Selective omission of loop ileostomy in restorative proctocolectomy

Abstract

Omission of a temporary ileostomy in patients undergoing restorative proctocolectomy is controversial. Although fewer operations may be required and some complications avoided, the risks of anastomotic dehiscence and pelvic sepsis may be greater. Patients undergoing restorative proctocolectomy with no ileostomy (Group NI, n = 72) were compared retrospectively with patients given a conventional loop ileostomy (Group I, n = 30). Criteria for avoiding faecal diversion included: absence of severe acute colitis, good nutritional status and favourable surgery with creation of a sound, tension-free anastomosis. Steroid intake was not a contraindication to single-stage surgery. Delayed stomas were necessary in 8% of Group NI. For Groups NI and I, the rates of anastomotic leak (3% vs 3%), pelvic sepsis without demonstrable leak (3% vs 0%), pouch fistula (3% vs 10%) and intestinal obstruction (8% vs 3%) were similar. Closure of the temporary ileostomy in Group I was associated with a 10% complication rate. Cumulative post-operative hospital stay was significantly less in Group NI (median 11 vs 16 days). Functional results at 1 year were similar. A temporary loop ileostomy can be safely avoided in carefully selected patients undergoing restorative proctocolectomy.