ArticleScientific reports2024
Complications associated with loop ileostomy reversal delayed greater than twelve months.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Safety and feasibility of early discharge (≤ 23 h) following loop ileostomy reversal: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Pooled it
- Letter to the editor regarding "Novel self-reversing tube ileostomy as an alternative for conventional loop ileostomy for fecal diversion".Turkish journal of surgery · 2026Article
- Delayed Loop Ileostomy Reversal Increases the Risk of Colitis and Clostridium difficile Infection.ANZ journal of surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diverting loop ileostomy is performed after colectomy to allow for anastomotic healing, and prevention of pelvic sepsis when an anastomotic leak occurs. There is no consensus on the optimal timing of ileostomy closure, and there is limited data on complications associated with ileostomy closure greater than 12 months after creation. The aim of this study is to investigate outcomes of delayed loop ileostomy closure greater than 12 months after creation. Patients undergoing loop ileostomy closure between 2013 and 2023 at Carilion Medical Center, in Roanoke, VA were reviewed. Cohorts compared were defined as Control Group (closure < 4 months) and Delayed Group (closure > 12 months). Demographics and outcomes were compared. Statistical comparisons were performed using either Wilcoxon rank sum test, Pearson's Chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test. Statistical modeling included binary logistic regression for 30-day readmissions and a generalized linear modeling for days till bowel function returns. Adjusted odds ratios, confidence intervals, and p-values were calculated. There were 135 patients in the Control Group and 19 patients in the Delayed Group. Demographics were similar between the groups except for a higher percentage of patients with diabetes, renal failure and history of cancer in Delayed Group (all p < 0.05). Operative time was longer for Delayed loop ileostomy closure (p < 0.05). Patients in the Delayed Group demonstrated a higher hospital readmission rate within 30 days (p < 0.05). Both groups had similar return of bowel function on post-operative day 2, similar length of stay, and similar rates of postoperative ileus (p = NS). Delayed loop ileostomy closure more than 12 months after creation does not delay return of bowel function but may lead to higher hospital readmission rates within 30 days.
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.