Double-Barreled Wet Colostomy versus Ileal Conduit and Terminal Colostomy for Urinary and Fecal Diversion: A Single Institution Experience.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The aim of this study was to compare the feasibility and early postoperative outcomes between patients undergoing double-barreled wet colostomy and patients undergoing terminal colostomy and ileal conduit for simultaneous urinary and fecal diversion.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between 1995 and 2012, we had 181 patients in whom it was necessary to make simultaneous urinary and fecal diversion. This is a retrospective study and patients were divided into two groups, depending on the technique applied for the fecal and urinary diversion. The first group consisted of patients undergoing ileal conduit and terminal colostomy and the second group consisted of patients undergoing  double-barreled wet colostomy.

RESULTS

Ileal conduit and terminal colostomy was performed in 77 (43%) cases, while wet colostomy was performed in 104 (57%) cases. Median length of stay was shorter for double-barreled wet colostomy (13.1 vs 18.1, p < 0.0001). Median operating times for urinary and fecal diversion were shorter for double-barreled wet colostomy (32 vs 64 min, p < 0.0001). The morbidity was lower for double-barreled wet colostomy (11.5% vs 23.4%, p = 0.0432), retrospectively. The mortality was 3.8% for double-barreled wet colostomy and 10.3% for ileal conduit and terminal colostomy group (p = 0.1282).

CONCLUSIONS

Double-barreled wet colostomy is a safe, fast, and simple alternative to traditional ileal conduit and terminal colostomy diversion. The technique is relatively easy to learn, and it reduces the time for urinary and fecal diversion, length of stay, and morbidity rate.