10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Loop ileostomy versus loop colostomy for fecal diversion after colorectal or coloanal anastomosis: a meta-analysis.

      International Journal of Colorectal Disease
      Anal Canal, surgery, Anastomosis, Surgical, Colostomy, Feces, Humans, Ileostomy, Rectum

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Sphincter-saving surgery for the treatment of middle and low rectal cancer has spread considerably when total mesorectal excision became standard treatment. In order to reduce leakage-related complications, surgeons often perform a derivative stoma, a loop ileostomy (LI), or a loop colostomy (LC), but to date, there is no evidence on which is the better technique to adopt. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials until 2007 and observational studies comparing temporary LI and LC for temporary decompression of colorectal and/or coloanal anastomoses. Clinically relevant events were grouped into four study outcomes: general outcome measures: dehydratation and wound infection GOM construction of the stoma outcome measures: parastomal hernia, stenosis, sepsis, prolapse, retraction, necrosis, and hemorrhage closure of the stoma outcome measures: anastomotic leak or fistula, wound infection COM, occlusion and hernia functioning of the stoma outcome measures: occlusion and skin irritation. Twelve comparative studies were included in this analysis, five randomized controlled trials and seven observational studies. Overall, the included studies reported on 1,529 patients, 894 (58.5%) undergoing defunctioning LI. LI reduced the risk of construction of the stoma outcome measure (odds ratio, OR = 0.47). Specifically, patients undergoing LI had a lower risk of prolapse (OR = 0.21) and sepsis (OR = 0.54). LI was associated with an excess risk of occlusion after stoma closure (OR = 2.13) and dehydratation (OR = 4.61). No other significant difference was found for outcomes. Our overview shows that LI is associated with a lower risk of construction of the stoma outcome measures.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          19219439
          10.1007/s00384-009-0662-x

          Chemistry
          Anal Canal,surgery,Anastomosis, Surgical,Colostomy,Feces,Humans,Ileostomy,Rectum
          Chemistry
          Anal Canal, surgery, Anastomosis, Surgical, Colostomy, Feces, Humans, Ileostomy, Rectum

          Comments

          Comment on this article