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
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Althaia Xarxa Assistencial Università ria de Manresa | OTHER |
| Hospital Mutua de Terrassa | OTHER |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
BACKGROUND Loop ileostomies are a type of stoma frequently used to protect high-risk colorectal anastomoses (surgical reconnection of the intestines), for example following rectal cancer resection. Temporary diversion of intestinal transit does not reduce the risk of anastomotic failure, but it does lower the morbidity and mortality associated with potential pelvic sepsis. Unfortunately, a second surgical procedure is required to restore intestinal continuity, and this carries its own risk of complications, the most common being postoperative ileus (temporary paralysis of bowel motility associated with abdominal distension, absence of bowel movements, nausea, and vomiting), which occurs in up to 20% of cases.
Several strategies have been proposed to reduce this problem, including stimulation of the efferent limb of the ileostomy (the part that is connected to the unused colon). This intervention consists of instilling a substance through the efferent limb of the ileostomy into the colon, simulating natural intestinal transit. It emerged as a harmless alternative aimed at reversing changes in the excluded colon in preparation for restoration of intestinal continuity. Several Spanish studies have investigated this technique, concluding that it is safe and significantly reduces the rate of postoperative ileus, thereby shortening hospital stay. Regarding the mechanism by which this intervention may be effective, there are studies investigating the changes that occur during diversion of intestinal transit:
Structural and microbiota-related changes favor the development of diversion colitis, a condition associated with erratic bowel habits once intestinal transit is restored. In an attempt to reverse this condition, several products have been tested for stimulation of the efferent limb of the ileostomy: probiotics, short chain fatty acids, saline solution with a thickening agent, and the patient's own intestinal contents, a well-tolerated and effective technique, in some cases superior to saline-based alternatives.
Overall, the available evidence is of low quality due to the limited number of patients studied and protocol variability. For this reason, we propose the implementation of a protocol for stimulation of the distal ileostomy limb prior to ileostomy closure, either with saline solution and thickening agent (the most widely described technique in the literature) or physiological stimulation using the patient's own intestinal contents.
The protocol consists of several sessions in which the instilled volume is progressively increased. This intervention will be performed on an outpatient basis, once daily, during the two weeks prior to surgery.
This process promotes the onset of bowel movements through the anus, which progressively become more formed and less frequent, approaching a more normal bowel habit. Only minor adverse effects have been described with this technique, including cramp-like abdominal pain in 27.6% of sessions. Recently, a nationwide study confirmed the favorable clinical outcomes following distal ileostomy limb stimulation before ileostomy closure. However, to our knowledge, no studies have evaluated its effect on intestinal microbiota.
HYPOTHESIS Distal limb stimulation of the ileostomy before its closure helps in the recovery of the colorectal microbiome and tissue. This associates with lower postoperative complications, specially postoperative ileus.
OBJECTIVES To gain knowledge regarding changes in intestinal microbiota composition before and after stimulation, in order to better understand recovery of intestinal function following this procedure. We will also analyze outcomes after ileostomy closure following efferent limb stimulation, determining the incidence of postoperative complications, particularly postoperative ileus.
METHODOLOGY
Patients will be randomly assigned to one of three groups:
Samples will be collected in all patients:
For a group of patients, the ones recruited at Hospital ClÃnic, rectal biopsies will also be collected before and after stimulation, to compare the effect of the treatment in the colonic tissue. We will collect clinical data during the whole process regarding postoperative complications.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control | No Intervention | No efferent limb stimulation. | |
| Serum stimulation | Active Comparator | Efferent limb stimulation with serum and thickener. |
|
| Physiological stimulation | Active Comparator | Efferent limb stimulation with the patient's own stoma output. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Serum stimulation | Other | The intervention has been described in previous studies, but the investigation of the microbiome changes associated with the obtained clinical results hasn't been described to date. Also, a study with three arms hasn't been published to date. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Changes in colorectal microbiome before and after efferent limb stimulation prior to stoma closure. | Descriptive analysis of the microbiome profiles of the three groups of patients (control, stimulation with serum, stimulation with own stoma output). | From enrollment to the end of follow-up at 3 months. |
| Changes in colorectal tissue before and after efferent limb stimulation prior to stoma closure. | Description of the tissue obtained by biopsy of the rectum, before and after stimulation of the ileostomy. | From the time of first biopsy (before stimulation) to the second one (surgery day). |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Postoperative complications after stoma closure. | Incidence of postoperative ileus and surgical site infection. | From the surgery (ileostomy closure) to 30 days follow-up. |
| Functional outcomes after efferent limb stimulation (LARS score) |
Not provided
Inclusion criteria:
Exclusion criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Romina Pena, MD | Contact | +34 617333153 | PENA@clinic.cat | |
| Miguel Pera, MD, PhD | Contact | +34 932275400 | 5559 | PERA@clinic.cat |
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Romina Pena, MD | Hospital Clinic of Barcelona | Principal Investigator |
Not provided
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 37994456 | Background | Charbonneau J, Morin G, Pare XG, Frigault J, Drolet S, Bouchard A, Rouleau-Fournier F, Bouchard P, Thibault C, Letarte F. Loop Ileostomy Closure as a 23-Hour Stay Procedure With Preoperative Efferent Limb Enteral Stimulation: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Dis Colon Rectum. 2024 Mar 1;67(3):466-475. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000003111. Epub 2023 Nov 16. | |
| 25950922 |
Not provided
Not provided
All IPD that underlie results in a publication.
