Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Conventional hand suture techniques for intestinal anastomosis have been standard practice for decades, but the development of staplers has significantly impacted surgical procedures. Staplers, designed to simplify surgery, have been increasingly used in various gastrointestinal surgeries, including pediatric procedures. Colostomy takedown in infants is a commonly performed surgical procedure in pediatric surgery, yet the optimal technique remains debated. This study aims to compare the outcomes of linear stapler anastomosis and hand-sewn anastomosis for elective closure of loop colostomies in children. The hypothesis is that linear stapler anastomosis offers advantages over hand-sewn anastomosis in terms of operative time, recovery, and hospital stay. Aim To compare the outcomes of linear stapler and hand-sewn anastomosis in the elective closure of pediatric loop colostomies. Methods This prospective, randomized controlled study was conducted at Sher-i-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences (SKIMS), Soura, J&K, India, between 2021 and 2023. A total of 70 infants were enrolled, randomly assigned to two groups: Group A (35 infants) underwent SA (Stapled Anastomosis), and Group B (35 infants) underwent HS (Hand-Sewn Anastomosis). Both groups were matched for clinical characteristics. The primary outcomes included operative time and time to return of bowel movements. Secondary outcomes included anastomotic leaks, wound infections, and length of hospital stay. Data analysis was performed using appropriate statistical methods including t-tests and chi-square tests. Results The mean age of patients was 5.79 ± 3.23 months in Group A and 4.21 ± 3.13 months in Group B. The mean time to return of bowel movements was significantly shorter in Group A (24.82 ± 6.34 h) compared to Group B (47.56 ± 5.65 h, p = 0.05). Oral feeding was commenced earlier in Group A (2.18 ± 0.39 days) than in Group B (3.16 ± 0.37 days, p < 0.001). Both groups had a follow-up of 1.81 ± 0.98 years, with no cases of anastomotic leakage or small bowel obstruction in either group. Hospital stay was shorter in Group A (53.82 ± 6.34 h) compared to Group B (79.56 ± 15.65 h, p < 0.0003).

Background Parastomal herniation is a prevalent complication of colostomies, with rates as high as 60% at 2 years. Traditional methods, including mesh use, have shown limited success. Here, we aim to compare 1-year PSH rates and evaluate stoma-related complications using a stapled versus conventional approach. Methods This randomized controlled trial investigates the efficacy of using a circular stapler to create an end colostomy for reducing parastomal hernia (PSH) incidence compared to conventional techniques. Eligible patients (aged 18–70) undergoing end colostomy for rectal cancer at Tata Memorial Hospital will be randomized into two groups: circular stapled versus conventional cruciate incision. Primary outcomes will be 1-year PSH rates, determined clinically and radiologically, with secondary outcomes including short-term stoma-related complications and reoperation rates. Discussion The study’s findings will provide evidence on the circular stapler’s effectiveness in reducing PSH incidence, potentially offering an innovative approach to ostomy creation. If successful, this technique may improve patient outcomes and reduce long-term healthcare costs related to PSH management. Trial registration CTRI/2023/10/059362; protocol version 1.2. Registered on March 11, 2023

ᅟ Obstruction and perforation due to colorectal cancer represent challenging matters in terms of diagnosis, life-saving strategies, obstruction resolution and oncologic challenge. The aims of the current paper are to update the previous WSES guidelines for the management of large bowel perforation and obstructive left colon carcinoma (OLCC) and to develop new guidelines on obstructive right colon carcinoma (ORCC). Methods The literature was extensively queried for focused publication until December 2017. Precise analysis and grading of the literature has been performed by a working group formed by a pool of experts: the statements and literature review were presented, discussed and voted at the Consensus Conference of the 4th Congress of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) held in Campinas in May 2017. Results CT scan is the best imaging technique to evaluate large bowel obstruction and perforation. For OLCC, self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS), when available, offers interesting advantages as compared to emergency surgery; however, the positioning of SEMS for surgically treatable causes carries some long-term oncologic disadvantages, which are still under analysis. In the context of emergency surgery, resection and primary anastomosis (RPA) is preferable to Hartmann’s procedure, whenever the characteristics of the patient and the surgeon are permissive. Right-sided loop colostomy is preferable in rectal cancer, when preoperative therapies are predicted. With regards to the treatment of ORCC, right colectomy represents the procedure of choice; alternatives, such as internal bypass and loop ileostomy, are of limited value. Clinical scenarios in the case of perforation might be dramatic, especially in case of free faecal peritonitis. The importance of an appropriate balance between life-saving surgical procedures and respect of oncologic caveats must be stressed. In selected cases, a damage control approach may be required. Medical treatments including appropriate fluid resuscitation, early antibiotic treatment and management of co-existing medical conditions according to international guidelines must be delivered to all patients at presentation. Conclusions The current guidelines offer an extensive overview of available evidence and a qualitative consensus regarding management of large bowel obstruction and perforation due to colorectal cancer.

