Search

Introduction: The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of preoperative bowel stimulation on the development of postoperative ileus (POI) after loop ileostomy closure., Methods: This was a multicenter, randomized controlled trial (NCT025596350) including adult (≥ 18 years old) patients who underwent elective loop ileostomy closure at 7 participating hospitals. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using a centralized computer-generated sequence with block randomization to either preoperative bowel stimulation or no stimulation (control group). Bowel stimulation consisted of 10 outpatient sessions within the 3 weeks prior to ileostomy closure and was performed by trained Enterostomal Therapy nurses. The primary outcome was POI, defined as an intolerance to oral food in the absence of clinical or radiological signs of obstruction, on or after postoperative day 3, that either (a) required nasogastric tube insertion; or (b) was associated with two of the following: nausea/vomiting, abdominal distension, or the absence of flatus., Results: Between January 2017 and November 2020, 101 patients were randomized, and 5 patients never underwent ileostomy closure; thus, 96 patients (47 stimulated vs. 49 control) were analyzed according to a modified intention-to-treat protocol. Baseline characteristics were well balanced in both groups. The incidence of POI was lower among patients randomized to stimulation (6.4% vs. 24.5%, p = 0.034; unadjusted RR: 0.26, 95% CI 0.078-0.87). Stimulated patients also had earlier median time to first flatus (2.0 days (1.0-2.0) vs. 2.0 days (2.0-3.0), p = 0.025), were more likely to pass flatus on postoperative day 1 (46.8% vs. 22.4%, p = 0.022), and had a shorter median postoperative hospital stay (3.0 days (2.0-3.5) vs. 4.0 days (2.0-6.0), p = 0.003)., Conclusions: Preoperative bowel stimulation via the efferent limb of the ileostomy reduced POI after elective loop ileostomy closure., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) and colonic lavage has emerged as a valid alternative to total abdominal colectomy (TAC) for the surgical management of Clostridioides difficile colitis (CDC). However, little data are available on outcomes beyond the index admission. The objective of this study was to compare post-discharge outcomes between patients who underwent DLI and TAC for CDC., Methods: Adult patients who underwent DLI or TAC for CDC between 2011 and 2016 were identified from the Nationwide Readmissions Database, and only discharges between January and September in each calendar year were included to allow for a 90-day follow-up period for all cases. Ninety-day overall in-hospital mortality (index admission mortality plus 90-day post-discharge mortality) and 90-day unplanned readmissions were compared. To assess 6-month ileostomy reversal rates, the cohort was then truncated to exclude discharges after June in each calendar year. Multivariate regression was used to adjust for patient demographics and disease severity., Results: In total, 2070 patients were discharged between January and September of each included year: 1486 (71.8%) TAC compared to 584 (28.2%) DLI. Overall in-hospital mortality was higher among patients who underwent TAC (34.5% vs. 27.7%, p = 0.004); however, this association did not remain on multivariate regression (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.91-1.43). Among the 1434 patients who were discharged alive, the 90-day unplanned readmission rate was similar in both groups (TAC: 26.1% vs. DLI: 23.1%, p = 0.26). After truncating the cohort to those patients discharged alive between January and June of each included year (n = 1016), patients who underwent DLI had a significantly greater 6-month ileostomy reversal rate (26.4% vs. 8.3%, p < 0.001). DLI was independently associated with higher odds of 6-month ileostomy reversal (OR 2.68, 95% CI 1.80-4.00)., Conclusions: In the surgical management of CDC, DLI is associated with equivalent mortality and unplanned readmission, but greater likelihood of 6-month ileostomy reversal, compared to TAC.

