Do different methods of specimen extraction in laparoscopic low rectal cancer surgery affect loop ileostomy closure?

Abstract Introduction: The aim of this study was to compare whether laparoscopic low rectal cancer surgery with three different specimen extraction methods affects loop ileostomy closure. Materials and methods A consecutive series of patients with low rectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection plus protective loop ileostomy (LAR-PLI) were enrolled. Three main techniques, namely specimen extraction through auxiliary incision (EXAI), specimen extraction through stoma incision (EXSI), and specimen eversion and extra-abdominal resection (EVER), were employed. The postoperative outcomes of the three techniques and the impact on loop ileostomy closure were compared. Results In all, 254 patients were enrolled in this study: 104 (40.9%) in the EXAI group, 104 (40.9%) in the EXSI group, and 46 (18.1%) in the EVER group. For primary surgery, EXAI group had significantly longer operative time (P < 0.001), more intraoperative bleeding (P < 0.001), longer length of abdominal incision (P༜0.001), longer time to first flatus (P < 0.001), longer time to first defecation (P < 0.001), longer time to first eat (P < 0.001), and longer postoperative hospital stays (P = 0.005) than the EXSI and EVER groups. The primary postoperative complication rate in the EXAI and EVER group was significantly higher than in the EXSI group (P = 0.005). In loop ileostomy closure, EXAI group had significantly longer operative time (P = 0.001), more bleeding volume and longer postoperative hospital stays (P < 0.001) than the EXSI and EVER groups. Conclusions All three techniques of LAR-PLI for low rectal cancer were safe and feasible, but specimen extraction via EXAI had no advantages in terms of early postoperative recovery and loop ileostomy closure.