The outcome of loop ileostomy closure in 293 cases

Our experience with closure of loop ileostomies between the years 1975–1986 was reviewed. Ninety-three percent of stoma closures were done by simple transverse suture. The overall complication rate was 17%. Of the early postoperative complications (13%), the major complication was small bowel obstruction especially in patients where the stoma was protecting a pelvic ileal reservoir. Abdominal septic complications (postclosure) were rare (1%). These were generally caused by unrecognized enteric tears during the mobilization of the stoma rather than anastomotic leakage. A careful operative technique is required. The wound infection rate after healing by both secondary intention and primary skin closure was low (3%) and mainly superficial. Only one incisional hernia was observed in the late postoperative period. In three patients a posterior rectus sheath defect at the stoma site was found incidentally at laparotomy, without clinical evidence of an incisional hernia. Closure of a loop ileostomy is a safe operation with a low morbidity. In patients with a previous total colectomy there was a significant risk of small bowel obstruction after ileostomy closure.     

Save the Skin and Improve the Scar

Reversal of a loop ileostomy is not infrequently associated with wound infection and delayed wound healing. This in turn may lead to a disappointing scar. A simple modification to the technique of stoma construction simplifies wound closure, reduces the rate of wound morbidity, and improves the cosmetic result.     

A case study of negative pressure wound therapy to manage acute necrotizing fasciitis

Acute necrotizing fasciitis is a devastating infectious process that requires immediate surgical debridement. Intravenous antibiotic treatment, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, and wound management are considered the standard of care. Subsequent wound closure is achieved with split-thickness skin grafting, delayed surgical closure, or healing by secondary intention. When a patient refuses additional surgical treatment or is no longer a surgical candidate, as was the case with a patient who presented with acute necrotizing fasciitis caused by Clostridium perfringens in the upper extremity, secondary intention healing is the only treatment option. Following surgery and intravenous antibiotic treatment, her wounds were managed with topical negative pressure wound therapy. No adverse events occurred and the wounds were almost completely healed 63 weeks following surgery. Research to develop evidence-based protocols of care for the closure of these wounds is needed.     

Diversion stoma after colorectal surgery: loop colostomy or ileostomy?

Background

The total rate as well as the clinical outcome of anastomotic leakage in colorectal and coloanal anastomosis necessitates a loop stoma for fecal diversion. The aim of this study was to determine the outcome of loop transverse colostomy compared to loop ileostomy as a temporary defunctioning stoma following colorectal surgery with colorectal or coloanal anastomosis.

Methods

Data of 200 patients between January 2003 and January 2009 were analyzed in this two-center study to determine the surgical outcome in patients with loop colostomy (n?=?100) in comparison to loop ileostomy (n?=?100) for fecal diversion including outcome of stoma creation and complication rates during stoma reversal.

Results

During stoma placement, dermatitis and renal insufficiency occurred significantly more often in the loop ileostomy group than in the loop transverse colostomy group (15% vs. 0%; p?p?=?0.005). During stoma reversal, wound infection occurred significantly more often in the loop transverse colostomy group than in the loop ileostomy group (27% vs. 8%; p?p?p?p?Conclusions Both methods provide a good operative outcome with low complication rates. We do recommend the loop ileostomy in all patients in which dehydration is not to be expected since wound infection rate is lower and hospital stay is shorter during stoma reversal.     

The morbidity surrounding reversal of defunctioning ileostomies: a systematic review of 48 studies including 6,107 cases

