New use of an absorbable adhesion barrier (INTERCEED) for temporary diverting ileostomy in minimally invasive rectal surgery

Objectives: Sometimes, severe adhesion occurs between the rectus abdominis muscle and the ileal intestinal limbs after temporary diverting ileostomy. This can make ileostomy reversal difficult. The aim of the present study is to assess whether absorbable adhesion barrier made of oxidized regenerated cellulose (INTERCEED) could contribute to improved surgical outcomes in stoma reversal. Methods: This was a single-institutional retrospective study. A total of 36 consecutive patients who underwent ileostomy reversal by a single surgeon were retrospectively reviewed. INTERCEED was inserted between the ileal limbs and the rectus abdominis muscle at the time of ileostomy creation in 12 patients. Surgical outcomes of the ileostomy reversal were compared between patients treated with and without INTERCEED. Results:The degree of adhesion formation between the ileal limbs and the rectus abdominis muscles, operating time, and estimated blood loss were significantly reduced in patients treated with INTERCEED compared with those treated by the conventional approach. None of the patients in the INTERCEED group had postoperative complications after the initial surgery and ileostomy reversal. Conclusions: INTERCEED is suitable for insertion between the ileal limbs and the rectus abdominis muscles because of its softness and flexibility. The use of INTERCEED for diverting ileostomy contributes to reduced adhesion formation, operative time, and blood loss in patients, and further research is needed to confirm our results. (AU)

The Significance of Diverting Ileostomy during Restorative Proctocolectomy

PURPOSE: Restorative proctocolectomy (RP) is a standard surgery in patients with ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis. Usually, diverting ileostomy is performed to protect an ileoanal anastomosis with RP. However, there are many controversies whether diverting ileostomy might urgently be needed. This study was performed to compare postoperative complications after RP with or without diverting ileostomy. METHODS: Between July 1994 and June 2001, 77 (M : F= 45 : 32) patients underwent RP. The indication criteria for diverting ileostomy included tension at the anastomosis, positive leakage test, compromised blood flow in the ileal pouch, long-term and high-dose steroid use, and severe rectal inflammation in ulcerative colitis patients. RESULTS: Histopathologic diagnoses revealed 45 ulcerative colitis, 23 familial adenomatous polyposis, 5 rectal cancer, and 4 hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Diverting ileostomies were performed in 40 patients (51.9%) and closed approximately 4 months later. Fourty eight complications were present in 32 patients. There was no perioperative death. There was no difference in perioperative outcome, morbidity or functional status between patients with and without ileostomy. However, in ulcerative colitis patients, anastomosis leakage was more frequent in patients without ileostomy. CONCLUSIONS: Restorative proctocolectomy can be safely performed without diverting ileostomy in most cases of RP. However, diverting ileostomy may reduce anastomosis leakage in patients with ulcerative colitis.