Department of General and Oncologic Surgery, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2011 Oct;396(7):997-1007. doi: 10.1007/s00423-011-0793-8. Epub 2011 Apr 9.
The aim of this study was to describe and evaluate the feasibility and the eventual advantages of ghost ileostomy (GI) versus covering stoma (CS) in terms of complications, hospital stay and quality of life of patients and their caregivers after anterior resection for rectal cancer.
In this prospective study, we included patients who had rectal cancer treated with laparotomic anterior resection and confectioning a stoma (GI or CS), in the period comprised between January 2008 and January 2009. Short-term and long-term surgery-related mortality and morbidity after primary surgery (including that stoma-related and colorectal anastomosis-related) and consequent to the intervention of intestinal recanalization (CS group) and GI closure were evaluated. We evaluated hospital stay and quality of life of patients and their caregivers.
Stoma-related morbidity rate was higher in the CS group than in GI group (37% vs. 5.5%, respectively, P = 0.04). Morbidity rate after intestinal recanalization in the CS group was 25.9% and 0% after GI closure (P = 0.08). Overall stoma morbidity rate was significantly lower in the GI group with respect to CS group (5.5% vs. 40.7%, respectively, P = 0.03). CS group was characterized by a significantly longer recovery time (P = 0.0002). Caregivers and stoma-related quality of life were better in the GI group than in CS group (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.0005, respectively).
GI is feasible, characterized by shorter recovery, lesser degree of total, as well as anastomosis-related morbidity and higher quality of life of patients and the caregivers in respect to CS. We suggest that GI (should be evaluated as an alternative to conventional ileostomy) could be indicated in selected patients that do not present risk factors, but require caution for anastomotic leakage for the low level of colorectal anastomosis.
本研究旨在描述和评估经肛门内镜微创手术(TEM)与传统经肛门手术(TaTME)治疗超低位直肠癌的短期及长期疗效差异。
回顾性分析 2016 年 1 月至 2019 年 1 月在我院行直肠癌根治术的 227 例超低位直肠癌患者的临床资料,根据手术方式不同分为 TEM 组(n=114)和 TaTME 组(n=113)。比较两组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、术后首次排气时间、术后住院时间、肿瘤学指标、吻合口漏发生率、局部复发率、保肛率、性功能及排尿功能障碍发生率等。
两组患者的一般资料比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。TEM 组的手术时间、术中出血量、术后首次排气时间及术后住院时间均明显短于 TaTME 组(P<0.05)。两组患者的肿瘤学指标(R0 切除率、淋巴结清扫数目)比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组患者的吻合口漏发生率、局部复发率及保肛率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。TEM 组患者的性功能及排尿功能障碍发生率明显低于 TaTME 组(P<0.05)。
TEM 治疗超低位直肠癌安全、有效,能够明显缩短手术时间、减少术中出血量、促进术后肠道功能恢复,且对患者的性功能及排尿功能影响较小。