Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
To evaluate if the Ghost Ileostomy is really advantageous in laparoscopy we conducted a prospective randomized controlled study comparing 2 groups of patients undergoing anterior resection of the rectum laparoscopically. In the first group of patients at the end of the procedure was always performed a Ghost Ileostomy while in the second group no protective stoma was built at the end of the intervention.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ghost Ileostomy | Experimental | The patients were subjected to laparoscopic anterior rectal resection with performance of ghost ileostomy |
|
| No protective stoma | Placebo Comparator | The patients were subjected to laparoscopic anterior rectal resection without simultaneous construction of any protective stoma. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ghost Ileostomy | Procedure | At the end of Laparoscopic Anterior Rectal Resection, once the colorectal anastomosis was performed, the terminal ileum was identified and a window in the mesentery was created to pass a rubber tube (we usually use an urinary catheter) around the intestinal loop. The tube was subsequently exteriorized trough the trocar incision in the right flank. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Presence of Clinical Evident Anastomotic Leak | 15 days |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Postoperative complication | 15 days | |
| Ghost Ileostomy complications | 15 days |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
|