Loop Ileostomy for Management of Toxic Clostridium difficile Enteritis and Bowel Obstruction After Restorative Proctocolectomy

2021 ◽  
pp. 000313482110562
Author(s):  
Nikhil C. Reddy ◽  
Robert D. Bennett
2020 ◽  
Vol 86 (10) ◽  
pp. 1269-1276
Author(s):  
Adam D. Shellito ◽  
Marcia M. Russell

Diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) with colonic lavage has been proposed as an alternative to total abdominal colectomy (TAC) for fulminant Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). Controversy exists regarding the mortality benefit and outcomes of this surgical approach. We conducted a MEDLINE database search for articles between 1999 and 2019 pertaining to DLI for the surgical treatment of CDI. Five articles met the inclusion criteria. Four studies were retrospective and one was a prospective matched cohort study. 3683 patients were included in the 5 studies; 733 patients (20%) underwent DLI, while 2950 patients (80%) underwent TAC. The only shared outcome measure across all 5 studies was mortality. The overall mortality rate for the entire cohort undergoing both procedures was 30.3%. There was no statistically significant difference in pooled mortality between DLI and TAC (OR: .73; 95% CI, .45-1.2; P = .22). Reporting of other postoperative outcomes was variable. Fulminant CDI remains a life-threatening condition with high mortality. Loop ileostomy may be a viable surgical alternative to total colectomy with similar mortality; however, further work is needed to determine specific patient characteristics that warrant routine use of DLI.


2020 ◽  
Vol 405 (6) ◽  
pp. 715-723
Author(s):  
Mario Trejo-Avila ◽  
Omar Vergara-Fernandez ◽  
Danilo Solórzano-Vicuña ◽  
Oscar Santes ◽  
Juan Carlos Sainz-Hernández ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 217 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradley R. Hall ◽  
Jennifer A. Leinicke ◽  
Priscila R. Armijo ◽  
Lynette M. Smith ◽  
Sean J. Langenfeld ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 183-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rana Madani ◽  
Nigel Day ◽  
Lalit Kumar ◽  
Henry S. Tilney ◽  
Andrew Mark Gudgeon

Background: Individual trials comparing hand-sewn with stapled closure of loop ileostomy show different outcomes due to lack of statistical power. A systematic review, with a pooled analysis of results, might provide a more definitive answer. This review aimed to compare hand-sewn with stapled anastomotic technique for closure of a loop ileostomy and looked at the effect of bowel resection on the complication rates. Methodology: Relevant studies were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane database. All randomised clinical trials, prospective and retrospective studies comparing hand-sewn with stapled closure of loop ileostomy were included. Results: Of the 4,917 patients in 15 identified studies, 3,406 had hand-sewn and 1,511 stapled anastomosis. There was no difference in the rate of anastomotic leak between the hand-sewn (2.93%, 55/1,877) and the stapled group (2.08%, 25/1,202) (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.43–1.54, p = 0.52, I2 = 33%). The rate of small-bowel obstruction was higher in the hand-sewn group (7.03%, 231/3,284) compared to the stapled group (5.58%, 73/1,308; OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.51–0.92, p = 0.01, I2 = 0%). There was no difference in the incidence of anastomotic leak and small-bowel obstruction in the hand-sewn anastomosis between patients with or without bowel resection. Conclusions: There was no significant difference in the rate of anastomotic leakage between the hand-sewn and stapled techniques. The rate of small-bowel obstruction was higher in the hand-sewn group. Performance of bowel resection does not significantly increase the incidence of anastomotic leak or small-bowel obstruction.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document