Beginning 1 month and ending 1 year after the publication of results.
IPD and supporting information of this study might be accessed by fellow researchers with a future study, related to our published findings. Researchers must submit a request for data sharing by contacting the principal investigator, who will also be the corresponding author in the future published data. The request to access IPD will be reviewed by the principal investigator (Romina Pena).
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Physiological stimulation | Other | The intervention has been described in previous studies, but the investigation of the microbiome changes associated with the obtained clinical results hasn't been described to date. Also, a study with three arms hasn't been published to date. |
|
Description of the funcional (defecatory) outcomes after ileostomy closure.
LARS (Low Anterior Resection Syndrome) score: total score ranges from 0-42 points (0-20 is equivalent no LARS, 21-29 points to minor LARS, and 30-42 to major LARS).
| From enrollment to the end of follow-up a 3 months. |
| Functional outcomes after efferent limb stimulation (Vaizey score) | Description of the funcional (defecatory) outcomes after ileostomy closure. Vaizey score (also known as the St. Mark's Incontinence Score): total score ranges from 0 (perfect continence) to 24 points (severe incontinence). | From enrollment to the end of follow-up at 3 months. |
| Bracey E, Chave H, Agombar A, Sleight S, Dukes S, Bryan S, Branagan G. Ileostomy closure in an enhanced recovery setting. Colorectal Dis. 2015 Oct;17(10):917-21. doi: 10.1111/codi.12989. |
| 33574345 | Background | Kim MJ, Park JW, Lee MA, Lim HK, Kwon YH, Ryoo SB, Park KJ, Jeong SY. Two dominant patterns of low anterior resection syndrome and their effects on patients' quality of life. Sci Rep. 2021 Feb 11;11(1):3538. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-82149-9. |
| 17667498 | Background | Matthiessen P, Hallbook O, Rutegard J, Simert G, Sjodahl R. Defunctioning stoma reduces symptomatic anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection of the rectum for cancer: a randomized multicenter trial. Ann Surg. 2007 Aug;246(2):207-14. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3180603024. |
| 42092745 | Background | Arredondo J, Uriz A, Oliva I, Martin JI, Iglesias CN, Choolani E, Valle A, Rivera J, Jeri-McFarlane S, Romero JM, Gonzalez C, Alvarellos A, Tasende M, Gomez L, Lazaro L, Montcusi B, Tejedor P, Trujillo-Diaz J, de la Hermosa AR, Baixauli J, Nunez-Cordoba JM, Aliseda D; ILEOSTIM Trial Group. The ILEOSTIM trial: A multicentre randomised controlled trial evaluating the impact of efferent loop stimulation prior to ileostomy reversal on postoperative ileus. Colorectal Dis. 2026 May;28(5):e70448. doi: 10.1111/codi.70448. |
| 34961502 | Background | Liu Z, Fang L, Lv L, Niu Z, Hou L, Chen D, Zhou Y, Guo D. Self-administered succus entericus reinfusion before ileostomy closure improves short-term outcomes. BMC Surg. 2021 Dec 28;21(1):440. doi: 10.1186/s12893-021-01444-4. |
| 37406079 | Background | Xia F, Zou Y, Zhang Q, Wu J, Sun Z. A novel nomogram to predict low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) after ileostomy reversal for rectal cancer patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2023 Feb;49(2):452-460. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2022.10.015. Epub 2022 Oct 23. |
| 33792822 | Background | Vogel I, Reeves N, Tanis PJ, Bemelman WA, Torkington J, Hompes R, Cornish JA. Impact of a defunctioning ileostomy and time to stoma closure on bowel function after low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Tech Coloproctol. 2021 Jul;25(7):751-760. doi: 10.1007/s10151-021-02436-5. Epub 2021 Apr 1. |
