Considerations in Stoma Reversal

Abstract

Temporary stomas are frequently used in the management of diverticulitis, colorectal cancer, and inflammatory bowel disease. These temporary stomas are used to try to mitigate septic complications from anastomotic leaks and to avoid the need for reoperation. Once acute medical conditions have improved and after the anastomosis has been proven to be healed, stomas can be reversed. Contrast enemas, digital rectal examination, and endoscopic evaluation are used to evaluate the anastomosis prior to reversal. Stoma reversal is associated with complications including anastomotic leak, postoperative ileus, bowel obstruction, enterocutaneous fistula, and, most commonly, surgical site infection. Furthermore, many stomas, which were intended to be temporary, may not be reversed due to postoperative complications, adjuvant therapy, or prohibitive comorbidities.

Keywords

stoma - ileostomy closure - Hartmann's reversal - colostomy closure

• References

• 1 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 (06) 711-723
• 2 Chu DI, Schlieve CR, Colibaseanu DT. , et al. Surgical site infections (SSIs) after stoma reversal (SR): risk factors, implications, and protective strategies. J Gastrointest Surg 2015; 19 (02) 327-334
• 3 Yang PF, Morgan MJ. Laparoscopic versus open reversal of Hartmann's procedure: a retrospective review. ANZ J Surg 2014; 84 (12) 965-969
• 4 Bell C, Asolati M, Hamilton E. , et al. A comparison of complications associated with colostomy reversal versus ileostomy reversal. Am J Surg 2005; 190 (05) 717-720
• 5 Figueiredo MN, Mège D, Maggiori L, Ferron M, Panis Y. When is the best time for temporary stoma closure in laparoscopic sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer? A study of 259 consecutive patients. Tech Coloproctol 2015; 19 (08) 469-474
• 6 Perez RO, Habr-Gama A, Seid VE. , et al. Loop ileostomy morbidity: timing of closure matters. Dis Colon Rectum 2006; 49 (10) 1539-1545
• 7 Shabbir J, Britton DC. Stoma complications: a literature overview. Colorectal Dis 2010; 12 (10) 958-964
• 8 Floodeen H, Lindgren R, Matthiessen P. When are defunctioning stomas in rectal cancer surgery really reversed? Results from a population-based single center experience. Scand J Surg 2013; 102 (04) 246-250
• 9 Omundsen M, Hayes J, Collinson R, Merrie A, Parry B, Bissett I. Early ileostomy closure: is there a downside?. ANZ J Surg 2012; 82 (05) 352-354
• 10 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 (12) 1680-1684
• 11 De'angelis N, Brunetti F, Memeo R. , et al. Comparison between open and laparoscopic reversal of Hartmann's procedure for diverticulitis. World J Gastrointest Surg 2013; 5 (08) 245-251
• 12 Slawik S, Dixon AR. Laparoscopic reversal of Hartmann's rectosigmoidectomy. Colorectal Dis 2008; 10 (01) 81-83
• 13 Mazeh H, Greenstein AJ, Swedish K. , et al. Laparoscopic and open reversal of Hartmann's procedure--a comparative retrospective analysis. Surg Endosc 2009; 23 (03) 496-502
• 14 Di Carlo I, Toro A, Pannofino O, Patane E, Pulvirenti E. Laparoscopic versus open restoration of intestinal continuity after Hartmann procedure. Hepatogastroenterology 2010; 57 (98) 232-235
• 15 Keck JO, Collopy BT, Ryan PJ, Fink R, Mackay JR, Woods RJ. Reversal of Hartmann's procedure: effect of timing and technique on ease and safety. Dis Colon Rectum 1994; 37 (03) 243-248
• 16 Fleming FJ, Gillen P. Reversal of Hartmann's procedure following acute diverticulitis: is timing everything?. Int J Colorectal Dis 2009; 24 (10) 1219-1225
• 17 David GG, Slavin JP, Willmott S, Corless DJ, Khan AU, Selvasekar CR. Loop ileostomy following anterior resection: is it really temporary?. Colorectal Dis 2010; 12 (05) 428-432
