ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Loop ileostomy closure is a common procedure in colorectal surgery. Often seen as a simple operation associated with a low complication rate, it still leads to lengthy hospitalizations. Reducing postoperative complications and ileus rates could lead to a shorter length of stay and even ambulatory surgery. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the safety and feasibility of ileostomy closure performed in a 23-hour hospitalization setting using a standardized enhanced recovery pathway. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTINGS: Two high-volume colorectal surgery centers. PATIENTS: Healthy adults undergoing elective ileostomy closure from July 2019 to January 2022. INTERVENTION: All patients were enrolled in a standardized enhanced recovery pathway specific to ileostomy closure, including daily irrigation of efferent limb with a nutritional formula for 7 days before surgery. Patients were randomly allocated to either conventional hospitalization (n = 23) or a 23-hour stay (n = 24). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was total length of stay and secondary outcomes were 30-day rates of readmission, postoperative ileus, surgical site infections, and postoperative morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 47 patients were ultimately randomly allocated. Patients in the 23-hour hospitalization arm had a shorter median length of stay (1 vs 2 days, p = 0.02) and similar rates of readmission (4% vs 13%, p = 0.35), postoperative ileus (none in both arms), surgical site infection (0% vs 4%, p = 0.49), postoperative morbidity (21% vs 22%, p = 1.00), and mortality (none in both arms). LIMITATIONS: Due to coronavirus disease 2019, access to surgical beds was greatly limited, leading to a shift toward ambulatory surgery for ileostomy closure. The study was terminated early, which affected its statistical power. CONCLUSION: Loop ileostomy closures as 23-hour stay procedures are feasible and safe. Ileus rate might be reduced by preoperative intestinal stimulation with nutritional formula through the stoma's efferent limb, although specific randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm this association. See Video Abstract . CIERRE DE ILEOSTOMA EN ASA COMO PROCEDIMIENTO AMBULATORIO DE HORAS CON ESTMULO PREOPERATORIO ENTERAL EFERENTE ESTUDIO ALEATORIO CONTROLADO: ANTECEDENTES:El cierre de la ileostomía en asa es un procedimiento común en la cirugía colorrectal. A menudo vista como una operación simple asociada con bajas tasas de complicaciones, aún conduce a largas hospitalizaciones. La reducción de las complicaciones postoperatorias y las tasas de íleo podría conducir a una estadía hospitalaria más corta o incluso a una cirugía ambulatoria.OBJETIVOS:El presente estudio pretende evaluar la seguridad y la viabilidad del cierre de ileostomía realizadas en un entorno de hospitalización de 23 horas utilizando una vía de recuperación mejorada y estandarizada.DISEÑO:Estudio aleatorio controladoAJUSTES:Dos centros de cirugía colorrectal de gran volúmenPACIENTES:Adultos sanos sometidos a cierre electivo de ileostomía, desde Julio de 2019 hasta Enero de 2022.INTERVENCIÓN:Todos los pacientes fueron inscritos en una vía de recuperación mejorada y estandarizada específica para el cierre de la ileostomía, incluyendo la irrigación diaria de la extremidad eferente del intestino asociada a una fórmula nutricional durante 7 días previos a la cirugía. Los pacientes fueron asignados aleatoriamente en hospitalización convencional (n = 23) o a una estadía de 23 horas (n = 24).PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado primario fue la duración total de la estadía hospitalaria y los resultados secundarios fueron las tasas de reingreso a los 30 días, el íleo postoperatorio, las infecciones de la herida quirúrgica, la morbilidad y mortalidad postoperatorias.RESULTADOS:Finalmente fueron randomizados un total de 47 pacientes. Aquellos que se encontraban en el grupo de hospitalización de 23 horas tuvieron una estadía media más corta (1 día versus 2 días, p = 0,02) y tasas similares de reingreso (4% vs 13%, p = 0,35), de íleo postoperatorio (ninguno en ambos brazos), de infección del sitio quirúrgico (0 vs 4%, p = 0,49), de morbilidad postoperatoria (21% vs 22%, p > 0,99) y de mortalidad (ninguna en ambos brazos).LIMITACIONES:Debido a la pandemia SARS CoV-2, el acceso a las camas quirúrgicas fue muy limitado, lo que llevó a un cambio hacia la cirugía ambulatoria para el cierre de ileostomías. El estudio finalizó anticipadamente, lo que afectó su poder estadístico.CONCLUSIÓN:Los cierres de ileostomía en asa como procedimientos de estadía de 23 horas son factibles y seguros. La tasa de íleo podría reducirse mediante la estimulación intestinal preoperatoria a través de la rama eferente del estoma asociada a fórmulas nutricionales, por lo que se necesitan estudios randomizados específicos para confirmar esta asociación. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo ).
Subject(s)
Digestive System Surgical Procedures , Ileus , Adult , Humans , Hospitalization , Ileostomy , Ileus/epidemiology , Ileus/prevention & control , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Surgical Wound InfectionABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The role of MRI-detected EMVI (mrEMVI) as a reliable prognostic factor in rectal cancer has been emphasized in recent years but this finding remains underreported by many institutions. OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to demonstrate the importance of pre- and post-treatment MRI-detected EMVI as independent prognostic factors of adverse oncologic outcomes in patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy followed by total mesorectal excision. METHODS: This review was designed using the PRISMA guidelines. The following electronic databases were searched from January 2002 to January 2020: CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, and Ovid Embase. Main outcomes included DFS and overall survival (OS). Other outcomes of interest comprised positive resection margin and synchronous metastases. RESULTS: Seventeen studies involving a total of 3821 patients were included for data synthesis. For preneoadjuvant treatment mrEMVI, pooled hazard ratio (HR) estimate for DFS was 2.30 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.54-3.44) for higher recurrence in mrEMVI-positive patients. mrEMVI-positive patients were found to have a lower OS with a pooled HR of 1.68 (95%CI 1.27-2.22). Pooled risk ratio for synchronous metastasis was 4.11 (95%CI 2.80-6.02) for mrEMVI-positivity. For postneoadjuvant treatment EMVI (ymrEMVI), positive status showed a lower DFS with a pooled HR of 2.04 (95%CI 1.55-2.69). Risk ratio of having a positive resection margin status was 2.95 (95%CI 1.75-4.98) for ymrEMVI-positive patients. CONCLUSIONS: This review showed that oncologic outcomes are significantly worse for both pre- and post-neoadjuvant treatment mrEMVI-positive patients. MRI-detected EMVI should be consistently reported in rectal cancer staging and may provide guidance for the targeted use of additional systemic therapy.