Background and aims  Loop ileostomies are used currently in surgical practice to reduce the consequences of distal anastomotic failure following colorectal resection. It is often assumed that reversal of a loop ileostomy is a simple and safe procedure. However, many studies have demonstrated high morbidity rates following loop ileostomy closure. The aims of this systematic review were to examine all the existing evidence in the literature on morbidity and mortality following closure of loop ileostomy. Method  A literature search of Ovid, Embase, the Cochrane database, Google Scholar™ and Medline using Pubmed as the search engine was used to identify studies reporting on the morbidity of loop ileostomy closure (latest at June 15th 2008), was performed. Outcomes of interest included demographics, the details regarding the original indication for operation, operative and hospital-related outcomes, post-operative bowel-related complications, and other surgical and medical complications. Results  Forty-eight studies from 18 countries satisfied the inclusion criteria. Outcomes of a total of 6,107 patients were analysed. Overall morbidity following closure of loop ileostomy was found to be 17.3% with a mortality rate of 0.4%. 3.7% of patients required a laparotomy at the time of ileostomy closure. The most common post-operative complications included small bowel obstruction (7.2%) and wound sepsis (5.0%). Conclusion  The consequences of anastomotic leakage following colorectal resection are severe. However, the consequences of stoma reversal are often underestimated. Surgeons should adopt a selective strategy regarding the use of defunctioning ileostomy, and counsel patients further prior to the original surgery. In this way, patients at low risk may be spared the morbidity of stoma reversal.     

Factors influencing the morbidity of colostomy closure

In a series of 80 colostomy closures, a total complication rate of 26 per cent was found, with a wound infection rate of 14 per cent and an anastomotic leak rate of four per cent. Patients having preoperative systemic antibiotics had fewer wound infections than those who did not (eight per cent versus 19 per cent). Delayed primary skin closure or closure by secondary intention was associated with less wound morbidity than was primary closure (ten per cent versus 17 per cent). However, the use of preoperative systemic antibiotics decreased the incidence of wound infection in those having primary skin closure (five per cent versus 27 per cent). Patients having diverticular disease had more wound infections (40 per cent) and greater overall morbidity (70 per cent). Older patients had a higher incidence of complications (24 per cent if less than 40 years and 45 per cent if greater than 50 years). Closure of left-sided colostomies was associated with a higher infectious complication rate (26 per cent versus 13 per cent). The time interval to colostomy closure was found to alter subsequent morbidity with a waiting period of one to two months associated with zero complications.     

Wound infection after ileostomy closure: a prospective randomized study comparing primary vs. delayed primary closure techniques

Background Closure of ileostomy is considered a contaminated operation. The infection rate of the stoma wound is ≥30%. Several ileostomy–closure techniques intended to reduce the high rate of infection have been described in the literature. Among them, delayed primary closure of the stoma wound is a commonly used method that was reported to reduce the infection rate according to several retrospective studies. We therefore conducted the first prospective randomized trial comparing primary with delayed primary closure of a stoma wound. Methods During 2003, 40 patients were admitted to our ward for closure of ileostomy. The ileostomies were taken down by the same team using the same surgical technique except for the technique of wound closure. We randomly divided the patients into two groups. In Group 1 (n = 20), the wound was left open for delayed primary closure and not closed until postoperative day 4. In Group 2, the wound was primarily closed at the end of the procedure. Results The total wound infection rate was relatively low (15%). Infection occurred more frequently (4 cases, 20%) in Group 1 than in Group 2 (2 cases, 10%). The length of hospital stay was similar for both groups. Conclusions In this first prospective comparison of two techniques during ileostomy take down, primary closure unexpectedly produced less wound infection than delayed primary closure.     

Purse-string closure technique reduces the incidence of incisional hernias following the reversal of temporary ileostomy

Purpose

The incidence of incisional hernia (IH) at ileostomy closure site has not been sufficiently evaluated. Temporary loop ileostomy is routinely used in patients after low anterior resection for rectal cancer. The goal of this study was to compare the IH rates of standard suture skin closure and purse-string skin closure techniques.

Patients and methods

Patients undergoing ileostomy reversal and follow-up CT scan at the University Hospital Frankfurt between January 2009 and December 2015 were retrospectively analyzed regarding IH and associated risk factors. Patients received either direct stitch skin closure (group DC) or purse-string skin closure (group PS).

Results

In total, 111 patients underwent ileostomy reversal in the aforementioned period. In 88 patients, a CT scan was performed 12–24 months after ileostomy reversal for cancer follow-up. Median follow-up was 12 months. Median time interval between ileostoma formation and closure was 12 (±?4 SD) weeks. In 19 of 88 patients (21.5%), an IH was detected. The incidence of IH detected by CT scan was significantly lower in the PS group (n?=?7, 12.9%) compared to the DC group (n?=?12, 35.2%, p?=?0.017).

