Short-term Outcomes of Day-Case Stoma Closure: A Prospective, Observational Study.

Publisher: Lippincott Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 0372764 Publication Model: Print Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1530-0358 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 00123706 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Dis Colon Rectum Subsets: MEDLINE

Original Publication: Philadelphia. Lippincott

Ambulatory Surgical Procedures/*adverse effects ; Enterostomy/*adverse effects ; Intestinal Diseases/*surgery ; Postoperative Complications/*epidemiology ; Surgical Stomas/*adverse effects ; Wound Closure Techniques/*adverse effects; Adult ; Aged ; Feasibility Studies ; Female ; France ; Hospitalization ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Prospective Studies

Background: Elective stoma closure is a common, standardized procedure in digestive surgery.
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of day-case surgery for elective stoma closure.
Design: This is a prospective, single-center, nonrandomized study of consecutive patients undergoing day-case elective stoma closure.
Setting: This study was performed at a French tertiary hospital between January 2016 and June 2018.
Patients: Elective stoma closure was performed by local incision with an ASA score of I, II, or stabilized III.
Outcome Measures: The primary end point was the day-case surgery success rate in the overall population (all patients having undergone elective stoma closure) and in the per protocol population (patients not fulfilling any of the preoperative or perioperative exclusion criteria). The secondary end points (in the per protocol population) were the overall morbidity rate (according to the Clavien-Dindo classification), the major morbidity rate (Clavien score ≥3), and day-case surgery quality criteria (unplanned consultation, unplanned hospitalization, and unplanned reoperation).
Results: Between January 2016 and June 2018, 236 patients (the overall population; mean ± SD age: 54 ± 17; 120 men (51%)) underwent elective stoma closure. Fifty of these patients (21%) met all the inclusion criteria and constituted the per protocol population. The day-case surgery success rate was 17% (40 of 236 patients) in the overall population and 80% (40 of 50 patients) in the per protocol population. In the per protocol population, the overall morbidity rate was 30% and the major morbidity rate was 6%. Of the 40 patients with successful day-case surgery, the unplanned consultation rate and the unplanned hospitalization rate were both 32.5%. There were no unplanned reoperations.
Limitations: This was a single-center study.
Conclusion: In selected patients, day-case surgery for elective stoma closure is feasible and has acceptable complication and readmission rates. Day-case elective stoma closure can therefore be legitimately offered to selected patients. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B583.
Resultados a Corto Plazo Del Cierre De Estoma Ambulatorio Un Estudio Observacional Y Prospectivo: ANTECEDENTES:El cierre electivo de un estoma es un procedimiento común y estandarizado en cirugía digestiva.OBJETIVO:Evaluar la viabilidad de la cirugía ambulatoria para el cierre electivo de estomas.DISEÑO:Un estudio prospectivo, unicéntrico, no aleatorizado de pacientes consecutivos sometidos a cierre de estoma electivo ambulatorio.ESCENARIO:Un hospital terciario francés entre enero de 2016 y junio de 2018.PACIENTES:Cierre electivo de estoma realizado por incisión local con una puntuación de la American Society of Anesthesiologists de I, II o III estabilizado.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado principal fue la tasa de éxito de la cirugía ambulatoria en la población general (todos los pacientes habiendo sido sometidos a cierre de estoma electivo) y en la población por protocolo (pacientes que no cumplían con ninguno de los criterios de exclusión preoperatorios o perioperatorios). Los resultados secundarios (en la población por protocolo) fueron la tasa de morbilidad general (según la clasificación de Clavien-Dindo), la tasa de morbilidad mayor (puntuación de Clavien ≥ 3) y los criterios de calidad de la cirugía ambulatoria (consulta no planificada, hospitalización no planificada y reoperación no planificada).RESULTADOS:Entre enero de 2016 y junio de 2018, 236 pacientes (la población general; edad media ± desviación estándar: 54 ± 17; 120 hombres (51%)) se sometieron al cierre electivo del estoma. Cincuenta de estos pacientes (21%) cumplieron todos los criterios de inclusión y constituyeron la población por protocolo. La tasa de éxito de la cirugía ambulatoria fue del 17% (40 de 236 pacientes) en la población general y del 80% (40 de 50 pacientes) en la población por protocolo. En la población por protocolo, la tasa de morbilidad general fue del 30% y la tasa de morbilidad mayor fue del 6%. De los 40 pacientes con cirugía ambulatoria exitosa, la tasa de consultas no planificadas y la tasa de hospitalización no planificada fueron ambas del 32.5%. No hubo reoperaciones no planificadas.LIMITACIONES:Este fue un estudio de un solo centro.CONCLUSIÓN:En pacientes seleccionados, la cirugía ambulatoria para el cierre electivo de estoma es factible y tiene tasas aceptables de complicaciones y reingreso. Por lo tanto, se puede ofrecer legítimamente el cierre electivo ambulatorio de estoma a pacientes seleccionados. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B583.
(Copyright © The ASCRS 2021.)

