Bulut Alisina, Attaallah Wafi
General Surgery, Bogazici Academy for Clinical Sciences, Istanbul, TUR.
General and Colorectal Surgery, Marmara University School of Medicine, Istanbul, TUR.
Cureus. 2022 Nov 2;14(11):e30997. doi: 10.7759/cureus.30997. eCollection 2022 Nov.
Purpose Diverting ileostomies are commonly performed to prevent morbidity and mortality caused by colorectal anastomotic leakage. However, many complications may develop due to loop ileostomy itself and its reversal. In this study, we aimed to compare the outcomes of completely diverted tube ileostomy and conventional loop ileostomy. Methods The study was designed prospectively, and operations were performed by the same surgeon at a single center. Completely diverted tube ileostomy with the rubber strip was performed in 20 consecutive patients, and loop ileostomy was performed in the next 20 consecutive patients who needed diverting stoma. The primary outcome of the study is to compare the overall complication rates in both techniques. Length of hospital stay, achieving complete diversion, and length of time with a stoma were evaluated as secondary outcomes. Results There were no significant differences in the demographic characteristics between the two groups. Complete diversion was achieved in both groups. The number of patients who developed any kind of complications during the observation period was significantly higher in the loop ileostomy group in comparison with the tube ileostomy group (13 (65%) versus 3 (15%), respectively (p=0.002)). The median time with a stoma was significantly higher in the loop ileostomy group compared to the tube ileostomy group (270 days (range: 56-443) versus 21 days (range: 14-28), respectively (p<0.001)). Conclusion Completely diverted tube ileostomy causes fewer complications, provides a cost advantage, and does not require surgery for stoma closure.
目的 回肠造口转流术常用于预防结直肠吻合口漏导致的发病和死亡。然而,由于袢式回肠造口术本身及其回纳手术,可能会出现许多并发症。在本研究中,我们旨在比较完全转流的管式回肠造口术和传统袢式回肠造口术的结果。方法 本研究为前瞻性设计,手术由同一外科医生在单一中心进行。连续20例患者接受带橡胶条的完全转流管式回肠造口术,随后连续20例需要造口转流的患者接受袢式回肠造口术。本研究的主要结果是比较两种技术的总体并发症发生率。住院时间、实现完全转流情况以及造口留置时间作为次要结果进行评估。结果 两组患者的人口统计学特征无显著差异。两组均实现了完全转流。观察期内出现任何并发症的患者数量,袢式回肠造口术组显著高于管式回肠造口术组(分别为13例(65%)和3例(15%),p = 0.002)。袢式回肠造口术组的造口留置时间中位数显著高于管式回肠造口术组(分别为270天(范围:56 - 443天)和21天(范围:14 - 28天),p < 0.001)。结论 完全转流管式回肠造口术并发症更少,具有成本优势,且无需进行造口关闭手术。