1 Nov 2021
ArticleLaparoscopic total mesorectal excision (L-TME) for rectal cancer surgery: does elective diverting ileostomy really protect? An observational retrospective cohort study
Alessandro Coppola 1Vincenzo Vaccara 1Chiara Cascone 1Tommaso Farolfi 1Ludovico Carbone 1Carlo Greco 2Sara Ramella 2Massimo Ciccozzi 3Silvia Angeletti 4Roberto Coppola 1Damiano Caputo 1
Affiliations
Article Info
1 Department of General Surgery, Università Campus Bio-Medico di Roma, Rome, Italy.
2 Radiation Oncology, Università Campus Bio-Medico di Roma, Rome, Italy.
3 Medical statistic and molecular epidemiology Unit, Università Campus Bio-Medico di Roma, Rome, Italy.
4 Unit of Clinical Laboratory Science, Università Campus Bio-Medico di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Ann. Ital. Chir., 2021, 92(6), 100459;
Published: 1 Nov 2021
Copyright © 2021 Annali Italiani di Chirurgia
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Abstract
AIMS: Elective diverting ileostomy may reduce consequences of anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (L-TME); however, its safety is debated because of morbidity related to stoma creation and closure. We aimed to investigate the impact of diverting ileostomy on clinical behavior of anastomotic leakage and complications related to stoma itself. MATERIAL OF THE STUDY: We retrospectively evaluated 150 L-TMEs with (Group 1, 100 patients) or without (Group 2, 50 patients) elective ileostomy for rectal cancer. RESULTS: Overall anastomotic fistula rate was 26% without significant differences between the two groups (28% in the Group 1 and 22% in the Group 2, respectively). In all the series, NAD was significantly associated with higher risk of postoperative complications (OR=2.14, p=0.02). In Group 2, NAD particularly increased the risk of anastomotic fistula (OR=6.6, p=0.014). Instead, patients of Group 1 showed higher odd of post-operative complications (OR: 3.8; CI 95%: 1.8483-8.0492; p = 0.0003) and notably 79 (79%) developed complications related to the ileostomy itself (hydroelectrolytic, metabolic and peristomal skin disorders). Moreover, thirty-two (32%) ileostomies were never reversed; among the reversed patients, 27 (39.7%) developed at least one postoperative complication and in 9 (33.3%) cases an urgent re-intervention was needed. DISCUSSION: Diverting ileostomy may mitigate clinical behavior of anastomotic leakage after L-TME. However, there is non-negligible morbidity of stoma creation and closure. CONCLUSION: Diverting ileostomy should be selectively considered in higher risk patients as those who received NAD.
Keywords
- Anastomotic leakage
- Ileostomy
- Rectal cancer
article-detail-mobile