IleostomyROLLINCT00959738
Diverting Loop Ileostomy: With or Without Rod
A study testing Diverting loop ileostomy with rod and diverting loop ileostomy without rod in people with Ileostomy and Rectal Neoplasms, run by Insel Gruppe AG, University Hospital Bern at 1 site in Switzerland.
Trial summary
Diverting ileostomies are created to protect a rectal anastomosis or in situations with a risk of intestinal perforation. Currently, the application of a rod to hinder slippage of the loop is an established technique to perform a diverting loop ileostomy. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Ileostomy, Rectal Neoplasms
- What is being tested?
- Diverting loop ileostomy with rod and diverting loop ileostomy without rod
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 121 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSwitzerland
- Study dates
- Aug 2008to Nov 2014
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- patients scheduled for planned protective loop ileostomy
Who cannot join
- patients with long-term use of corticosteroids (> 15 mg prednisolone equivalent)
- immunosuppressive agent rapamune
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Switzerland1 site
Bern University Hospital, Dep. of Visceral and Transplant Surgery
Bern, 3010
About this study
Official title: A Prospective Multicenter Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial to Compare the Method of Protective Diverting Loop Ileostomy With or Without the Support of a Plastic Rod
Diverting ileostomies are created to protect a rectal anastomosis or in situations with a risk of intestinal perforation. Currently, the application of a rod to hinder slippage of the loop is an established technique to perform a diverting loop ileostomy. However, various "rod-less" techniques have been described and are performed with similar success. The aim of this study is to determine, whether a modification (without rod) of the current standard method of protective loop ileostomy formation (with rod) could improve ileostomy specific morbidity. Secondary endpoints include stoma care, determinants of quality of life and stoma function.
Read the detailed description
Background
For rectal anastomoses within 6 cm of the anal verge, leakage rates are up to 15%. Here liberal use of protective stomas is widely accepted. Fecal diversion by loop ostomy may also be performed after extended adhesiolysis with serosal lesions and risk of intestinal perforation, in patients with obstructing rectal tumours requiring neoadjuvant radio-chemotherapy or in patients with complex anorectal injuries or fistulas. Generally, diverting loop ileostomies are secured at skin level by means of a supporting device in order to prevent retraction of the loop ileostomy into the abdomen. Nevertheless, due to the supporting rod, difficulties may occur in applying a stoma bag correctly and leakage of feces onto the skin may occur even with correct eversion of the afferent limb. Despite easier application of stoma bags and therefore reduced risk of skin irritation, none of these alternative techniques are established. In various non-randomized studies rodless loop ileostomies were described with an overall morbidity between 3 and 39%. However definition of morbidity varies significantly in these studies and randomised controlled trials are missing so far.
Objective
The aim of this study is to determine, whether a modification (without rod) of the current standard method of protective loop ileostomy formation (with rod) could improve ileostomy specific morbidity. Secondary endpoints include stoma care, determinants of quality of life and stoma function.
Methods
The study is designed as multi-institutional, randomized controlled, two-armed study. Patients scheduled for a protective loop ileostomy and meeting the eligibility criteria will be randomized to creation of a loop ileostomy with or without sustaining rod.
- Conditions
- Ileostomy, Rectal Neoplasms
- Being tested
- Diverting loop ileostomy with rod, diverting loop ileostomy without rod
- Keywords
- loop ileostomy, quality of life, morbidity, Rectal Neoplasms
- Medical subject headings
- Rectal Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Diverting loop ileostomy with rodProcedure or surgery
Diverting loop ileostomy with rod
diverting loop ileostomy without rodProcedure or surgery
diverting loop ileostomy without rod
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| A | Other | diverting loop ileostomy with rod Receives: Procedure: Diverting loop ileostomy with rod |
| B | Other | diverting loop ileostomy without rod Receives: Procedure: diverting loop ileostomy without rod |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Severe stoma specific morbidity rate
Measured: postoperative during 2 weeks, 3 months postoperative
Secondary outcomes (4)
Rate of patients reaching self-sufficient stoma care
Measured: postoperative during 2 weeks
Time used by the stoma nurses for instructing and assisting patients
Measured in total hours from the intervention up to 3 months postoperatively
Measured: preoperative, 2 weeks and 3 months postoperative
Quality of life (QoL) by a stoma quality of life scale
Measured: postoperative during 2 weeks, 3 months postoperative
Predictive factors for stomal complications
Measured: postoperative during 2 weeks, 3 months postoperative
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted17 Aug 2009 (estimated)
- Study startAug 2008
- Primary completionJul 2014
- Study completionNov 2014
Why it stopped: Difference found in interim analysis, not ethical to continue
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (10)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for IleostomyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 121 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Insel Gruppe AG, University Hospital Bern
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Investigators
- Lukas E Bruegger, MD, Principal investigator, Bern University Hospital,Dep. of Visceral and Transplant Surgery Switzerland
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00959738
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 061/08
- Acronym
- ROLLI
- Status last verified
- Nov 2014
- First submitted
- 14 Aug 2009
- Last updated
- 14 Nov 2014
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Rosen HR, Schiessel R. [Loop enterostomy]. Chirurg. 1999 Jun;70(6):650-5. doi: 10.1007/s001040050701. German.
