Stoma-related complications and quality-of-life assessment: A cross-sectional study with patients from Ethiopia and Sweden.

BACKGROUND: The situation for patients with ostomy can be challenging, probably more in a resource-constrained environment. Our objective was to evaluate quality of life (QoL) (using EQ5D-5L) and stoma-specific QoL (using Stoma QoL) in a high- and low-income setting. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study from the Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital (TASH), Addis Ababa, and South General Hospital (SGH), Stockholm, patients with a permanent or temporary ostomy at TASH (EthioPerm), (EthioTemp), and patients with ostomy at SGH (SweSto) were included in October 2022-January 2023. RESULTS: Patients N = 66 were included in groups: EthioPerm N = 28, EthioTemp N = 17, and SweSto N = 21. In EthioTemp, 88% used homemade stoma bags. Although morbidity related to the nipple itself was similar in the groups, the overall score from Stoma QoL was significantly lower in EthioPerm, 48/100 than in SweSto, 74/100. Scores were significantly lower for pouch-related problems and social interactions in Ethiopian patients. In EthioPerm, 71% of the patients worried that they were a burden to the people close to them compared to 14% in SweSto (p < 0.001). Leakage was over four times more common in EthioPerm than in SweSto. Mean overall EQ5D-5L score was 18 percentage points lower than the national mean score in EthioPerm and 2 percentage points lower in SweSto. CONCLUSION: QoL was more affected in the Ethiopian study participants than in the Swedish, even when commercial stoma bags were available. The largest problems were leakage, embarrassment with social interactions, and pouch-related problems. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05970458 Clinicaltrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05970458?locStr=Ethiopia&country=Ethiopia&distance=50&cond=Stoma%20Ileostomy&rank=1.

PHaLIR: prevent hernia after loop ileostomy reversal-a study protocol for a randomized controlled multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Rectal cancer is a common cancer worldwide. Surgery for rectal cancer with low anterior resection often includes the formation of a temporary protective loop ileostomy. The temporary ostomy is later reversed in a separate operation. One complication following stoma closure is the development of a hernia at the former stoma site, and this has been reported in 7-15% of patients. The best method to avoid hernia after stoma closure is unclear. The most common closure is by suturing only, but different forms of mesh have been tried. Biological mesh has in a randomized trial halved hernia incidence after stoma reversal. Biosynthetic mesh and retromuscular mesh are currently being evaluated in ongoing studies. METHODS: The present multicenter, double-blinded, randomized, controlled study will compare standard suture closure of the abdominal wall in loop ileostomy reversal with retromuscular synthetic mesh at the stoma site. The study has been approved by the Regional Ethical Review board in Stockholm. Patients aged 18-90 years, operated on with low anterior resection and a protective loop ileostomy for rectal cancer and planned for ileostomy reversal, will be considered for inclusion in the study. Randomization will be 1:1 on the operation day with concealed envelopes. The estimated sample size is intended to evaluate the superiority of the experimental arm and to detect a reduction of hernia occurrence from 12 to 3%. The operation method is blinded to the patients and in the chart and for the observer at the 30-day follow-up. The main outcome is hernia occurrence at the stoma site within 3 years postoperatively, diagnosed through CT with strain. Secondary outcomes are operation time, length of hospital stay, pain, and 30-day complications. DISCUSSION: This double-blinded randomized controlled superiority study will compare retromuscular synthetic mesh during the closure of loop ileostomy to standard care. If this study can show a lower frequency of hernia with the use of prophylactic mesh, it may lead to new surgical guidelines during stoma closure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03720262. Registered on October 25, 2018.

Trends in Treatment of Colorectal Cancer and Short-term Outcomes During the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Sweden.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a large impact on health care systems, not least the treatment of malignant diseases, including colorectal cancer. Objective: To investigate the treatment of colorectal cancer and short-term outcomes during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, compared with the year before. Design, Setting, and Participants: This register-based cohort study used information from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry during the years 2020 and 2019. Patients were from the Stockholm-Gotland region, 1 of 6 health care regions in Sweden, with approximately one-fifth of the country's population and 8 hospitals. All patients with a diagnosis of colorectal cancer from March 1 to August 31, 2019, and March 1 to August 31, 2020, were eligible. Data were analyzed from May to June 2021. Exposures: Diagnosis of colorectal cancer during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: The study aimed to compare the number of patients, time to surgery, operation methods, short-term complications, and residents' involvement in surgical practice between 2019 and 2020. Subanalyses were conducted for colon and rectal cancer. Results: A total of 1140 patients (583 men [51%]; median [IQR] age, 74 [26-99] years in 2019 and 73 [24-96] years in 2020) were enrolled. Fewer patients received a diagnosis of colorectal cancer in March through August 2020 compared with the same months in 2019 (550 vs 590 patients). Overall, patient characteristics were similar, but pretherapeutic tumor stage was more advanced in 2020 compared with 2019, with an increased proportion of T4 tumors (30% [172 patients] vs 22% [132 patients]; χ23 = 21.1; P < .001). The proportion of patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery, time to surgery, and 30-day complications were similar, but the proportion of patients treated with ostomy almost doubled between 2019 and 2020, from 17% (53 patients) to 30% (96 patients) (absolute risk, 13.0%; 95% CI, 6.8% to 20.0%). Residents participated in fewer resections in 2020 than in 2019 (35% [108 patients] vs 27% [83 patients]; absolute risk, -7.90%; 95% CI, -15.00% to -0.55%). On the other hand, the treatment and outcomes for rectal cancer were comparable between the years. Significantly more patients were transferred to the nonemergency, COVID-free hospital in the region in 2020. Conclusions and Relevance: In this Swedish register-based cohort study of patients who received a diagnosis of colorectal cancer during the most intense period of the COVID-19 pandemic, a significant increase in ostomy formation for patients with colon cancer and a lower participation of residents during surgery were observed. These changes most likely were aimed at reducing complications and intensive care unit care.

