Top

Published in:

01-08-2017 | Original Article

The influence of specific technical maneuvers utilized in the creation of diverting loop-ileostomies on stoma-related morbidity

Authors: Masaaki Miyo, Ichiro Takemasa, Masataka Ikeda, Masaki Tujie, Junichi Hasegawa, Masayuki Ohue, Takeshi Kato, Tsunekazu Mizushima, Yuichiro Doki, Masaki Mori

Published in: Surgery Today | Issue 8/2017

Abstract

Purpose

The association between technical maneuvers in fashioning a diverting loop-ileostomy and stoma-related complications remains unclear. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate their relevance to stoma-related morbidity.

Methods

This retrospective multicenter study was designed to collect data from 37 institutions. We evaluated the perioperative outcomes of consecutive patients who underwent surgery to create a diverting loop-ileostomy in 2013.

Results

A total of 4137 patients with colorectal disease underwent colorectomy, 279 of whom received an ileostomy. The results of these 279 patients were analyzed. The most common complications were parastomal dermatitis (n = 132) followed by ileus (n = 36), mucocutaneous separation (n = 24), parastomal hernia (n = 16), stoma retraction (n = 15), and stoma prolapse (n = 9). The technical maneuvers used in the creation of ileostomies were heterogeneous and some had a great deal of relevance to the complications. A long distance from the ileocecal valve to the ileostomy was associated with a low risk of stoma retraction and a high risk of ileus. Additionally, the height of the distal limb of the ileostomy significantly affected the incidence of parastomal dermatitis and mucocutaneous separation.

Conclusions

Specific technical maneuvers that are utilized in the creation of diverting loop-ileostomies had a significant influence on the incidence of stoma-related morbidities. Our findings emphasize the possibility of minimizing stoma-related complications with appropriate surgical techniques.

Heald RJ, Ryall RD. Recurrence and survival after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Lancet. 1986;1:1479–82.CrossRefPubMed

Mohammed S, Anaya DA, Awad SS, Albo D, Berger DH, Artinyan A. Sphincter preservation rates after radical resection for rectal cancer in the United States veteran population: opportunity for improvement in early disease. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:216–23.CrossRefPubMed

Akagi Y, Kinugasa T, Shirouzu K. Intersphincteric resection for very low rectal cancer: a systematic review. Surg Today. 2013;43:838–47.CrossRefPubMed

Saito N, Ito M, Kobayashi A, Nishizawa Y, Kojima M, Nishizawa Y, et al. Long-term outcomes after intersphincteric resection for low-lying rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:3608–15.CrossRefPubMed

Krarup PM, Nordholm-Carstensen A, Jorgensen LN, Harling H. Anastomotic leak increases distant recurrence and long-term mortality after curative resection for colonic cancer: a nationwide cohort study. Ann Surg. 2014;259:930–8.CrossRefPubMed

Mirnezami A, Mirnezami R, Chandrakumaran K, Sasapu K, Sagar P, Finan P. Increased local recurrence and reduced survival from colorectal cancer following anastomotic leak: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2011;253:890–9.CrossRefPubMed

Mongin C, Maggiori L, Agostini J, Ferron M, Panis Y. Does anastomotic leakage impair functional results and quality of life after laparoscopic sphincter-saving total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer? A case-matched study. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2014;29:459–67.CrossRefPubMed

Sahami S, Bartels SA, D’Hoore A, Fadok TY, Tanis PJ, Lindeboom R, et al. A multicentre. Evaluation of risk factors for anastomotic leakage after restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for inflammatory bowel disease. J Crohns Colitis. 2015;pii:jjv170 (Epub ahead of print).

Sagap I, Remzi FH, Hammel JP, Fazio VW. Factors associated with failure in managing pelvic sepsis after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA)—a multivariate analysis. Surgery. 2006;140:691–703.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Weston-Petrides GK, Lovegrove RE, Tilney HS, Heriot AG, Nicholls RJ, Mortensen NJ, et al. Comparison of outcomes after restorative proctocolectomy with or without defunctioning ileostomy. Arch Surg. 2008;143:406–12.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Matthiessen P, Hallböök O, Rutegård J, Simert G, Sjödahl R. Defunctioning stoma reduces symptomatic anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection of the rectum for cancer: a randomized multicenter trial. Ann Surg. 2007;246:207–14.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Fujita F, Torashima Y, Kuroki T, Eguchi S. The risk factors and predictive factors for anastomotic leakage after resection for colorectal cancer: reappraisal of the literature. Surg Today. 2014;44:1595–602.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Hüser N, Michalski CW, Erkan M, Schuster T, Rosenberg R, Kleeff J, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the role of defunctioning stoma in low rectal cancer surgery. Ann Surg. 2008;248:52–60.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Hallböök O, Matthiessen P, Leinsköld T, Nyström PO, Sjödahl R. Safety of the temporary loop ileostomy. Colorectal Dis. 2002;4:361–4.CrossRefPubMed

15.