• 18 Gessler B, Haglind E, Angenete E. Loop ileostomies in colorectal cancer patients--morbidity and risk factors for nonreversal. J Surg Res 2012; 178 (02) 708-714
• 19 Lindgren R, Hallböök O, Rutegård J, Sjödahl R, Matthiessen P. What is the risk for a permanent stoma after low anterior resection of the rectum for cancer? A six-year follow-up of a multicenter trial. Dis Colon Rectum 2011; 54 (01) 41-47
• 20 Chiu A, Chan HT, Brown CJ, Raval MJ, Phang PT. Failing to reverse a diverting stoma after lower anterior resection of rectal cancer. Am J Surg 2014; 207 (05) 708-711 , discussion 711
• 21 den Dulk M, Smit M, Peeters KC. , et al; Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group. A multivariate analysis of limiting factors for stoma reversal in patients with rectal cancer entered into the total mesorectal excision (TME) trial: a retrospective study. Lancet Oncol 2007; 8 (04) 297-303
• 22 Daluvoy S, Gonzalez F, Vaziri K, Sabnis A, Brody F. Factors associated with ostomy reversal. Surg Endosc 2008; 22 (10) 2168-2170
• 23 Habib K, Gupta A, White D, Mazari FA, Wilson TR. Utility of contrast enema to assess anastomotic integrity and the natural history of radiological leaks after low rectal surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis 2015; 30 (08) 1007-1014
• 24 Khair G, Alhamarneh O, Avery J. , et al. Routine use of gastrograffin enema prior to the reversal of a loop ileostomy. Dig Surg 2007; 24 (05) 338-341
• 25 Kalady MF, Mantyh CR, Petrofski J, Ludwig KA. Routine contrast imaging of low pelvic anastomosis prior to closure of defunctioning ileostomy: is it necessary?. J Gastrointest Surg 2008; 12 (07) 1227-1231
• 26 Tang CL, Seow-Choen F. Digital rectal examination compares favourably with conventional water-soluble contrast enema in the assessment of anastomotic healing after low rectal excision: a cohort study. Int J Colorectal Dis 2005; 20 (03) 262-266
• 27 Larsson A, Lindmark G, Syk I, Buchwald P. Water soluble contrast enema examination of the integrity of the rectal anastomosis prior to loop ileostomy reversal may be superfluous. Int J Colorectal Dis 2015; 30 (03) 381-384
• 28 Fong SS, Chen K, Sim R. Chronic anastomotic sinus after low anterior resection: when can the defunctioning stoma be reversed?. Colorectal Dis 2011; 13 (06) 644-649
• 29 Alsanea N, Alabbad S. Use of the endostapler for the treatment of non-healing sinus secondary to a dehisced colorectal anastomosis. Tech Coloproctol 2010; 14 (03) 249-251
• 30 Seo SI, Lee JL, Park SH, Ha HK, Kim JC. Assessment by using a water-soluble contrast enema study of radiologic leakage in lower rectal cancer patients with sphincter-saving surgery. Ann Coloproctol 2015; 31 (04) 131-137
• 31 Markides GA, Wijetunga IU, Brown SR, Anwar S. Meta-analysis of handsewn versus stapled reversal of loop ileostomy. ANZ J Surg 2015; 85 (04) 217-224
• 32 Gong J, Guo Z, Li Y. , et al. Stapled vs hand suture closure of loop ileostomy: a meta-analysis. Colorectal Dis 2013; 15 (10) e561-e568
• 33 Gustavsson K, Gunnarsson U, Jestin P. Postoperative complications after closure of a diverting ileostoma--differences according to closure technique. Int J Colorectal Dis 2012; 27 (01) 55-58
• 34 Narang R, Kalaskar S, Chong HY. , et al. Stapled Loop Ileostomy Closure: Does Stapler Length Matter? The Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 54th Annual Meeting, Orlando, Florida, Poster Presentation, 2013
• 35 Lopez MP, Melendres MF, Maglangit SA, Roxas MF, Monroy III HJ, Crisostomo AC. A randomized controlled clinical trial comparing the outcomes of circumferential subcuticular wound approximation (CSWA) with conventional wound closure after stoma reversal. Tech Coloproctol 2015; 19 (08) 461-468
