回肠袢造口需要桥(棒)吗?一项II期随机对照试验。

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
C Sabbagh, F Mauvais, M Demouron, F Browet, L Tartar, H Hariz, V Bridoux, J-J Tuech, M Diouf, J-M Regimbeau
{"title":"回肠袢造口需要桥(棒)吗?一项II期随机对照试验。","authors":"C Sabbagh, F Mauvais, M Demouron, F Browet, L Tartar, H Hariz, V Bridoux, J-J Tuech, M Diouf, J-M Regimbeau","doi":"10.1007/s10151-025-03132-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The value of a bridge in loop ileostomies is debated. We aimed to evaluate whether using a bridge when creating a loop ileostomy can reduce morbidity following an ileostomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who had a loop ileostomy after elective colorectal surgery from January 2016 to July 2022 were randomized in this multicenter phase 2 randomized superiority trial. The primary endpoint was the absence of postoperative stomal complications at 2 months and was assessed in a blinded fashion by a stoma therapist. Secondary endpoints were morbidity at 1 month and the STOMA-QOL score at 2 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the study period, 67 patients were randomized to the bridge group and 63 to the no-bridge group. Epidemiological and perioperative data did not differ between the two groups. The stomal complication-free rate was 76% in the bridge group and 67% in the no-bridge group (p = 0.3). There was no difference in the distribution of complications at 1 month according to the Clavien-Dindo score (p = 0.2) or the STOMA-QOL score at 2 months (p = 0.4) between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The bridge does not reduce the rate of stomatal complications, nor does it appear to reduce patients' quality of life.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT02756273 (May 10, 2016).</p>","PeriodicalId":51192,"journal":{"name":"Techniques in Coloproctology","volume":"29 1","pages":"87"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11937139/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is a bridge (rod) necessary for loop ileostomy? A phase II randomized control trial.\",\"authors\":\"C Sabbagh, F Mauvais, M Demouron, F Browet, L Tartar, H Hariz, V Bridoux, J-J Tuech, M Diouf, J-M Regimbeau\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10151-025-03132-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The value of a bridge in loop ileostomies is debated. We aimed to evaluate whether using a bridge when creating a loop ileostomy can reduce morbidity following an ileostomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who had a loop ileostomy after elective colorectal surgery from January 2016 to July 2022 were randomized in this multicenter phase 2 randomized superiority trial. The primary endpoint was the absence of postoperative stomal complications at 2 months and was assessed in a blinded fashion by a stoma therapist. Secondary endpoints were morbidity at 1 month and the STOMA-QOL score at 2 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the study period, 67 patients were randomized to the bridge group and 63 to the no-bridge group. Epidemiological and perioperative data did not differ between the two groups. The stomal complication-free rate was 76% in the bridge group and 67% in the no-bridge group (p = 0.3). There was no difference in the distribution of complications at 1 month according to the Clavien-Dindo score (p = 0.2) or the STOMA-QOL score at 2 months (p = 0.4) between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The bridge does not reduce the rate of stomatal complications, nor does it appear to reduce patients' quality of life.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT02756273 (May 10, 2016).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51192,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Techniques in Coloproctology\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"87\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11937139/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Techniques in Coloproctology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-025-03132-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Techniques in Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-025-03132-4","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

摘要

背景:在环形回肠造口术中桥的价值是有争议的。我们的目的是评估在创建环形回肠造口时使用桥是否可以降低回肠造口术后的发病率。方法:2016年1月至2022年7月择期结直肠手术后行回肠袢造口术的患者随机纳入这项多中心2期随机优势试验。主要终点是2个月时无术后造口并发症,由造口治疗师以盲法评估。次要终点是1个月时的发病率和2个月时的STOMA-QOL评分。结果:在研究期间,67例患者随机分为桥组,63例患者随机分为无桥组。两组间流行病学和围手术期资料无差异。桥组无吻合口并发症发生率为76%,无桥组为67% (p = 0.3)。两组患者1个月时Clavien-Dindo评分(p = 0.2)和2个月时STOMA-QOL评分(p = 0.4)的并发症分布无差异。结论:造口桥并没有降低气孔并发症的发生率,也没有降低患者的生活质量。试验注册号:NCT02756273(2016年5月10日)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Is a bridge (rod) necessary for loop ileostomy? A phase II randomized control trial.

Is a bridge (rod) necessary for loop ileostomy? A phase II randomized control trial.

Background: The value of a bridge in loop ileostomies is debated. We aimed to evaluate whether using a bridge when creating a loop ileostomy can reduce morbidity following an ileostomy.

Methods: Patients who had a loop ileostomy after elective colorectal surgery from January 2016 to July 2022 were randomized in this multicenter phase 2 randomized superiority trial. The primary endpoint was the absence of postoperative stomal complications at 2 months and was assessed in a blinded fashion by a stoma therapist. Secondary endpoints were morbidity at 1 month and the STOMA-QOL score at 2 months.

Results: During the study period, 67 patients were randomized to the bridge group and 63 to the no-bridge group. Epidemiological and perioperative data did not differ between the two groups. The stomal complication-free rate was 76% in the bridge group and 67% in the no-bridge group (p = 0.3). There was no difference in the distribution of complications at 1 month according to the Clavien-Dindo score (p = 0.2) or the STOMA-QOL score at 2 months (p = 0.4) between the two groups.

Conclusion: The bridge does not reduce the rate of stomatal complications, nor does it appear to reduce patients' quality of life.

Trial registration number: NCT02756273 (May 10, 2016).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信