended as temporary to defunction a high-risk pelvic anastomosis to reduce the risk of septic consequences of anastomotic leak. However, these procedures have a high rate of readmission, most commonly due to dehydration and associated with acute kidney injury (AKI).

METHODS

A single centre retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent ileostomy formation from 2015 to 2020 and analysed in two groups: those who needed readmission within 60 days and those who did not. Data collected included demographics and renal function and electrolytes at baseline (ileostomy formation) and at elective ileostomy closure.

RESULTS

A total of 171 patients were included in the analysis, with a readmission rate 38% within 60 days of discharge. There was a significant increase in creatinine from baseline blood tests compared to date of elective ileostomy closure in both the readmission and no readmission arms. There was a significant decrease in eGFR from baseline blood tests compared with date of ileostomy closure in both readmission and no readmission arms. There was no significant difference in creatinine or eGFR between readmission and no readmission arms at date of ileostomy closure. Baseline serum sodium levels were lower in the readmission arm compared to no readmission arm.

CONCLUSION

Ileostomy formation is associated with a deterioration in renal function, which occurs independent of whether the patient requires readmission to hospital. Low serum sodium may be used as a predictor for patients with an increased risk of readmission.

Impact of surgeon volume on 18-month unclosed ileostomy rate after restorative rectal cancer resection

AIM

The impact of surgeon volume on 18-month unclosed ileostomy rates after rectal cancer surgery has not been fully explored. The aim of this study was to describe the effect of surgeon volume and evaluate factors predictive of an unclosed ileostomy.

METHOD

Patients undergoing anterior resection with a diverting ileostomy for rectal cancer from March 2004 to October 2018 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. The unclosed ileostomy rate was determined by those with an unclosed ileostomy at 18 months. High- and low-volume surgeons (HVS and LVS, respectively) were classed as those performing five or more or fewer than five rectal cancer resections per year, respectively. Data on sex, age, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), tumour height, T-stage, anastomotic leak, surgical approach and adjuvant chemotherapy were also collected. Factors predictive of an unclosed ileostomy at 18 months were explored using a multivariate binary logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 415 patients (62.4% male) with a median age of 67 were eligible for analysis. Of these, 115 (27.7%) had an unclosed ileostomy at 18 months. HVS had an unclosed ileostomy rate of 24.6% (72/292) compared with 34.9% (43/123) for LVS. Volume was associated with an unclosed ileostomy in univariable analysis (p = 0.032) but not in multivariate analysis (OR 1.75, 95% CI 0.92-3.32, p = 0.08). Independent factors predictive of an unclosed ileostomy were anastomotic leak (OR 10.41, 3.95-27.0, p < 0.01), adjuvant chemotherapy (OR 2.23, 1.24-3.96, p < 0.01) and neoadjuvant CRT (OR 2.16, 1.15-5.75, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

LVS were associated with a higher unclosed ileostomy at 18 months compared with HVS. This study adds further weight to the call for adoption of a minimum annual case threshold in rectal cancer surgery.

Impact of timing of reversal of loop ileostomy on patient outcomes: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Diverting loop ileostomies (DLIs) are ideally reversed 6-12 weeks after the index operation. However, reversal surgery is frequently delayed in a real-world setting, with potential implications on patient's quality of life and postoperative complications. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of timing of the reversal on patient outcomes at a tertiary referral hospital.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent elective reversal of loop ileostomy (RLI) between January 2007 and January 2019 were included. The primary outcomes were incidence of postoperative ileus (POI) and 30-day postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Of 251 eligible patients, 158 (63%) were men, the median age was 64 years (range 23-88 years), and the most common index operation was an ultra-low anterior resection in 106 (42%). The median time to reversal for the entire cohort was 7.4 months (range 1-28). RLI was performed within 6 months after the index surgery in 89 patients (35%, early group), 6-12 months in 120 (48%, middle group) and after more than 12 months in 42 (17%, late group) patients. A significantly lower incidence of postoperative ileus (13.5% vs. 25.8% vs. 38.1%, p = 0.006), and 30-day postoperative complications (29.2% vs 41.7% vs. 57.1%, p = 0.011) were seen in the early group compared to the middle and late groups, respectively. There was no difference in the return to theater, length of hospital stay, and readmission rate between groups.

CONCLUSION

Delayed RLI is associated with increased risk of postoperative complications.

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.

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.

Stoma reversal after intended restorative rectal cancer resection in Denmark: nationwide population-based study

BACKGROUND

Data on stoma reversal following restorative rectal resection (RRR) with a diverting stoma are conflicting. This study investigated a Danish population-based cohort of patients undergoing RRR to evaluate factors predictive of stoma reversal during 3 years of follow-up.

