Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 3/2008

01-03-2008

Morbidity of Ostomy Takedown

Authors: Andreas M. Kaiser, Shlomo Israelit, Daniel Klaristenfeld, Paul Selvindoss, Petar Vukasin, Glenn Ault, Robert W. Beart

Published in: Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery | Issue 3/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Creation of a temporary ostomy is a surgical tool to divert stool from a more distal area of concern (anastomosis, inflammation, etc). To provide a true benefit, the morbidity/mortality from the ostomy takedown itself should be minimal. The aim of our study was therefore to evaluate our own experience and determine the complications and mortality of stoma closure in relation to the type and location of the respective ostomy.

Methods

Patients undergoing an elective takedown of a temporary ostomy at our teaching institution between January 1999 and July 2005 were included in our analysis, and the medical records were retrospectively reviewed. Excluded were only patients with relevant chart deficiencies and nonelective stoma revisions/takedowns. Data collected included general demographics; the type and location of the stoma; the operative technique; and the type, timing, and impact of complications. Perioperative morbidity was defined as complications occurring within 30 days from the operation.

Results

156 patients (median age 45 years, range 18–85) were included in the analysis: 31 loop and 59 end colostomy reversals and 56 loop and 10 end ileostomy takedowns. Mean follow-up was 6 months. The overall mortality rate was low (0.65%, 1/156 patients). However, the morbidity rate was 36.5% (57 patients), with 6 (3.8%) systemic complications and 51 (32.7%) local complications. Minor would infection (34 patients, 21.8%) and postoperative ileus (9 patients, 5.7%) were the most common surgery-related complications, but they generally resolved with conservative management. Anastomotic leak and formation/persistence of an enterocutaneous fistula (6 patients, 3.8%) were the most serious local complications and required reintervention in all of the patients. Closure of a loop colostomy accounted for half and Hartmann reversals for one third of these complications, as opposed to ileostomy takedowns, which accounted for only one sixth (1.8% absolute risk).

