Loop Ileostomy Closure as a 23-hour Stay Procedure, a Multi-center Randomized Controlled Trial

Ileostomy - Stoma

loop ileostomy, diversion ileostomy, ileostomy closure

The purpose of this study is to assess the safety and feasibility of ileostomy closure performed in a 23 hours hospitalization setting, using a multi-center, open-label, randomized controlled trial comparing patients being hospitalized overnight (discharged on the day after surgery) to patients being hospitalized as per the current conventional care after ileostomy closure with both groups following a standardized enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway specific to ileostomy closure. Primary outcome will be total length of hospital stay in days and secondary outcomes, measured at 30 days, will include readmission rate, postoperative complication rate minor and severe, postoperative ileus rate, postoperative surgical site infection rate and mortality rate.

Rationale : Loop ileostomy is defined by bringing a loop of small bowel out onto the surface of the skin to allow diversion of the fecal stream. It is a common procedure that is conjointly done with colorectal surgeries with the objective to protect intestinal anastomosis at high risk of leaking. Loop ileostomy closure is then performed in the months following the initial surgery when the anastomosis has healed. Often thought of as a simple procedure, it is still associated with a significant postoperative morbidity rate consisting mostly of postoperative ileus. In the CHU de Québec-Université Laval, patients are hospitalized for a median of five days until their bowels open up while no active care is given. This represents 645 days of hospitalization each year for Hôpital Saint-François d'Assise (HSFA), Hôtel-Dieu de Québec (HDQ) and Centre Hospitalier de l'Université Laval (CHUL). Hence, there is a clear need to determine if the investigator can improve the outcomes following ileostomy closure by applying a standardized enhanced recovery pathway specific to ileostomy closure to the point where the surgery can be performed in a twenty-three hours hospitalization setting. Objective : The purpose of this study is to assess the safety and feasibility of ileostomy closure performed in a 23 hours hospitalization setting, using a multi-center, open-label, randomized controlled trial comparing patients being hospitalized overnight (discharged on the day after surgery) to patients being hospitalized as per the current conventional care after ileostomy closure with both groups following a standardized enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway specific to ileostomy closure. Primary outcome will be total length of hospital stay in days and secondary outcomes, measured at 30 days, will include readmission rate, postoperative complication rate minor and severe, postoperative ileus rate, postoperative surgical site infection rate and mortality rate. Hypothesis : The investigator believes patients randomized to the group 23-hour stay will have reduced total length of hospital stay compared to patients randomized to the group conventional hospitalization after ileostomy closure. Methods : Healthy adults (ASA I and II) undergoing elective ileostomy closure who consented to take part in the study will be enrolled in a standardized enhanced recovery pathway specific to ileostomy closure. Once surgery is completed, they will be randomized to either 23-hour stay or conventional hospitalization. Data on postoperative outcomes will be gathered prospectively until 30 days after surgery and will include total length of hospital stay in days, readmissions, postoperative complications, more precisely postoperative ileus and surgical site infections, as well as mortality. Clinical significance : If safety and feasibility of a fast discharge of patients is demonstrated by this study, it would then mean that patients could be discharged from hospital less than 24 hours after a loop ileostomy closure. It could potentially lower the consequences of a long hospital stay for patients, such as risks of nosocomial infections, thromboembolic events, and hospital acquired autonomy loss.

No related papers found yet.

Canada