Stoma associated complications after diverting loop ileostomy, end ileostomy or split stoma formation after right sided colectomy-a retrospective cohort study (StoComSplit Analysis).

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
B Wiesler, L Hirt, M-O Guenin, D C Steinemann, M von Flüe, B Müller-Stich, T Glass, M von Strauss Und Torney
{"title":"Stoma associated complications after diverting loop ileostomy, end ileostomy or split stoma formation after right sided colectomy-a retrospective cohort study (StoComSplit Analysis).","authors":"B Wiesler, L Hirt, M-O Guenin, D C Steinemann, M von Flüe, B Müller-Stich, T Glass, M von Strauss Und Torney","doi":"10.1007/s10151-024-02945-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>For high-risk patients receiving right-sided colectomy, stoma formation is a safety strategy. Options are anastomosis with loop ileostomy, end ileostomy, or split stoma. The aim is to compare the outcome of these three options.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study included all patients who underwent right sided colectomy and stoma formation between January 2008 and December 2021 at two tertial referral centers in Switzerland. The primary outcome was the stoma associated complication rate within one year.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 116 patients were included. A total of 20 patients (17%) underwent primary anastomosis with loop ileostomy (PA group), 29 (25%) received an end ileostomy (ES group) and 67 (58%) received a split stoma (SS group). Stoma associated complication rate was 43% (n = 21) in PA and in ES group and 50% (n = 34) in SS group (n.s.). A total of 30% (n = 6) of patients in PA group needed reoperations, whereas 59% (n = 17) in ES and 58% (n = 39) in SS group had reoperations (P = 0.07). Wound infections occurred in 15% (n = 3) in PA, in 10% (n = 3) in ES, and in 30% (n = 20) in SS group (P = 0.08). A total of 13 patients (65%) in PA, 7 (24%) in ES, and 29 (43%) in SS group achieved stoma closure (P = 0.02). A total of 5 patients (38%) in PA group, 2 (15%) in ES, and 22 patients (67%) in SS group had a stoma-associated rehospitalization (P < 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Primary anastomosis and loop ileostomy may be an option for selected patients. Patients with end ileostomies have fewer stoma-related readmissions than those with a split stoma, but they have a lower rate of stoma closure.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration: </strong>Trial not registered.</p>","PeriodicalId":51192,"journal":{"name":"Techniques in Coloproctology","volume":"28 1","pages":"68"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11169016/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Techniques in Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-024-02945-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: For high-risk patients receiving right-sided colectomy, stoma formation is a safety strategy. Options are anastomosis with loop ileostomy, end ileostomy, or split stoma. The aim is to compare the outcome of these three options.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study included all patients who underwent right sided colectomy and stoma formation between January 2008 and December 2021 at two tertial referral centers in Switzerland. The primary outcome was the stoma associated complication rate within one year.

Results: A total of 116 patients were included. A total of 20 patients (17%) underwent primary anastomosis with loop ileostomy (PA group), 29 (25%) received an end ileostomy (ES group) and 67 (58%) received a split stoma (SS group). Stoma associated complication rate was 43% (n = 21) in PA and in ES group and 50% (n = 34) in SS group (n.s.). A total of 30% (n = 6) of patients in PA group needed reoperations, whereas 59% (n = 17) in ES and 58% (n = 39) in SS group had reoperations (P = 0.07). Wound infections occurred in 15% (n = 3) in PA, in 10% (n = 3) in ES, and in 30% (n = 20) in SS group (P = 0.08). A total of 13 patients (65%) in PA, 7 (24%) in ES, and 29 (43%) in SS group achieved stoma closure (P = 0.02). A total of 5 patients (38%) in PA group, 2 (15%) in ES, and 22 patients (67%) in SS group had a stoma-associated rehospitalization (P < 0.01).

Conclusion: Primary anastomosis and loop ileostomy may be an option for selected patients. Patients with end ileostomies have fewer stoma-related readmissions than those with a split stoma, but they have a lower rate of stoma closure.

Clinical trial registration: Trial not registered.

右侧结肠切除术后分流环状回肠造口术、回肠末端造口术或分流造口形成后的造口相关并发症--回顾性队列研究(StoComSplit 分析)。
背景:对于接受右侧结肠切除术的高危患者,造口形成是一种安全策略。可供选择的方案有环状回肠造口吻合术、回肠末端造口术或分割造口。目的是比较这三种方案的结果:这项回顾性队列研究纳入了 2008 年 1 月至 2021 年 12 月期间在瑞士两家三级转诊中心接受右侧结肠切除术和造口形成术的所有患者。研究的主要结果是一年内造口相关并发症的发生率:结果:共纳入 116 名患者。共有20名患者(17%)接受了环状回肠造口术(PA组),29名患者(25%)接受了回肠末端造口术(ES组),67名患者(58%)接受了分隔造口术(SS组)。PA 组和 ES 组的造口相关并发症发生率为 43%(n = 21),SS 组为 50%(n = 34)(n.s.)。PA 组共有 30% (6 人)的患者需要再次手术,而 ES 组和 SS 组分别有 59% (17 人)和 58% (39 人)的患者需要再次手术(P = 0.07)。PA 组 15%(3 人)、ES 组 10%(3 人)和 SS 组 30%(20 人)发生伤口感染(P = 0.08)。PA 组共有 13 名患者(65%)、ES 组共有 7 名患者(24%)、SS 组共有 29 名患者(43%)实现了造口闭合(P = 0.02)。PA 组共有 5 名患者(38%)、ES 组共有 2 名患者(15%)、SS 组共有 22 名患者(67%)因造口相关问题再次住院(P=0.01):初端吻合术和环状回肠造口术可能是部分患者的选择。末端回肠造口患者的造口相关再住院率低于分隔造口患者,但造口关闭率较低:试验未注册。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Techniques in Coloproctology
Techniques in Coloproctology GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-SURGERY
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
176
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Techniques in Coloproctology is an international journal fully devoted to diagnostic and operative procedures carried out in the management of colorectal diseases. Imaging, clinical physiology, laparoscopy, open abdominal surgery and proctoperineology are the main topics covered by the journal. Reviews, original articles, technical notes and short communications with many detailed illustrations render this publication indispensable for coloproctologists and related specialists. Both surgeons and gastroenterologists are represented on the distinguished Editorial Board, together with pathologists, radiologists and basic scientists from all over the world. The journal is strongly recommended to those who wish to be updated on recent developments in the field, and improve the standards of their work. Manuscripts submitted for publication must contain a statement to the effect that all human studies have been reviewed by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in an appropriate version of the 1965 Declaration of Helsinki. It should also be stated clearly in the text that all persons gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study. Details that might disclose the identity of the subjects under study should be omitted. Reports of animal experiments must state that the Principles of Laboratory Animal Care (NIH publication no. 86-23 revised 1985) were followed as were applicable national laws (e.g. the current version of the German Law on the Protection of Animals). The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. Authors will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfill such requirements.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信