Is a sustaining rod necessary for diverting loop ileostomy?

Banz, V; Brügger, L; Egloff, Ch; Gelpke, M; Decurtins, D; Candinas, D (2008). Is a sustaining rod necessary for diverting loop ileostomy? British journal of surgery, 95(S2). John Wright & Sons

Objective: Whether or not a protective stoma reduces the rate of anastomotic leakage after distal colorectal anastomosis is still discussed controversially. It does however facilitate clinical management once leakage has occurred. Loop ileostomies seem to be associated with a lower morbidity and a better quality of life compared to loop colostomies. Generally, diverting loop ileostomies are secured at skin level by means of a supporting device in order to prevent retraction of the ileostomy into the abdomen. However, due to the supporting rod, difficulties may occur in applying a stoma bag correctly and leakage of faeces onto the skin may occur even with correct eversion of the afferent limb. Our aim was to compare morbidity and time to self-sufficient stoma-care in patients having a loop ileostomy with rod to those without rod.

Methods: A total of 60 patients necessitating loop ileostomy were analyzed. Patients received surgery in of the two involved institutions according to inhouse standard procedures. 30 patients had an ileostomy with rod (VCHK Inselspital) and a further 30 without rod (KSW Winterthur). Morbidity and time to self-sufficiency regarding stoma care was analyzed during the first 90 postoperative days. Morbidity was determined according to a scoring system ranging from 0 to 4 points for any given set of possible complications (bleeding, necrosis, skin irritation, abscess, stenosis, retraction, fistula, prolapse, parastomal hernia, incomplete diversion), where 0 = no complication and 4 = severe complication. Continuous variables were expressed as median (95% Confidence Interval). For comparisons between the groups the Mann-Whitney U test was used, between categorical variables the X2 test was applied.

Results: There were no significant differences in length of hospital stay or time to self-sufficient stoma-care between the groups. Although not significant, patients with a rod ileostomy had a tendency towards more stoma-related complications as well as stoma-related reoperations. The number of patients reaching total self-sufficiency regarding stoma care was higher after rodless ileostomy.

Conclusion: According to our data, rodless ileostomies seemto fare just as well as those with a supporting rod, with equal morbidity rates and more patients reaching self-sufficient stoma care. Therefore routine application of a rod for diverting loop ileostomy seems unnecessary

Item Type:

Conference or Workshop Item (Abstract)


04 Faculty of Medicine > Department of Gastro-intestinal, Liver and Lung Disorders (DMLL) > Clinic of Visceral Surgery and Medicine > Visceral Surgery

UniBE Contributor:

Brügger, Lukas and Candinas, Daniel




John Wright & Sons




Factscience Import

Date Deposited:

04 Oct 2013 15:05

Last Modified:

10 May 2014 00:42

URI: (FactScience: 120652)

Actions (login required)

Edit item Edit item
Provide Feedback