Minimally invasive approach for reversal of Hartmann's procedure remains understudied. This study examined the outcomes associated with open and minimally invasive approaches for colostomy reversal in a national cohort. The 2012-2022 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program participant use file data was queried to identify all adult (≥18 years) patients undergoing elective open or minimally invasive colostomy takedown. Multivariable regression models were developed to assess the associations between operative modalities and outcomes of interest, including overall complications (cardiac, respiratory, infectious, wound, renal and thromboembolic postoperative sequelae as well as reoperation and transfusion), operative duration, postoperative length of stay, and 30-day Readmissions. Among the 20,163 patients who underwent colostomy takedown during the study period, 6,180 (30.7%) had a minimally invasive reversal. Utilization of minimally invasive colostomy reversal increased from 18.2% in 2012 to 41.9% in 2022 (nptrend < 0.001). Following risk adjustment, minimally invasive colostomy takedown was associated with reduced odds of overall complications compared to the open approach (AOR 0.56, 95% CI 0.51-0.62). The minimally invasive approach was associated with decremental operative duration by 16.9 minutes (95% CI 13.6 to 20.2 minutes) and postoperative length of stay by 1.70 days (95% CI 1.56 to 1.84 days), as well as decreased odds of 30-day readmission (AOR 0.75, 95% CI 0.67-0.85). Over the past decade, utilization of minimally invasive colostomy reversal has more than doubled and yielded lower overall complication rates compared to the open approach. Our findings suggest that the minimally invasive approach may be appropriate for colostomy takedown in suitable cases.

Background The construction of a colostomy is a common procedure, but the evidence for the different parts of the construction of the colostomy is lacking. Parastomal hernia is a common complication of colostomy formation. The aim of this study is to standardise the colostomy formation and to compare three types of colostomy formation (one including a mesh) regarding the development of parastomal hernia. Methods/Design Stoma-Const is a Scandinavian randomised trial comparing three types of colostomy formation. The primary endpoint is parastomal herniation as shown by clinical examination or CT scan within one year. Secondary endpoints are re-admission rate, postoperative complications (classified according to Clavien-Dindo), stoma-related complications (registered in the case record form at stoma care nurse follow-up), total length of hospital stay during 12 months, health-related quality of life and health economic analysis as well as re-operation rate and mortality within 30 days and 12 months of primary surgery. Follow-up is scheduled at 4-6 weeks, and 6 and 12 months. Inclusion is set at 240 patients. Discussion Parastomal hernia is a common complication after colostomy formation. Several studies have been performed with the aim to reduce the rate of this complication. However, none are fully conclusive and data on quality of life and health economy are lacking. The aim of this study is to develop new standardised techniques for colostomy formation and evaluate this with patient reported outcomes as well as clinical and radiological assessment. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01694238 .2012-09-24.