PubMed 10427451Gastinger I, Marusch F, Steinert R, Wolff S, Koeckerling F, Lippert H; Working Group 'Colon/Rectum Carcinoma'. Protective defunctioning stoma in low anterior resection for rectal carcinoma. Br J Surg. 2005 Sep;92(9):1137-42. doi: 10.1002/bjs.5045.
PubMed 15997447Moran B, Heald R. Anastomotic leakage after colorectal anastomosis. Semin Surg Oncol. 2000 Apr-May;18(3):244-8. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1098-2388(200004/05)18:33.0.co;2-6.
PubMed 10757890Karanjia ND, Corder AP, Bearn P, Heald RJ. Leakage from stapled low anastomosis after total mesorectal excision for carcinoma of the rectum. Br J Surg. 1994 Aug;81(8):1224-6. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800810850.
PubMed 7953369Silva MA, Ratnayake G, Deen KI. Quality of life of stoma patients: temporary ileostomy versus colostomy. World J Surg. 2003 Apr;27(4):421-4. doi: 10.1007/s00268-002-6699-4.
PubMed 12658485Amin SN, Memon MA, Armitage NC, Scholefield JH. Defunctioning loop ileostomy and stapled side-to-side closure has low morbidity. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2001 Jul;83(4):246-9.
PubMed 11518371Edwards DP, Leppington-Clarke A, Sexton R, Heald RJ, Moran BJ. Stoma-related complications are more frequent after transverse colostomy than loop ileostomy: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Br J Surg. 2001 Mar;88(3):360-3. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2168.2001.01727.x.
PubMed 11260099Bada-Yllan O, Garcia-Osogobio S, Zarate X, Velasco L, Hoyos-Tello CM, Takahashi T. [Morbi-mortality related to ileostomy and colostomy closure]. Rev Invest Clin. 2006 Nov-Dec;58(6):555-60. Spanish.
PubMed 17432286Goldstein ET, Williamson PR. A more functional loop ileostomy rod. Dis Colon Rectum. 1993 Mar;36(3):297-8. doi: 10.1007/BF02053516.
PubMed 8449139Unti JA, Abcarian H, Pearl RK, Orsay CP, Nelson RL, Prasad ML, Duarte B, Leff MM, Tan AB. Rodless end-loop stomas. Seven-year experience. Dis Colon Rectum. 1991 Nov;34(11):999-1004. doi: 10.1007/BF02049964.
PubMed 1935478
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 14 Nov 2014. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Prospective Multicenter Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial to Compare the Method of Protective Diverting Loop Ileostomy With or Without the Support of a Plastic Rod
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00959738
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- ROLLI / 061/08
- Conditions
- Ileostomy, Rectal Neoplasms
- Keywords
- loop ileostomy, quality of life, morbidity, Rectal Neoplasms
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- TerminatedReason stopped: Difference found in interim analysis, not ethical to continue
- Enrolment
- 121 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Insel Gruppe AG, University Hospital BernUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Aug 2008
- Primary completion
- Jul 2014 (actual)
- Study completion
- Nov 2014 (actual)
- First posted
- 17 Aug 2009 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Diverting ileostomies are created to protect a rectal anastomosis or in situations with a risk of intestinal perforation. Currently, the application of a rod to hinder slippage of the loop is an established technique to perform a diverting loop ileostomy. However, various "rod-less" techniques have been described and are performed with similar success. The aim of this study is to determine, whether a modification (without rod) of the current standard method of protective loop ileostomy formation (with rod) could improve ileostomy specific morbidity. Secondary endpoints include stoma care, determinants of quality of life and stoma function.