Background: Dehydration is the most common morbidity following creation of a diverting loop ileostomy (DLI). We aimed to develop and validate a prediction model and web-based risk calculator for readmission for dehydration following DLI creation., Methods: After institutional review board approval, we retrospectively reviewed the American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database between 2012 and 2017. Adult patients (> 18 years) who underwent DLI with a resection for colorectal cancer, inflammatory bowel disease, or diverticulitis were identified. Patient demographics, operative and postoperative data were collected. The final prediction model, developed in 60% of the cohort (training set) and which modeled the 30-day cumulative incidence of readmission for dehydration, was selected using highest area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) criterion. Model calibration was assessed with the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test. The model was then assessed in validation and test sets, using 20% of the cohort for each., Results: Of 25,638 patients in the ACS-NSQIP database who met inclusion criteria, 15,222 patients were randomly selected for the training set. The incidence of readmission for dehydration in this cohort was 2.1%. The final model with the highest AUC retained 12 candidate variables: age, sex, smoking status, diabetes, hypertension, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, type of admission, underlying diagnosis, procedure performed, operative time, index admission length of stay, and major morbidity. The model demonstrated good discrimination (AUC 0.76, 95% CI 0.74-0.79) and the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test confirmed good calibration (p = 0.50). Five-thousand and seventy-three patients were available for the validation and test sets, respectively, and the model remained strong in both the validation and test sets (AUCs of 0.73 and 0.73, respectively). The prediction model was then converted into a web-based risk calculator., Conclusions: A prediction model and web-based risk calculator for readmission for dehydration after DLI creation was developed and validated, demonstrating good predictive capabilities.

Introduction: Postoperative ileus (POI) is regarded as the most clinically significant morbidity following loop ileostomy closure; however, its incidence remains poorly understood. Our objective was therefore to determine the pooled incidence of POI after loop ileostomy closure and identify risk factors associated with its development., Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE (via Ovid and PubMed), Embase, the Cochrane Library, Biosis Previews, and Scopus to identify studies reporting the incidence of POI in patients who underwent loop ileostomy closure. Two independent reviewers extracted data and appraised study quality. Cumulative incidence proportions were pooled across studies using a random-effects meta-analytic model., Results: Sixty-seven studies, including 9528 patients, met our inclusion criteria. The pooled estimate of POI was 8.0% (95% CI 6.9-9.3%; I 2  = 74%). The estimated incidence varied by POI definition: studies with a robust definition of POI (n = 8) demonstrated the highest estimate of POI (12.4%, 95% CI 9.2-16.5%; I 2  = 79%) while studies that did not report an explicit POI definition (n = 38) demonstrated the lowest estimate (6.7%, 95% CI 5.3-8.3%; I 2  = 61%). Small bowel anastomosis technique (hand-sewn) and interval time from ileostomy creation to closure (longer time) were the factors most commonly associated with POI after loop ileostomy closure. However, most comparative studies were not powered to examine risk factors for POI., Conclusions: POI is an important complication after loop ileostomy closure, and its incidence is dependent on its definition. More research aimed at studying this complication is required to better understand risk factors for POI after loop ileostomy closure.

The term “evidence-based medicine” was first coined by Sackett and colleagues as “the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients.”1 The key to practising evidencebased medicine is applying the best current knowledge to decisions in individual patients. Medical knowledge is continually and rapidly expanding. For clinicians to practise evidence-based medicine, they must have the skills to read and interpret the medical literature so that they can determine the validity, reliability, credibility and utility of individual articles. These skills are known as critical appraisal skills, and they require some knowledge of biostatistics, clinical epidemiology, decision analysis and economics, and clinical knowledge. Evidence Based Reviews in Surgery (EBRS) is a program jointly sponsored by the Canadian Association of General Surgeons (CAGS) and the American College of Surgeons (ACS). The primary objective of EBRS is to help practising surgeons improve their critical appraisal skills. During the academic year, 8 clinical articles are chosen for review and discussion. They are selected for their clinical relevance to general surgeons and because they cover a spectrum of issues im -port ant to surgeons, including causation or risk factors for disease, natural history or prognosis of disease, how to quantify disease, diagnostic tests, early diagnosis and the effectiveness of treatment. A methodological article guides the reader in critical appraisal of the clinical article. Methodological and clinical reviews of the article are performed by experts in the relevant areas and posted on the EBRS website, where they are archived indefinitely. In addition, a listserv allows participants to discuss the monthly article. Surgeons who participate in the monthly packages can obtain Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada Maintenance of Certification credits and/or continuing medical education credits for the current article only by reading the monthly articles, participating in the listserv discussion, reading the methodological and clinical reviews and completing the monthly online evaluation and multiple choice questions. We hope readers will find EBRS useful in improving their critical appraisal skills and in keeping abreast of new developments in general surgery. Four reviews are published in condensed versions in the Canadian Journal of Surgery, 4 are published in the Journal of the American College of Surgeons and 4 are published in Diseases of the Colon and Rectum. For further information about EBRS, please refer to the CAGS or ACS websites. Questions and comments can be directed to the program administrator, Marg McKenzie, at mmckenzie@mtsinai.on.ca.

