
doi: 10.1007/bf01656594
pmid: 3324499
AbstractThe object of this article is to evaluate the results with the continent ileostomy and to define its place as a therapeutic alternative after proctocolectomy. In the past, the method has been affected by a high incidence of complications, but technical developments, simplifications, and improvements in surgical techniques have reduced the incidence of early complications from 20–25% to less than 10%, and that of late complications from 45–54% to 10–22%. The mortality rate in several recently published series of 1,142 patients was 0–1% (mean 0.2%), none of the deaths being directly pouch related. Fifteen to 20% of patients develop ileitis, which is usually successfully treated with antibiotics. Eighty‐nine to 97% of the patients never require external ileostomy appliances, indicating perfect continence. No serious adverse effects have been found after 19 years' experience with the method, but a few patients have developed subnormal values of vitamin B12. More than 90% of patients who have previously had a conventional ileostomy claim improvements in social life and sports activities and 68–85% found that the quality of their sexual life had improved. There is no doubt that a well‐functioning continent ileostomy offers the patients a quality of life superior to that with a conventional ileostomy. Despite the increasing popularity of the pelvic reservoir and ileoanal anastomosis, the continent ileostomy remains a therapeutic alternative for proctocolectomized patients undergoing conversional procedures and for patients in whom ileoanal anastomosis with pelvic reservoirs are contraindicated or impossible to construct.
Ileostomy, Humans, Fecal Incontinence
Ileostomy, Humans, Fecal Incontinence
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 22 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
