International journal of colorectal disease · 2026
Gunsight closure versus conventional techniques for reversal of protective stoma after rectal cancer surgery: a propensity score matching study.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lin Senbin, Mao Misha, Chen Rui, Guo Linnan, Zhou Mengya, Chen Jianhui
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection (SSI), wound-related complications, and incisional hernia are common concerns following stoma reversal. These complications can significantly impair postoperative recovery and quality of life, especially in rectal cancer patients. This study compared the clinical and patient-reported outcomes of two protective stoma reversal procedures, the gunsight and conventional linear closure techniques.
METHODS: A retrospective propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was conducted on 194 patients who underwent stoma reversal between 2016 and 2023. Baseline characteristics, surgical outcomes, postoperative complications, and patient satisfaction were compared between the gunsight and conventional closure groups. A structured, self-designed questionnaire based on the principles of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) was administered at 6 months post-operatively to assess pain relief, wound healing, scar appearance, and functional recovery.
RESULTS: After PSM, 97 matched pairs were analyzed. The gunsight group had significantly lower SSI rates (11.34% vs. 22.68%, p = 0.036) and reported lower postoperative pain scores on POD 1 (p < 0.001) and POD 2 (p = 0.003). No significant differences were observed in terms of operative time, hospital stay, wound dehiscence, or incidence of incisional hernia. Patient-reported satisfaction with pain relief was significantly greater in the gunsight group (p = 0.012), whereas overall satisfaction scores were comparable.
CONCLUSION: The gunsight closure technique reduces postoperative infections and early postoperative pain without increasing complication rates. It also improves early patient-reported outcomes, making it a safe, effective, and patient-centered alternative for stoma reversal in rectal cancer surgery.
METHODS: A retrospective propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was conducted on 194 patients who underwent stoma reversal between 2016 and 2023. Baseline characteristics, surgical outcomes, postoperative complications, and patient satisfaction were compared between the gunsight and conventional closure groups. A structured, self-designed questionnaire based on the principles of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) was administered at 6 months post-operatively to assess pain relief, wound healing, scar appearance, and functional recovery.
RESULTS: After PSM, 97 matched pairs were analyzed. The gunsight group had significantly lower SSI rates (11.34% vs. 22.68%, p = 0.036) and reported lower postoperative pain scores on POD 1 (p < 0.001) and POD 2 (p = 0.003). No significant differences were observed in terms of operative time, hospital stay, wound dehiscence, or incidence of incisional hernia. Patient-reported satisfaction with pain relief was significantly greater in the gunsight group (p = 0.012), whereas overall satisfaction scores were comparable.
CONCLUSION: The gunsight closure technique reduces postoperative infections and early postoperative pain without increasing complication rates. It also improves early patient-reported outcomes, making it a safe, effective, and patient-centered alternative for stoma reversal in rectal cancer surgery.