Conclusions

This retrospective study shows an advantage of the purse-string skin closure technique in ileostomy reversals. The use of this technique for skin closure following ileostomy reversals is recommended to reduce the IH rates. Randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.

     

Loop ileostomy is a safe option for fecal diversion

This study was undertaken to prospectively assess all morbidity and mortality associated with temporary loop ileostomy. Eighty-three consecutive patients of a median age of 45 years required temporary fecal diversion after either ileoanal or low colorectal anastomosis (n=72), for perianal Crohn's disease (n=5), or for other reasons (n=6). All loop ileostomies were supported with a rod, and fecal diversion was maintained for a mean of 10 weeks. To date, 67 patients have had re-establishment of intestinal continuity. Stoma closure was affected through a parastomal incision in 64 patients; in three, a laparotomy was required. The closure was stapled side to side in 49 patients, while a hand-sewn anastomosis was done in the other 18 patients; all skin wounds were left open. The mean length of surgery for ileostomy closure was 56 minutes, and the mean hospital stay was five days. Nine patients (10.8 percent) developed 10 complications, nine of which required hospitalization. Specifically, four patients developed dehydration and electrolyte abnormalities secondary to high stoma output, and two had anastomotic leaks that spontaneously healed following conservative management. One patient developed a superficial wound infection that spontaneously drained itself. One patient developed a partial small bowel obstruction that resolved without surgery after a four-day hospitalization. One stoma retracted after supporting rod removal and prompted premature closure. There was no stomal ischemia, hemorrhage, prolapse, or mortality in this series. Thus, loop ileostomy is a safe way to achieve fecal diversion.     

Bioresorbable Adhesion Barrier Facilitates Early Closure of the Defunctioning Ileostomy After Rectal Excision

INTRODUCTION: A temporary loop ileostomy is often created to minimize the impact of peritoneal sepsis from an anastomotic dehiscence after a coloanal or low colorectal anastomosis. Such a stoma is usually closed after 6 to 12 weeks when the intestinal edema is reduced and the peristomal adhesions are less dense. This period is three to four times longer than necessary for assurance of anastomotic healing, which is usually achieved by the second week after surgery. With the use of a bioresorbable membrane to minimize the formation of peristomal adhesions, earlier closure is hypothetically possible at three weeks. METHODS: Patients undergoing creation of a defunctioning ileostomy were randomized in Phase I either to have an adhesion barrier membrane wrapped around the limbs of the ileostomy, with closure at three weeks, or to the control group, with no barrier membrane and closure after more than six weeks. In the subsequent Phase II, the efficacy of the barrier membrane was compared in a similar manner with a control group at ileostomy reversal after three weeks. Peristomal adhesions at the time of stomal mobilization were scored in a blinded manner. RESULTS: In Phase I, no statistically significant differences were noted in the mean adhesion scores between the two groups (7.42 vs. 7.28). However, in Phase II, when peristomal adhesions at closure were compared at three weeks for both groups, with and without adhesion barrier placement, there was a significant reduction in the overall mean adhesion scores (5.81 vs. 7.82, respectively). The number of patients with dense adhesions was also reduced in the adhesion barrier group. There was no significant difference in the time taken and the difficulty encountered during ileostomy closure in the two groups. A tendency to easier closure, as evidenced by a lower incidence of perioperative complications, was noted in the adhesion barrier group. CONCLUSION: An adhesion barrier membrane placed around the limbs of a defunctioning loop ileostomy reduces peristomal adhesion and facilitates early closure at three weeks with minimal complications.     