METHODS

Patients from national registries with rectal cancer undergoing RRR or Hartmann's procedure with curative intent between May 2001 and April 2012 were included. Patients with a diverting stoma were followed from the time of primary rectal cancer resection to date of stoma reversal, death, emigration, or end of 3-year follow-up. The cumulative incidence proportion (CIP) of stoma reversal at 1 and 3 years was calculated, treating death as a competing risk. Factors predictive of stoma reversal were explored using Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

Of 6859 patients included, 35·7, 41·9 and 22·4 per cent respectively had a RRR with a diverting stoma, RRR without a stoma, and Hartmann's procedure with an end-colostomy. In patients with a diverting stoma, the CIP of stoma reversal was 70·3 (95 per cent c.i. 68·4 to 72·1) per cent after 1 year, and 74·3 (72·5 to 76·0) per cent after 3 years. Neoadjuvant treatment (hazard ratio (HR) 0·75, 95 per cent c.i. 0·66 to 0·85), blood loss greater than 300 ml (HR 0·86, 0·76 to 0·97), anastomotic leak (HR 0·41, 0·33 to 0·50), T3 category (HR 0·63, 0·47 to 0·83), T4 category (HR 0·62, 0·42 to 0·90) and UICC stage IV (HR 0·57, 0·41 to 0·80) were possible predictors of delayed stoma reversal.

CONCLUSION

In one-quarter of the patients the diverting stoma had not been reversed 3 years after the intended RRR procedure.

Precision functional sphincter-preserving surgery (PPS) for ultralow rectal cancer: a natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) surgery technique

BACKGROUND

In patients with ultralow rectal cancer, surgical resection of the tumor without impairing sphincter function remains a technical challenge. The purpose of this study was to describe a new technique of transanal natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) surgery using our independently developed devices, aiming to achieve precise cancer resection and preserve sphincter function in patients with ultralow rectal cancer.

METHODS

Precision functional sphincter-preserving surgery (PPS) was performed on nineteen patients with ultralow rectal cancer between June 2019 and April 2020. With the help of our independently developed devices, surgeons directly and accurately removed the lower edge of the tumor and retained healthy rectal tissue on the nontumorous side. Hand-sewn anastomosis with a mattress suture was used to achieve sturdy anastomosis. Preoperative baseline characteristics, operative details, 90-day postoperative complications, costs, and anal function score at 6 months after surgery were documented.

RESULTS

Nineteen ultralow rectal cancer patients with a median distance to the dentate line of 2.0 cm successfully underwent PPS without serious postoperative complications. Six out of nineteen patients (31.6%) received a prophylactic stoma. The average cost was 62164.1 yuan. At 6 months after surgery, the average Wexner anal function score and the average Vaizey score were both 3 points.

CONCLUSIONS

PPS can be employed to precisely resect rectal tumors and preserve sphincter function in ultralow rectal cancer patients. The use of our devices enhanced surgical efficiency, reduced the need for prophylactic stoma, reduced surgery-related costs, and prevented abdominal surgical incisions.

Risk factors for nonclosure of defunctioning stoma and stoma-related complications among low rectal cancer patients after sphincter-preserving surgery

Background

Defunctioning stoma is widely used to reduce anastomotic complications in rectal cancer surgery. However, the complications of stoma and stoma reversal surgery should not be underestimated. Furthermore, in some patients, stoma reversal failed. Here, we investigated the complications of defunctioning stoma surgery and subsequent reversal surgery and identify risk factors associated with the failure of getting stoma reversed.

Methods

In total, 154 patients who simultaneously underwent low anterior resection and defunctioning stoma were reviewed. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether their stoma got reversed or not. The reasons that patients received defunctioning stoma and experienced stoma-related complications and the risk factors for failing to get stoma reversed were analysed.

Results

The mean follow-up time was 47.54 (range 4.0–164.0) months. During follow-up, 19.5% of the patients suffered stoma-related long-term complications. Only 79 (51.3%) patients had their stomas reversed. The morbidity of complications after reversal surgery was 45.6%, and these mainly consisted of incision-related complications. Multivariate analyses showed that pre-treatment comorbidity (HR = 3.17, 95% CI 1.27–7.96, P = 0.014), postoperative TNM stage (HR = 2.55, 95% CI 1.05–6.18, P = 0.038), neoadjuvant therapy (HR = 2.75, 95% CI 1.07–7.05, P = 0.036), anastomosis-related complications (HR = 4.52, 95% CI 1.81–11.29, P = 0.001), and disease recurrence (HR = 24.83, 95% CI 2.90–213.06, P = 0.003) were significant independent risk factors for a defunctioning stoma to be permanent.

