ArticleAnnals of coloproctology2024
Protective loop ileostomy or colostomy? A risk evaluation of all common complications.
Article in Annals of coloproctology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-analysis: loop ileostomy versus colostomy to prevent complications of anterior resection for rectal cancer.International journal of colorectal disease · 2024Pooled it
- Prevention and management of anastomotic leakage after colorectal resection: evolving trends among Italian surgeons. A SICCR survey.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Observational
- Impact of ileostomy reversal on gut microbiome and metabolome in rectal cancer: a review of mechanisms and clinical consequences.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Review
- One-Stitch Versus Traditional Ileostomy After Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Gut microbiome and plasma metabolome alterations in ileostomy and after closure of ileostomy.Microbiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Effect of one-stitch method of temporary ileostomy on the surgical outcomes and complications after laparoscopic low anterior resection in rectal cancer patients: a propensity score matching analysis.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- The Differences in Postoperative Nursing Between Temporary Ileostomy and Temporary Colostomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Nursing open · 2025Observational
- The Role of Colon in Isolated Intestinal Transplantation: Description of 4 Cases.International journal of surgical oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeProtective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice.
methodsPatients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared.
resultsThere were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13-7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22-4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22-0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542).
conclusionWe suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.