Methods of Colostomy construction and Parastomal hernia rate
Now open: Certificate Course in Management of Covid-19 by Govt. Of Gujarat and PlexusMDKnow more...Now open: Certificate Course in Management of Covid-19 by Govt. Of Gujarat and PlexusMDKnow more...
A recent study found no difference in parastomal hernia rate with different techniques of colostomy construction. This study was published in the Annals of Surgery.

The primary objective of this trial was to compare the parastomal hernia rates 1 year after the construction of an end colostomy by 3 surgical techniques: cruciate incision, circular incision in the fascia, and using prophylactic mesh. Secondary objectives were evaluation of postoperative complications, readmissions/reoperations, and risk factors for a parastomal hernia.

A randomized, multicenter trial was performed in 3 hospitals in Sweden and Denmark; all patients scheduled to receive an end colostomy were asked to participate. Parastomal hernia within 12 months was determined by computed tomography of the abdomen in a prone position and by clinical assessment. Complications, readmissions, reoperations, and risk factors were also assessed.

209 patients were randomized to 1 of the 3 arms of the study. Patient demographics were similar in all 3 groups. Assessment of parastomal hernia was possible in 185 patients.

--The risk ratio for parastomal hernia was 1.25, and 1.22 between cruciate versus circular and cruciate versus mesh groups, respectively.

--There were no statistically significant differences between the groups with regard to parastomal hernia rate.

--Age and body mass index were found to be associated with the development of a parastomal hernia.

Conclusively, there were no significant differences in the rates of a parastomal hernia within 12 months of index surgery between the 3 surgical techniques of colostomy construction.