García-Botello SA, García-Armengol J, García-Granero E, Espí A, Juan C, López-Mozos F, et al. A prospective audit of the complications of loop ileostomy construction and takedown. Dig Surg. 2004;21:440–6.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Phatak UR, Kao LS, You YN, Rodriguez-Bigas MA, Skibber JM, Feig BW, et al. Impact of ileostomy-related complications on the multidisciplinary treatment of rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:507–12.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Chow A, Tilney HS, Paraskeva P, Jeyarajah S, Zacharakis E, Purkayastha S. The morbidity surrounding reversal of defunctioning ileostomies: a systematic review of 48 studies including 6,107 cases. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2009;24:711–23.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Tilney HS, Sains PS, Lovegrove RE, Reese GE, Heriot AG, Tekkis PP. Comparison of outcomes following ileostomy versus colostomy for defunctioning colorectal anastomoses. World J Surg. 2007;31:1142–51.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Rondelli F, Reboldi P, Rulli A, Barberini F, Guerrisi A, Izzo L, et al. Loop ileostomy versus loop colostomy for fecal diversion after colorectal or coloanal anastomosis: a meta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2009;24:479–88.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Marcello PW, Roberts PL, Schoetz DJ Jr, Coller JA, Murray JJ, Veidenheimer MC. Obstruction after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: a preventable complication? Dis Colon Rectum. 1993;36:1105–11.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Kouba E, Sands M, Lentz A, Wallen E, Pruthi RS. Incidence and risk factors of stomal complications in patients undergoing cystectomy with ileal conduit urinary diversion for bladder cancer. J Urol. 2007;178: 950–954.

22.

Scarpa M, Ruffolo C, Boetto R, Pozza A, Sadocchi L, Angriman I. Diverting loop ileostomy after restorative proctocolectomy: predictors of poor outcome and poor quality of life. Colorectal Dis. 2010;12:914–20.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Cottam J, Richards K, Hasted A, Blackman A. Results of a nationwide prospective audit of stoma complications within 3 weeks of surgery. Colorectal Dis. 2007;9:834–8.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Persson E, Berndtsson I, Carlsson E, Hallén AM, Lindholm E. Stoma-related complications and stoma size—a 2-year follow up. Colorectal Dis. 2010;12:971–6.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Ostomy Guidelines Task Force, Goldberg M, Aukett LK, Carmel J, Fellows J, Folkedahl B, et al. Management of the patient with a fecal ostomy: best practice guideline for clinicians. J Wound Ostomy Cont Nurs. 2010;37:596–8.CrossRef

26.

Sung YH, Kwon I, Jo S, Park S. Factors affecting ostomy-related complications in Korea. J Wound Ostomy Cont Nurs. 2010;37:166–72.CrossRef

27.

Nastro P, Knowles CH, McGrath A, Heyman B, Porrett TR, Lunniss PJ. Complications of intestinal stomas. Br J Surg. 2010;97:1885–9.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Kobayashi S, Ito M, Sugito M, Kobayashi A, Nishizawa Y, Saito N. Association between incisional surgical site infection and the type of skin closure after stoma closure. Surg Today. 2011;41:941–5.CrossRefPubMed

Title: The influence of specific technical maneuvers utilized in the creation of diverting loop-ileostomies on stoma-related morbidity
Authors: Masaaki Miyo
Ichiro Takemasa
Masataka Ikeda
Masaki Tujie
Junichi Hasegawa
Masayuki Ohue
Takeshi Kato
Tsunekazu Mizushima
Yuichiro Doki
Masaki Mori
Publication date: 01-08-2017
Publisher: Springer Japan
Published in: Surgery Today / Issue 8/2017
Print ISSN: 0941-1291
Electronic ISSN: 1436-2813
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-017-1481-2

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

The influence of specific technical maneuvers utilized in the creation of diverting loop-ileostomies on stoma-related morbidity

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 8/2017

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for gastric adenocarcinoma in Japan

Timing and outcome of stoma closure in very low birth weight infants with surgical intestinal disorders

The donor advocacy team: a risk management program for living organ, tissue, and cell transplant donors

A decrease in the prognostic nutritional index is associated with a worse long-term outcome in gastric cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy

Prolonged air leak following lobectomy can be predicted in lung cancer patients

Omitting perioperative urinary catheterization in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a single-institution experience