Temporary tube stoma versus conventional loop stoma for the protection of a low anastomosis in colorectal surgery: A systematic review and meta-Analysis

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of temporary tube stoma and conventional loop stoma for the protection of a low anastomosis in colorectal cancer. A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trails. Primary outcome measures were anastomotic leakage rate, the reoperation rate for anastomotic leakage, and stoma-related complications. Secondary outcome measures were operation time, length of hospital stay, time to stoma closure, and permanent stoma rate. Four studies were carried out and 642 patients (332 with temporary tube stoma and 310 with conventional loop stoma) met the inclusion criteria. The incidences of anastomotic leakage and reoperation rate were statistically similar in tube stoma and loop stoma groups. In comparison with conventional loop stoma, temporary tube stoma was associated with a significantly less stoma-related complications (odds ratio 5 0.20; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.08-0.50), and shorter operation and hospital stay time (weighted mean difference5247.28 minutes, 95% CI: 274.68 to 219.88; and weighted mean difference 5 25.22 days, 95% CI: 210.32 to 20.13, respectively). Time to stoma closure was significantly shorter in the temporary tube stoma groups (weightedmean difference52114.58 days, 95%CI:2148.38 to280.77). Patients receiving temporary tube stoma had lower rates of stoma-related complications, shorter operation and hospital stay time, and stoma closure time. Tube can be easily removed without second surgery in most cases. Therefore, temporary tube stoma is a feasible and effective alternative to conventional loop stoma for the protection of a low colorectal anastomosis.