The incidence and causes of permanent stoma after anterior resection

Aims Defunctioning stomas are used following anterior resection to guard against the serious consequences of anastomotic leak such as pelvic sepsis and generalized peritonitis. This study aims to determine what proportion of patients undergoing anterior resection have a defunctioning stoma, how many of these patients do not have their stoma closed, and the reasons for this. Methods All patients undergoing a resection for rectal cancer in our institution in a five year period (January 1995 to December 1999) are included in the study. Anterior resection was performed on 154 patients, divided into 76 anterior resections (AR) and 78 low anterior resections (defined as the anastomosis within 6 cm of the anal verge). The data from these patients were analysed retrospectively. Results Of the total of 154 patients undergoing anterior resection, 59 (38%) were defunctioned, divided into 33 with loop ileostomy and 26 with loop colostomy. Five of these patients had not had their stoma closed at a median follow up of four years (range 1.5–6.5 years). The reasons for non closure were anastomotic stricture (2), metastatic disease (2), and patient choice (1). When comparing AR and LAR, 16% of patients had a defunctioning stoma after AR, compared with 60% after LAR (P < 0.01). Conclusion Anterior resection is being performed for very low rectal tumours in order to avoid a permanent stoma. However we have found that 8% of patients who are defunctioned with a stoma at anterior resection will not have their stoma closed, and conclude that patients should be warned of this pre‐operatively.     

Protective defunctioning stoma in low anterior resection for rectal carcinoma

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leak is a serious complication of resection for low rectal carcinoma. METHODS: Data from a prospective multicentre study conducted between January 2000 and December 2001 were analysed to determine the early outcome after low anterior resection in patients with and without a protective stoma. The morbidity and mortality rates associated with ileostomy and colostomy closure were compared. RESULTS: Eight hundred and eighty-one (32.3 per cent) of 2729 patients received a protective stoma after low anterior resection. Overall anastomotic leak rates were similar in patients with or without a stoma (14.5 versus 14.2 per cent respectively). The incidence of leaks that required surgical intervention was significantly lower in those with a protective stoma (3.6 versus 10.1 per cent; P < 0.001), as was the mortality rate (0.9 versus 2.0 per cent; P = 0.037). Logistic regression analysis showed that provision of a protective stoma was the most powerful independent variable for avoiding an anastomotic leak that required surgical correction. Seven hundred and twenty-four of the 881 patients who received a stoma were followed up. The overall postoperative morbidity associated with stoma closure was significantly lower for colostomy than for ileostomy (15.3 versus 22.4 per cent; P = 0.031). CONCLUSION: A protective stoma reduced the rate of anastomotic leakage that required surgical intervention, and mitigated the sequelae of such leakage. Colostomy closure was associated with less morbidity than closure of an ileostomy.     

Septic complications after low anterior rectal resection--is diverting stoma still justified?

A retrospective study was designed to determine the effects of faecal diversion on the rate and severity of clinical anastomotic leaks after low anterior resection. The study explored the complications of stoma closure as well. During the period between 1 January 1995 and 30 July 2000, anterior rectal resection was performed on 249 patients with anastomoses created at a 6-cm or smaller distance to the dentate line. In 74 cases, the anastomosis was protected by loop ileostomy. The indications for creating a stoma were evaluated subjectively, by the operating surgeon. In 64 patients, the ileostoma was closed 3 months later. A 'clinical leak' after anterior resection was defined as an anastomotic insufficiency with clinically relevant consequences. The overall rate of anastomotic leak was 6.4 per cent; it was 5.1% (9/175) without and 9.4% (7/74) with a protective stoma. In 8 out of 9 patients, the anastomotic leak that had occurred without a protective stoma warranted laparatomy and defunctioning colostomy. Lavage and drainage of the peritoneal cavity and the presacral space were necessary in 6 out of these 8 cases- and furthermore, the deranged anastomosis had to be removed in 2 patients. Local management was successful in a single case only. Although relaparotomy entails long-term intensive care, all reoperated patients survived anastomotic leakage. Seven patients with a leak despite a protective did not require laparatomy; transanal drainage was appropriate in all cases. There were no fatalities in this group either. Only one fatal complication from suture leakage occurred after stoma-closure. Abdominal exploration was inevitable in almost all patients with a clinical anastomotic leak and without defunctioning stoma. By contrast, patients with anastomotic insufficiency despite a protective stoma were successfully managed without further intra-abdominal intervention. As shown by these results, faecal diversion undoubtedly mitigates the clinical consequences of anastomotic leaks, but cannot prevent its occurrence. When considering the cumulative risk of surgical complications associated with anterior resection, the complications of stoma-closure must also be taken into account. Our data confirm that a defunctioning stoma is beneficial for high-risk patients, who are unfit for a second abdominal procedure required to control suture leakage.     