| 30963659 | Background | Rombey T, Panagiotopoulou IG, Hind D, Fearnhead NS. Preoperative bowel stimulation prior to ileostomy closure to restore bowel function more quickly and improve postoperative outcomes: a systematic review. Colorectal Dis. 2019 Sep;21(9):994-1003. doi: 10.1111/codi.14636. Epub 2019 May 7. |
| 38095756 | Background | Lloyd AJ, Hardy NP, Jordan P, Ryan EJ, Whelan M, Clancy C, O'Riordan J, Kavanagh DO, Neary P, Sahebally SM. Efferent limb stimulation prior to loop ileostomy closure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Tech Coloproctol. 2023 Dec 14;28(1):15. doi: 10.1007/s10151-023-02875-2. |
| 33671968 | Background | Rodriguez-Padilla A, Morales-Martin G, Perez-Quintero R, Gomez-Salgado J, Balongo-Garcia R, Ruiz-Frutos C. Postoperative Ileus after Stimulation with Probiotics before Ileostomy Closure. Nutrients. 2021 Feb 15;13(2):626. doi: 10.3390/nu13020626. |
| 35596903 | Background | Ocana J, Garcia-Perez JC, Labalde-Martinez M, Rodriguez-Velasco G, Moreno I, Vivas A, Clemente-Esteban I, Ballestero A, Abadia P, Ferrero E, Fernandez-Cebrian JM, Die J. Can physiological stimulation prior to ileostomy closure reduce postoperative ileus? A prospective multicenter pilot study. Tech Coloproctol. 2022 Aug;26(8):645-653. doi: 10.1007/s10151-022-02620-1. Epub 2022 May 21. |
| 30337046 | Background | Fernandez Lopez F, Gonzalez Lopez J, Paz Novo M, Ladra Gonzalez MJ, Paredes Cotore J. Stimulation the efferent limb before loop ileostomy closure with short chain fatty acids. Cir Esp (Engl Ed). 2019 Jan;97(1):59-61. doi: 10.1016/j.ciresp.2018.06.018. Epub 2018 Oct 15. No abstract available. English, Spanish. |
| 35984521 | Background | Garfinkle R, Demian M, Sabboobeh S, Moon J, Hulme-Moir M, Liberman AS, Feinberg S, Hayden DM, Chadi SA, Demyttenaere S, Samuel L, Hotakorzian N, Quintin L, Morin N, Faria J, Ghitulescu G, Vasilevsky CA, Boutros M; Bowel Stimulation Research Collaborative. Bowel stimulation before loop ileostomy closure to reduce postoperative ileus: a multicenter, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc. 2023 May;37(5):3934-3943. doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09510-5. Epub 2022 Aug 19. |
| 25380005 | Background | Abrisqueta J, Abellan I, Lujan J, Hernandez Q, Parrilla P. Stimulation of the efferent limb before ileostomy closure: a randomized clinical trial. Dis Colon Rectum. 2014 Dec;57(12):1391-6. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000237. |
| 37055940 | Background | Beamish EL, Johnson J, Shih B, Killick R, Dondelinger F, McGoran C, Brewster-Craig C, Davies A, Bhowmick A, Rigby RJ. Delay in loop ileostomy reversal surgery does not impact upon post-operative clinical outcomes. Complications are associated with an increased loss of microflora in the defunctioned intestine. Gut Microbes. 2023 Jan-Dec;15(1):2199659. doi: 10.1080/19490976.2023.2199659. |
| 10403736 | Background | Ekelund KM, Ekblad E. Structural, neuronal, and functional adaptive changes in atrophic rat ileum. Gut. 1999 Aug;45(2):236-45. doi: 10.1136/gut.45.2.236. |
| 20889147 | Background | Courtier R, Pares D, Silva CA, Gil MJ, Pascual M, Alonso S, Pera M, Grande L. [Clinical results of loop ileostomy closures in rectal cancer surgical patients. Effect of chemotherapy in the waiting period]. Cir Esp. 2010 Nov;88(5):308-13. doi: 10.1016/j.ciresp.2010.08.001. Spanish. |
| 22974343 | Background | Sharma A, Deeb AP, Rickles AS, Iannuzzi JC, Monson JR, Fleming FJ. Closure of defunctioning loop ileostomy is associated with considerable morbidity. Colorectal Dis. 2013 Apr;15(4):458-62. doi: 10.1111/codi.12029. |
| 31020433 | Background | Garfinkle R, Savage P, Boutros M, Landry T, Reynier P, Morin N, Vasilevsky CA, Filion KB. Incidence and predictors of postoperative ileus after loop ileostomy closure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc. 2019 Aug;33(8):2430-2443. doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-06794-y. Epub 2019 Apr 17. |