Celayir Mustafa F, Tanal Mert, Besler Evren, Koksal Hakan
General Surgery, Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Training and Research Hospital, University of Health Sciences, Istanbul, TUR.
Cureus. 2020 Oct 16;12(10):e10977. doi: 10.7759/cureus.10977.
Objective Anastomotic leaks can be very dangerous in colorectal cancers. Protective loop ileostomy is life-saving in low anterior rectal tumors to prevent pelvic sepsis. The aim of this study is to compare early morbidities for stapled, handsewn closure (end to end) or handsewn closure (anterior wall only) of loop ileostomy, and to further assess efficacy and safety for each technique. Methods Patients who underwent loop ileostomy closure from January 2014 and December 2019 retrospectively were analyzed. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the effect of the potential risk factors on the rate of each complication. The patients were divided into three groups based on the anastomoses. The first group included patients who had handsewn anterior closure; the second group included patients who had side-to-side anastomosis using linear stapler, and the third group included patients who had end-to-end handsewn anastomosis. The primary endpoint of the study was the postoperative 30 days. IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), version 22.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) was used for statistical analysis. Results A total of 198 patients underwent reversal. There was a statistical difference between the handsewn anterior wall and stapler anastomosis in terms of postoperative ileus and wound infection. The handsewn group was superior to anastomosis with stapler (p: 0.027 and p: 0.042, respectively). A statistical difference was found between handsewn anterior wall closure and handsewn end-to-end anastomosis in terms of postoperative ileus, wound infection, and postoperative hospital stay (p: 0.013, p: 0.037, and p: 0.046, respectively). When stapled anastomosis and handsewn end-to-end anastomosis techniques were compared, a statistical difference was found in terms of postoperative ileus risk (p: 0.043), but no significant difference was found in terms of postoperative wound infection and hospital stay. Conclusions There was no significant difference in the rate of anastomotic leakage between the handsewn and stapled techniques. The rate of small-bowel obstruction was higher in the handsewn group. As a result, in this study, it was revealed that the handsewn anterior wall closure technique is the best among all ileostomy closure techniques.
目的 吻合口漏在结直肠癌中可能非常危险。保护性回肠袢式造口术对低位直肠肿瘤患者可挽救生命,以预防盆腔感染。本研究的目的是比较袢式回肠造口术的吻合器吻合、手工缝合(端端吻合)或手工缝合(仅前壁吻合)的早期发病率,并进一步评估每种技术的疗效和安全性。方法 回顾性分析2014年1月至2019年12月期间接受袢式回肠造口术关闭的患者。采用多因素逻辑回归分析确定潜在危险因素对每种并发症发生率的影响。根据吻合方式将患者分为三组。第一组包括行手工缝合前壁关闭的患者;第二组包括使用直线吻合器行侧侧吻合的患者;第三组包括行端端手工缝合吻合的患者。本研究的主要终点为术后30天。使用IBM社会科学统计软件包(SPSS)22.0版(SPSS公司,伊利诺伊州芝加哥)进行统计分析。结果 共有198例患者接受了造口回纳术。手工缝合前壁与吻合器吻合在术后肠梗阻和伤口感染方面存在统计学差异。手工缝合组优于吻合器吻合组(p值分别为0.027和0.042)。手工缝合前壁关闭与手工端端吻合在术后肠梗阻、伤口感染和术后住院时间方面存在统计学差异(p值分别为0.013、0.037和0.046)。比较吻合器吻合与手工端端吻合技术时,在术后肠梗阻风险方面存在统计学差异(p值为0.043),但在术后伤口感染和住院时间方面未发现显著差异。结论 手工缝合和吻合器技术在吻合口漏发生率上无显著差异。手工缝合组小肠梗阻发生率较高。因此,本研究表明,手工缝合前壁关闭技术是所有回肠造口关闭技术中最好的。