DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20220740
Published: 2022-03-28

A method of ileostomy closure associated with a low anastomotic leak rate: does operative time matter?

Charbel Karam, Alan P. Meagher

Abstract


Background: Anastomotic leaks (AL) are serious post-operative complications associated with a high morbidity following routine ileostomy closure. Studies comparing standard methods of closure show no difference in outcome. The benefit of longer operative time has not been investigated.

Methods: Baseline characteristics and surgery outcomes for all patients who had an ileostomy closure from 1994-2015 at a single centre by a single surgeon were extracted from medical records. An electronic literature search of EMBASE, PubMed was performed to identify systematic reviews of Randomised controlled trials (RCT) reporting pooled leak rates and operative time for stapled vs hand sutured anastomosis. A meta-analysis using data from 4 eligible RCT was used to compare outcomes between the new versus standard techniques.

Results: A total of 415 patients underwent ileostomy closure during the study period with no leaks (0%, 95%CI 0-0.9); compared with 10 leaks reported in 649 patients (1.5%, 95%CI 7-28) from four trials. This risk difference of 1.55% corresponds to a Number needed to treat (NNT) of 66. Two individual trials reported leak rates of 2-3% which were statistically significantly different to the case series leak rate (p<0.05). Mean operative time was 170 minutes (95%CI 163-177) (p<0.05) using the modified functional end-end anastomosis and stapled: 67 minutes (95%CI 59-74) and hand-sutured: 80 minutes (95%CI 70-90).

Conclusions: The increased operative time performing our modified stapled functional end-end anastomosis is associated with a very low leak rate compared with stapled or hand-sutured anastomosis.  


Keywords


Anastomotic leak, Leak, Ileostomy closure, Operative time, Ileostomy reversal

Full Text:

PDF

References


Bax TW, McNevin MS. The value of diverting loop ileostomy on the high-risk colon and rectal anastomosis. Am J Surg. 2007;193(5):585-7.

Metcalf AM, Dozois RR, Beart RW Jr, Kelly KA, Wolff BG. Temporary ileostomy for ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Function and complications. Dis Colon Rectum. 1986;29(5):300-3.

Ballester M, Marín JA, Franco E, Paredes MP, García ML, Baldó MJ, et al. Protective ileostomy: complications and mortality associated with its closure. Rev Esp Enferm Dig. 2012;104(7):350-4.

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(2):207-14.

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(1):52-60.

Williams LA, Sagar PM, Finan PJ, Burke D. The outcome of loop ileostomy closure: a prospective study. Colorectal Dis. 2008;10(5):460-4.

Sharma A, Deeb AP, Rickles AS, Iannuzzi JC, Monson JR, Fleming FJ. Closure of defunctioning loop ileostomy is associated with considerable morbidity. Colorectal Dis. 2013;15(4):458-62.

Chun LJ, Haigh PI, Tam MS, Abbas MA. Defunctioning loop ileostomy for pelvic anastomoses: predictors of morbidity and nonclosure. Dis Colon Rectum. 2012;55(2):167-74.

Zelkowicz B, Cazador A, Coll R, Pujol F, Grillo A, Palol M. Morbidity and mortality associated with diverting ileostomy closures in rectal cancer surgery. Cir Esp. 2008;84(1):16-9.

Perez RO, Gama A, Seid VE, Proscurshim I, Sousa AH, Kiss DR, et al. Loop ileostomy morbidity: timing of closure matters. Dis Colon Rectum. 2006;49(10):1539-45.

Dinc B, Ay N, Ciyiltepe H. Comparing methods of ileostomy closure constructed in colorectal surgery in Turkey. Prz Gastroenterol. 2014;9(5):291-6.

Cipe G, Erkek B, Kuzu A, Gecim E. Morbidity and mortality after the closure of a protective loop ileostomy: analysis of possible predictors. Hepatogastroenterology. 2012;59(119):2168-72.

Gessler B, Haglind E, Angenete E. Loop ileostomies in colorectal cancer patients--morbidity and risk factors for nonreversal. J Surg Res. 2012;178(2):708-14.

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(6):711-23.

Sajid MS, Craciunas L, Baig MK, Sains P. Systematic review and meta-analysis of published, randomized, controlled trials comparing suture anastomosis to stapled anastomosis for ileostomy closure. Tech Coloproctol. 2013;17(6):631-9.

