• Kutt-Sing Wong, Feza H Remzi, Emre Gorgun, Susana Arrigain, James M Church, Miriam Preen, and Victor W Fazio.
• Department of Colorectal Surgery, The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA.
• Dis. Colon Rectum. 2005 Feb 1; 48 (2): 243-50.

PurposeRoutine use of a temporary loop ileostomy for diversion after restorative proctocolectomy is controversial because of reported morbidity associated with its creation and closure. This study intended to review our experience with loop ileostomy closure after restorative proctocolectomy and determine the complication rates. In addition, complication rates between handsewn and stapled closures were compared.MethodsOur Department Pelvic Pouch Database was queried and charts reviewed for all patients who had ileostomy closure after restorative proctocolectomy from August 1983 to March 2002.ResultsA total of 1,504 patients underwent ileostomy closure after restorative proctocolectomy during a 19-year period. The median length of hospitalization was three (range, 1-40) days and the overall complication rate was 11.4 percent. Complications included small-bowel obstruction (6.4 percent), wound infection (1.5 percent), abdominal septic complications (1 percent), and enterocutaneous fistulas (0.6 percent). Handsewn closure was performed in 1,278 patients (85 percent) and stapled closure in 226 (15 percent). No significant differences in complication rates and length of hospitalization were found between handsewn and stapled closure techniques.ConclusionsOur results demonstrated that ileostomy closure after restorative proctocolectomy can be achieved with a low morbidity and a short hospitalization stay. In addition, we found that complication rates and length of hospitalization were similar between handsewn and stapled closures.

28 keywords...

hide…