Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Ostomy”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 235 records · Page 13Linked to original sources
PubMed1987

Colonoscopy in ostomy patients. Results at the first postoperative examination.

Patients with a personal history of rectal cancer are considered at high risk for metachronous large-bowel primaries. Since a malignant growth was the main reason for performing a colostomy in patients followed at the centers of the authors' association (AISTOM), a correct follow-up approach for these patients is very important. A multicentric clinical trial was thus carried out to evaluate the efficacy of transstomal endoscopic exploration (TEE) of the residual colon, and data collection began on May 31, 1984. Nine hundred fifty-seven patients were submitted to TEE after curative abdominoperineal resection (Miles) for rectal cancer. The male-female ratio was 1.3; 89.6 percent of the patients were over 50 years of age. A family history of large-bowel cancer was present in 18 percent, and in 23 percent of the patients the cancer was associated with synchronous adenomas. Only 31 percent of the patients had colonoscopy or double-contrast barium enema x-ray beyond the neoplastic area before surgery. TEE was done in 96.8 percent of the patients; in 3.3 percent the examination was not possible, mainly for stenosis of the stoma (in 2.3 percent). In 82 percent of the patients a complete large-bowel exploration was possible: a new large, bowel cancer was found in 22 patients (2.2 percent) and an adenoma in 183 patients (19.1 percent). These results show that, because it is safe, practical, and effective, endoscopy plays an important role in the follow-up of ostomates.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed2001

Infection in the patient with indwelling devices and ostomies.

Urinary tract devices, often placed to alleviate obstruction or serve as support for surgical anastamosis, are used with increasing frequency. Although useful, they are fraught with hazards, especially infection. Infected devices have a myriad of clinical presentations that can be unrevealing or even misleading as to the underlying disease process. The astute clinician should maintain a high index of suspicion for such infections. Urinalysis alone has not been adequately studied to demonstrate that it alone can rule out infected foreign material in the urinary tract and should be followed by culture. Failure to recognize and treat infected urological hardware might lead to more rapid progression to ascending infection and more severe illness than expected in the absence of such devices.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗
PubMed1997

The path to a clinical pathway: collaborative care for the patient with an ostomy.

A colostomy and ileostomy clinical pathway was developed at a southeastern teaching hospital in 1990 in response to excessive lengths of stay and costs at our hospital compared with national data for this patient group. A multidisciplinary clinical pathway team was formed and charged with the development, implementation, and ongoing monitoring of the clinical pathway tool and its effect on the outcomes of the population of patients with colostomies and ileostomies. Through this multidisciplinary collaboration, length of stay and cost have been reduced while quality care indicators have been maintained. This article presents the sample pathway we developed and describes the pathway development process, documentation, the variance analysis process, and the outcomes achieved with implementation. A urostomy/urinary diversion pathway that was developed after variance analysis review of the colostomy and ileostomy clinical pathway is also presented.

Analysis of Variance↗
PubMed2002

Using quality of life scores to help determine treatment: is restoring bowel continuity better than an ostomy?

OBJECTIVE: In colorectal surgery, evaluation of heath-related quality of life (HRQL) has been relatively minimal when compared to other medical specialties. Would the performance of such HRQL evaluations change our decision-making in patient care? In familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), procedures that restore bowel continuity (i.e. Ileorectal anastomosis or ileal pouch anal anastomosis) are routinely preferred to ileostomy because of the perceived, but unproven, better HRQL. This study evaluates FAP patients who underwent prophylactic colectomy with either permanent ileostomy or 'restored bowel continuity' reconstruction. The functional outcomes of both groups are reported, and the HRQL assessments are compared. METHODS: All FAP patients who underwent (procto) colectomy resection with reconstruction, either restored bowel continuity (BC) or permanent ileostomy (OST), between 1980 and 1998 were studied. Functional data were obtained by questionnaire and medical record review. HRQL was assessed by 2 validated instruments - the SF-36 Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales and the SF-36 Health Survey - which measure physical summary (PSF) and mental summary functioning (MSF) as well as eight separate health quality dimensions including health perception (HP), physical (PF) and social functioning (SF), physical (PR) and emotional role limitations (ER), mental health (MH), bodily pain (BP), and energy level (E). RESULTS: Results were obtained in 54 patients; bowel continuity (44), ileostomy (10). Mean patient age was 39 years, mean follow up time was 10.5 years. Mean patient age at operation was 28 years. Functional results for BC included number of bowel movements/day (6.7), leakage (30%), having to wear a pad (11%), perianal skin problems (25%), food avoidance (68%), and inability to distinguish gas (27%). Functional results for OST were routinely excellent. Results of the HRQL surveys reveal no significant differences for BC vs OST (HP: 67 +/- 28 vs 79 +/- 39; PF: 91 +/- 14 vs 90 +/- 17; SF: 86 +/- 23 vs 97 +/- 5; PR: 79 +/- 34 vs 83 +/- 40; ER: 86 +/- 28 vs 88 +/- 27; MH: 77 +/- 19 vs 82 +/- 14; BP: 78 +/- 24 vs 71 +/- 32; E 60 +/- 21 vs 58 +/- 18, respectively). CONCLUSION: Although the perceived quality of life for ileostomy patients is generally worse than the 'restored bowel continuity' group, the measured HRQL is the same for both groups. These results suggest that a permanent ileostomy should be included as a viable and appropriate first line treatment option for FAP patients after resection. This study also suggests that HRQL should play a greater role in the evaluation of care and treatment in colorectal surgery.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1978

Pseudo-ostomy.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Colostomy↗