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

Permanent stoma after sphincter preservation for rectal cancer. A situation that occurs more often than you might think

Objectives

This study aimed: (i) to assess the cumulative incidence of permanent stoma (PS) after sphincter-preserving surgery (SPS) for rectal cancer (RC): (ii) to analyze associated risk factors for primary and secondary PS; and (iii) to compare the long-term survival of patients according to the stoma state.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective single-center cohort study based on a prospectively maintained database of SRC patients undergoing SPS from January 2007 to December 2017. Incidence of both primary (no reversal of defunctioning stoma) and secondary (created after closure of defunctioning stoma) PS were investigated. Associations between potential risk factors and PS were analyzed using a logistic regression model. Cumulative survival curve was drawn by Kaplan-Meier method.

Results

Of the 257 eligible patients, 43 patients (16.7%) had a PS (16 primary PS and 27 secondary PS) after a median follow-up of 4.8 years. In multivariate analysis, the independent risk factors for primary PS were severe post-operative complications (OR 3.66; 95% CI, 1.19-11.20, p=0.022), and old age (OR 1.11; 95% CI 1.04-1.18, p=0.001) and those for secondary PS were local recurrence (OR 38.07; 95% CI 11.07-130.9, p<0.0001), anastomotic leakage (OR 7.01; 95% CI, 2.23-22.04, p=0.009), and severe post-operative complications (OR 3.67; 95% CI, 1.22-11.04, p=0.02), respectively. Both overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were significantly lower in patients with a PS compared with patients with SPS (p < 0.01).

Conclusions

This present study suggests that one out of 6 patients has a PS, 5 years after rectal resection with SPS for SRC.

Timing of Closure of a Protective Loop-Ileostomy Can Be Crucial for Restoration of a Functional Digestion

Introduction

Protective loop-ileostomy is one of the most common interventions in abdominal surgery to provide an alternative intestinal outlet until sufficient healing of a distal anastomosis has occurred. However, closure of a loop-ileostomy is also associated with complications. Thus, knowledge of the optimal time interval between primary and secondary surgery is crucial.

Methods

Data from 409 patients were retrospectively analyzed regarding complications and risk factors in closure-associated morbidity and mortality. A modified Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications was used to evaluate the severity of complications.

Results

A total of 96 (23.5%) patients suffered from postoperative complications after the closure of the loop-ileostomy. Early closure within 150 days from enterostomy (n = 229) was associated with less complications (p < 0.001^**). Looking at the severity of complications, there were significantly more (p = 0.014^*) mild postoperative complications in the late closure group (>150 days). Dysfunctional digestive problems—either (sub-) ileus (p = 0.004^*), diarrhea or stool incontinence (p = 0.003^*)—were the most frequent complications associated with late closure. Finally, we could validate in a multivariate analysis that “time to closure” (p = 0.002^*) is independently associated with the development of complications after closure of a protective loop-ileostomy.

Conclusion

Late closure (>150 days) of a loop-ileostomy is an independent risk factor in post-closure complications in a multivariate analysis. Nevertheless, circumstances of disease and therapy need to be considered when scheduling the closure procedure.