TY - JOUR
T1 - Protective ileostomy creation after anterior resection of the rectum
T2 - Shared decision-making or still subjective?
AU - Balla, Andrea
AU - Saraceno, Federica
AU - Rullo, Marika
AU - Morales-Conde, Salvador
AU - Targarona Soler, Eduardo M.
AU - Di Saverio, Salomone
AU - Guerrieri, Mario
AU - Lepiane, Pasquale
AU - Di Lorenzo, Nicola
AU - Adamina, Michel
AU - Alarcón, Isaias
AU - Arezzo, Alberto
AU - Bollo Rodriguez, Jesus
AU - Boni, Luigi
AU - Biondo, Sebastiano
AU - Carrano, Francesco Maria
AU - Chand, Manish
AU - Jenkins, John T.
AU - Davies, Justin
AU - Delgado Rivilla, Salvadora
AU - Delrio, Paolo
AU - Elmore, Ugo
AU - Espin-Basany, Eloy
AU - Fichera, Alessandro
AU - Flor Lorente, Blas
AU - Francis, Nader
AU - Gómez Ruiz, Marcos
AU - Hahnloser, Dieter
AU - Licardie, Eugenio
AU - Martinez, Carmen
AU - Ortenzi, Monica
AU - Panis, Yves
AU - Pastor Idoate, Carlos
AU - Paganini, Alessandro M.
AU - Pera, Miguel
AU - Perinotti, Roberto
AU - Popowich, Daniel A.
AU - Rockall, Timothy
AU - Rosati, Riccardo
AU - Sartori, Alberto
AU - Scoglio, Daniele
AU - Shalaby, Mostafa
AU - Simó Fernández, Vicente
AU - Smart, Neil J.
AU - Spinelli, Antonino
AU - Sylla, Patricia
AU - Tanis, Pieter J.
AU - Valdes-Hernandez, Javier
AU - Wexner, Steven D.
AU - Sileri, Pierpaolo
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.
PY - 2023/4
Y1 - 2023/4
N2 - Aim: The choice of whether to perform protective ileostomy (PI) after anterior resection (AR) is mainly guided by risk factors (RFs) responsible for the development of anastomotic leakage (AL). However, clear guidelines about PI creation are still lacking in the literature and this is often decided according to the surgeon's preferences, experiences or feelings. This qualitative study aims to investigate, by an open-ended question survey, the individual surgeon's decision-making process regarding PI creation after elective AR. Method: Fifty four colorectal surgeons took part in an electronic survey to answer the questions and describe what usually led their decision to perform PI. A content analysis was used to code the answers. To classify answers, five dichotomous categories (In favour/Against PI, Listed/Unlisted RFs, Typical/Atypical, Emotions/Non-emotions, Personal experience/No personal experience) have been developed. Results: Overall, 76% of surgeons were in favour of PI creation and 88% considered listed RFs in the question of whether to perform PI. Atypical answers were reported in 10% of cases. Emotions and personal experience influenced surgeons' decision-making process in 22% and 49% of cases, respectively. The most frequently considered RFs were the distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge (96%), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (88%), a positive intraoperative leak test (65%), blood loss (37%) and immunosuppression therapy (35%). Conclusion: The indications to perform PI following rectal cancer surgery lack standardization and evidence-based guidelines are required to inform practice. Until then, expert opinion can be helpful to assist the decision-making process in patients who have undergone AR for adenocarcinoma.
AB - Aim: The choice of whether to perform protective ileostomy (PI) after anterior resection (AR) is mainly guided by risk factors (RFs) responsible for the development of anastomotic leakage (AL). However, clear guidelines about PI creation are still lacking in the literature and this is often decided according to the surgeon's preferences, experiences or feelings. This qualitative study aims to investigate, by an open-ended question survey, the individual surgeon's decision-making process regarding PI creation after elective AR. Method: Fifty four colorectal surgeons took part in an electronic survey to answer the questions and describe what usually led their decision to perform PI. A content analysis was used to code the answers. To classify answers, five dichotomous categories (In favour/Against PI, Listed/Unlisted RFs, Typical/Atypical, Emotions/Non-emotions, Personal experience/No personal experience) have been developed. Results: Overall, 76% of surgeons were in favour of PI creation and 88% considered listed RFs in the question of whether to perform PI. Atypical answers were reported in 10% of cases. Emotions and personal experience influenced surgeons' decision-making process in 22% and 49% of cases, respectively. The most frequently considered RFs were the distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge (96%), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (88%), a positive intraoperative leak test (65%), blood loss (37%) and immunosuppression therapy (35%). Conclusion: The indications to perform PI following rectal cancer surgery lack standardization and evidence-based guidelines are required to inform practice. Until then, expert opinion can be helpful to assist the decision-making process in patients who have undergone AR for adenocarcinoma.
KW - Adenocarcinoma
KW - Anterior resection of the rectum
KW - Decision-making process
KW - Defunctioning stoma
KW - Protective ileostomy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85145283725&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/codi.16454
DO - 10.1111/codi.16454
M3 - Article
C2 - 36527323
AN - SCOPUS:85145283725
SN - 1462-8910
VL - 25
SP - 647
EP - 659
JO - Colorectal Disease
JF - Colorectal Disease
IS - 4
ER -