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...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
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 |