Colon cancer treatment in Sweden during the COVID-19 pandemic: A nationwide register-based study.

AIM: The COVID-19 pandemic has reduced the capacity to diagnose and treat cancer worldwide due to the prioritization of COVID-19 treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate treatment and outcomes of colon cancer in Sweden before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: In an observational study, using the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry, we included (i) all Swedish patients diagnosed with colon cancer, and (ii) all patients undergoing surgery for colon cancer, in 2016-2020. Incidence of colon cancer, treatments and outcomes in 2020 were compared with 2019. RESULTS: The number of colon cancer cases in Sweden in April-May 2020 was 27% lower than the previous year, whereas no difference was observed on an annual level (4,589 vs. 4,763 patients [-4%]). Among patients with colon cancer undergoing surgery in 2020, the proportion of resections was 93 vs. 94% in 2019, with no increase in acute resections. Time from diagnosis to elective surgery decreased (29 days vs. 33 days in 2020 vs. 2019). In 2020, more patients underwent a two-stage procedure with a diverting stoma as first surgery (6.1%) vs. (4.4%) in 2019 (p = 0.0020) and more patients were treated with preoperative chemotherapy (5.1%) vs. (3,5%) 2019 (p = 0.0016). The proportion of patients that underwent laparoscopic surgery increased from 54% to 58% (p = 0.0017) There were no differences in length of stay, surgical complications, reoperation, ICU-stay or 30-day mortality between the years. CONCLUSION: Based on nationwide annual data, we did not observe adverse effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on colon cancer treatment and short time outcomes in Sweden.

Long-Term Results after Anastomotic Leakage following Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Comparison of Treatment with Endo-Sponge and Transanal Irrigation.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate long-term results in patients from regular health care treated with endoscopic transanal closure system, that is, endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure system (EVAC) compared to transanal irrigation. METHODS: In this retrospective, medical chart-based, observational study, we included patients with anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection for rectal cancer from 3 Stockholm hospitals 2006-2016 and compared time to first stoma closure in a Kaplan-Meier model and the proportion of patients who were stoma-free at end of follow-up. RESULTS: Anastomotic leakage was found in 81 patients who were followed up in median 5.9 years (min-max: 0.53-13). EVAC was used on 14 (17%) patients and transanal irrigation on 34 (42%) patients. The remaining 33 (41%) patients either got a permanent colostomy or were treated only with antibiotics and percutaneous drainage. Treatment with EVAC or transanal irrigation led to similar rates of stoma closure, both when comparing all patients, and when comparing patients with similar defects. At the end of follow-up, 43% of patients treated with EVAC and 50% of patients treated with repeated irrigation were stoma-free (p = 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence of better outcomes in patients treated with EVAC. The study was, however, limited by small sample size.

Hernia at the stoma site after loop ileostomy reversal.

PURPOSE: To estimate the incidence of and risk factors for stoma site hernia after closure of a temporary diverting ileostomy. METHOD: In a non-comparative cohort study, charts (n = 216) and CT-scans (n = 169) from patients who had undergone loop ileostomy closure following low anterior resection for rectal cancer 2010-2015 (mainly open surgery) at three hospitals were evaluated retrospectively. Patients without hernia diagnosis were evaluated cross-sectionally through a questionnaire (n = 158), and patients with symptoms of bulging or pain were contacted and offered a clinical examination or a CT scan including Valsalva maneuver. RESULTS: In the chart review, five (2.3%) patients had a diagnosis of incisional hernia at the previous stoma site after 8 months (median). In 12 patients, the CT scan showed a hernia, of which 8 had not been detected previously. The questionnaire was returned by 130 (82%) patients, of which 31% had symptoms of bulging or pain. Less than one in five of patients who reported bulging were diagnosed with hernia, but the absolute majority of the radiologically diagnosed hernias reported symptoms. By combining clinical and radiological diagnosis, the cumulative incidence of hernia was 7.4% during a median follow up time of 30 months. Risk factors for stoma site hernia were male sex and higher BMI. CONCLUSION: Hernia at the previous stoma site was underdiagnosed. Less than a third of symptomatic patients had a hernia diagnosis in routine follow up. Randomized studies are needed to evaluate if prophylactic mesh can be used to prevent hernias, especially in patients with risk factors.