保护性造口在直肠癌低位前切除术中价值的前瞻性随机对照研究

目的前瞻性评价保护性造口在直肠癌低位前切除术中的价值。方法选择2006年10月～2011年10月间在我院接受择期开腹根治性低位前切除术,并符合入选标准的100例中下段直肠癌患者,随机分为三组：A组33例在完成结直肠吻合后行经升结肠回肠置管造口术;B组35例行横结肠或末段回肠袢式造口术;C组32例不行保护性造口术。观察吻合口漏的发生率以及造口相关的并发症。结果 100例患者术后发生吻合口漏5例,总的吻合口漏发生率为5.0%。A、B、C组的吻合口漏发生率分别为6.1%（2/33）、5.7%（2/35）和3.1%（1/32）,组间比较无统计学差异（P=0.838,P〉0.05）。68例行保护性造口患者（A＋B组）和32例不行保护性造口患者（C组）术后吻合口漏的发生率分别为5.9%（4/68）和3.1%（1/32）,无统计学差异（P=0.922,P〉0.05）。4例（A、B组）有保护性造口发生吻合口漏的患者症状较轻,而1例（C组）无保护性造口发生吻合口漏患者的症状较重。A组中仅2例在拔除回肠置管后发生腹壁瘘口短暂的溢肠内容物现象,经换药后很快愈合。而B组中肠造口并发症的发生率为25.7%（9/35）,后期造口还纳术并发症的发生率为22.9%（8/35）。结论保护性造口不能降低直肠癌低位前切除术后吻合口漏的发生,但能减轻吻合口漏发生后的症状。传统的保护性横结肠或末段回肠袢式造口术造口相关的并发症发生率较高。对具有吻合口漏高危因素患者,经升结肠回肠置管造口术是一种理想的可供选择的方法。     

The outcome of loop ileostomy closure: a prospective study

Background The use of a loop ileostomy is an effective method to protect pelvic anastomoses, although there is some debate as to the routine use of a stoma. A second operation is required to close the stoma, with potential complications. Objective The aim of this study was to assess prospectively the morbidity of closure of loop ileostomy. Method All patients scheduled for loop ileostomy closure over a 12‐month period were included. The patient demographics, operative technique, complications and length of stay were recorded prospectively. Results Fifty consecutive patients (28 males and 22 females) with a median age (interquartile range, IQR) of 56 (42–73) years underwent closure of loop ileostomy, at a median time (IQR) of 29 (18–48) weeks after formation. Twelve patients (24%) developed complications: six (12%) had intestinal obstruction of which one required a laparotomy, four (8%) had wound infections of which one required re‐operation, one (2%) had an ileal anastomotic leak and subsequently died and one (2%) died from a myocardial infarction. The median length (IQR) of hospital stay was 8 (7–10) days. Conclusion We have demonstrated that a quarter of patients develop complications after loop ileostomy closure. The majority of these are minor. Methods to reduce the number of complications, such as optimum time for closure and distal limb irrigation techniques, need to be studied.     

THE MORBIDITY OF DEFUNCTIONING STOMATA

Background: The choice of a defunctioning stoma in restorative resection of rectal carcinoma is unclear. Traditionally, the loop colostomy has been preferred. Methods: All patients with either a defunctioning loop ileostomy or colostomy treated by a single surgeon (MS) were studied. The morbidity of stoma construction and closure, as well as problems experienced in the intervening period, were entered on a database. Results: No significant difference in the morbidity of closure was noted when loop ileostomy was compared to loop colostomy. Although a trend favouring loop ileostomy was noted when interval morbidity was examined, this difference was not statistically significant. Conclusions: Loop colostomy and ileostomy are both effective in defunctioning the distal colon following a restorative resection for rectal carcinoma. There is some morbidity associated with both but when a stoma is constructed, loop ileostomy is preferable. The loop ileostomy is generally easier to manage and is not associated with a greater rate of complications (in its construction and closure) than the loop colostomy.     

Clinical utility of a de-functioning loop ileostomy

BACKGROUND: The de-functioning loop ileostomy was introduced as a technique to create a manageable stoma that would divert the faecal stream from a more distal anastomosis in order to reduce the consequences of any anastomotic leakage. The value of de-functioning stomas is currently being challenged. The purpose of the present study was to review the clinical utility of performing a de-functioning loop ileostomy in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. METHODS: A review was undertaken of a prospective colorectal database maintained at Fremantle Hospital. All end-points were defined prior to the collection of data. The study reviewed the indications and type of surgery performed. The main end-points included (i) the prevalence and management of anastomotic leaks at the primary surgery; (ii) unplanned readmissions prior to stoma closure; and (iii) the mortality, reoperation rate, and morbidity associated with closure of the stoma. RESULTS: The study involved 233 patients of mean age 58 years (range 15-89 years) and a male:female ratio of 1.1:1. The majority of patients were undergoing elective surgery (82%) for colorectal neoplasia (71%). The commonest surgical procedure was an ultra-low anterior resection (62%). At the initial surgery, 16 patients (7.0%) developed anastomotic leaks, but only two (0.9%) required reoperation. Eleven patients (4.8%) required 12 unplanned readmissions prior to stoma closure. At closure (n = 230), there were no postoperative deaths, one patient developed an ileal anastomotic leak that was managed with antibiotics, and five patients (2.2%) required reoperation within 30 days of surgery. CONCLUSION: De-functioning loop ileostomy was found to be associated with a relatively low morbidity and no mortality.     

腹腔镜直肠癌超低位前切除术造口回纳后再发吻合口漏危险因素分析北大核心CSCD

目的探讨腹腔镜直肠癌超低位前切除术(Ls-uLAR)并发直肠吻合口漏病人的转归,并对造口回纳后再发吻合口漏的危险因素进行初步分析。方法回顾性分析北京大学第一医院普通外科2012年1月至2020年12月同一手术团队完成的Ls-uLAR并发吻合口漏的31例直肠癌病人的临床资料及随访结果,对造口回纳后再发吻合口漏的临床特征及危险因素进行分析。结果371例接受Ls-uLAR的病人中有31例(8.4%)术后并发吻合口漏。其中预防性造口术后吻合口漏23例(23/307,7.5%),其转归为:1例围手术期死亡,1例吻合口复发再次行经腹-会阴联合切除术,6例吻合口重度狭窄难以回纳,15例经保守治疗吻合口漏临床愈合(其中2例因肺转移而放弃回纳);无预防性造口术后吻合口漏8例(8/64,12.5%),其转归为:1例围手术期死亡,2例急诊行回肠造口,5例经保守治疗愈合。符合吻合口漏临床愈合标准的15例病人于初次术后3~16个月行造口回纳,其中8例(8/15,53.3%)再次出现吻合口漏。单因素分析结果显示:新辅助放化疗(是vs.否:100.0%vs.30.0%,P=0.026)、初次术中出血量(>50 mL vs.≤50 mL 87.5%vs.14.3%,P=0.010)及吻合口内镜下缺血征象(有vs.无:85.7%vs.25.0%,P=0.041)与再发吻合口漏相关。8例再发吻合口漏病人表现为骶前脓肿并继发不完全性肠梗阻4例,反复发作肛周脓肿和肛瘘2例,直肠阴道瘘2例。所有再发漏病人经保守治疗1~2个月均未能愈合,除1例直肠阴道瘘拒绝再次造口外,其余7例均改行横结肠造口。结论腹腔镜直肠癌超低位前切除术并发吻合口漏结局不良,继发吻合口狭窄及回纳后再发吻合口漏的风险较高,对吻合口漏病人的临床愈合标准、造口回纳时机和手术方式,尤其是新辅助放化疗后病人仍有待进一步研究。     

保护性肠造口自闭可行性研究

目的 探索保护性肠造口自行闭合的可能性。方法 2009年3月至2012年2月浙江大学医学院附属第一医院肛肠外科对128例结直肠手术病人用末端回肠插管造口加远端回肠单排钉闭合器钉闭肠腔阻断粪流,观察保护性造口自闭回纳及吻合口漏的发生情况。 结果 钉闭肠腔自动开放（肛门恢复排便）的成功率为100%。肛门恢复排便的时间,即吻合口的保护期平均为29.3（12～75）d。造口导管拔除后造口自动闭合（愈合）的成功率为100%。拔管后造口自动闭合时间平均为12.4（7～30）d。术后化疗期间发生与插管部位有关的腹壁感染1例。未发现与肠腔钉闭有关并发症,也未发现与吻合口漏有关并发症。结论 自闭性保护性造口手术方式为先在末端回肠用单排钉闭合器钉闭肠腔,然后在近端回肠做一插管造口（末端回肠插管造口加远端单排钉肠腔闭合法）。其对远端吻合口的保护期限平均为4周,在这期间绝大多数吻合口漏如果存在应已愈合。     

Chronic anastomotic sinus after low anterior resection: when can the defunctioning stoma be reversed?

Aim Anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection may incompletely resolve, resulting in sinus tracts that persist on repeated contrast studies. This case series evaluated the factors that may contribute to sinus healing or to safe reversal of the defunctioning ileostomy. Method All patients (n = 8) who developed an anastomotic sinus after low anterior resection over an 8‐year period were identified from a prospective database. Results All patients had been treated with low anterior resections with defunctioning stomas for rectal carcinoma [median follow up 43.5 (13–84) months]. Two patients with an unhealed subclinical leak had the stoma reversed successfully. Of the six patients with clinical leakage, two healed spontaneously, one healed after application of fibrin glue, one developed an anastomotic stricture that was successfully treated by dilatation with subsequent stoma reversal, and one developed recurrent cancer and was not reversed. One patient underwent reversal, despite persistence of the sinus, followed by rectal perforation requiring laparotomy and faecal diversion. Bowel function was satisfactory where the sinus healed spontaneously, but poor where reversal was carried out without sinus healing. Conclusion Tracks that persist for longer than 1 year are unlikely to heal, but the stoma can be reversed if there had been a subclinical leak previously. A persistent anastomotic sinus leading to a cavity may not be suitable for stoma closure.     

简易支撑架联合一针缝合法在直肠癌末端回肠造口中的应用

目的：探讨低位直肠癌病人保肛根治手术中,应用简易支撑架联合一针缝合行末端回肠双腔造口的可行性及效果。方法：回顾性分析2019年12月至2021年5月我院普外科有术后吻合口漏高危因素的直肠癌病人。病人行腹腔镜辅助低位直肠癌根治术和末端回肠双腔造口术。分为简易支撑架联合一针缝合造口组35例,传统缝合造口组35例。术前、术后资料行统计学分析。结果：两组病人一般资料及术后造口相关并发症发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。所有病人住院期间均未出现严重并发症。所有病人末端回肠造口均成功还纳。简易支撑架联合一针缝合造口组病人一期造口时间[(13.77±2.02) min比(22.66±3.64)min(P<0.001)];二期造口还纳时间[(88.14±28.03) min比(103.29±30.96) min(P=0.04)]和术后总住院时间[(14.54±2.32) d比(17.34±4.57) d(P=0.002)];以及一期手术住院费用[(42 057.98±4 938.69)元比(44 728.46±5 223.62)元,(P=0.03)]和二期造口还纳手术出血量[(17....     

Colo-anal pouches: lessons from a prospective audit

Objective  Colonic pouch formation with pouch-anal anastomosis is the treatment of choice following restorative anterior resection for low rectal cancers with a proximal loop ileostomy to defunction the anastomosis. Controversy exists as to whether anastomotic integrity needs to be checked prior to ileostomy reversal. The aim of this prospective study was to audit our current practice.
Method  Data on all patients undergoing resectional surgery for rectal cancer in our unit are entered prospectively onto a database. Patients who underwent an anterior resection with pouch formation and defunctioning ileostomy were identified and a review of notes and radiological records was carried out.
Results  Forty-two patients with rectal adenocarcinoma underwent an anterior resection with colo-colonic pouch, colo-anal anastomosis and a covering loop ileostomy. Of these, 38(90.5%) had water-soluble contrast enemas (WSCE) 6–8 weeks postoperatively. Two studies (5.3%) confirmed the presence of normal colo-colonic pouch but 24(63.2%) normal reports made no mention of the presence of pouch. Three studies (7.9%) reported true leaks, one study (2.6%) an anastomotic stricture and eight studies (21.1%) anastomotic leaks. Review by radiologists and surgeons, and examination with flexible sigmoidoscopy of these final eight confirmed that these appearances were consistent with normal colo-colonic pouches and anastomosis with no leak. These patients went on to have uneventful stoma closure.
Conclusion  Our study suggests that Colon pouches are difficult to clearly delineate on WSCE and appearances may be mistaken for leaks leading to questioning of the suitability of WSCE in assessing anastomotic integrity. A true positive leak rate of 7.9% would suggest that postoperative assessment prior to closure is still necessary in some patients.     

Routine use of gastrograffin enema prior to the reversal of a loop ileostomy

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Anastomotic failure occurs in up to 10% of patients following anterior resection. Selective use of a loop ileostomy may reduce the septic consequences of anastomotic leak. The use of gastrograffin enema to confirm the anastomotic integrity prior to ileostomy closure is still controversial. Our aim was to determine the impact of the routine use of gastrograffin enema on patients' management prior to ileostomy reversal. METHODS: A review of 81 patients who underwent low anterior resection with loop ileostomy for rectal cancer over 3 years. RESULTS: Gastrograffin enema was performed in 69 patients (85.2%). The mean time from operation to gastrograffin enema was 22 weeks. Four patients (5.8%) had a positive radiological leak without clinical suspicion of anastomotic problems, 2 patients (2.9%) of these subsequently had the ileostomy closed despite the positive result, 2 patients (2.9%) had a gastrograffin enema repeated which showed no leak and the patients are awaiting reversal. CONCLUSION: The incidence of positive radiological leak in uncomplicated patients is low; such patients had their loop ileostomies closed with or without serial gastrograffin enema. Routine gastrograffin enema in the absence of a clinical suspicion of anastomotic failure would appear to be of little value.     

Outcome and late functional results after anastomotic leakage following mesorectal excision for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND: Few studies have evaluated the long-term functional outcome after anastomotic leakage in the treatment of rectal cancer. METHODS: Between 1993 and 1998, 147 patients were admitted with resectable rectal carcinoma, and 92 underwent low anterior resection (LAR). Seventeen patients (18 per cent) developed clinical anastomotic leakage. The functional outcome of 11 of 12 patients, in whom the stoma was subsequently closed and bowel continuity was restored without stricture, was compared with that of 11 matched patients who had undergone LAR without leakage. Anorectal manovolumetry and symptom scoring on visual analogue scales were done 12-48 months after stoma closure. RESULTS: Nine patients made an uneventful recovery after the initial treatment of anastomotic leakage. Eight developed serious septic complications, four of whom had a pelvic abscess, but there was no death. Five patients had chronic complications that precluded closure of the stoma. Patients who had experienced leakage showed reduced neorectal capacity (120 versus 180 ml; P = 0.04), more evacuation problems (P = 0.02), and a trend towards more faecal urgency (P = 0.09) and incontinence (P = 0.06) than control patients. CONCLUSION: Stoma closure was not possible in five of 17 patients who had experienced anastomotic leakage. Patients who had the stoma closed had impaired long-term anorectal function compared with control patients without leakage.     