Background: Early ileostomy closure (EIC), ≤ 2 weeks from creation, is a relatively new practice. Multiple studies have demonstrated that this approach is safe, feasible, and cost-effective. Despite the demonstrated benefits, this is neither routine practice, nor has it been studied, in North America. This study aimed to assess patient and surgeon perspectives about EIC. Methods: A mixed-methods, cross-sectional study of patients and surgeons was performed. Rectal cancer survivors from a single institution who underwent restorative proctectomy with diverting loop ileostomy and subsequent closure within the last 5 years were contacted. North American surgeons with high rectal cancer volumes (> 20 cases/year) were included. Surveys (patients) and semi-structured interviews (surgeons) were conducted. Analysis employed descriptive statistics and thematic analysis, respectively. Results: Forty-eight patients were surveyed (mean age 65.1 ± 11.8 years; 54.2% male). Stoma closure occurred after a median of 7.7 months (IQR 4.8–10.9) and 50.0% (24) found it "difficult" or "very difficult" to live with their stoma. Patients considered improvement in quality of life and quicker return to normal function the most important advantages of EIC, whereas the idea of two operations in two weeks being too taxing on the body was deemed the biggest disadvantage. Most patients (35, 72.9%) would have opted for EIC. Surgeon interviews (15) revealed 4 overarching themes: (1) there are many benefits to EIC; (2) specific patient characteristics would make EIC an appropriate option; (3) many barriers to implementing EIC exist; and (4) many logistical hurdles need to be addressed for successful implementation. Most surgeons (12, 80.0%) would "definitely want to participate" in a North American randomized-controlled trial (RCT) on EIC for rectal cancer patients. Conclusions: Implementing EIC poses many logistical challenges. Both patients and surgeons are interested in further exploring EIC and believe it warrants a North American RCT to motivate a change in practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Laparoscopic total proctocolectomy (TPC) with or without ileoanal pouch is a major operation for which the traditional benefits of laparoscopy were not immediately apparent, in part due to the longer operating times. The use of energy devices has been shown to improve operative outcomes for patients who undergo laparoscopic segmental colectomies, but there are limited data for laparoscopic TPC (LTPC).Methods: All patients who underwent LTPC between January 2002 and July 2011 were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional-review-board-approved database. Univariate and multiple linear regression analyses were performed to assess the impact of electrothermal bipolar vessel sealers (EBVS) for vessel ligation on operative time. Secondary outcomes included vessel ligation failures, estimated blood loss, and other intra- and postoperative outcomes.Results: One hundred and forty-five patients underwent LTPC, including 126 restorative ileoanal pouch and diverting ileostomy operations and 19 TPC and end ileostomy procedures. Fifteen percent of LTPCs were totally laparoscopic, 45 % were laparoscopic-assisted, 32 % were hand-assisted, and 8 % were laparoscopic-converted cases. Laparoscopic vessel ligation was performed using EBVS (76 %), endoscopic staplers (12 %), or hybrid techniques (12 %). Vessel ligation groups were similar in demographics, body mass index, surgical indication, immunosuppression, and prior surgery. EBVS were associated with shorter median operative times (247 vs. 290 vs. 300 min, p = 0.018) and fewer vessel ligation failures (1 vs. 11 vs. 12 %, p = 0.027) compared with endoscopic staplers and hybrid techniques, respectively. There were no differences in estimated blood loss and intra-operative complications among the three groups. Length of stay, 30-day morbidity, and 30-day re-operation rates were also similar. On multiple linear regression analysis, EBVS were a significant predictor of operative time (p = 0.019).Conclusions: Routine use of electrothermal bipolar vessel ligation for LTPC is associated with shorter operative time and fewer vessel ligation failures without higher risk of complications than other vessel control methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a study on reduction in mortality of patients with severe Clostridium difficile-associated disease (CDAD) with the use of colon-sparing diverting ileostomy with colonic lavage as an alternative to cloectomy. It mentions about the Turnbull-Blowhole colectomy and increase in surgical intervention. Also mentions that the study found reduced mortality in CDAD patients when treated using ileostomy.