Impact of a defunctioning ileostomy and time to stoma closure on bowel function after low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Bowel function
Ileostomy
Low anterior resection
Low anterior resection syndrome
Rectal cancer
Journal
Techniques in coloproctology
ISSN: 1128-045X
Titre abrégé: Tech Coloproctol
Pays: Italy
ID NLM: 9613614
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2021
07 2021
Historique:
received:
24
10
2020
accepted:
10
03
2021
pubmed:
2
4
2021
medline:
29
6
2021
entrez:
1
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Impaired bowel function after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer is a frequent problem with a major impact on quality of life. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of a defunctioning ileostomy, and time to ileostomy closure on bowel function after LAR for rectal cancer. We performed a systematic review based on the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. Comprehensive literature searches were conducted using PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases for articles published from 1989 up to August 2019. Analysis was performed using Review Manager (version 5.3) using a random-effects model. The search yielded 11 studies (1400 patients) that reported on functional outcome after LAR with at least 1 year follow-up, except for one study. Five scales were used: the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) score, the Wexner score, the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Centre Bowel Function Instrument, the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life scale, and the Hallbook questionnaire. Based on seven studies, major LARS occurred more often in the ileostomy group (OR 2.84, 95% CI, 1.70-4.75, p < 0.0001: I The risk of developing major LARS seems higher with a defunctioning ileostomy. A prolonged time to ileostomy closure seems to reinforce the negative effect on bowel function; therefore, early reversal should be an important part of the patient pathway.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Impaired bowel function after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer is a frequent problem with a major impact on quality of life. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of a defunctioning ileostomy, and time to ileostomy closure on bowel function after LAR for rectal cancer.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review based on the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. Comprehensive literature searches were conducted using PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases for articles published from 1989 up to August 2019. Analysis was performed using Review Manager (version 5.3) using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
The search yielded 11 studies (1400 patients) that reported on functional outcome after LAR with at least 1 year follow-up, except for one study. Five scales were used: the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) score, the Wexner score, the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Centre Bowel Function Instrument, the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life scale, and the Hallbook questionnaire. Based on seven studies, major LARS occurred more often in the ileostomy group (OR 2.84, 95% CI, 1.70-4.75, p < 0.0001: I
CONCLUSIONS
The risk of developing major LARS seems higher with a defunctioning ileostomy. A prolonged time to ileostomy closure seems to reinforce the negative effect on bowel function; therefore, early reversal should be an important part of the patient pathway.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33792822
doi: 10.1007/s10151-021-02436-5
pii: 10.1007/s10151-021-02436-5
pmc: PMC8187190
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
751-760Références
Colorectal Dis. 2017 Sep 29;:
pubmed: 28963744
Ann Surg. 2017 Nov;266(5):870-877
pubmed: 28746154
Gut Microbes. 2017 Sep 3;8(5):467-478
pubmed: 28622070
ANZ J Surg. 2020 Mar;90(3):300-307
pubmed: 32040983
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2018 Aug;44(8):1261-1267
pubmed: 29778617
Dis Colon Rectum. 2011 Jun;54(6):747-52
pubmed: 21552061
Colorectal Dis. 2017 Dec;19(12):1050-1057
pubmed: 29028289
Int J Surg. 2018 Aug;56:234-241
pubmed: 29936195
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2015 Sep;30(9):1185-92
pubmed: 26054385
Gut Liver. 2014 Mar;8(2):170-6
pubmed: 24672659
Dis Colon Rectum. 2017 Aug;60(8):800-806
pubmed: 28682965
Dis Colon Rectum. 2000 Jan;43(1):9-16; discussion 16-7
pubmed: 10813117
Ann Surg. 2017 Feb;265(2):284-290
pubmed: 27322187
Dig Surg. 2019;36(5):409-417
pubmed: 29990965
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2017 Jan;32(1):83-88
pubmed: 27695976
Gut. 1999 Jan;44(1):77-80
pubmed: 9862829
Ann Surg Oncol. 2019 Mar;26(3):746-755
pubmed: 30536129
Br J Surg. 2019 Apr;106(5):645-652
pubmed: 30706439
Dis Colon Rectum. 2005 Jul;48(7):1353-65
pubmed: 15868235
ANZ J Surg. 2020 May;90(5):687-692
pubmed: 31701636
Control Clin Trials. 1996 Feb;17(1):1-12
pubmed: 8721797
Ann Surg. 2019 Jun;269(6):1124-1128
pubmed: 31082911
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 May 12;(5):CD006878
pubmed: 20464746
Tech Coloproctol. 2013 Apr;17(2):151-62
pubmed: 23076289
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2017 May;32(5):691-697
pubmed: 28130593
Colorectal Dis. 2017 May;19(5):485-490
pubmed: 27634544
Dis Colon Rectum. 2014 Oct;57(10):1162-8
pubmed: 25203371
Colorectal Dis. 2017 Jul;19 Suppl 1:18-36
pubmed: 28632309
Lancet Oncol. 2012 Sep;13(9):e403-8
pubmed: 22935240
Dis Colon Rectum. 2019 Jan;62(1):14-20
pubmed: 30394987
Ann Surg. 2012 May;255(5):922-8
pubmed: 22504191
Ann Coloproctol. 2015 Feb;31(1):23-8
pubmed: 25745623
Colorectal Dis. 2015 Oct;17(10):908-16
pubmed: 25807963
Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2020 Feb 05;6:12
pubmed: 32042438
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2015 Nov;41(11):1493-9
pubmed: 26219852
Ann Coloproctol. 2019 Aug;35(4):187-193
pubmed: 31487766
Ann Coloproctol. 2014 Jun;30(3):109-14
pubmed: 24999460
Semin Surg Oncol. 2000 Apr-May;18(3):249-58
pubmed: 10757891
BMJ Open. 2018 Oct 15;8(10):e023305
pubmed: 30327406
Int J Surg. 2010;8(5):336-41
pubmed: 20171303