Loop ileostomy as temporary faecal diversion following total mesorectal excision

Aim: Anastomotic leakage following low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision carries a significant morbidity and mortality. Both loop ileostomy and loop transverse colostomy are common options of temporary faecal diversion to reduce the severity of anastomotic leakage. We use loop ileostomy routinely because of its ease of construction and closure, and low complication rate. Here, we reviewed our result of loop ileostomy. Methods: We reviewed the medical records of all patients who had temporary loop ileostomy constructed following low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision for CA rectum, from 1.1999 to 12.2003. Stoma related morbidity pre and post–closure of loop ileostomy were recorded. Results: Eighty‐eight patients had loop ileostomy constructed and later closed from 1.1999 to 12.2003. Seventeen of them required small bowel resection during closure of the loop ileostomy. Three patients (3.4%) had skin excoriation and one patient (1.1%) had prolonged ileus after the construction of ileostomy (3.4%). After closure of ileostomy, two patients (2.2%) had wound infection and two patients (2.2%) had anastomotic leakage. Six patients (6.8%) developed intestinal obstruction later. Post‐closure intestinal obstruction and anastomotic leakage were found to be associated with small bowel resection during the closure of ileostomy (P=0.042). Conclusion: Loop ileostomy and its closure are associated with low complication rates. We therefore continue to advocate the use of loop ileostomy as a temporary diversion procedure after total mesorectal excision.     

The management and outcome of anastomotic leaks in colorectal surgery

Purpose  Anastomotic leaks in colorectal surgery are associated with significant morbidity and mortality and may result in poor functional and oncological outcomes. Diagnostic difficulties may delay identification and appropriate management of leaks. The aim of this study was to look at the diagnosis, clinical management and outcomes of anastamotic leaks in our department.
Method  A retrospective audit and case note review of all patients who underwent the formation of a colorectal anastomosis between January 1996 and December 2002 ( n  = 1421) was performed. An anastomotic leak was defined as sepsis identified to have arisen from an anastomosis that subsequently required surgery, radiological drainage or intravenous antibiotics. Forty-one patients (25 male, 16 female) with a median age of 60 years (range 7–89 years) were identified as having suffered an anastomotic leak.
Results  The median time to diagnosis of an anastomotic leak following surgery was 7 days (range 3–29). At re-operation, 21 patients (51%) underwent formation of a stoma, and any who required the anastomosis to be formally taken down have been left with a 'permanent' stoma. Currently only four of 12 patients (33%) who required a stoma for an anastomotic leak following anterior resection have undergone stoma reversal. Eleven of 16 patients (69%) who had received a stoma following another colorectal procedure had undergone stoma reversal. The mortality associated with an anastamotic leak in this series was 5% ( n  = 2).
Conclusion  Although anastomotic leaks following colorectal surgery are associated with significant morbidity and stoma formation, early and aggressive management should result in a low overall mortality. If an anastomosis is taken down following an anastomotic leak after anterior resection, this will usually result in a 'permanent' stoma.     

915��ֱ����ǰ�г����󲢷�֢�ٴ�����

目的探讨直肠癌前切除术后并发症的预防和治疗。方法回顾性分析哈尔滨医科大学肿瘤医院1975年5月至2005年12月收治的行前切除术(AR)的915例直肠癌的临床资料,总结并发症的形式、相关因素、预防和治疗方法。结果915例直肠癌前切除术后,共发生吻合口漏28例(3.06%,28/915),吻合口狭窄38例(4.15%,38/915),术后早期吻合口大出血6例(0.66%,6/915)。吻合口漏的相关因素分析发现吻合口漏的发生与性别、吻合技术、中重度贫血和低蛋白血症密切相关(P<0.05),而与年龄、肿瘤距肛缘距离、直肠癌扩大根治术无明显相关(P>0.05)。24例(85.7%,24/28)吻合口漏经保守治疗(双引流管冲洗)后治愈,5例(5/6)吻合口大出血立即再次手术,38例发生吻合口狭窄均经扩肛后好转。结论直肠癌前切除手术虽然可以避免永久性人工肛门,但应重视其术后发生的吻合口漏、吻合口狭窄及吻合口大出血等并发症的预防和治疗。     