末端回肠造口早期还纳的可行性及安全性的Meta分析

目的通过Meta分析来评价早期还纳末端回肠造口的可行性及安全性，为造口还纳的最佳时机提供循证医学证据。 方法检索万方、中国知网、Cochrane Library、PubMed、SpringerLink、EBSCO、MEDLINE等数据库，以"末端回肠造口" "早期还纳" "ileostomy" "early clsure" "stoma" "reversal"为检索词检索从2000年1月至2019年11月所有对比早期还纳及晚期还纳的文献，提取相关临床资料和数据，根据纳入和排除标准，并根据Cochrane文献质量评估手册和NOS量表评估文献质量，最后采用RevMan5.3进行Meta分析。 结果最终9篇文献符合纳入标准，早期还纳组手术时间少于晚期还纳组（P= 0.0005）、造口相关并发症及肠梗阻发生率低于晚期还纳组（P<0.00001），切口感染发生率高于晚期还纳组（P<0.0001），差异均有统计学意义；术后并发症（P=0.67）、术后吻合口漏发生率（P=0.39）基本相似，差异均无统计学意义。 结论早期还纳末端回肠造口是安全可行的，并不增加手术并发症，且能够减少造口相关并发症，提高患者的生活质量。     

Does sterile or nonsterile technique make a difference in wounds healing by secondary intention?

After observing inconsistencies in care of acute surgical wounds healing by secondary intention and reviewing the potential cost savings of implementing clean dressing change technique policies, surgical nurses at a university-based medical center monitored supply usage and infection rates of these wounds using a nonexperimental, longitudinal study design. Staff from two acute care surgical units provided data for 3 months before and 3 months after standardization of wound care to a clean wound care technique. All adult patients requiring dressing changes three times per day with normal saline moistened gauze of their open surgical wound(s) participated in the study. Before changing the wound care procedures, nine (9) of 1,070 (0.84%) admissions to the two surgical units had a surgical site infection. During the 3 months following implementation of clean wound care protocols, eight (8) surgical site infections were documented in 963 admissions (rate.83%). Dressing supply costs were $380 less. In this study, using nonsterile wound care procedures for wounds healing by secondary intention did not negatively impact infection rates and saved supply costs.     

Myocutaneous flaps and proctocolectomy in severe perianal Crohn’s disease—a single stage procedure

Background Complex perianal wounds can be extremely difficult to treat and primary closure of these defects can be a challenge even for experienced surgeons. So far, myocutaneous flaps for wound closure after removal of malignant tumors are a well-accepted option, but there are only a few reports focusing on the primary closure of the perineal wound after proctocolectomy for Crohn’s disease. We describe our experience with wide excision of the diseased perineum using a combined abdominoperineal two-team approach. Materials and methods We performed proctocolectomy with permanent ileostomy in five patients with longstanding extensive Crohn’s disease. All five patients had fistulizing perineal Crohn’s disease combined with Crohn’s colitis. Each patient received at least one flap for primary wound closure, either a rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap or a gracilis flap. Results Indication for surgical intervention included anal or bowel stenosis, septic condition, fecal incontinence, or a combination of these features. One patient had a simultaneous adenocarcinoma of the sigmoid colon. Five patients underwent a total of seven flaps. Three months after surgery, complete healing was achieved in all patients; one patient suffered recurrence in the region of his right thigh. Mean follow up was 19.6 months (range—12–43 months). Conclusions Myocutaneous flaps are a promising therapeutic option in patients with chronic perianal disease. With the transposition of well-vascularized tissue into the perineal defect, complete healing and control of sepsis can be achieved in the majority of patients.     

Loop Ileostomy Closure After Restorative Proctocolectomy: Outcome in 1,504 Patients

PURPOSE Routine use of a temporary loop ileostomy for diversion after restorative proctocolectomy is controversial because of reported morbidity associated with its creation and closure. This study intended to review our experience with loop ileostomy closure after restorative proctocolectomy and determine the complication rates. In addition, complication rates between handsewn and stapled closures were compared.METHODS Our Department Pelvic Pouch Database was queried and charts reviewed for all patients who had ileostomy closure after restorative proctocolectomy from August 1983 to March 2002.RESULTS A total of 1,504 patients underwent ileostomy closure after restorative proctocolectomy during a 19-year period. The median length of hospitalization was three (range, 1–40) days and the overall complication rate was 11.4 percent. Complications included small-bowel obstruction (6.4 percent), wound infection (1.5 percent), abdominal septic complications (1 percent), and enterocutaneous fistulas (0.6 percent). Handsewn closure was performed in 1,278 patients (85 percent) and stapled closure in 226 (15 percent). No significant differences in complication rates and length of hospitalization were found between handsewn and stapled closure techniques.CONCLUSIONS Our results demonstrated that ileostomy closure after restorative proctocolectomy can be achieved with a low morbidity and a short hospitalization stay. In addition, we found that complication rates and length of hospitalization were similar between handsewn and stapled closures.Published online: 28 January.Read at the meeting of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, New Orleans, Louisiana, June 21 to 26, 2003.     

Evaluation of skin stapling for wound closure in the emergency department

Automatic skin staplers have been commonly used for surgical wound closure for many years. The efficiency and ease of placement of skin staplers make them an attractive alternative to suture repair of selected lacerations in the emergency department. Emergency physicians, however, have been reluctant to use staplers in the ED. We evaluated skin staples in 76 patients presenting with 87 lacerations to the scalp, trunk, or extremities, excluding hands and feet. Patients returned to the ED in two and seven to ten day for wound check and staple removal. Skin stapling was assessed for efficiency, cosmetic results, complications, and cost-effectiveness. Only one significant complication was noted in our study group - a dehiscence of a scalp laceration secondary to hematoma collection. There was also a minor dehiscence of a superficial laceration of the leg due to inadequate primary closure, which did not result in any cosmetic deformity. No infectious complications, delayed wound healing, or cosmetic problems were seen. Skin stapling was easier and quicker than suture repair at a lower overall cost in most circumstances. Our study shows skin stapling to be an efficient and cost-effective alternative method to suture wound closure for selected lacerations in patients presenting to the ED, without compromising wound healing or cosmetic results.     

Factors predicting stomal wound closure infection rates

Background

Stoma closure is associated with high wound infection rates. The aim of this study was to evaluate risk factors for infection rates in such wounds, with particular emphasis on assessing the importance of the stomal wound closure technique.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of 142 patients who had undergone ileostomy or colostomy closure between 2002 and 2011 was performed. Postoperative outcome as measured by wound infection rate was recorded. Three different closure techniques were identified: primary closure (PC), primary closure with Penrose drain (PCP) and purse-string circumferential wound approximation technique (PSC). Other factors such as age, sex, ASA score, type of prophylactic antibiotics used, diabetes, smoking and obesity were also analysed. All other techniques were excluded.

Results

Our series consisted of 142 stomal closures (90 ileostomy and 52 colostomy closures). The patients had a median age of 63.5 years with an interquartile range of 50.1–73.2 years. The overall wound infection rate was 10.7 %. PC, PCP and PSC were associated with wound infection rates of 17.9, 10.5 and 3.6 %, respectively. Compared to PSC, PC and PCP were associated with significantly higher wound infection rates (p = 0.027 and p = 0.068, respectively). Obesity was a significant risk factor for wound infection (p = 0.024). Use of triple-agent antibiotics prophylactically had a protective effect on the infection rate (p = 0.012).

Conclusions

To reduce stomal wound closure infection rates, we recommend institution of closure techniques other than PC with or without a drain. Risk factors such as obesity should be addressed, and prophylactic triple antibiotics should be administered.     

Feasibility of early closure of loop ileostomies

PURPOSE: A loop ileostomy is constructed to protect a distal anastomosis, and closure is usually performed not earlier than after two to three months. Earlier closure might reduce stoma-related morbidity, improve quality of life, and still effectively protect the distal anastomosis. This pilot study was designed to investigate the feasibility of early closure of loop ileostomies, i.e., during the same hospital admission as the initial operation. METHODS: Twenty-seven consecutive patients with a protective loop ileostomy were included. If patient's recovery was uneventful, water-soluble contrast enema examination was performed, preferably after seven to eight days. If no radiologic signs of leakage were detected, the ileostomy was closed during the same hospital admission. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients (8 females; mean age, 60 years) were analyzed. Eighteen patients had early ileostomy closure on average 11 (range, 7-21) days after the initial procedure. In nine patients the procedure was postponed because of leakage of the anastomosis (n = 3), delayed recovery (n = 1), small bowel obstruction (n = 1), gastroparesis (n = 1), logistic reasons (n = 2), or irradical cancer resection followed by radiotherapy (n = 1). There was no mortality and four mild complications occurred after early closure: superficial wound infection (n = 2), intravenous-catheter sepsis (n = 1), small bowel obstruction (n = 1). CONCLUSION: Closure of a loop ileostomy early after the initial operation was feasible in 18 of 27 patients and was associated with low morbidity and no mortality.     

