SynthesisInternational journal of colorectal disease2026
Safety and feasibility of early discharge (≤ 23 h) following loop ileostomy reversal: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International journal of colorectal disease, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe standard practice for postoperative management of loop ileostomy reversal has been standard admission with several days of inpatient observation, largely to monitor for postoperative complications. These primarily include anastomotic leak, postoperative ileus, and surgical site infection. In recent years, several studies have piloted ambulatory or short-stay pathways; however, the safety and impact of these pathways on complications remains unclear.
methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with PRISMA. It was also conducted in accordance with a prospectively registered protocol (PROSPERO CRD420251252408). Adults undergoing loop ileostomy reversal discharged within 23 h of surgery (including same-day discharge (SDD), short-stay protocols (LOS 1)) were compared with patients managed with standard admission. Primary outcomes were anastomotic leak, postoperative ileus, and surgical site infection at 30 postoperative days; secondary outcomes included readmission, overall complications including Clavien-Dindo-graded events, and mortality. Random-effects models were used to pool odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals.
resultsTwelve studies (11 retrospective cohort studies, 1 RCT), comprising 30,040 patients were included. Of these, 2611 (8.7%) patients underwent ambulatory or short-stay reversal. There was no significant difference between early discharge and standard cohorts in anastomotic leak (pooled OR 1.31, 95% CI 0.24-7.32), postoperative ileus (pooled OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.16-1.55), or surgical site infection (pooled OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.38-1.51). However, the low event rates and wide Cis likely preclude confident exclusion of a clinically meaningful effect. Similarly, readmission rates showed no difference between groups (pooled OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.78-1.19). Early discharge following reversal was, however, associated with a modest but statistically significant reduction in overall postoperative complications (pooled OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.50-0.98), with comparable rates of major (Clavien-Dindo III-IV) complications and very low mortality in both groups.
conclusionsThis study suggests that early discharge following loop ileostomy reversal, if carried out as part of a structured perioperative pathway, appears to be safe, with no apparent increase in risk of any additional postoperative complications. However, the data available at present is dominated by largely retrospective cohort studies, with heterogenous discharge criteria, and inconsistency in intervention (SDD vs 23 h stay vs short-stay protocol), precluding any firm conclusions regarding equivalence with standard admission. Rather than advocating for its widespread adoption, these findings support the cautious implementation of early discharge pathways in select cohorts with prospectively collected outcomes. Adequately powered multicentre RCTs with standardisation of intervention and outcome measures are required before broader dissemination can be recommended. CLINICAL
trial registrationNot applicable. This study is not a clinical trial.
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.