Conclusions

Defunctioning stoma is an effective method to reduce symptomatic anastomotic leakage, but the stoma itself and its reversal procedure are associated with high morbidity of complications, and many defunctioning stomas eventually become permanent. Therefore, surgeons should carefully assess preoperatively and perform defunctioning stomas in very high risk patients. In addition, doctors should perform stoma reversal surgery more actively to prevent temporary stomas from becoming permanent.

Reversal of defunctioning stoma following rectal cancer surgery: are we getting better? A population-based single centre experience

BACKGROUND

The aim was to assess factors influencing the timing of defunctioning stoma (DS) reversal following low anterior resection of rectum for cancer (LAR).

METHODS

All patients operated with LAR and a primary DS during a 9-year period were included. Reversal later than 120 days after LAR was considered as delayed. A DS not reversed within 2 years was considered as permanent.

RESULTS

In the present study, median age at LAR was 67 years, 45% were females, median body mass index was 25, 87% had American Society of Anesthesiologists class I or II, 64% had pre-operative radiotherapy, and 3% had cancer stage IV. A total of 79% (92/116) underwent stoma reversal, whereof 25% (23/92) were reversed within 120 days. The most common health-related reasons for delayed stoma reversal were adjuvant chemotherapy in 38%, symptomatic anastomotic leakage in 16% and other post-operative adverse events in 13%. In 35% delayed stoma reversal was because of low priority within the healthcare system. A total of 18% (20/110) never had their DS reversed (n = 11) or had their DS converted to a permanent end colostomy (n = 9). Major risk factors for permanent stoma were stage IV cancer in 55%, and symptomatic anastomotic leakage in 30%.

CONCLUSION

One fourth of the patients had their defunctioning stoma reversed within 120 days. The most common identifiable medical reasons for delayed stoma reversal were adjuvant chemotherapy and symptomatic anastomotic leakage, while in one out of three patients it was because of low priority by the healthcare provider.

Factors preventing restoration of bowel continuity in patients with rectal cancer submitted to anterior rectal resection and protective ileostomy

OBJECTIVE

to evaluate the factors associated with non-closure of protective ileostomy after anterior resection of the rectum with total mesorectum excision for rectal cancer, the morbidity associated with the closure of ileostomies and the rate of permanent ileostomy in patients with rectal adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

we conducted a retrospective study with 174 consecutive patients diagnosed with rectal tumors, of whom 92 underwent anterior resection of the rectum with coloanal or colorectal anastomosis and protective ileostomy, with curative intent. We carried out a multivariate analysis to determine the factors associated with definite permanence of the stoma, as well as studied the morbidity of patients who underwent bowel continuity restoration.

RESULTS

In the 84-month follow-up period, 54 of the 92 patients evaluated (58.7%) had the ileostomy closed and 38 (41.3%) remained with the stoma. Among the 62 patients who had the ileostomy closed, 11 (17.7%) presented some type of postoperative complication: three had ileal anastomosis dehiscence, five had intestinal obstruction, two had surgical wound infection, and one, pneumonia. Eight of these patients required a new stoma.

CONCLUSION

according to the multivariate analysis, the factors associated with stoma permanence were anastomotic fistula, presence of metastases and closure of the ileostomy during chemotherapy.

Defunctioning ileostomy reduces leakage rate in rectal cancer surgery - systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives

The role of a defunctioning ileostomy in every anterior rectal resection with total mesorectal excision (TME) is still controversial. In this study, we aimed to review the current literature to determine the impact of ileostomy creation on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing anterior rectal resection with TME.

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched for eligible studies. We analyzed data up to October 2017. Eligible studies had to compare patients with vs. without a defunctioning ileostomy in rectal cancer surgery and comprise data on anastomotic leakage in both groups. The primary outcome was anastomotic leakage. Secondary outcomes included the complication rate, mortality, reoperation rate, length of hospital stay and 30-day readmission.

Results

Initial search yielded 1,966 articles. Thorough evaluation resulted in 13 eligible articles which were analyzed. Leakage rate (RR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.28-0.67) and the number of reoperations (RR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.40-0.94) were significantly lower in the defunctioning stoma group. Morbidity was significantly higher in the stoma group (RR = 1.32, 95% CI 1.05–1.65). Analysis of mortality, length of hospital stay and readmission rate did not show any significant differences.

Conclusion

A defunctioning ileostomy may decrease the anastomotic leakage rate, additionally significantly reducing the risk of reoperations but it may also increase the overall complication rate. The presence of the protective stoma has no effect on mortality, length of hospital stay and readmission rate.