Matthiessen P, Hallböök O, Rutegård J, Simert G, Sjödahl R. Defunctioning stoma reduces symptomatic anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection of the rectum for cancer: a randomized multicenter trial. Ann Surg. 2007;246:207–214.
Gessler B, Haglind E, Angenete E. Loop ileostomies in colorectal cancer patients–morbidity and risk factors for nonreversal. J Surg Res. 2012;178:708–714.
Bakx R, Busch OR, van Geldere D, Bemelman WA, Slors JF, van Lanschot JJ. Feasibility of early closure of loop ileostomies: a pilot study. Dis Colon Rectum. 2003;46:1680–1684.
Chow A, Tilney HS, Paraskeva P, Jeyarajah S, Zacharakis E, Purkayastha S. The morbidity surrounding reversal of defunctioning ileostomies: a systematic review of 48 studies including 6,107 cases. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2009;24:711–723.
Lassen K, Soop M, Nygren J, et al.; Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Group. Consensus review of optimal perioperative care in colorectal surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Group recommendations. Arch Surg. 2009;144:961–969.
Pearsall EA, Meghji Z, Pitzul KB, et al. A qualitative study to understand the barriers and enablers in implementing an enhanced recovery after surgery program. Ann Surg. 2015;261:92–96.
Kehlet H, Wilmore DW. Evidence-based surgical care and the evolution of fast-track surgery. Ann Surg. 2008;248:189–198.
Mjåland O, Raeder J, Aasboe V, Trondsen E, Buanes T. Outpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg. 1997;84:958–961.
Trondsen E, Mjâland O, Raeder J, Buanes T. Day-case laparoscopic fundoplication for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Br J Surg. 2000;87:1708–1711.
Rebibo L, Dhahri A, Badaoui R, Dupont H, Regimbeau JM. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy as day-case surgery (without overnight hospitalization). Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2015;11:335–342.
Gignoux B, Pasquer A, Vulliez A, Lanz T. Outpatient colectomy within an enhanced recovery program. J Visc Surg. 2015;152:11–15.
Rebibo L, Leourier P, Badaoui R, Le Roux F, Lorne E, Regimbeau JM. Minor laparoscopic liver resection as day-case surgery (without overnight hospitalisation): a pilot study. Surg Endosc. 2019;33:261–271.
Bhalla A, Peacock O, Tierney GM, et al. Day-case closure of ileostomy: feasible, safe and efficient. Colorectal Dis. 2015;17:820–823.
Sabbagh C, Cosse C, Rebibo L, Hariz H, Dhahri A, Regimbeau JM. Identifying patients eligible for a short hospital stay after stoma closure. J Invest Surg. 2018;31:168–172.
Allart K, Sabbagh C, Dembinski JDA, Lorne E, Regimbeau JM. Abstracts of the 14th Scientific and Annual Meeting of the European Society of Coloproctology, Austria Centre, 25-27 September 2019. Colorectal Dis. 2019;21(suppl 3):3–133.
Kraft K, Mariette C, Sauvanet A, et al.; French Society of Gastrointestinal Surgery; Association for Hepatobiliary and Transplantation Surgery. Indications for ambulatory gastrointestinal and endocrine surgery in adults. J Visc Surg. 2011;148:69–74.
Badaoui R, Alami Chentoufi Y, Hchikat A, et al. Outpatient laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: first 100 cases. J Clin Anesth. 2016;34:85–90.
Leichtle SW, Mouawad NJ, Welch KB, Lampman RM, Cleary RK. Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after colectomy. Dis Colon Rectum. 2012;55:569–575.
Brehant O, Pessaux P, Regenet N, et al. Healing of stoma orifices: multicenter, prospective, randomized study comparing calcium alginate mesh and polyvidone iodine mesh. World J Surg. 2009;33:1795–1801.
Pedrazzani C, Moro M, Mantovani G, et al. C-reactive protein as early predictor of complications after minimally invasive colorectal resection. J Surg Res. 2017;210:261–268.
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205–213.
Vather R, Trivedi S, Bissett I. Defining postoperative ileus: results of a systematic review and global survey. J Gastrointest Surg. 2013;17:962–972.
Grelpois G, Sabbagh C, Cosse C, et al. Management of uncomplicated acute appendicitis as day case surgery: feasibility and a critical analysis of exclusion criteria and treatment failure. J Am Coll Surg. 2016;223:694–703.
Taylor JP, Stem M, Chen SY, et al. The safety of outpatient stoma closure: on the verge of a paradigm shift? J Gastrointest Surg. 2019;23:2019–2026.
Leung TT, MacLean AR, Buie WD, Dixon E. Comparison of stapled versus handsewn loop ileostomy closure: a meta-analysis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2008;12:939–944.
Sajid MS, Craciunas L, Baig MK, Sains P. Systematic review and meta-analysis of published, randomized, controlled trials comparing suture anastomosis to stapled anastomosis for ileostomy closure. Tech Coloproctol. 2013;17:631–639.
Löffler T, Rossion I, Gooßen K, et al. Hand suture versus stapler for closure of loop ileostomy–a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2015;400:193–205.
Reid K, Pockney P, Pollitt T, Draganic B, Smith SR. Randomized clinical trial of short-term outcomes following purse-string versus conventional closure of ileostomy wounds. Br J Surg. 2010;97:1511–1517.
Camacho-Mauries D, Rodriguez-Díaz JL, Salgado-Nesme N, González QH, Vergara-Fernández O. Randomized clinical trial of intestinal ostomy takedown comparing pursestring wound closure vs conventional closure to eliminate the risk of wound infection. Dis Colon Rectum. 2013;56:205–211.
Chudner A, Gachabayov M, Dyatlov A, Lee H, Essani R, Bergamaschi R. The influence of diverting loop ileostomy vs. colostomy on postoperative morbidity in restorative anterior resection for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2019;404:129–139.
Golda T, Zerpa C, Kreisler E, Trenti L, Biondo S. Incidence and management of anastomotic bleeding after ileocolic anastomosis. Colorectal Dis. 2013;15:1301–1308.
Harries RL, Ansell J, Codd RJ, Williams GL. A systematic review of Clostridium difficile infection following reversal of ileostomy. Colorectal Dis. 2017;19:881–887.

Date Created: 20210505 Date Completed: 20220103 Latest Revision: 20220103

20231215

10.1097/DCR.0000000000001905

33951687