Cargando…
Comparison of specimen extraction site and another site for protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection: a retrospective comparative study
BACKGROUND: Protective loop ileostomy is commonly performed in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection to prevent the serious complications of anastomotic fistula. It is usually created at the right lower quadrant of the abdomen and another wound is required for stoma. The study aimed to evaluate...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10102083/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37055576 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00423-023-02886-5 |
_version_ | 1785025626332200960 |
---|---|
author | Liu, Chao Zhang, Jizhun Li, Leping Zhang, Li Shang, Liang Ma, Yan |
author_facet | Liu, Chao Zhang, Jizhun Li, Leping Zhang, Li Shang, Liang Ma, Yan |
author_sort | Liu, Chao |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Protective loop ileostomy is commonly performed in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection to prevent the serious complications of anastomotic fistula. It is usually created at the right lower quadrant of the abdomen and another wound is required for stoma. The study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of ileostomy at the specimen extraction site (SES) and another site (AS) beside the auxiliary incision. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 101 eligible patients with pathologically diagnosed adenocarcinoma of the rectum from January 2020 to December 2021 in the study center. According to whether the ileostomy was at the specimen extraction site, patients were divided into SES group (40 patients) and AS group (61 patients). Clinicopathological characteristics, the intraoperative details, and postoperative outcomes of the two groups were measured. RESULTS: Univariate analysis showed that the operative time was significantly shorter and the blood loss was significantly less in the SES group than in the AS group during laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection, the time to first flatus was significantly shorter, and the pain was significantly less in the SES group than in the AS group during ileostomy closure. The postoperative complications were similar in both groups. Multivariable analysis showed that ileostomy at the specimen extraction site was a significant factor influencing the operative time and blood loss of rectal resection, and influencing the pain and the time to first flatus during ileostomy closure. CONCLUSION: Compared to ileostomy at AS, protective loop ileostomy at SES was time-saving and less bleeding during laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection, and more quick to first flatus and less pain during stoma closure, and did not lead to more postoperative complications. The median incision of the lower abdomen and the left lower abdominal incision were both good sites for ileostomy. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10102083 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-101020832023-04-15 Comparison of specimen extraction site and another site for protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection: a retrospective comparative study Liu, Chao Zhang, Jizhun Li, Leping Zhang, Li Shang, Liang Ma, Yan Langenbecks Arch Surg Research BACKGROUND: Protective loop ileostomy is commonly performed in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection to prevent the serious complications of anastomotic fistula. It is usually created at the right lower quadrant of the abdomen and another wound is required for stoma. The study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of ileostomy at the specimen extraction site (SES) and another site (AS) beside the auxiliary incision. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 101 eligible patients with pathologically diagnosed adenocarcinoma of the rectum from January 2020 to December 2021 in the study center. According to whether the ileostomy was at the specimen extraction site, patients were divided into SES group (40 patients) and AS group (61 patients). Clinicopathological characteristics, the intraoperative details, and postoperative outcomes of the two groups were measured. RESULTS: Univariate analysis showed that the operative time was significantly shorter and the blood loss was significantly less in the SES group than in the AS group during laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection, the time to first flatus was significantly shorter, and the pain was significantly less in the SES group than in the AS group during ileostomy closure. The postoperative complications were similar in both groups. Multivariable analysis showed that ileostomy at the specimen extraction site was a significant factor influencing the operative time and blood loss of rectal resection, and influencing the pain and the time to first flatus during ileostomy closure. CONCLUSION: Compared to ileostomy at AS, protective loop ileostomy at SES was time-saving and less bleeding during laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection, and more quick to first flatus and less pain during stoma closure, and did not lead to more postoperative complications. The median incision of the lower abdomen and the left lower abdominal incision were both good sites for ileostomy. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023-04-13 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10102083/ /pubmed/37055576 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00423-023-02886-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Research Liu, Chao Zhang, Jizhun Li, Leping Zhang, Li Shang, Liang Ma, Yan Comparison of specimen extraction site and another site for protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection: a retrospective comparative study |
title | Comparison of specimen extraction site and another site for protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection: a retrospective comparative study |
title_full | Comparison of specimen extraction site and another site for protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection: a retrospective comparative study |
title_fullStr | Comparison of specimen extraction site and another site for protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection: a retrospective comparative study |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of specimen extraction site and another site for protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection: a retrospective comparative study |
title_short | Comparison of specimen extraction site and another site for protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection: a retrospective comparative study |
title_sort | comparison of specimen extraction site and another site for protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection: a retrospective comparative study |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10102083/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37055576 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00423-023-02886-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT liuchao comparisonofspecimenextractionsiteandanothersiteforprotectiveloopileostomyinlaparoscopiclowanteriorrectalresectionaretrospectivecomparativestudy AT zhangjizhun comparisonofspecimenextractionsiteandanothersiteforprotectiveloopileostomyinlaparoscopiclowanteriorrectalresectionaretrospectivecomparativestudy AT lileping comparisonofspecimenextractionsiteandanothersiteforprotectiveloopileostomyinlaparoscopiclowanteriorrectalresectionaretrospectivecomparativestudy AT zhangli comparisonofspecimenextractionsiteandanothersiteforprotectiveloopileostomyinlaparoscopiclowanteriorrectalresectionaretrospectivecomparativestudy AT shangliang comparisonofspecimenextractionsiteandanothersiteforprotectiveloopileostomyinlaparoscopiclowanteriorrectalresectionaretrospectivecomparativestudy AT mayan comparisonofspecimenextractionsiteandanothersiteforprotectiveloopileostomyinlaparoscopiclowanteriorrectalresectionaretrospectivecomparativestudy |