Conclusion

Takedown of a temporary ostomy has a low mortality but a nonnegligible morbidity. The stoma location (large vs. small bowel) has a higher impact than the type of stoma construction (end vs. loop) on the incidence and severity of complications.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Wong NY, Eu KW. A defunctioning ileostomy does not prevent clinical anastomotic leak after a low anterior resection: A prospective, comparative study. Dis Colon Rectum 2005;48(11):2076–2079.PubMedCrossRef Wong NY, Eu KW. A defunctioning ileostomy does not prevent clinical anastomotic leak after a low anterior resection: A prospective, comparative study. Dis Colon Rectum 2005;48(11):2076–2079.PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Platell C, Barwood N, Makin G. Clinical utility of a de-functioning loop ileostomy. ANZ J Surg 2005;75(3):147–151.PubMedCrossRef Platell C, Barwood N, Makin G. Clinical utility of a de-functioning loop ileostomy. ANZ J Surg 2005;75(3):147–151.PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Gastinger I, Marusch F, Steinert R, et al. Protective defunctioning stoma in low anterior resection for rectal carcinoma. Br J Surg 2005;92(9):1137–1142.PubMedCrossRef Gastinger I, Marusch F, Steinert R, et al. Protective defunctioning stoma in low anterior resection for rectal carcinoma. Br J Surg 2005;92(9):1137–1142.PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Hedrick TL, Sawyer RG, Foley EF, Friel CM. Anastomotic leak and the loop ileostomy: Friend or foe? Dis Colon Rectum 2006;49(8):1167–1176.PubMedCrossRef Hedrick TL, Sawyer RG, Foley EF, Friel CM. Anastomotic leak and the loop ileostomy: Friend or foe? Dis Colon Rectum 2006;49(8):1167–1176.PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Dehni N, Schlegel RD, Cunningham C, Guiguet M, Tiret E, Parc R. Influence of a defunctioning stoma on leakage rates after low colorectal anastomosis and colonic J pouch-anal anastomosis. Br J Surg 1998;85(8):1114–1117.PubMedCrossRef Dehni N, Schlegel RD, Cunningham C, Guiguet M, Tiret E, Parc R. Influence of a defunctioning stoma on leakage rates after low colorectal anastomosis and colonic J pouch-anal anastomosis. Br J Surg 1998;85(8):1114–1117.PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Nesbakken A, Nygaard K, Lunde OC, Blucher J, Gjertsen O, Dullerud R. Anastomotic leak following mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: True incidence and diagnostic challenges. Colorectal Dis 2005;7(6):576–581.PubMedCrossRef Nesbakken A, Nygaard K, Lunde OC, Blucher J, Gjertsen O, Dullerud R. Anastomotic leak following mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: True incidence and diagnostic challenges. Colorectal Dis 2005;7(6):576–581.PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Ho K, Seow-Choen F. Surgical results of total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer in a specialised colorectal unit. Recent Results Cancer Res 2005;165:105–111.PubMed Ho K, Seow-Choen F. Surgical results of total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer in a specialised colorectal unit. Recent Results Cancer Res 2005;165:105–111.PubMed
8.
go back to reference Law WL, Chu KW. Anterior resection for rectal cancer with mesorectal excision: A prospective evaluation of 622 patients. Ann Surg 2004;240(2):260–268.PubMedCrossRef Law WL, Chu KW. Anterior resection for rectal cancer with mesorectal excision: A prospective evaluation of 622 patients. Ann Surg 2004;240(2):260–268.PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Bulger EM, McMahon K, Jurkovich GJ. The morbidity of penetrating colon injury. Injury 2003;34(1):41–46.PubMedCrossRef Bulger EM, McMahon K, Jurkovich GJ. The morbidity of penetrating colon injury. Injury 2003;34(1):41–46.PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Miller PR, Fabian TC, Croce MA, et al. Improving outcomes following penetrating colon wounds: Application of a clinical pathway. Ann Surg 2002;235(6):775–781.PubMedCrossRef Miller PR, Fabian TC, Croce MA, et al. Improving outcomes following penetrating colon wounds: Application of a clinical pathway. Ann Surg 2002;235(6):775–781.PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Demetriades D, Murray JA, Chan L, et al. Penetrating colon injuries requiring resection: Diversion or primary anastomosis? An AAST prospective multicenter study. J Trauma 2001;50(5):765–775.PubMedCrossRef Demetriades D, Murray JA, Chan L, et al. Penetrating colon injuries requiring resection: Diversion or primary anastomosis? An AAST prospective multicenter study. J Trauma 2001;50(5):765–775.PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Berne JD, Velmahos GC, Chan LS, Asensio JA, Demetriades D. The high morbidity of colostomy closure after trauma: Further support for the primary repair of colon injuries. Surgery 1998;123(2):157–164.PubMed Berne JD, Velmahos GC, Chan LS, Asensio JA, Demetriades D. The high morbidity of colostomy closure after trauma: Further support for the primary repair of colon injuries. Surgery 1998;123(2):157–164.PubMed