Protection of low rectal anastomosis with a new tube ileostomy using a biofragmentable anastomosis ring: A retrospective study

A temporarily defunctioning stoma, while effective at reducing symptomatic anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection (LAR) of rectal cancer, and its subsequent closure, is associated with significant morbidity. Here, we devised a new tube ileostomy using a biofragmentable anastomosis ring (TIB) with no need for reversal.This is a retrospective cohort study. From June 2011 to March 2015, TIBs were performed on 31 consecutive patients with mid- or low-rectal cancer who underwent elective laparoscopic LARs. From January 2008 to May 2011, 25 similarly diseased patients underwent elective laparoscopic LARs and conventional loop ileostomy (LI) and were included as controls. All of the anastomotic sites were within 6 cm of the anal verge. Demographic, clinical feature, and operative data were recorded.The demographic features of both groups were similar. The TIB mean surgical duration was significantly lower than in the LI group (215 ± 28 vs 245 ± 54 min, P = 0.010). Because of readmission for stoma closure, the total hospital stay of the LI group was longer than that of the TIB group (38.1 ± 26.5 vs 19.1 ± 7.9 days, respectively, P = 0.002). Ileal content was completely diverted by TIB for 13.7 ± 2.1 (range, 10-19) days postoperatively. The drainage tube was removed on postoperative day 27.8 ± 6.9 (range, 20-44), and the mean continued duration of the discharge tract, before fistula healing, was 4.5 ± 1.9 (range, 2-10) days. Postoperative complications of the 2 modalities were not significant. In the TIB group, 1 rectovaginal fistula occurred 30 days postsurgery. In the LI group, 1 rectovaginal fistula occurred 3 months after stoma closure. Both complications were treated with transverse colostomy. No major TIB associated complications were observed in the present study.TIB is a safe, feasible, effective, but time-limited diversion technique, which may reduce symptomatic anastomosis leakage after LAR for rectal cancer.

Quality of life in rectal cancer surgery: What do the patient ask?

Rectal cancer surgery has dramatically changed with the introduction of the total mesorectal excision (TME), which has demonstrated to significantly reduce the risk of local recurrence. The combination of TME with radiochemotherapy has led to a reduction of local failure to less than 5%. On the other hand, surgery for rectal cancer is also impaired by the potential for a significant loss in quality of life. This is a new challenge surgeons should think about nowadays: If patients live more, they also want to live better. The fight against cancer cannot only be based on survival, recurrence rate and other oncological endpoints. Patients are also asking for a decent quality of life. Rectal cancer is probably a paradigmatic example: Its treatment is often associated with the loss or severe impairment of faecal function, alteration of body anatomy, urogenital problems and, sometimes, intractable pain. The evolution of laparoscopic colorectal surgery in the last decades is an important example, which emphasizes the importance that themes like scar, recovery, pain and quality of life might play for patients. The attention to quality of life from both patients and surgeons led to several surgical innovations in the treatment of rectal cancer: Sphincter saving procedures, reservoir techniques (pouch and coloplasty) to mitigate postoperative faecal disorders, nerve-sparing techniques to reduce the risk for sexual dysfunction. Even more conservative procedures have been proposed alternatively to the abdominal-perineal resection, like the local excisions or transanal endoscopic microsurgery, till the possibility of a wait and see approach in selected cases after radiation therapy.

Defunctioning Ileostomy Reversal Rates and Reasons for Delayed Reversal: Does Delay Impact on Complications of Ileostomy Reversal? A Study of 170 Defunctioning Ileostomies

Background

Temporary defunctioning ileostomy can reduce the consequences of anastomotic leak following low anterior resection. However, some patients never have their ileostomy reversed and in other cases the time to reversal of ileostomy can be delayed. The aim of this study was to identify the ileostomy closure rate following anterior resection, time to closure of ileostomy, reasons for delay in reversal and whether delay was associated with an increased complication rate.

Methods

Data were collected retrospectively on consecutive patients undergoing defunctioning ileostomy following anterior resection for rectal cancer, between January 2009 and August 2013. Data were collected on reversal of ileostomy rates, time to reversal, reasons for delayed reversal (defined as > 6 months) and complications following reversal.

Results

One hundred seventy patients were studied (median age 69 years, range 41 - 90 years), of whom 117 (69%) were male. One hundred twenty-seven (75%) patients had their ileostomies reversed. Median time to reversal was 6 months (range 1 - 42). In 63 patients who had delayed reversal, reasons were adjuvant chemotherapy (22, 35%), medical illness (14, 22%), anastomotic leak (9, 14%), and others (4, 7%). Postoperative complications occurred in 33 patients (26%). There was no postoperative mortality. Univariate analysis showed that delayed reversal was associated with an increased rate of complications and longer length of hospital stay following reversal (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

One in four defunctioning ileostomies are not closed following anterior resection in our unit. Of those that are closed, approximately 50% have delayed closure beyond 6 months which is associated with increased risk of complications following their ileostomy reversal.

