Cohort study identifies risk factors for permanent stoma after low anterior resection, suggesting targeted monitoring for patients receiving radiotherapy or experiencing leaks.
Introduction : Postoperative anastomotic leakage is a serious complication in rectal surgery that affects quality of life, increases morbidity and mortality rates, and worsens oncologic outcomes. One of the methods that can minimize septic complications is a diverting ostomy. Although intended as temporary, approximately 20% of diverting stomas become permanent or are converted to end colostomies. Factors significantly increasing the risk of permanent stomas include advanced age, local recurrence, stoma-related complications, and impaired anal sphincter function caused by denervation during surgery or due to neo-adjuvant or adjuvant radiotherapy. Aim : This study aimed to identify the risk factors that increase the possibility of temporary stoma becoming permanent after low anterior resection. Materials and methods : For the described period, we reviewed a total of 418 histologically confirmed rectal cancer patients who underwent low anterior resection with temporary diverting ileostomy. Results : Our study included 348 patients, of whom 324 (93.1%) had their stomas reversed. After a median follow-up of 50.4 months (range 6-106 months), 324 (93.1%) patients had temporary stomas and 24 (6.9%) had permanent ones. Of the 24 permanent stoma patients, there were 12 ileostomies (50.0%), 6 colostomies (25.0%), six patients with abdominoperineal resections (25.0%) due to total dehiscence of the anastomosis. Conclusion : Neo-adjuvant or adjuvant chemo and/or radiation therapy, local recurrence, and anastomotic leakage could be important risk factors for the stoma’s nonclosure or re-creation after primary closure in low rectal cancer patients. Surgeons should be more alert in the stoma closure of these risk patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Костов et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: