The safety of early versus late ileostomy reversal after low anterior rectal resection: a retrospective study in 47 patients

The Frequency of Urination Dysfunction in Patients Operated on for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analyses

The frequency of long-term urination dysfunction after surgery for rectal cancer remains unclear, yet it is essential to establish this to improve treatment strategies. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs, and cohort studies were included with patients having undergone sphincter-preserving total (TME) or partial mesorectal excision (PME) for the treatment of primary rectal cancer in this review. The outcome was urination dysfunction reported at least three months postoperatively, both overall urination dysfunction and subdivided into specific symptoms. The online databases PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched, bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and results were synthesized using one-group frequency meta-analyses. A total of 55 studies with 15,072 adults were included. The median follow-up was 29 months (range 3-180). The pooled overall urination dysfunction was 21% (95% confidence interval (CI) 12%-30%) 3-11 months postoperatively and 25% (95% CI 19%-32%) ≥12 months postoperatively. Retention and incontinence were common 3-11 months postoperatively, with pooled frequencies of 11% and 14%, respectively. Increased urinary frequency, retention, and incontinence seemed even more common ≥12 months postoperatively, with pooled frequencies of 37%, 20%, and 23%, respectively. In conclusion, one in five patients experienced urination dysfunction more than a year following an operation for rectal cancer.

Timing of restoration of bowel continuity after decompressing stoma, in left-sided obstructive colon cancer: a nationwide retrospective cohort

BACKGROUND

With the increasing use of decompressing stoma as a bridge to surgery for left-sided obstructive colon cancer (LSOCC), the timing of restoration of bowel continuity (ROBC) is a subject of debate. There is a lack of data on immediate ROBC during elective resection as an alternative for a 3-stage procedure. This study analysed if immediate ROBC during tumour resection is safe and of any benefit for patients who underwent decompressing stoma for LSOCC.

METHODS

In a Dutch nationwide collaborative research project, 3153 patients who underwent resection for LSOCC in 75 hospitals (2009-2016) were identified. Extensive data on disease and procedural characteristics, and outcomes was collected by local collaborators. For this analysis, 332 patients who underwent decompressing stoma followed by curative resection were selected. Immediate ROBC during tumour resection was compared to two no immediate ROBC groups, (1) tumour resection with primary anastomosis (PA) with leaving the decompressing stoma in situ, and (2) tumour resection without PA.

RESULTS

Immediate ROBC was performed in 113 patients (34.0%) and no immediate ROBC in 219 patients [168 with PA (50.6%) and 51 patients without PA (15.4%)]. No differences at baseline between the groups were found for age, ASA score, cT, and cM. Major surgical complications (8.8% immediate ROBC vs. 4.8% PA with decompressing stoma and 7.8% no PA; P =0.37) and mortality (2.7% vs. 2.4% and 0%, respectively; P =0.52) were similar. Immediate ROBC resulted in a shorter time with a stoma (mean 41 vs. 240 and 314 days, respectively; P <0.001), and fewer permanent stomas (7% vs. 21% and 80%, respectively; P <0.001) as compared to PA with a decompressing stoma or no PA.

CONCLUSION

After a decompressing stoma for LSOCC, immediate ROBC during elective resection appears safe, reduces the total time with a stoma and the risk of a permanent stoma.

Outcome of early versus late ileostomy closure in patients with rectal cancers undergoing low anterior resection: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Protective loop ileostomy is performed following low anterior resection (LAR) in patients with rectal cancer to reduce the complications of primary anastomosis. The optimal timing for ileostomy closure remains controversial. The aim of the current study was to compare the effects of early (<2 weeks) versus late (≥2 months) closure of the stoma in patients with rectal cancer undergoing LAR on surgical outcome and complications rates.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study was conducted in two referral centers in Shiraz, Iran, during a 2-year period. We have consecutively and prospectively included adult patients with rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent LAR followed by protective loop ileostomy in our center during the study period. The baseline, tumor characteristics and complication as well as outcome was recorded in a 1-year follow-up and was compared between early and late ileostomy closure.

RESULTS

Overall, 69 patients (32 in early and 37 in late group) were included. The mean age of the patients was 59.40 ± 9.30 years and there were 46 (66.7%) men and 23 (33.3%) women. Patients undergoing early closure of the ileostomy had significantly shorter operation duration (p<0.001) and lower intraoperative bleeding (p<0.001) compared to late ileostomy closure. There was no significant difference between two study groups regarding the complications. Early closure was also not found to be a predictive factor of post-ileostomy closure complications.

CONCLUSION

Early closure (<2 weeks) of ileostomy after LAR in patients with rectal adenocarcinoma is a safe and feasible technique which is associated with favorable outcome.

Early vs. standard reversal ileostomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Formation of a defunctioning loop ileostomy is common after mid and low rectal resection. Historically, they were reversed between 3 and 6 months after initial resection. Recently, earlier closure (< 14 days) has been suggested by some current randomised controlled trials. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of early stoma closure on surgical and patient outcomes.

Methods

A systematic review of the current randomised controlled trial literature comparing early and standard ileostomy closure after rectal surgery was performed. Specifically, we examined surgical outcomes including; morbidity, mortality and quality of life.

Results

Six studies met the predefined criteria and were included in our analysis. 275 patients underwent early stoma closure compared with 259 patients having standard closure. Overall morbidity was similar between both groups (25.5% vs. 21.6%) (OR, 1.47; 95% CI 0.75–2.87). However, there tended to be more reoperations (8.4 vs. 4.2%) (OR, 2.02, 95% CI 0.99–4.14) and small bowel obstructions/postoperative ileus (9.3% vs. 4.4%) (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.22–0.90) in the early closure group, but no difference across the other domains.

Conclusions

Early closure appears to be a feasible in highly selective cases after good perioperative counselling and shared decision-making. Further research on quality of life outcomes and long term benefits is necessary to help define which patients are suitable candidates for early closure.