Cost analysis of early versus delayed loop ileostomy closure: a case-matched study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The optimal timing for the closure of loop ileostomies remains controversial. The aim of the current study was to investigate whether early ileostomy closure (EC) (<2 weeks post-formation) results in significant healthcare savings as against late closure (LC).

METHODS

Patients with available cost data that underwent EC between January 2008 and December 2012 were compared against matched patients undergoing LC during the same period. Direct hospital costs for the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

There were 42 EC patients and 61 LC patients. EC patients had significantly less ileostomy-related complications (p < 0.001) and hospital readmissions (p < 0.001). Operative time (p < 0.001) and operative cost (p = 0.002) were also both significantly less in the EC group. Community nursing costs favoured the LC group (p = 0.047). The EC group had an increased post-closure wound infection rate (p = 0.02). The mean total direct cost per patient was NZD 13,724 (SD NZD 3,736) for EC and NZD 16,728 (SD NZD 8,028) for LC. Representing an average costs saving of NZD 3,004 per patient favouring EC (p = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

Although EC increases the post-closure wound infection rate, EC reduces ileostomy complications, hospital readmissions and operative costs resulting in significant healthcare savings. In order to improve patient outcomes and make EC even more cost effective, efforts should be taken to reduce wound infections.

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

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical outcomes between 2 groups of elderly rectal cancer patients according to the time duration after which their diverting stoma can be reversed.

METHODS

We recruited 124 patients who were ≥65 years old and had undergone diverting stoma after rectal cancer surgery. In Group 1, the reversal of the stoma was predominantly performed after the sixth adjuvant chemotherapy. In Group 2, the reversal was predominantly performed after the third adjuvant chemotherapy.

RESULTS

The mean duration for which patients had a stoma was 28.6 ± 9.9 weeks in Group 1 and 17.1 ± 7.4 weeks in Group 2. The interval between stoma formation and stoma formation-related complications was slightly longer in Group 1 than in Group 2 (13.5 ± 9.7 vs. 8.0 ± 4.9 weeks, p = 0.075). There were 16 stoma-related complications in Group 1 (23.2%) and 10 in Group 2 (18.2%) (p = 0.516). There were 6 stoma closure-related complications in Group 1 (8.8%) and 6 in Group 2 (10.9%) (p = 0.766).

DISCUSSION

This study shows that stoma closure during adjuvant chemotherapy is no more harmful than stoma closure after termination of adjuvant chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

It may be possible to limit the duration of diverting stoma following rectal cancer surgery, even if patients are elderly and undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy.

Morbidity and mortality of temporary diverting ileostomies in rectal cancer surgery

INTRODUCTION

A temporary diverting ileostomy is frequently used to reduce the consequences of a distal anastomotic leakage after total mesorectal excision in rectal cancer surgery. This surgical technique is associated with high morbidity and a not negligible mortality. The aim of this study is to evaluate the morbidity and mortality rate associated with an ileostomy and its posterior closure.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between 2001 and 2012, 96 patients with temporary diverting ileostomy were retrospectively analyzed. Morbidity and mortality were analyzed before and after the stoma closure. The studied variables included age, sex, comorbidities, time to bowel continuity restoration and adjuvant chemotherapy.

RESULTS

In 5 patients the stoma was permanent and another 5 died. The morbidity and mortality rates associated with the stoma while it was present were 21 and 1% respectively. We performed a stoma closure in 86 patients, 57% of whom had previously received adjuvant therapy. There was no postoperative mortality after closure and the morbidity rate was 24%. The average time between initial surgery and restoration of intestinal continuity was 152.2 days. This interval was significantly higher in patients who had received adjuvant therapy. No statistically significant difference was found between the variables analyzed and complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Diverting ileostomy is associated with low mortality and high morbidity rates before and after closure. Adjuvant chemotherapy significantly delays bowel continuity restoration, although in this study did not influence in the rate of complications.

Failing to reverse a diverting stoma after lower anterior resection of rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

A diverting stoma is an accepted adjunct to low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer. However, some patients do not undergo a subsequent procedure to have the stoma reversed. We aim to determine incidence and risk factors for nonclosure of the diverting stoma.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of stage I to III rectal cancer patients at a single institution having LAR with curative intent and a diverting stoma.

RESULTS

We studied 162 patients. Prevalence of nonclosure of the temporary stoma was 14.5% within 13 months of the index surgery. On a multivariate linear regression model, nonclosure was associated with anastomotic leak (odds ratio 9.89, 2.31 to 43.93, P < .001) and age older than 65 (odds ratio 2.76, 1.08 to 7.48, P < .036).

