Techniques and complications of ileostomy takedown

被引:106
作者
Phang, PT [1 ]
Hain, JM [1 ]
Perez-Ramirez, JJ [1 ]
Madoff, RD [1 ]
Gemio, BT [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Minnesota, Div Colon & Rectal Surg, St Paul, MN 55108 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0002-9610(99)00091-4
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
OBJECTIVE: We use a loop ileostomy for temporary fecal diversion because of ease of technical construction and assumed low complication rate. Here, we review our complications of loop ileostomy and takedown using three techniques of closure. METHODS: We reviewed charts of all patients who had temporary ileostomies constructed during 1987 to 1995 (n = 366). Ileostomy takedown was performed in 339 patients using one of three closure techniques: enterotomy suture (65%), resection with handsewn anastomosis (20%), and stapled anastomosis (15%). Complications were recorded for pre-takedown and 30-day post-takedown intervals. RESULTS: Overall complication rate was 28%. Pre-takedown complications occurred in 21 patients (5.7%), including small bowel obstruction (2.5%) and dehydration/electrolyte derangement (2.2%). Post-takedown complications occurred in 83 patients (24.5%), including wound infection (14.2%), small bowel obstruction (5%), anastomotic leak (2.9%), and 1 death from a cardiac event. Post-takedown obstruction was higher for closure using resection with sutured anastomosis (12%) compared with enterotomy suture (2.3%), P less than or equal to 0.003. Stapled anastomosis had an intermediate rate of obstruction (7.7%). Anastomotic leak was similar between closure techniques. CONCLUSIONS: LOOP ileostomy and takedown are associated with low rates of serious complications (5% or less). As such, we continue to advocate use of loop ileostomy as a diversion procedure. Closure by enterotomy suture is preferred over resection. However, if resection is required, closure by stapled anastomosis is preferred over suture anastomosis. (C) 1999 by Excerpta Medica, Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:463 / 466
页数:4
相关论文
共 13 条
  • [1] LOOP ILEOSTOMY FIXATION - A SIMPLE TECHNIQUE TO MINIMIZE THE RISK OF STOMAL VOLVULUS
    ANDERSON, DN
    DRIVER, CP
    PARK, KGM
    DAVIDSON, AI
    KEENAN, RA
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COLORECTAL DISEASE, 1994, 9 (03) : 138 - 140
  • [2] FASTH S, 1984, WORLD J SURG, V8, P410
  • [3] COMPLICATIONS OF LOOP LLEOSTOMY
    FEINBERG, SM
    MCLEOD, RS
    COHEN, Z
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1987, 153 (01) : 102 - 107
  • [4] KEEHAN RA, 1994, DIS COLON RECTUM, V11, P1176
  • [5] LOOP ILEOSTOMY FOR TEMPORARY FECAL DIVERSION
    KHOO, REH
    COHEN, MM
    CHAPMAN, GM
    JENKEN, DA
    LANGEVIN, JM
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1994, 167 (05) : 519 - 522
  • [6] ROTHENBERGER DA, 1985, ALTERNATIVES CONVENT, P345
  • [7] TEMPORARY LOOP ILEOSTOMY FOR RESTORATIVE PROCTOCOLECTOMY
    SENAPATI, A
    NICHOLLS, RJ
    RITCHIE, JK
    TIBBS, CJ
    HAWLEY, PR
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1993, 80 (05) : 628 - 630
  • [8] TURNBULL RB, 1967, ATLAS INTESTINAL STO, P32
  • [9] THE OUTCOME OF LOOP ILEOSTOMY CLOSURE IN 293 CASES
    VANDEPAVOORDT, HDWM
    FAZIO, VW
    JAGELMAN, DG
    LAVERY, IC
    WEAKLEY, FL
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COLORECTAL DISEASE, 1987, 2 (04) : 214 - 217
  • [10] LOOP ILEOSTOMY IS A SAFE OPTION FOR FECAL DIVERSION
    WEXNER, SD
    TARANOW, DA
    JOHANSEN, OB
    ITZKOWITZ, F
    DANIEL, N
    NOGUERAS, JJ
    JAGELMAN, DG
    [J]. DISEASES OF THE COLON & RECTUM, 1993, 36 (04) : 349 - 354