Effect of one-stitch method of temporary ileostomy on the surgical outcomes and complications after laparoscopic low anterior resection in rectal cancer patients: a propensity score matching analysis.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Xin-Peng Shu, Jia-Liang Wang, Zi-Wei Li, Fei Liu, Xu-Rui Liu, Lian-Shuo Li, Yue Tong, Xiao-Yu Liu, Chun-Yi Wang, Yong Cheng, Dong Peng
{"title":"Effect of one-stitch method of temporary ileostomy on the surgical outcomes and complications after laparoscopic low anterior resection in rectal cancer patients: a propensity score matching analysis.","authors":"Xin-Peng Shu, Jia-Liang Wang, Zi-Wei Li, Fei Liu, Xu-Rui Liu, Lian-Shuo Li, Yue Tong, Xiao-Yu Liu, Chun-Yi Wang, Yong Cheng, Dong Peng","doi":"10.1186/s40001-025-02464-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this current study was to explore whether one-stitch method (OM) of temporary ileostomy influenced the surgical outcomes after laparoscopic low anterior resection (LLAR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively identified rectal cancer (RC) patients who underwent LLAR plus temporary ileostomy in a single teaching hospital from Jan 2011 to June 2023. According to the different methods of ileostomy, the patients were divided into the OM group and the traditional method (TM) group. A propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to eliminate bias and compare the surgical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 469 RC patients were included in this study. There were 57 patients in the OM group and 412 patients in the TM group. After 1:1 PSM, there were 57 patients in each group, and no significant difference was found in baseline information (P > 0.05). In terms of surgical outcomes of primary RC surgery, we found that patients in the OM group had shorter operation time (P < 0.01), less blood loss (P < 0.01), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.01) than in the TM group after PSM. Moreover, there was no significant difference in both overall complications and stoma-related complications. As for the outcomes of stoma reversal surgery, patients in the OM group had shorter postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.002) than in the TM group before PSM. However, no significant difference was found after PSM (P > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The OM of temporary ileostomy was easier, more effective and time-saving than the TM, which did not increase the incidence of both postoperative complications and stoma-related complications.</p>","PeriodicalId":11949,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Medical Research","volume":"30 1","pages":"197"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11929356/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Medical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40001-025-02464-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this current study was to explore whether one-stitch method (OM) of temporary ileostomy influenced the surgical outcomes after laparoscopic low anterior resection (LLAR).

Methods: We retrospectively identified rectal cancer (RC) patients who underwent LLAR plus temporary ileostomy in a single teaching hospital from Jan 2011 to June 2023. According to the different methods of ileostomy, the patients were divided into the OM group and the traditional method (TM) group. A propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to eliminate bias and compare the surgical outcomes.

Results: A total of 469 RC patients were included in this study. There were 57 patients in the OM group and 412 patients in the TM group. After 1:1 PSM, there were 57 patients in each group, and no significant difference was found in baseline information (P > 0.05). In terms of surgical outcomes of primary RC surgery, we found that patients in the OM group had shorter operation time (P < 0.01), less blood loss (P < 0.01), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.01) than in the TM group after PSM. Moreover, there was no significant difference in both overall complications and stoma-related complications. As for the outcomes of stoma reversal surgery, patients in the OM group had shorter postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.002) than in the TM group before PSM. However, no significant difference was found after PSM (P > 0.05).

Conclusion: The OM of temporary ileostomy was easier, more effective and time-saving than the TM, which did not increase the incidence of both postoperative complications and stoma-related complications.

一针临时回肠造口术对直肠癌腹腔镜下前低位切除术后手术结局及并发症的影响:倾向评分匹配分析
目的:本研究的目的是探讨一针法(OM)临时回肠造口是否影响腹腔镜下前低位切除术(LLAR)后的手术效果。方法:回顾性分析2011年1月至2023年6月在一家教学医院接受LLAR +临时回肠造口术的直肠癌(RC)患者。根据回肠造口方法的不同,将患者分为OM组和传统方法(TM)组。进行倾向评分匹配(PSM)分析以消除偏倚并比较手术结果。结果:共纳入469例RC患者。OM组57例,TM组412例。经1:1 PSM治疗后,两组患者共57例,基线信息比较差异无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。在原发性RC手术的手术效果方面,我们发现OM组患者的手术时间更短(p0.05)。结论:回肠临时造口OM比TM更简单、更有效、更省时,没有增加术后并发症和造口相关并发症的发生率。
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
European Journal of Medical Research
European Journal of Medical Research 医学-医学:研究与实验
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
247
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: European Journal of Medical Research publishes translational and clinical research of international interest across all medical disciplines, enabling clinicians and other researchers to learn about developments and innovations within these disciplines and across the boundaries between disciplines. The journal publishes high quality research and reviews and aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted research are published, regardless of their outcome.
×
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