CONCLUSIONS

Prevalence of nonclosure of a diverting stoma after LAR for rectal cancer is substantial (14.5%). Patients should be counselled regarding this risk with particular attention to potential risk factors.

[Ileostomy closure in a colorectal surgery unit. Comparative analysis of different techniques]

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study is to assess whether the results of loop ileostomy closure in terms of morbidity and hospital stay are influenced by the type of anastomosis and suture used.

METHOD

All patients who underwent loop ileostomy closure were reviewed. A retrospective cohort study comparing morbidity and hospital stay according to the type of anastomosis (TT/LL) and the type of suture (hand sewn/mechanical) was performed.

RESULTS

From January 2003 to November 2011 a total of 167 loop ileostomy closures were analized. The groups were: type of anastomosis (TT 95/LL 72) and type of suture (manual 105/stapled 62). In 76% of the observed population the underlying disease was cancer. Mortality occurred in one case. The stratified morbidity analysis by type of complications showed no significant differences between the groups in terms of local (7.4% TT, LL 8.3%, 6.7% hand sewn, stapled 9.7%), general (TT 9.5%, 16.7% LL, hand sewn 6.7%, 6.5% stapled) and surgical (TT 15.8%, 19.4% LL, hand sewn 17.1%, 17.7% stapled) complications, nor in the rate of reoperations (TT 6.3%, 6.9% LL, hand sewn 6.7%, 6.5% stapled) and hospital stay in days (TT 7.8, 8 LL, hand sewn 8.6, stapled 6.7) CONCLUSIONS: Closure of loop ileostomy can be performed regardless of the type of suture or anastomosis used, with the same rate of morbidity and hospital stay.

When are defunctioning stomas in rectal cancer surgery really reversed? Results from a population-based single center experience

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

This study assessed the timing of reversal of defunctioning stoma following low anterior resection of the rectum for cancer and risk factors for a defunctioning stoma becoming permanent in patients who were not reversed.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients who underwent low anterior resection with defunctioning stoma during a 12-year period were assessed with regard to timing of stoma reversal. Delayed reversal was defined as >4 months after low anterior resection. Patients with a defunctioning stoma that was never reversed were assessed regarding risk factors for permanent stoma.

RESULTS

A total of 134 patients were analyzed. Of 106 stoma reversals, 19% were reversed within 4 months of low anterior resection, while 81% were reversed later than 4 months. In 58% of these patients, the delay was to due to low medical priority given to this procedure. The other main reasons for delayed stoma reversal were nonsurgical complications (20%), symptomatic anastomotic leakage following low anterior resection (12%), and postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy (10%). Of all patients, 21% (28/134) ended up with a permanent stoma. Risk factors for a defunctioning stoma becoming permanent were stage IV cancer (P < 0.001) and symptomatic anastomotic leakage following low anterior resection (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Four in five patients experienced a delayed stoma reversal, in a majority because of the low priority given to this surgical procedure.

Do older Americans undergo stoma reversal following low anterior resection for rectal cancer?

OBJECTIVE

For low-lying rectal cancers, proximal diversion can reduce anastomotic leak after sphincter-preserving surgery; however, evidence suggests that such temporary diversions are often not reversed. We aimed to evaluate nonreversal and delayed stoma reversal in elderly patients undergoing low anterior resection (LAR).

DESIGN

SEER-Medicare-linked analysis from 1991-2007.

SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS

A total of 1179 primary stage I-III rectal cancer patients over age 66 who underwent LAR with synchronous diverting stoma.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

(1) Stoma creation and reversal rates; (2) time to reversal; (3) characteristics associated with reversal and shorter time to reversal.

RESULTS

Within 18 mo of LAR, 51% of patients (603/1179) underwent stoma reversal. Stoma reversal was associated with age <80 y (P < 0.0001), male sex (P = 0.018), fewer comorbidities (P = 0.017), higher income (quartile 4 versus 1; P = 0.002), early tumor stage (1 versus 3; P < 0.001), neoadjuvant radiation (P < 0.0001), rectal tumor location (versus rectosigmoid; P = 0.001), more recent diagnosis (P = 0.021), and shorter length of stay on LAR admission (P = 0.021). Median time to reversal was 126 d (interquartile range: 79-249). Longer time to reversal was associated with older age (P = 0.031), presence of comorbidities (P = 0.014), more advanced tumor stage (P = 0.007), positive lymph nodes (P = 0.009), receipt of adjuvant radiation therapy (P = 0.008), more recent diagnosis (P = 0.004), and longer length of stay on LAR admission (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Half of elderly rectal cancer patients who undergo LAR with temporary stoma have not undergone stoma reversal by 18 mo. Identifiable risk factors predict both nonreversal and longer time to reversal. These results help inform preoperative discussions and promote realistic expectations for elderly rectal cancer patients.

