Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 12854101

Parastomal hernia.

P W G Carne·G M Robertson·F A Frizelle
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Parastomal hernia following formation of an ileostomy or colostomy is common. This article reviews the incidence of hernia, the technical factors related to the construction of the stoma that may influence the incidence, and the success of the different methods of repair. METHODS: A literature search using the Medline database was performed to locate English language articles on parastomal hernia. Further articles were obtained from the references cited in the literature initially reviewed. RESULTS: Parastomal hernia affects 1.8-28.3 per cent of end ileostomies, and 0-6.2 per cent of loop ileostomies. Following colostomy formation, the rates are 4.0-48.1 and 0-30.8 per cent respectively. Site of stoma formation (through or lateral to rectus abdominis), trephine size, fascial fixation and closure of lateral space are not proven to affect the incidence of hernia. The role of extraperitoneal stoma construction is uncertain. Mesh repair gives a lower rate of recurrence (0-33.3 per cent) than direct tissue repair (46-100 per cent) or stoma relocation (0-76.2 per cent). CONCLUSION: The incidence of parastomal hernia is between 0 and 48.1 per cent, depending on the type of stoma and length of follow-up. No technical factors related to the construction of the stoma have been shown to prevent herniation. If repair is required, a prosthetic mesh technique should be considered. Further randomized clinical trials (particularly of extraperitoneal stoma construction) are needed.

Explore related subjects

ColostomyHerniaHerniorrhaphyHumansIleostomyLaparoscopyRecurrenceSurgical MeshSurgical StomasJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P W G Carne, G M Robertson, F A Frizelle. 2003. Parastomal hernia.. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.4220

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2004

[Implementation and evaluation of a teaching plan for the auto-irrigation of colostomy: a case study].

With a view to describing and evaluating the implementation of a teaching plan for the auto-irrigation of colostomy and reporting on the perceptions of colostomized patients related to auto-irrigation, this case study was developed at the colostomy out-patient clinic of the Júlio Müller University Hospital, Cuiabá, Brazil, from February to March 1997. The teaching plan helped the patients to learn about the irrigation technique and social rehabilitation.

Colostomy↗
PubMed2004

An audit of neonatal colostomy for high anorectal malformation: the developing world perspective.

A high divided sigmoid colostomy has been recommended for staged management of high anorectal malformation. We audited our cases of neonatal colostomy for high anorectal malformation to assess its effectiveness. A retrospective study was carried out of all surgical newborns admitted with high imperforate anus as the single diagnosis at our centre between December 1998 and December 2000. Morbidity and mortality were analysed after retrospective stratification into two groups (group A: birth weight >2.5 kg; group B: birth weight <2.5 kg). The chi square test was used to test the statistical significance in terms of outcome in the two groups. Overall mortality was 16%. Group A consisted of 34 babies: 30 with divided sigmoid colostomy and four with transverse loop colostomy. One baby with a divided sigmoid colostomy died from wound complications and septicaemia (mortality 2.9%). All four babies with transverse loop colostomy done under local anaesthesia survived, despite being sick on arrival. Group B consisted of 16 babies: 15 with sigmoid colostomy and one with transverse loop colostomy, with seven deaths (44%). None of the five babies with transverse loop colostomy done under local anaesthesia died, despite being sick on arrival, whereas all eight babies who died had undergone sigmoid colostomy under general anaesthesia. The difference in the outcomes of babies in groups A and B is highly significant ( p <.01). Sick, small (<2.5 kg) and septic babies arriving late to the unit do not appear to tolerate general anaesthesia and divided sigmoid colostomy well, despite that procedure's long-term advantages. Divided sigmoid colostomy has produced excellent results in babies >2.5 kg, but in the context of the developing world and limited critical care availability, transverse loop colostomy under local anaesthesia may save lives.

Colostomy↗
PubMed2004

Quality of life after rectal resection for cancer, with or without permanent colostomy.

BACKGROUND: For almost one hundred years abdominoperineal excision has been the standard treatment of choice for rectal cancer. With advances in the techniques for rectal resection and anastomosis, anterior resection with preservation of the sphincter function has become the preferred treatment for rectal cancers, except for those cancers very close to the anal sphincter. The main reason for this has been the conviction that the quality of life for patients with a colostomy after abdominoperineal excision was poorer than for patients undergoing a sphincter-preserving technique. However, patients having sphincter-preserving operations may experience symptoms affecting their quality of life that are different from those withstoma-patients. OBJECTIVES: To compare the quality of life in rectal cancer patients with or without permanent colostomy. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, LILACS, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group's specialised register. Abstracts books from major gastroenterological and colorectal congresses were searched. Reference lists of the selected articles were scrutinized. SELECTION CRITERIA: All controlled clinical trials and observational studies in which quality of life was measured in patients with rectal cancer having either abdominoperineal excision or low anterior resection, using a validated quality of life instrument, were considered. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One reviewer (JP) checked the titles and abstracts identified from the databases and hand search. Full text copies of all studies of possible relevance were obtained. The reviewer decided which studies met the inclusion criteria. Both reviewers independently extracted data. If information was insufficient the original author was contacted to obtain missing data. Extracted data were crosschecked and discrepancies resolved by consensus. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty five potential studies were identified. Eight of these, all non-randomised and representing 620 participants, met the inclusion criteria. Four trials found that people undergoing abdominoperineal excision did not have poorer quality of life measures than patients undergoing anterior resection. One study found that a stoma only slightly affected the persons quality of life. Three studies found that patients receiving abdominoperineal excision had significantly poorer quality of life than after anterior resection. Due to heterogeneity, meta-analysis of the included studies was not possible. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: The studies included in this review do not allow firm conclusions as to the question of whether the quality of life of people after anterior resection is superior to that of people after abdominoperineal excision. The included studies challenged the assumption that anterior resection patients fare better.Larger, better designed and executed prospective studies are needed to answer this question.

Colostomy↗