Objective: The study aimed to compare the outcomes and complications of loop colostomy (LC) and split colostomy (SC) in pediatric patients requiring colostomy for various congenital and acquired gastrointestinal disorders. Additionally, we also wanted to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of each technique and determine their role in contemporary clinical practice. Methodology: This study includes patients at the Department of Pediatric Surgery, Dicle University Faculty of Medicine, between January 2010 to January 2025. A total of 589 patients were analyzed, with data collected on demographics, stoma type (loop or split), associated complications and clinical outcomes. Patients were categorized into two groups: Group-I (loop stoma) and Group-II (split stoma) and the findings were compared statistically. Results: The most common indications for stoma creation were anorectal malformations (43.8%), Hirschsprung’s disease (24.3%), gastrointestinal perforation (13.8%) and necrotizing enterocolitis (6.3%). Of the 589 patients, 59.3% had loop stomas and 40.7% had split stomas. Common complications included excoriation (11.2%) and wound dehiscence (10.5%). Loop stomas had higher rates of prolapse (16%), evisceration (2%) and overall complications (38%), while split stomas showed higher rates of excoriation (14%) and wound dehiscence (14%). Stomas in the small intestine had higher rates of skin-related complications, while those in the sigmoid colon had a higher rate of stricture (3%). Conclusion: Both loop and split stomas are effective for managing pediatric gastrointestinal disorders, but each technique carries its own risk profile. Loop colostomies are more prone to prolapse and other internal complications, while split colostomies tend to have more skin-related issues. The choice of stoma type should be tailored to each patient’s specific clinical condition and anatomy.

IntroductionLoop ileostomy and loop colostomy are both used to form a protective stoma after anterior resection. Evidence regarding which of these two procedures is superior is lacking. Furthermore, no studies comparing changes in the microbiome after loop ileostomy or loop colostomy exist.Methods and analysisThis multicentre, open-label, superiority, individually randomised controlled trial will include patients who undergo anterior rectal resection with primary anastomosis with a protective stoma. The exclusion criteria are patients who already have a stoma, technical inability to create either type of stoma, aged <18 years and inadequate cooperation. Patients scheduled for anterior rectal resection will be randomised intraoperatively in a 1:1 ratio to undergo either loop ileostomy or loop colostomy. The primary outcome is cumulative stoma-related adverse events within 60 days after primary surgery, measured using the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI). Secondary outcomes include all postoperative complications (measured using the CCI), number of hospital-free days within 30 days after primary surgery, quality of life at 2 months (measured using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaires-Core 30 and Colorectal 29), complications within 30 days after stoma closure (measured using the CCI) and kidney function (measured using estimated glomerular filtration rate) at 1 year. Tertiary outcomes are survival, kidney function and number of stoma site hernias at 5 years. The sample size was calculated to detect a mean difference of five CCI points between groups, resulting in a final sample size of 350 patients. Microbiome samples will be collected from the faeces and mucous membrane from patients in Helsinki University Hospital.Ethics and disseminationThe Ethics Committee of Helsinki University Hospital approved the study (approval number 4579/2024). The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed academic journals.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT06650085, registered on 20 August 2024. Protocol version: Version 3.0, dated 17 April 2025.

PurposeColostomy is a frequent event in oncological or inflammatory bowel diseases. Its related morbidity includes retraction, infection and parastomal hernia (PH), which is a quite common late complication. Several surgical options are available for PH repair, the majority including mesh. However, results are often disappointing with relevant recurrence rates, up to 33%. The study aim was to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of prophylactic biosynthetic mesh (BIO-A®, polyglycolide-trimethylene carbonate copolymer) placed during colostomy fashioning, in reducing PH. A prospective randomized controlled double-blind trial was conducted from January 2014 to December 2019 to compare conventional end-colostomy with end-colostomy reinforced with BIO-A mesh in ante-rectus position in patients undergoing colon diversion in emergency surgery.MethodsPatients were clinically followed up at 3, 6, and 12 months and received a CT scan at 6 and 12 months. The postoperative morbidity and wound events were also evaluated.Results55 patients receiving conventional colostomy considered as Control Group and 55 patients receiving BIO-A mesh supported colostomy (Mesh Group) were included in the study. At 12 months, the incidence of PH was 9 (12.7%) and 24 (43.6%) in the Mesh Group and Control Group, respectively (p < 0.05). Postoperative morbidity was similar between Mesh Group and Control Group (7 [12.7%] vs 4 [7.3%], respectively; p = 0.340). The multivariable analysis showed that not using a mesh (p = 0.042), age > 70 years (p = 0.041), diabetes (p < 0.001), colon dilation > 7 cm (p < 0.0001) and COPD (p = 0.009) were all related with postoperative PH.ConclusionsThe prophylactic BIO-A mesh positioning during colostomy is an effective procedure reducing PH incidence at a 1 years follow-up guaranteeing low postoperative morbidity.Study dataset is available on ClinicalTrials.gov IDNCT04436887.

