A Comparative Study between Santulli Ileostomy and Loop Ileostomy

Kumar, Vijayendra; Sathyanarayana, K

doi:10.9790/0853-150733640

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These agreed with Kumar et al who found that there was a significantly higher incidence rate of leakage of liquid stool after loss of the seal of the ileostomy bag than that of the colostomy bag thus making patients suffer more of financial problems pressing more also towards early closure of the stoma which may not be applicable when there is a risk of permanent stoma. 12,13 Another study by Fazekas et al reported a significantly higher incidence of small intestinal obstruction with loop ileostomy group of patients rather than the loop transverse colostomy group (31% vs. 7%) which is in accordance with other studies. 14,15 Small intestinal obstruction before loop ileostomy closure has been reported to be due to adhesions adjacent to the stoma, increase the chance of twisting the small intestine, retraction of loop ileostomy and herniation of proximal bowel lateral to the ileostomy.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Loop ileostomy versus transverse colostomy as a covering stoma after anterior resection for rectal cancer

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Most colorectal cancer occurs due to lifestyle and increase age with only a minority of cases associated with underlying genetic disorders and environmental factors enables us to move in the direction of a complete assessment of disease risk. The objective of the present study was to compare between two different types of diverting stoma (loop ileostomy and transverse colostomy) as regard immediate and remote complications in patient with rectal cancer treated by restorative resection.Methods: A prospective randomized comparative clinical study was conducted on 50 patients who underwent anterior resection and low anterior resection for rectal cancer divided into two groups: Group I consisted of 25 patients who underwent by loop ileostomy. Group II consisted of 25 patients who underwent by loop transverse colostomy. All patients attended to surgical oncology unit of Sayed Galal hospital, Al Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt during the period from October 2018 to October 2019. Full history, routine, physical examination, routine and imaging investigations were done.Results: 80% and 84% of loop ileostomy and transverse colostomy patients had anterior resection, respectively with no statistically significant differences between the two studied groups regarding anterior resection. Patient who treated by loop ileostomy had deceased time of closure (5.2±0.25 weeks) and stay in hospital (5.16±1.65 and 3.29±0.55 days) than those treated by transverse colostomy (9.6±0.37 weeks) and (7.44±2.58 and 6.03±1.97 days) respectively.Conclusions: Egyptians have unique tumor characters and behavior, and different compliance with treatment regimens. Multicenter prospective studies, as well as evolving Egyptian treatment guidelines are needed to address this.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Loop ileostomy versus transverse colostomy as a covering stoma after anterior resection for rectal cancer

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…23 There is a significantly higher incidence rate of leakage of liquid stool after loss of the seal of the ileostomy bag than that of the colostomy bag thus making patients suffer more of financial problems pressing more also towards early closure of the stoma which may not be applicable when there is a risk of permanent stoma. 25,27 As described in previous studies, the LTC has higher incidence of stoma prolapse without reaching statistical significance in present study (p=0.316). 28 This is because the larger fascial defect created during LTC construction.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 64%

Loop transverse colostomy versus loop ileostomy after low and ultralow anterior resection

Ali

2018

Int Surg J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Since the introduction of sphincter saving procedures for low and mid-rectal carcinoma and the associated high anastomotic leakage rate is a matter of troublesome. There is a consensus between surgeons that diverting proximal stoma decreases the incidence of clinical leakage. But the choice between loop transverse colostomy (LTC) and loop ileostomy (LI) still a matter of debate. In this study we tried to compare both methods and evaluate the outcome of each.Methods: This is a prospective observational study included 28 patients suffering from mid- or low-rectal cancer who underwent elective low anterior resection (LARs), admitted to Sohag University Hospital between July 2013 to July 2017. Patients were randomly allocated into two groups; group (A) included 15 patients and managed with LTC, and group (B) included 13 patients and managed with LI. The data of the patients were collected, tabulated and analyzed, with special consideration of the general outcome measures related to stoma construction, special outcome measures related to stoma construction, and the outcome measures related to stoma closure. All of the patients were followed up for 6 months.Results: Author found a significantly higher incidence rate of skin excoriation (p<0.001), leaks from the appliance (p<0.005), in the LI group than in the LTC group and higher incidence of parastomal hernia (p=0.042) in the LTC than in the LI. Also, author found a significantly higher incidence rate of intestinal obstruction in the LI group (p<0.001), also we found a significantly higher incidence of wound infection after stoma closure (p=0.006) in the LTC group than in the LI group. The mean time to first bowel movement (days) was earlier in the LI than LTC group and showing also a significant value (p<0.001). The mean cumulative total hospital stay was significantly longer in the LTC group than in the LI group (p<0.001).Conclusions: LTC and LI; both have advantages and disadvantages and the use of any for fecal diversion after low and mid-rectal carcinoma should be considered for every patient individually according to his circumstances.

show abstract

“…In the study performed by Kumar et al 6 reported that Santulli ileostomy is effective with lower morbidity and complication rates especially skin excoriation, ostomy prolapsed, and failure to thrive as compared to loop ileostomy, which can be used as an alternative to loop ileostomy. In another work performed by Eltayeb et al 3 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparative study between Santulli ileostomy and loop ileostomy in neonates with meconium ileus

Askarpour¹,

Ayatipour²,

Peyvasteh³

et al. 2020

ABCD, arq. bras. cir. dig.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Meconium ileus is a common cause of intestinal obstruction in neonates that different surgical methods have been described for its management such as Santulli and loop ileostomy. Aim: To evaluate and compare clinical efficacy of Santulli and loop ileostomy in neonates with meconium ileus. Methods: In this retrospective study, 58 patients with meconium ileus were evaluated. After analyses of hospital records, 53 patients with completed hospital records were included. Demographic information, surgery parameters and postoperative complications were extracted from the hospital records or calling parents. Results: Skin excoriation (21.4% vs. 84%, p<0.001), ostomy prolapsed (0 vs. 28%, p=0.003), and surgical site infection (7.1% vs. 28%, p=0.044) was significantly lower in Santulli ileostomy group. Furthermore, ileostomy output in first week (70.53±15.11 ml vs. 144.6±19.99 ml, p<0.001) and in 4th week (2.14±4.98 ml vs. 18.4±17.95 ml, p<0.001) was significantly lower in Santulli ileostomy group as compared to loop ileostomy group. Finally, hospital stay in Santulli ileostomy group was 12±2.34 and in loop ileostomy 14.24±1.47 days (p<0.001). Conclusion: Santulli ileostomy is better than loop ileostomy due to significant less frequency of surgical site infection, skin excoriation, prolapse of ostomy, ileostomy volume output and hospitalization time.

show abstract

A Comparative Study between Santulli Ileostomy and Loop Ileostomy

Abstract: Abstract

Cited by 5 publications

References 17 publications

Loop ileostomy versus transverse colostomy as a covering stoma after anterior resection for rectal cancer

Loop ileostomy versus transverse colostomy as a covering stoma after anterior resection for rectal cancer

Loop transverse colostomy versus loop ileostomy after low and ultralow anterior resection

A comparative study between Santulli ileostomy and loop ileostomy in neonates with meconium ileus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About