JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
A prospective randomized controlled trial comparing early postoperative complications in patients undergoing loop colostomy with and without a stoma rod.
Colorectal Disease 2017 July
AIM: A stoma rod or bridge has been traditionally placed under the bowel loop while constructing a loop colostomy. This is believed to prevent stomal retraction and provide better faecal diversion. However, the rod can cause complications such as mucosal congestion, oedema and necrosis. This single-centre prospective randomized controlled trial compared outcomes after creation of loop colostomy with and without a supporting stoma rod. The primary outcome studied was stoma retraction rate; other stoma-related complications were studied as secondary outcomes.
METHOD: One hundred and fifty-one patients were randomly allotted to one of two arms, colostomy with or without a supporting rod. Postoperative complications such as retraction, mucocutaneous separation, congestion and re-exploration for stoma-related complications were recorded.
RESULTS: There was no difference in the stoma retraction rate between the two arms (8.1% in the rod arm and 6.6% in the no-rod arm; P = 0.719). Stomal necrosis (10.7% vs 1.3%; P = 0.018), oedema (23% vs 3.9%; P = 0.001), congestion (20.3% vs 2.6%; P = 0.001) and re-admission rates (8.5% vs 0%; P = 0.027) were significantly increased in the arm randomized to the rod.
CONCLUSION: The stoma rod does not prevent stomal retraction. However, complication rates are significantly higher when a stoma rod is used. Routine use of a stoma rod for construction of loop colostomy can be avoided.
METHOD: One hundred and fifty-one patients were randomly allotted to one of two arms, colostomy with or without a supporting rod. Postoperative complications such as retraction, mucocutaneous separation, congestion and re-exploration for stoma-related complications were recorded.
RESULTS: There was no difference in the stoma retraction rate between the two arms (8.1% in the rod arm and 6.6% in the no-rod arm; P = 0.719). Stomal necrosis (10.7% vs 1.3%; P = 0.018), oedema (23% vs 3.9%; P = 0.001), congestion (20.3% vs 2.6%; P = 0.001) and re-admission rates (8.5% vs 0%; P = 0.027) were significantly increased in the arm randomized to the rod.
CONCLUSION: The stoma rod does not prevent stomal retraction. However, complication rates are significantly higher when a stoma rod is used. Routine use of a stoma rod for construction of loop colostomy can be avoided.
Full text links
Trending Papers
Management of type 2 diabetes in the new era.Hormones : International Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism 2023 September 14
Beta-blocker therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction: not all patients need it.Acute and critical care. 2023 August
The pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of sepsis-associated disseminated intravascular coagulation.Journal of Intensive Care 2023 May 24
Pharmacological Treatments in Heart Failure With Mildly Reduced and Preserved Ejection Fraction: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.JACC. Heart Failure 2023 August 26
Hypertensive Heart Failure.Journal of Clinical Medicine 2023 August 3
SGLT2 Inhibitors vs. GLP-1 Agonists to Treat the Heart, the Kidneys and the Brain.Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease 2023 July 31
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app