Skip to main content
Log in

Morbidities after closure of ileostomy: analysis of risk factors

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Colorectal Disease Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Low anterior resection is commonly performed for carcinoma of the distal rectum. Diverting ileostomy has been used to decrease the septic consequence of anastomotic leakage and to reduce the re-operation rate. Nevertheless, subsequent closure of ileostomy can be associated with considerable morbidities. This study aimed to evaluate the morbidities after closure of ileostomy and to identify possible risk factors associated with the morbidities.

Methods

Data of patients who underwent closure of ileostomy, after a previous low anterior resection and defunctioning ileostomy for rectal cancer, was reviewed retrospectively. Patient’s demographics, coexisting morbidities, operative details, and post-operative outcomes were analyzed.

Results

From January 2000 to September 2012, 213 patients who underwent ileostomy closure were included. Thirty-five patients developed post-operative complications. The overall complication rate was 16.4 %. The majority of complications could be managed by conservative treatment. Only one patient required re-operation due to intestinal obstruction. There was no 30-day mortality. Age >80 years was an independent risk factor for post-operative complications. Age >80 years was also an independent risk factor for developing urinary retention (p = 0.001) and prolonged ileus (p = 0.02). Closure of ileostomy with hand-sewn techniques showed a higher incidence of post-operative intestinal obstruction (p = 0.049) compared to closure using stapler.

Conclusion

Closure of ileostomy following low anterior resection is associated with acceptable morbidities. Elderly patients tend to have a more complicated post-operative course and require more medical attention. The use of stapler is the preferred method for ileostomy closure as it is associated with less post-operative intestinal obstruction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. http://www.chp.gov.hk. Centre for Health Protection. Department of Health.

  2. Lee WS, Yun SH, Roh YN, Yun HR, Lee WY, Cho YB, Chun HK (2008) Risk factors and clinical outcome for anastomotic leakage after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. World J Surg 32:1124–1129

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Nesbakken A, Nygaard K, Lunde OC, Blϋcher J, Gjertsen Ø, Dullerud R (2005) Anastomotic leak following mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: true incidence and diagnostic challenges. Color Dis 7:578–581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Caulfied H, Human NH (2013) Anastomotic leak after low anterior resection: a spectrum of clinical entities. JAMA Surgery 148:177–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Wong NY, Eu KW (2005) A defunctioning ileostomy does not prevent clinical anastomotic leak after a low anterior resection: a prospective, comparative study. Dis Colon Rectum 48:2076–2079

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Mansfield SD, Jensen C, Phair AS, Kelly OT, Kelly SB (2008) Complications of loop ileostomy closure: a retrospective cohort analysis of 123 patients. World J Surg 32:2101–2106

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Williams LA, Sagar PM, Finan PJ, Burke D (2007) The outcome of loop ileostomy closure: a prospective study. Color Dis 10:460–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Thalheimer A, Bueter M, Kortuem M, Thiede A, Meyer D (2006) Morbidity of temporary loop ileostomy in patients with colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 49:1011–1017

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Akiyoshi T, Fujimoto Y, Konishi T, Kuroyanagi H, Ueno M, Oya M, Yamaguchi T (2010) Complications of loop ileostomy closure in patients with rectal tumor. World J Surg 34:1937–1942

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Saha AK, Tapping CR, Foley GT, Baker RP, Sagar PM, Burke DA, Sue-Ling HM, Finan PJ (2009) Morbidity and mortality after closure of loop ileostomy. Color Dis 11:866–871

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Chow A, Tilney HS, Paraskeva P, Jeyarajah S, Zacharakis E, Purkayastha S (2009) The morbidity surrounding reversal of defunctioning ileostomies: a systematic review of 48 studies including 6107 cases. Int J Colorectal Dis 24:711–723

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sharma A, Deeb AP, Rickles AS, Iannuzzi JC, Monson JRT, Flemming FJ (2012) Closure of defunctioning loop ileostomy is associated with considerable morbidity. Color Dis 15:458–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Perez RO, Habr-Fama A, Seid VE, Proscurshim I, Sousa AH Jr, Kiss DR, Linhares M, Sapucahy M, Gam-Rodregues J (2006) Loop ileostomy morbidity: timing of closure matters. Dis Colon Rectum 49:1539–1545

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Shadle B, Barbaro C, Waxman K, Connor S, Von Dollen K (2009) Predictors of postoperative urinary retention. Am Surg 75:922–924

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sivasankaran MV, Pham T, Divino CM (2014) Incidence and risk factors for urinary retention following laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Am J Surg 207:288–292

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Mohammadi-Fallah M, Hamedanchi S, Tayyebi-Azar A (2012) Preventive effect of tamsulosin on postoperative urinary retention. K J Urol 53:419–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Omundsen M, Hayes J, Collinson R, Merrie A, Parry B, Bissett I (2012) Early ileostomy closure: is there a downside? ANZ J Surg 82:352–354

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lahat G, Tulchinsky H, Goldman G, Klauzner JM, Rabau M (2005) Wound infection after ileostomy closure: a prospective randomized study comparing primary versus delayed primary closure techniques. Tech Coloproctol 9:206–208

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Camacho-Mauries D, Rodriguez-Díaz JL, Salgado-Nesme N, González QH, Vergara-Fernández O (2013) Randomized clinical trial of intestinal ostomy takedown comparing pursestring wound closure versus conventional closure to eliminate the risk of wound infection. Dis Colon Rectum 56:205–211

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Phang PT, Hain JM, Perez-Ramirez JJ, Madoff RD, Gemlo BT (1999) Techniques and complications of ileostomy takedown. Am J Surg 177:463–466

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Shelygin YA, Chernyshov SV, Rybakov EG (2010) Stapled ileostomy closure results in reduction of postoperative mortality. Tech Coloproctol 14:19–23

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Löffler T., Rossion I., Gooßen K., Saure D., Weitz J., Ulrich A., Büchler M.W., Diener M.K. (2014). Hand suture versus stapler for closure of loop ileostomy—a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Langenbecks Arch Surg, Dec 25. [Epub ahead of print]

  23. Peacock O, Law CI, Collins PW, Speake WJ, Lund JN, Tierney GM (2011) Closure of loop ileostomy: potentially a daycase procedure? Tech Coloproctology 15:431–437

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wai Lun Law.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Man, V.C.M., Choi, H.K., Law, W.L. et al. Morbidities after closure of ileostomy: analysis of risk factors. Int J Colorectal Dis 31, 51–57 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-015-2327-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-015-2327-2

Keywords

Navigation