Purpose Parastomal hernia (PSH) is a common complication after colostomy formation. Recent studies indicate that mesh implantation during formation of a colostomy might prevent a PSH. To determine if placement of a retromuscular mesh at the colostomy site is a feasible, safe and effective procedure in preventing a parastomal hernia, we performed a multicentre randomized controlled trial in 11 large teaching hospitals and three university centres in The Netherlands. Methods Augmentation of the abdominal wall with a retromuscular light-weight polypropylene mesh (Parietene Light™, Covidien) around the trephine was compared with traditional colostomy formation. Patients undergoing elective open formation of a permanent end-colostomy were eligible. 150 patients were randomized between 2010 and 2012. Primary endpoint of the PREVENT trial is the incidence of parastomal hernia. Secondary endpoints are morbidity, pain, quality of life, mortality and cost-effectiveness. This article focussed on the early results of the PREVENT trial and, therefore, operation time, postoperative morbidity, pain, and quality of life were measured. Results Outcomes represent results after 3 months of follow-up. A total of 150 patients were randomized. Mean operation time of the mesh group ( N  = 72) was significantly longer than in the control group ( N  = 78) (182.6 vs. 156.8 min; P  = 0.018). Four (2.7 %) peristomal infections occurred of which one (1.4 %) in the mesh group. No infection of the mesh occurred. Most of the other infections were infections of the perineal wound, equally distributed over both groups. No statistical differences were discovered in stoma or mesh-related complications, fistula or stricture formation, pain, or quality of life. Conclusions During open and elective formation of an end-colostomy, primary placement of a retromuscular light-weight polypropylene mesh for prevention of a parastomal hernia is a safe and feasible procedure. The PREVENT trial is registered at: http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=2018 .

Objective This study investigated the use of a modified laparoscopic repair of paraostomy hernia technique, called “D-Type parastomal hernia repair surgery” which combines abdominal wall and extraperitoneal stoma reconstruction, in patients with parastomal hernia (PSH) following colorectal stoma surgery. The aim was to determine whether D-type parastomal hernia repair surgery is a promising surgical approach compared to the traditional laparoscopic repair technique (Sugarbaker method) for patients with PSH. Methods PSH patients were selected and retrospectively divided into two groups: the study group underwent D-type parastomal hernia repair, while the control group underwent laparoscopic Sugarbaker repair. Clinical data from both groups were analyzed. Result Compared to control group ( n  = 68), the study group undergoing D-type stoma lateral hernia repair had significant increase in total operative time (98.82 ± 12.37 min vs 124.61 ± 34.99 min, p  < 0.001). The study group also showed better postoperative stoma bowel function scores in sensory ability, frequency of bowel movements, and clothing cleanliness without a stoma bag ( p  = 0.037, 0.001, 0.002). The treatment cost was significantly higher in the control group (3899.97 ± 260.00$ vs 3215.91 ± 230.03$, p  < 0.001). The postoperative recurrence rate in the control group was 26.4%, while in the study group, it was 4.3%, with a significant statistical difference ( p  = 0.024). In terms of long-term postoperative complications, the study group had an overall lower incidence compared to the control group ( p  = 0.035). Other parameters showed no significant differences between the two groups. Conclusion The study suggests that D-type parastomal hernia repair surgery is a safe and feasible procedure. Compared to traditional surgery, it can reduce the recurrence of lateral hernia, improve postoperative stoma bowel function, and save medical resources.