These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Clinical application of compound anastomotic device in protective terminal ileostomy during rectal cancer operation].
    Author: Huang Q, Cao F, Zhou J, Liu L, Ge B.
    Journal: Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2017 Dec 25; 20(12):1375-1380. PubMed ID: 29280120.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical effect of the application of "compound anastomotic device" on the high-risk colorectal anastomosis in rectal cancer patients undergoing protective ileostomy. METHODS: A total of 116 rectal cancer patients undergoing surgical procedure and prophylactic ileostomy in Tongji Hospital (90 cases) and The Third People's Hospital of Jingdezhen City (26 cases) from May 2011 to October 2016 were prospectively enrolled in the study. Paralleled control study and random digital table were applied. Fifty-eight cases received the compound anastomotic device for protective ileostomy (anastomosis ring group) and 58 cases underwent traditional terminal ileostomy (traditional group). The compound device was mainly composed of Valtrac biodegradable anastomosis ring, drainage tube and condom. Operational procedure was as follows: Ileocecum was freed through incision following laparoscopic total mesorectal excision; Two intestinal ring-shape purses were made; Intestinal wall between purse string was cut and the compound anastomotic device was put into; The purse was tightened and anastomosis ring was closed; The compound device was embed and pull out through the Trocar hole in the right lower abdomen; Then the drainage tube was fixed to the abdominal wall and connected with a drainage bag or an outer pocket. Incidence of anastomotic leak, stoma-related complications, hospital stay and total cost of two groups were compared. RESULTS: The general clinical data between two groups were not significantly different(all P>0.05). Stoma operation was performed successfully in all the patients of two groups. The stoma operation time was (34.6±13.8) min in anastomosis ring group and (25.8±14.0) min in traditional group with significant difference (t=2.123, P=0.035). Postoperative anastomotic leak occurred in 7 cases, including 3 cases with small fistula in traditional group and 4 cases in anastomosis ring group, of whom 1 case underwent left-low abdominal colonic stoma after necrotic intestine resection. All the patients were discharged within postoperative 7 to 37 days. In traditional group, 35 cases (60.3%) occurred stoma-related complications, the total hospitalization expenses was (65±28) thousand yuan, and the average hospital stay (including stoma reversion) was (23.6±11.8) days. In anastomosis ring group, 17 cases (29.3%) occurred stoma-related complications, the total hospitalization expense was (52±11) thousand Yuan, and the average hospital stay was (21.0±16.8) days. The incidence of anastomotic fistula and the hospital stay had no significant difference between two groups (all P>0.05). The stoma-related complication morbidity (χ2=3.216, P=0.002) and the total hospitalization expenses (t=2.683, P=0.027) in anastomosis ring group were significantly lower than those in traditional group. CONCLUSION: Compared with traditional ileostomy, the application of compound anastomotic device for protective ileostomy would be better to benefit the recovery of patients.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]