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
In the current work we are aiming to compare between the mesh-reinforced stoma closure and the anatomical closure in terms of the risk of developing surgical site incisional hernia (SSIH),incidence of surgical site infection , post-operative Pain and Hospital stay
Intestinal stomas are used to divert intestinal content as a treatment option. Faecal flow is diverted from the site of the pathology by bringing the end or a loop of bowel through the anterior abdominal wall; any segments of the colon can be used, as well as the distal part of the ileum. A stoma may be temporary or permanent according to the condition. Temporary stomas are usually followed by elective stoma closure 6-8 weeks after. Though considered a relative safe procedure, studies reported high morbidity rates following stoma closure with different complications.
Incisional hernia following stoma closure occurs in up to 30% of patients. Incisional hernia affects quality of life, in regards to pain, physical function, ability to work, and cosmoses. Other serious complications due to bowel obstruction with incarceration or strangulation can occur which may necessitate reoperation. Mesh-reinforced stoma closure shown to decrease the incidence of surgical site incisional hernia (SSIH) with low complications risk. Though there is a debate about its efficacy due to lake of data ,and doubt to use a mesh in contaminated wounds due to fear of wounds complications which may necessitate mesh extraction or longer hospital stay make it hard for many surgeons to use Mesh-reinforced stoma closure.
In the current work we are aiming to compare between the mesh-reinforced stoma closure and the anatomical closure in terms of the risk of developing (SSIH),incidence of surgical site infection ,post-operative Pain and Hospital stay
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Group A | No Intervention |
| |
| Group B | Experimental |
|
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prolene mesh | Device | Application of mesh onlay post stoma closure |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Incisional (stoma-site) hernia rate | Proportion of participants developing an incisional hernia at the stoma site, confirmed by physical examination or imaging (ultrasound/CT). | Up to 12 months postoperatively |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Surgical site infection rate | Rate of postoperative infections at the stoma closure site | Within 30 days postoperatively |
| post-operative Pain | Pain at the stoma closure site measured using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Mostafa Thabet, Professor | Assiut University | Study Chair |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assiut university hospitals | Asyut | Asyut Governorate | Egypt |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19221766 | Background | Chow A, Tilney HS, Paraskeva P, Jeyarajah S, Zacharakis E, Purkayastha S. The morbidity surrounding reversal of defunctioning ileostomies: a systematic review of 48 studies including 6,107 cases. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2009 Jun;24(6):711-23. doi: 10.1007/s00384-009-0660-z. Epub 2009 Feb 17. | |
| 3524742 | Background |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D000069290 | Incisional Hernia |
| D013530 | Surgical Wound Infection |
| D010149 | Pain, Postoperative |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D006547 | Hernia |
| D020763 | Pathological Conditions, Anatomical |
| D013568 | Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |
| D011183 | Postoperative Complications |
Not provided
Not provided
Participants are randomized into two parallel groups. The intervention group undergoes stoma reversal with prophylactic onlay Prolene mesh reinforcement, while the control group undergoes standard anatomical closure without mesh. Each participant receives only one assigned surgical technique, and outcomes are compared between the two groups.
Not provided
Not provided
This is an open-label study. Neither the participants, the treating surgeons, nor the outcome assessors are blinded to the assigned intervention due to the surgical nature of the procedures.
Not provided
| Daily for the first 7 postoperative days |
| Length of hospital stay | Number of days spent in hospital following surgery. | through study completion, an average of 2 years |
| Postoperative complications | Any postoperative complications, including wound dehiscence, ileus, bowel obstruction, or reoperation, graded according to Clavien-Dindo classification. | Within 30 days postoperatively |
| Operative time | Total duration of surgery measured in minutes. | Intraoperative (from skin incision to skin closure) |
| Intraoperative blood loss | During surgery | through study completion, an average of 2 years |
| Williams NS, Nasmyth DG, Jones D, Smith AH. De-functioning stomas: a prospective controlled trial comparing loop ileostomy with loop transverse colostomy. Br J Surg. 1986 Jul;73(7):566-70. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800730717. |
| 29314655 | Background | Reinforcement of Closure of Stoma Site (ROCSS) Collaborative and the West Midlands Research Collaborative. Randomized controlled trial of standard closure of a stoma site vs biological mesh reinforcement: study protocol of the ROCSS trial. Colorectal Dis. 2018 Feb;20(2):O46-O54. doi: 10.1111/codi.13997. |
| 32588121 | Background | Mohamedahmed AYY, Stonelake S, Zaman S, Hajibandeh S. Closure of stoma site with or without prophylactic mesh reinforcement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2020 Aug;35(8):1477-1488. doi: 10.1007/s00384-020-03681-0. Epub 2020 Jun 25. |
| 23716028 | Background | Liu DS, Banham E, Yellapu S. Prophylactic mesh reinforcement reduces stomal site incisional hernia after ileostomy closure. World J Surg. 2013 Sep;37(9):2039-45. doi: 10.1007/s00268-013-2109-3. |
| 32511101 | Background | Lee JH, Ahn BK, Lee KH. Complications Following the Use of Biologic Mesh in Ileostomy Closure: A Retrospective, Comparative Study. Wound Manag Prev. 2020 Jun;66(6):16-22. |
| D010335 | Pathologic Processes |
| D014946 | Wound Infection |
| D007239 | Infections |
| D010146 | Pain |
| D009461 | Neurologic Manifestations |
| D012816 | Signs and Symptoms |