Clinical Safety and Effectiveness of COLO-BT™, an Intraluminal Fecal Diverting Device, as an Alternative to Defunctioning Ileostomy After Proctectomy.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Ho Yung Lee, Sung Il Kang, Sohyun Kim
{"title":"Clinical Safety and Effectiveness of COLO-BT™, an Intraluminal Fecal Diverting Device, as an Alternative to Defunctioning Ileostomy After Proctectomy.","authors":"Ho Yung Lee, Sung Il Kang, Sohyun Kim","doi":"10.1177/15533506251392444","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of an intraluminal fecal diverting device (FDD), COLO-BT™ as an alternative to defunctioning ileostomy in patients who declined stoma formation following proctectomy.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent proctectomy followed by placement of an intraluminal FDD (COLO-BT™) as a temporary substitute for ileostomy at a single tertiary care center between September 2017 and September 2021. Safety was assessed based on postoperative and anastomotic complications, as well as endoscopic findings of colonic changes at the FDD fixation site. Effectiveness was evaluated by the rate of permanent stoma formation.ResultsAmong 91 patients, 8 (8.8%) required surgical re-intervention. Of these, five patients experienced anastomotic complications necessitating stoma formation: rectovaginal fistula (n = 2), delayed anastomotic leakage (n = 2), and rectourethral fistula (n = 1). One patient developed severe ileus requiring surgery, which also resulted in stoma formation. Overall, six patients (6.6%) underwent permanent stoma formation during a mean follow-up period of 24 months. Endoscopic follow-up identified colonic luminal deformities in 15 patients (16.5%), most of which were asymptomatic mucosal edema or erosion (n = 12). Three patients (3.3%) had non-symptomatic ulcers at the FDD fixation site. All luminal deformities had resolved on follow-up sigmoidoscopy performed 1 year later.ConclusionThe intraluminal FDD (COLO-BT™) may offer a feasible alternative to defunctioning ileostomy following proctectomy in selected patients, with acceptable rates of postoperative complications and permanent stoma formation. Further studies are needed to confirm long-term safety and efficacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":22095,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Innovation","volume":" ","pages":"15533506251392444"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Innovation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15533506251392444","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of an intraluminal fecal diverting device (FDD), COLO-BT™ as an alternative to defunctioning ileostomy in patients who declined stoma formation following proctectomy.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent proctectomy followed by placement of an intraluminal FDD (COLO-BT™) as a temporary substitute for ileostomy at a single tertiary care center between September 2017 and September 2021. Safety was assessed based on postoperative and anastomotic complications, as well as endoscopic findings of colonic changes at the FDD fixation site. Effectiveness was evaluated by the rate of permanent stoma formation.ResultsAmong 91 patients, 8 (8.8%) required surgical re-intervention. Of these, five patients experienced anastomotic complications necessitating stoma formation: rectovaginal fistula (n = 2), delayed anastomotic leakage (n = 2), and rectourethral fistula (n = 1). One patient developed severe ileus requiring surgery, which also resulted in stoma formation. Overall, six patients (6.6%) underwent permanent stoma formation during a mean follow-up period of 24 months. Endoscopic follow-up identified colonic luminal deformities in 15 patients (16.5%), most of which were asymptomatic mucosal edema or erosion (n = 12). Three patients (3.3%) had non-symptomatic ulcers at the FDD fixation site. All luminal deformities had resolved on follow-up sigmoidoscopy performed 1 year later.ConclusionThe intraluminal FDD (COLO-BT™) may offer a feasible alternative to defunctioning ileostomy following proctectomy in selected patients, with acceptable rates of postoperative complications and permanent stoma formation. Further studies are needed to confirm long-term safety and efficacy.

COLO-BT™,一种腔内粪便转移装置,作为保护切除术后功能障碍回肠造口的替代方案的临床安全性和有效性。
目的:本研究旨在评估肠腔内粪便转移装置(FDD) COLO-BT™作为回肠造口术的替代方案,用于直肠切除术后造口减少的患者。方法:我们回顾性回顾了2017年9月至2021年9月在单一三级保健中心接受直肠切除术后放置腔内FDD (COLO-BT™)作为临时替代回肠造口术的患者的医疗记录。安全性评估基于术后和吻合口并发症,以及FDD固定部位结肠改变的内镜检查结果。通过永久性造口的形成率来评估有效性。结果91例患者中有8例(8.8%)需要再手术治疗。其中,5例患者出现吻合口并发症,需要造口:直肠阴道瘘(n = 2),延迟性吻合口漏(n = 2)和直肠尿道瘘(n = 1)。一名患者出现了严重的肠梗阻,需要手术,这也导致了气孔的形成。总体而言,6名患者(6.6%)在平均24个月的随访期间进行了永久性造口。内镜随访发现结肠腔畸形15例(16.5%),其中大部分为无症状粘膜水肿或糜烂(n = 12)。3例患者(3.3%)在FDD固定部位出现无症状性溃疡。1年后进行乙状结肠镜随访,所有腔内畸形均消失。结论在部分患者中,腔内FDD (COLO-BT™)可能是一种可行的选择,可以替代保护性肠切除术后功能不全的回肠造口术,其术后并发症和永久性造口的发生率可接受。需要进一步的研究来确认长期的安全性和有效性。
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
Surgical Innovation
Surgical Innovation 医学-外科
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
72
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Surgical Innovation (SRI) is a peer-reviewed bi-monthly journal focusing on minimally invasive surgical techniques, new instruments such as laparoscopes and endoscopes, and new technologies. SRI prepares surgeons to think and work in "the operating room of the future" through learning new techniques, understanding and adapting to new technologies, maintaining surgical competencies, and applying surgical outcomes data to their practices. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信