Löffler T, Rossion I, Bruckner T, Diener MK, Koch M, Frankenberg M, et al. HAnd Suture Versus STApling for Closure of Loop Ileostomy (HASTA Trial): results of a multicenter randomized trial (DRKS00000040). Ann Surg. 2012 Nov;256(5):828-35; discussion 835-6. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318272df97. Erratum in: Ann Surg. 2013;257(3):577.

Gong J, Guo Z, Li Y, Gu L, Zhu W, Li J, et al. Stapled vs hand suture closure of loop ileostomy: a meta-analysis. Colorectal Dis. 2013;15(10):561-8.

Markides GA, Wijetunga IU, Brown SR, Anwar S. Meta-analysis of handsewn versus stapled reversal of loop ileostomy. ANZ J Surg. 2015;85(4):217-24.

Leung TT, MacLean AR, Buie WD, Dixon E. Comparison of stapled versus handsewn loop ileostomy closure: a meta-analysis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2008;12(5):939-44.

Hull TL, Kobe I, Fazio VW. Comparison of handsewn with stapled loop ileostomy closures. Dis Colon Rectum. 1996;39(10):1086-9.

Hasegawa H, Radley S, Morton DG, Keighley MR. Stapled versus sutured closure of loop ileostomy: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2000;231(2):202-4.

Shelygin YA, Chernyshov SV, Rybakov EG. Stapled ileostomy closure results in reduction of postoperative morbidity. Tech Coloproctol. 2010;14(1):19-23.

Löffler T, Rossion I, Gooßen K, Saure D, Weitz J, Ulrich A, et al. Hand suture versus stapler for closure of loop ileostomy--a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2015;400(2):193-205.

Wong KS, Remzi FH, Gorgun E, Arrigain S, Church JM, Preen M, et al. Loop ileostomy closure after restorative proctocolectomy: outcome in 1,504 patients. Dis Colon Rectum. 2005;48(2):243-50.

Damen N, Spilsbury K, Levitt M, Makin G, Salama P, Tan P, et al. Anastomotic leaks in colorectal surgery. ANZ J Surg. 2014;84(10):763-8.

Lipska MA, Bissett IP, Parry BR, Merrie AE. Anastomotic leakage after lower gastrointestinal anastomosis: men are at a higher risk. ANZ J Surg. 2006;76(7):579-85.

Alves A, Panis Y, Trancart D, Regimbeau JM, Pocard M, Valleur P. Factors associated with clinically significant anastomotic leakage after large bowel resection: multivariate analysis of 707 patients. World J Surg. 2002;26(4):499-502.

Telem DA, Chin EH, Nguyen SQ, Divino CM. Risk factors for anastomotic leak following colorectal surgery: a case-control study. Arch Surg. 2010;145(4):371-6.

Faunø L, Rasmussen C, Sloth KK, Sloth AM, Tøttrup A. Low complication rate after stoma closure. Consultants attended 90% of the operations. Colorectal Dis. 2012;14(8):499-505.

Mäkelä JT, Kiviniemi H, Laitinen S. Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after left-sided colorectal resection with rectal anastomosis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2003;46(5):653-60.

Poskus E, Kildusis E, Smolskas E, Ambrazevicius M, Strupas K. Complications after Loop Ileostomy Closure: A Retrospective Analysis of 132 Patients. Viszeralmedizin. 2014;30(4):276-80.

Pokorny H, Herkner H, Jakesz R, Herbst F. Mortality and complications after stoma closure. Arch Surg. 2005;140(10):956-60.

Butterly L, Robinson CM, Anderson JC, Weiss JE, Goodrich M, et al. Serrated and adenomatous polyp detection increases with longer withdrawal time: results from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry. Am J Gastroenterol. 2014;109(3):417-26.

Lee TJ, Blanks RG, Rees CJ, Wright KC, Nickerson C, Moss SM, et al. Longer mean colonoscopy withdrawal time is associated with increased adenoma detection: evidence from the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme in England. Endoscopy. 2013;45(1):20-6.

Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Greenlaw RL. Effect of a time-dependent colonoscopic withdrawal protocol on adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;6(10):1091-8.