Cargando…

Protective Loop Ileostomy Closure Techniques: Comparison of Three Different Surgical Techniques

Objective Anastomotic leaks can be very dangerous in colorectal cancers. Protective loop ileostomy is life-saving in low anterior rectal tumors to prevent pelvic sepsis. The aim of this study is to compare early morbidities for stapled, handsewn closure (end to end) or handsewn closure (anterior wal...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Celayir, Mustafa F, Tanal, Mert, Besler, Evren, Koksal, Hakan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7571599/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33094038
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.10977
_version_ 1783597200644767744
author Celayir, Mustafa F
Tanal, Mert
Besler, Evren
Koksal, Hakan
author_facet Celayir, Mustafa F
Tanal, Mert
Besler, Evren
Koksal, Hakan
author_sort Celayir, Mustafa F
collection PubMed
description Objective Anastomotic leaks can be very dangerous in colorectal cancers. Protective loop ileostomy is life-saving in low anterior rectal tumors to prevent pelvic sepsis. The aim of this study is to compare early morbidities for stapled, handsewn closure (end to end) or handsewn closure (anterior wall only) of loop ileostomy, and to further assess efficacy and safety for each technique.  Methods Patients who underwent loop ileostomy closure from January 2014 and December 2019 retrospectively were analyzed. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the effect of the potential risk factors on the rate of each complication. The patients were divided into three groups based on the anastomoses. The first group included patients who had handsewn anterior closure; the second group included patients who had side-to-side anastomosis using linear stapler, and the third group included patients who had end-to-end handsewn anastomosis. The primary endpoint of the study was the postoperative 30 days. IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), version 22.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) was used for statistical analysis. Results A total of 198 patients underwent reversal. There was a statistical difference between the handsewn anterior wall and stapler anastomosis in terms of postoperative ileus and wound infection. The handsewn group was superior to anastomosis with stapler (p: 0.027 and p: 0.042, respectively). A statistical difference was found between handsewn anterior wall closure and handsewn end-to-end anastomosis in terms of postoperative ileus, wound infection, and postoperative hospital stay (p: 0.013, p: 0.037, and p: 0.046, respectively). When stapled anastomosis and handsewn end-to-end anastomosis techniques were compared, a statistical difference was found in terms of postoperative ileus risk (p: 0.043), but no significant difference was found in terms of postoperative wound infection and hospital stay. Conclusions There was no significant difference in the rate of anastomotic leakage between the handsewn and stapled techniques. The rate of small-bowel obstruction was higher in the handsewn group. As a result, in this study, it was revealed that the handsewn anterior wall closure technique is the best among all ileostomy closure techniques.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7571599
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Cureus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75715992020-10-21 Protective Loop Ileostomy Closure Techniques: Comparison of Three Different Surgical Techniques Celayir, Mustafa F Tanal, Mert Besler, Evren Koksal, Hakan Cureus General Surgery Objective Anastomotic leaks can be very dangerous in colorectal cancers. Protective loop ileostomy is life-saving in low anterior rectal tumors to prevent pelvic sepsis. The aim of this study is to compare early morbidities for stapled, handsewn closure (end to end) or handsewn closure (anterior wall only) of loop ileostomy, and to further assess efficacy and safety for each technique.  Methods Patients who underwent loop ileostomy closure from January 2014 and December 2019 retrospectively were analyzed. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the effect of the potential risk factors on the rate of each complication. The patients were divided into three groups based on the anastomoses. The first group included patients who had handsewn anterior closure; the second group included patients who had side-to-side anastomosis using linear stapler, and the third group included patients who had end-to-end handsewn anastomosis. The primary endpoint of the study was the postoperative 30 days. IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), version 22.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) was used for statistical analysis. Results A total of 198 patients underwent reversal. There was a statistical difference between the handsewn anterior wall and stapler anastomosis in terms of postoperative ileus and wound infection. The handsewn group was superior to anastomosis with stapler (p: 0.027 and p: 0.042, respectively). A statistical difference was found between handsewn anterior wall closure and handsewn end-to-end anastomosis in terms of postoperative ileus, wound infection, and postoperative hospital stay (p: 0.013, p: 0.037, and p: 0.046, respectively). When stapled anastomosis and handsewn end-to-end anastomosis techniques were compared, a statistical difference was found in terms of postoperative ileus risk (p: 0.043), but no significant difference was found in terms of postoperative wound infection and hospital stay. Conclusions There was no significant difference in the rate of anastomotic leakage between the handsewn and stapled techniques. The rate of small-bowel obstruction was higher in the handsewn group. As a result, in this study, it was revealed that the handsewn anterior wall closure technique is the best among all ileostomy closure techniques. Cureus 2020-10-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7571599/ /pubmed/33094038 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.10977 Text en Copyright © 2020, Celayir et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle General Surgery
Celayir, Mustafa F
Tanal, Mert
Besler, Evren
Koksal, Hakan
Protective Loop Ileostomy Closure Techniques: Comparison of Three Different Surgical Techniques
title Protective Loop Ileostomy Closure Techniques: Comparison of Three Different Surgical Techniques
title_full Protective Loop Ileostomy Closure Techniques: Comparison of Three Different Surgical Techniques
title_fullStr Protective Loop Ileostomy Closure Techniques: Comparison of Three Different Surgical Techniques
title_full_unstemmed Protective Loop Ileostomy Closure Techniques: Comparison of Three Different Surgical Techniques
title_short Protective Loop Ileostomy Closure Techniques: Comparison of Three Different Surgical Techniques
title_sort protective loop ileostomy closure techniques: comparison of three different surgical techniques
topic General Surgery
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7571599/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33094038
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.10977
work_keys_str_mv AT celayirmustafaf protectiveloopileostomyclosuretechniquescomparisonofthreedifferentsurgicaltechniques
AT tanalmert protectiveloopileostomyclosuretechniquescomparisonofthreedifferentsurgicaltechniques
AT beslerevren protectiveloopileostomyclosuretechniquescomparisonofthreedifferentsurgicaltechniques
AT koksalhakan protectiveloopileostomyclosuretechniquescomparisonofthreedifferentsurgicaltechniques