Morbidity after Closure of a Defunctioning Loop Ileostomy

Purpose : A low pelvic anastomosis is associated with a substantial risk of leakage. A defunctioning stoma (DS) reduces the clinical anastomotic leak rate and the need for re-operation, but stoma closure has its own risk of morbidity and mortality. This study aims to audit morbidity and mortality after loop ileostomy (LI) closure. Patients and methods : The medical records of 197 consecutive patients who underwent closure of a defunctioning LI between August 2003 and July 2008 were reviewed. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were recorded. Results : Transverse closure of the enterotomy was performed in 149 patients (75.6%), segmental enterectomy with hand-sewn end-to-end anastomosis in 26 (13.2%) and stapled side-to-side anastomosis in 22 (11.2%). Overall postoperative morbidity and mortality were 32.0% and 0.5%, respectively. The surgical complication rate was 30.5%, including prolonged ileus (11.2%), small bowel obstruction (4.1%), anastomotic leak (3.0%) and wound infection (4.6%). Surgical complications were more frequent in male patients (p = 0.005). Prolonged ileus was more frequent when the interval to stoma reversal exceeded 12 weeks (14.3% versus 3.5%; p = 0.02). The incidence of complications was not influenced by the closure technique. Nineteen patients (9.6%) required re-operation for anastomotic leak (n = 8), wound infection (n = 1), small bowel obstruction (n = 3) and incisional herniation (n = 7).

Conclusion : LI closure is associated with clinically relevant morbidity and mortality. This association should be taken into account in the context of a routine DS policy and should be part of the patient’s information.     

Anastomotic Leakage of a Colorectal Anastomosis Treated by Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery

Objective: To report a minimal invasive technique for repairing an anastomotic leakage with Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (T.E.M.) without creating a protective ostomy.

Summary: There are a large number of techniques for the management of anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery. Depending on the size and location of the disruption, a protective ileostomy, a permanent colostomy or even reïnterven-tion for drainage or closure of the leak may be indicated. In most cases the patient faces the morbidity associated with a new intervention, a prolonged hospital stay and a future operation for closure of the stoma. In the present case a 56-year-old man underwent a laparoscopic rectosigmoid resection after two episodes of diverticulitis in six months. An end-to-end circular stapled anastomosis was constructed. Unfortunately 8-days postoperatively an anastomotic leak occurred. Attempts to close the tear non-surgically with colonoscopy and clipping failed. A minimally invasive reintervention with transanal endoscopic microsurgery (T.E.M.) was performed without creation of an ileostomy.

One week postoperatively a gastrografin bowel study showed no leakage. To our knowledge, this technique has not yet been reported without the simultaneous construction of a stoma.

Conclusion: We describe a possible minimally invasive technique to avoid laparotomy and/or the creation of a derivative stoma in the management of anastomotic leakage. Hospital stay is not significantly prolonged, future reïntervention for closure of stoma is avoided and sphincter function is preserved.     

Safety of the temporary loop ileostomy

Objective To evaluate the complications of the temporary loop ileostomy. Method A retrospective study of 222 consecutive patients with low anterior resection, ileal pouch‐anal anastomosis or continent ileostomy and a diverting loop ileostomy routinely fashioned during the primary operation. The loop ileostomy was closed in 213 patients (96%) during the minimum follow‐up period of 15 months. Results Four patients (2%) required preterm closure of the ostomy due to stomal retraction (n = 3) or bowel obstruction (n = 1). Four patients were readmitted due to transient bowel obstruction that resolved without surgery. After closure of the loop ileostomy a total of 27 patients (13%) had complications. In 7 patients emergency re‐operation was done due to small bowel obstruction (n = 5) or intra‐abdominal abscess (n = 2). Elective re‐operation was done in 5 patients for hernia at the site of the previous stoma. Despite the use of a loop ileostomy there was 1 postoperative death after the initial operation in consequence of anastomotic leakage. There was 1 death in consequence of closure of the loop ileostomy after 3 weeks due to intra‐abdominal sepsis and heart failure. Conclusion In this series closure of the ostomy wasassociated with one death (0.5%) and overall ostomy‐related morbidity included the need to re‐operate in 6%.