Factors affecting closure of a temporary stoma

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to examine time to reversal of a temporary ostomy, reasons for delayed closure, and patient satisfaction with the scheduling of their closure and related hospital care.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional, descriptive study.

SUBJECTS AND SETTING

The target population comprised patients who underwent creation of a temporary ostomy and reversal surgery within one National Health System Hospital Trust in the United Kingdom. The population served by this Trust are ethnically and socioeconomically diverse, predominantly living in urban areas around Greater London. Sixty-one persons who met inclusion criteria were identified.

METHODS

A two-step analytical process was undertaken. First, a literature review examining incidence and causes of delayed stoma closure was undertaken. Second, a postal survey of all patients who had had their stoma closed in 2009 was conducted. Respondents were allowed 2 weeks to complete and return the questionnaire.

INSTRUMENT

The survey instrument was developed locally and subjected to content validation using ostomy patients, surgical and nursing colleagues. It consisted of 9 questions querying time from original surgery to closure, reasons for delaying closure surgery beyond 12 weeks, and satisfaction with care.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients returned their questionnaires, indicating they consented to participate; a response rate of 44%. Half of the respondents (n = 14 [52%]) underwent closure surgery within 6 months of stoma formation; the remaining 48% waited more than 6 months (median: 6.5 months, range: 1.5-26 months). Thirteen patients (48%) reported a delay in receiving their stoma closure; the main reason cited was the need for a course of adjuvant postoperative chemotherapy. Three quarters of respondents (22 [74%]) were satisfied with the overall care they received.

CONCLUSION

Findings from this study suggest that stoma closure may be associated with fewest complications if performed before 12 weeks.

[Clinical results of loop ileostomy closures in rectal cancer surgical patients. Effect of chemotherapy in the waiting period]

INTRODUCTION

The introduction of sphincter preservation surgery in rectal cancer has led to an increase in the number of low resections protected with a loop ileostomy. This requires subsequent closure of the stoma, a surgical procedure which is not devoid of morbidity or mortality. The aims of the study were to analyse the clinical results of the passage reconstruction surgery and to find out the interval between both surgeries, as well as the role chemotherapy plays in this.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

The prospective data of patients previously operated on for rectal cancer were used retrospectively with those whose ileostomy was closed between May 2004 and September 2008. Data associated to chemotherapy indication, interval between surgeries and complications were collected and analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 54 consecutive patients with a mean age of 66 years were analysed. The mean interval between surgeries was 178 days, being significantly less in the patient group that did not receive chemotherapy (p=0.008). The post-operative stay was 6.3 days (SD=4.1). Mortality due to respiratory failure was 1.8% and the morbidity was 22.2%, with 7.4% requiring further surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The mortality and morbidity of ileostomy closures are not inconsiderable, although its advantages in the protection of the stoma justify its use. The ileostomy construction interval appears to be significantly affected by post-operative chemotherapy.

Quality of life following reversal of temporary stoma after rectal cancer treatment

PURPOSE

An examination of quality of life outcomes following reversal of a temporary stoma after rectal cancer treatment.

METHOD

An extensive search of the literature was conducted. Studies selected examine the consequences of stoma reversal on individual's lives. Methodological issues and implications for nursing practice are also considered.

RESULTS

It is clear that after stoma reversal, there is often a temporary alteration in bowel function, impacting on individuals' physical, social and psychological health for several months. There is possibility of permanent difficulties for some, significantly affecting their quality of life if left untreated. These effects can lead to more negative post-operative experiences than expected.

CONCLUSION

This review prompts discussion about how to provide appropriate support for patients following stoma reversal but also optimal pre-operative preparation, to foster realistic expectations and subsequent adaptation. It is suggested that nursing support should be targeted to the first few months post-reversal when bowel symptoms tend to be most troublesome.

Loop ileostomy following anterior resection: is it really temporary?

INTRODUCTION

A temporary loop ileostomy is often created to minimize the impact of peritoneal sepsis if anastomotic dehiscence occurs following low colorectal anastomosis. Although it has been suggested that a loop ileostomy should be reversed within 12 weeks of formation, this is often not the case. We set out to analyse the use of loop ileostomy following elective anterior resection in England and to identify factors associated with non and delayed reversal.