• 36 Milanchi S, Nasseri Y, Kidner T, Fleshner P. Wound infection after ileostomy closure can be eliminated by circumferential subcuticular wound approximation. Dis Colon Rectum 2009; 52 (03) 469-474
• 37 Wong KS, Remzi FH, Gorgun E. , et al. Loop ileostomy closure after restorative proctocolectomy: outcome in 1,504 patients. Dis Colon Rectum 2005; 48 (02) 243-250
• 38 Alexander JW, Solomkin JS, Edwards MJ. Updated recommendations for control of surgical site infections. Ann Surg 2011; 253 (06) 1082-1093
• 39 Liang MK, Li LT, Avellaneda A, Moffett JM, Hicks SC, Awad SS. Outcomes and predictors of incisional surgical site infection in stoma reversal. JAMA Surg 2013; 148 (02) 183-189
• 40 Nguyen MT, Phatak UR, Li LT. , et al. Review of stoma site and midline incisional hernias after stoma reversal. J Surg Res 2014; 190 (02) 504-509
• 41 Hsieh MC, Kuo LT, Chi CC, Huang WS, Chin CC. Pursestring closure versus conventional primary closure following stoma reversal to reduce surgical site infection rate: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Dis Colon Rectum 2015; 58 (08) 808-815
• 42 Yoon SI, Bae SM, Namgung H, Park DG. Clinical trial on the incidence of wound infection and patient satisfaction after stoma closure: comparison of two skin closure techniques. Ann Coloproctol 2015; 31 (01) 29-33
• 43 Habbe N, Hannes S, Liese J, Woeste G, Bechstein WO, Strey C. The use of purse-string skin closure in loop ileostomy reversals leads to lower wound infection rates--a single high-volume centre experience. Int J Colorectal Dis 2014; 29 (06) 709-714
• 44 Klink CD, Wünschmann M, Binnebösel M. , et al. Influence of skin closure technique on surgical site infection after loop ileostomy reversal: retrospective cohort study. Int J Surg 2013; 11 (10) 1123-1125
• 45 McCartan DP, Burke JP, Walsh SR, Coffey JC. Purse-string approximation is superior to primary skin closure following stoma reversal: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Tech Coloproctol 2013; 17 (04) 345-351
• 46 Abbas S. Resection and primary anastomosis in acute complicated diverticulitis, a systematic review of the literature. Int J Colorectal Dis 2007; 22 (04) 351-357
• 47 Alizai PH, Schulze-Hagen M, Klink CD. , et al. Primary anastomosis with a defunctioning stoma versus Hartmann's procedure for perforated diverticulitis--a comparison of stoma reversal rates. Int J Colorectal Dis 2013; 28 (12) 1681-1688
• 48 Rosen MJ, Cobb WS, Kercher KW, Heniford BT. Laparoscopic versus open colostomy reversal: a comparative analysis. J Gastrointest Surg 2006; 10 (06) 895-900
• 49 Richards CH, Roxburgh CS. ; Scottish Surgical Research Group (SSRG). Surgical outcome in patients undergoing reversal of Hartmann's procedures: a multicentre study. Colorectal Dis 2015; 17 (03) 242-249
• 50 Vermeulen J, Vrijland W, Mannaerts GH. Reversal of Hartmann's procedure through the stomal side: a new even more minimal invasive technique. Surg Endosc 2008; 22 (10) 2319-2322
• 51 Aydin C, Olmez A, Isik S, Sumer F, Kayaalp C. Reversal of the Hartmann procedure through only a stomal orifice. Am Surg 2011; 77 (06) 694-696
• 52 Zachariah SK. Reverse transrectal stapling technique using the EEA stapler: an alternative approach in difficult reversal of Hartmann's procedure. J Surg Tech Case Rep 2010; 2 (02) 70-72
• 53 Parkin E, Khurshid M, Ravi S, Linn T. Surgical access through the stoma for laparoscopic reversal of Hartmann procedures. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 2013; 23 (01) 41-44
• 54 Toro A, Ardiri A, Mannino M. , et al. Laparoscopic reversal of Hartmann's procedure: state of the art 20 years after the first reported case. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2014; 2014: 530140