13.
go back to reference Mileski WJ, Rege RV, Joehl RJ, Nahrwold DL. Rates of morbidity and mortality after closure of loop and end colostomy. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1990;171(1):17–21.PubMed Mileski WJ, Rege RV, Joehl RJ, Nahrwold DL. Rates of morbidity and mortality after closure of loop and end colostomy. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1990;171(1):17–21.PubMed
14.
go back to reference Oomen JL, Cuesta MA, Engel AF. Reversal of Hartmann’s procedure after surgery for complications of diverticular disease of the sigmoid colon is safe and possible in most patients. Dig Surg 2005;22(6):419–425.PubMedCrossRef Oomen JL, Cuesta MA, Engel AF. Reversal of Hartmann’s procedure after surgery for complications of diverticular disease of the sigmoid colon is safe and possible in most patients. Dig Surg 2005;22(6):419–425.PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Bell C, Asolati M, Hamilton E, et al. A comparison of complications associated with colostomy reversal versus ileostomy reversal. Am J Surg 2005;190(5):717–720.PubMedCrossRef Bell C, Asolati M, Hamilton E, et al. A comparison of complications associated with colostomy reversal versus ileostomy reversal. Am J Surg 2005;190(5):717–720.PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Garcia-Botello SA, Garcia-Armengol J, Garcia-Granero E, et al. A prospective audit of the complications of loop ileostomy construction and takedown. Dig Surg 2004;21(5–6):440–446.PubMedCrossRef Garcia-Botello SA, Garcia-Armengol J, Garcia-Granero E, et al. A prospective audit of the complications of loop ileostomy construction and takedown. Dig Surg 2004;21(5–6):440–446.PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Wigmore SJ, Duthie GS, Young IE, Spalding EM, Rainey JB. Restoration of intestinal continuity following Hartmann’s procedure: The Lothian experience 1987–1992. Br J Surg 1995;82(1):27–30.PubMedCrossRef Wigmore SJ, Duthie GS, Young IE, Spalding EM, Rainey JB. Restoration of intestinal continuity following Hartmann’s procedure: The Lothian experience 1987–1992. Br J Surg 1995;82(1):27–30.PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Keck JO, Collopy BT, Ryan PJ, Fink R, Mackay JR, Woods RJ. Reversal of Hartmann’s procedure: Effect of timing and technique on ease and safety. Dis Colon Rectum 1994;37(3):243–248.PubMedCrossRef Keck JO, Collopy BT, Ryan PJ, Fink R, Mackay JR, Woods RJ. Reversal of Hartmann’s procedure: Effect of timing and technique on ease and safety. Dis Colon Rectum 1994;37(3):243–248.PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Roe AM, Prabhu S, Ali A, Brown C, Brodribb AJ. Reversal of Hartmann’s procedure: Timing and operative technique. Br J Surg 1991;78(10):1167–1170.PubMedCrossRef Roe AM, Prabhu S, Ali A, Brown C, Brodribb AJ. Reversal of Hartmann’s procedure: Timing and operative technique. Br J Surg 1991;78(10):1167–1170.PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Salem L, Flum DR. Primary anastomosis or Hartmann’s procedure for patients with diverticular peritonitis? A systematic review. Dis Colon Rectum 2004;47(11):1953–1964.PubMedCrossRef Salem L, Flum DR. Primary anastomosis or Hartmann’s procedure for patients with diverticular peritonitis? A systematic review. Dis Colon Rectum 2004;47(11):1953–1964.PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Constantinides VA, Heriot A, Remzi F, et al. Operative strategies for diverticular peritonitis: A decision analysis between primary resection and anastomosis versus Hartmann’s procedures. Ann Surg 2007;245(1):94–103.PubMedCrossRef Constantinides VA, Heriot A, Remzi F, et al. Operative strategies for diverticular peritonitis: A decision analysis between primary resection and anastomosis versus Hartmann’s procedures. Ann Surg 2007;245(1):94–103.PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference O’Toole GC, Hyland JM, Grant DC, Barry MK. Defunctioning loop ileostomy: A prospective audit. J Am Coll Surg 1999;188(1):6–9.PubMedCrossRef O’Toole GC, Hyland JM, Grant DC, Barry MK. Defunctioning loop ileostomy: A prospective audit. J Am Coll Surg 1999;188(1):6–9.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Morbidity of Ostomy Takedown
Authors
Andreas M. Kaiser
Shlomo Israelit
Daniel Klaristenfeld
Paul Selvindoss
Petar Vukasin
Glenn Ault
Robert W. Beart
Publication date
01-03-2008
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery / Issue 3/2008
Print ISSN: 1091-255X
Electronic ISSN: 1873-4626
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-007-0457-8

Other articles of this Issue 3/2008

Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 3/2008 Go to the issue