METHOD

Hospital episode statistics for the years 2001-2006 were obtained from the Department of Health. Patients undergoing elective anterior resection with a loop ileostomy for a primary diagnosis of rectal or recto-sigmoid cancer between April 2001 and March 2003 were identified as the study cohort. This cohort was followed until March 2006 to identify patients undergoing reversal of an ileostomy in an English NHS Hospital.

RESULTS

A total of 6582 patients had an elective anterior resection between April 2001 and March 2003, of which 964 (14.6%) also had an ileostomy. Seven hundred and two (75.1%) patients were reversed before March 2006. Advancing age and comorbidity were statistically related to nonreversal. Median time to reversal was 207 days (Interquartile range 119-321.5 days). Postoperative chemotherapy and comorbidity significantly delayed reversal.

CONCLUSIONS

One in four loop ileostomies performed to defunction an elective anterior resection is not reversed, and in the presence of significant comorbidity one in three is not reversed. Only 12% is reversed within 12 weeks.

Morbidity and mortality after closure of loop ileostomy

BACKGROUND

A temporary loop ileostomy is commonly used to protect low pelvic anastomoses. Closure is associated with morbidity and mortality. This study investigated patterns of complications after loop ileostomy closure and factors associated with morbidity and mortality.

METHOD

A review was performed of patients who underwent loop ileostomy closure between 1999 and 2005.

RESULTS

Three hundred and twenty-five patients underwent closure of loop ileostomy. Reasons for primary surgery were: anterior resection for cancer (n = 160, 49%), ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (n = 114, 35%), diverticular disease (n = 25, 8%), Crohn's colitis (n = 4, 1%) and other conditions (n = 22, 7%). Overall mortality was 2.5% (n = 8) and morbidity was 22.8% (n = 74). Thirty-two patients (10%) developed small bowel obstruction, of whom seven required operative intervention. Overall, the re-operation rate in this series was 28 patients (8.6%). Thirteen (4%) patients had an anastomotic leak of whom 12 patients had re-operation. Preoperative anaemia was significantly associated with leakage (Hb < 11 g/dl; n = 65, P = 0.033). The leakage rate was lower after a stapled anastomosis than a hand-sutured anastomosis (4/203 vs 9/122; P = 0.039). Hypo-albuminaemia (albumin < 34 g/l) was significantly associated with mortality (n = 46, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Loop ileostomy closure is associated with morbidity and mortality. Anaemia and hypo-albuminaemia may be associated with poor outcome.

Use of Hartmann's procedure in England

INTRODUCTION

Hartmann's procedure is widely used in the management of complicated diverticular disease and for colorectal cancer. Very little national data are available about the reasons for performing this procedure and the reversal rate.

METHOD

Hospital episode statistics data were obtained from The Department of Health and exported to an Access database for analysis. A cohort of patients who underwent a Hartmann's procedure between April 2001 and March 2002 were identified and followed until April 2006 to identify patients undergoing reversal of Hartmann's.

RESULTS

Approximately 3950 Hartmann's procedures were performed between April 2001 and March 2002, 2853 as an emergency and 1097 as an elective procedure. Most emergency Hartmann's were performed for benign disease (2067, 72.5%) whereas a majority of the elective Hartmann's were performed for cancer (756, 68.9%). Seven hundred and thirty six (23.3%) of these patients underwent reversal during the study period. The median time interval between a Hartmann's procedure and reversal was 284.5 days (interquartile range 181-468.25).

CONCLUSION

This study represents the single largest cohort in whom outcome after Hartmann's procedure has been studied. A majority of Hartmann's are performed as an emergency for benign diseases and most of them are not reversed.

Liver resections combined with closure of loop ileostomies: a retrospective analysis

Background. The management of patients with colorectal liver metastases and loop ileostomies remains controversial. This study was performed to assess the outcome of combined liver resection and loop ileostomy closure. Methods. Analysis of prospectively collected perioperative data, including morbidity and mortality, of 283 consecutive hepatectomies for colorectal liver metastases was undertaken. Consecutive liver resections were performed from 1996 to 2006 in one centre by a single surgeon (NDK). Fourteen of these patients had combined liver resection and ileostomy closure. Case-matched analysis was undertaken. Results. Six (2.2%) patients died in the hepatectomy only group and none died in the combined group. There was no difference in operative blood loss between the two groups (0.09). Perioperative morbidity was 36% in the combined group and 23% in the hepatectomy alone group (P = 0.33). Mean hospital stay was 14 days in the combined group and 11 days in the hepatectomy only group (P = 0.046). Case-matched analysis showed a significant increase in hospital stay (P = 0.03) and complications (P = 0.049) in the combined group. Conclusion. In patients with CRLM, combined liver resection and closure of ileostomy may be associated with a higher operative morbidity and a prolonged hospital stay.