Closure of transverse loop colostomy and loop ileostomy.
OA: closed
AI-generated summary
A retrospective audit of 77 patients found that loop ileostomy closure for pouches had a higher complication rate than transverse loop colostomy closure, leading to selective use and supporting primary wound closure without drainage.
One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works
Abstract
The aim of a defunctioning stoma is to protect patients from the consequences of faecal leakage and pelvic sepsis, should it occur. A retrospective audit of 77 patients who had undergone closure of a loop stoma between 1988 and 1996 was performed. Sixty patients had either transverse loop colostomy (52) or loop ileostomy (8) to defunction distal colorectal/anal anastomoses or pathology, and 17 patients had a loop ileostomy to defunction an ileoanal pouch. Those who had restorative proctocolectomy experienced a much higher (24%) complication rate than the loop colostomy group (5%), despite similar perioperative care and surgery performed by surgeons of equivalent seniority. The complication rate of ileostomy closure in pouch patients is similar to other published series. As a result of these findings, a selective approach to the use of loop ileostomy to protect pouches has been introduced. The absence of wound infections in our series would suggest that primary closure of the stomal wound without drainage can be achieved.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
Citation neighborhood (no data yet)
We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.
Source provenance
- europepmc
- last seen: 2026-09-20T09:27:46.357103+00:00