钛夹预防消化内镜术后并发症的Meta分析

目的评价使用钛夹关闭内镜下黏膜切除术(endoscopic mucosal resection,EMR)、内镜下黏膜剥离术(endoscopic submucosal dissection,ESD)等术后创面减少术后迟发性出血以及促进创面愈合的有效性。 方法计算机检索2017年10月之前PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrance library三个数据库中公开发表的有关钛夹关闭EMR、ESD术后创面的文献,依据纳入和排除标准将最终入选的文献应用Review Manager 5.3软件分析数据。 结果最终6篇随机对照试验文献纳入研究。Meta分析结果显示：钛夹关闭创面不能减少术后迟发性出血的发生率(OR＝0.43,95% CI：0.14～1.29,P＝0.13),差异无统计学意义;然而创面关闭可以促进创面愈合(OR＝－1.18,95% CI：－1.77～－0.60,P<0.01),差异有统计学意义。 结论钛夹关闭创面不能减少EMR、ESD等术后迟发性出血的发生,但可能促进医源性创面的愈合。     

Treatment of chronic pilonidal disease

PURPOSE: Pilonidal disease (PD) is a common chronic intermittent disorder of the sacrococcygeal region. Despite surgical therapy dating back more than one century, management remains controversial and recent reports have advocated different surgical approaches. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of 129 patients who were treated for chronic PD in our institution during a five-year period, 1990 to 1994. RESULTS: Excision with primary closure was performed in 56 patients; 47 underwent open excision without closure, and 26 had marsupialization procedure. All were performed electively, with only minor complications. Complete healing was fastest in the primary closure group, despite a 14 percent postoperative wound infection rate. Recurrence rates of 11, 13, and 4 percent were found for primary closure, wide resection, and marsupialization procedures, respectively. There was no correlation among recurrence rate, postoperative infection, or prior surgery. CONCLUSION: Considering healing time, morbidity, and recurrence rate, we conclude that surgical treatment should be directed at either excision and primary closure or marsupialization. Wide excision with secondary healing should be performed only for grossly infected and complex cysts.     

Loop Ileostomy Morbidity: Timing of Closure Matters

Purpose Diverting stomas are commonly performed during ileoanal and coloanal anastomoses. We studied a series of patients after loop ileostomy closure to determine risk factors and the impact of the interval from primary operation on morbidity. Methods Ninety-three consecutive patients undergoing loop ileostomy closure at a single institution after coloanal or ileoanal anastomosis were retrospectively reviewed. Complications were classified as medical or surgical according to its treatment requirements. Results were correlated to clinical and operative features. Results Of the 93 patients, 43 were male and 50 were female with mean age of 56 years. Overall, complication rate was 17.2 percent. The most common complication was small-bowel obstruction. Complications required operative management in 3.2 percent and medical management alone in 14 percent. There was no mortality. There was no correlation between complication occurrence and age, gender, type of suture (manual or mechanical), and operative time. Complications were significantly associated with primary disease and shorter interval between primary operation and ileostomy closure. Regarding the optimal interval between primary surgery and ileostomy closure, the cutoff value for increased risk of developing postoperative complications was 8.5 weeks, below which the risk of such occurrence was significantly higher with a sensitivity rate of 88 percent. Conclusions Diverting loop ileostomy adds little cumulative morbidity to the primary operation and is a safe option for diversion to protect a low colorectal anastomosis. To further reduce morbidity, the interval between primary operation and ileostomy closure should be no shorter than 8.5 weeks. Poster presentation at the meeting of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, April 30 to May 5, 2005.