Detailed description
Background
For rectal anastomoses within 6 cm of the anal verge, leakage rates are up to 15%. Here liberal use of protective stomas is widely accepted. Fecal diversion by loop ostomy may also be performed after extended adhesiolysis with serosal lesions and risk of intestinal perforation, in patients with obstructing rectal tumours requiring neoadjuvant radio-chemotherapy or in patients with complex anorectal injuries or fistulas. Generally, diverting loop ileostomies are secured at skin level by means of a supporting device in order to prevent retraction of the loop ileostomy into the abdomen. Nevertheless, due to the supporting rod, difficulties may occur in applying a stoma bag correctly and leakage of feces onto the skin may occur even with correct eversion of the afferent limb. Despite easier application of stoma bags and therefore reduced risk of skin irritation, none of these alternative techniques are established. In various non-randomized studies rodless loop ileostomies were described with an overall morbidity between 3 and 39%. However definition of morbidity varies significantly in these studies and randomised controlled trials are missing so far.
Objective
The aim of this study is to determine, whether a modification (without rod) of the current standard method of protective loop ileostomy formation (with rod) could improve ileostomy specific morbidity. Secondary endpoints include stoma care, determinants of quality of life and stoma function.
Methods
The study is designed as multi-institutional, randomized controlled, two-armed study. Patients scheduled for a protective loop ileostomy and meeting the eligibility criteria will be randomized to creation of a loop ileostomy with or without sustaining rod.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| A | Other | Procedure: Diverting loop ileostomy with roddiverting loop ileostomy with rod |
| B | Other | Procedure: diverting loop ileostomy without roddiverting loop ileostomy without rod |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- patients scheduled for planned protective loop ileostomy
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- patients with long-term use of corticosteroids (> 15 mg prednisolone equivalent)
- immunosuppressive agent rapamune
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Diverting loop ileostomy with rodDiverting loop ileostomy with rod | Procedure or surgery | A |
| diverting loop ileostomy without roddiverting loop ileostomy without rod | Procedure or surgery | B |
Primary outcome
Severe stoma specific morbidity rate
Time frame: postoperative during 2 weeks, 3 months postoperative
4 secondary outcomes
Rate of patients reaching self-sufficient stoma care
Time frame: postoperative during 2 weeks
Time used by the stoma nurses for instructing and assisting patients
Time frame: preoperative, 2 weeks and 3 months postoperative
Quality of life (QoL) by a stoma quality of life scale
Time frame: postoperative during 2 weeks, 3 months postoperative
Predictive factors for stomal complications
Time frame: postoperative during 2 weeks, 3 months postoperative
Results and safety
The study was stopped early (reason given: Difference found in interim analysis, not ethical to continue). Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 14 Nov 2014.
- Background: PubMed 10427451Rosen HR, Schiessel R. [Loop enterostomy]. Chirurg. 1999 Jun;70(6):650-5. doi: 10.1007/s001040050701. German.
- Background: PubMed 15997447Gastinger I, Marusch F, Steinert R, Wolff S, Koeckerling F, Lippert H; Working Group 'Colon/Rectum Carcinoma'. Protective defunctioning stoma in low anterior resection for rectal carcinoma. Br J Surg. 2005 Sep;92(9):1137-42. doi: 10.1002/bjs.5045.
- Background: PubMed 10757890Moran B, Heald R. Anastomotic leakage after colorectal anastomosis. Semin Surg Oncol. 2000 Apr-May;18(3):244-8. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1098-2388(200004/05)18:33.0.co;2-6.
- Background: PubMed 7953369Karanjia ND, Corder AP, Bearn P, Heald RJ. Leakage from stapled low anastomosis after total mesorectal excision for carcinoma of the rectum. Br J Surg. 1994 Aug;81(8):1224-6. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800810850.
- Background: PubMed 12658485Silva MA, Ratnayake G, Deen KI. Quality of life of stoma patients: temporary ileostomy versus colostomy. World J Surg. 2003 Apr;27(4):421-4. doi: 10.1007/s00268-002-6699-4.
- Background: PubMed 11518371Amin SN, Memon MA, Armitage NC, Scholefield JH. Defunctioning loop ileostomy and stapled side-to-side closure has low morbidity. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2001 Jul;83(4):246-9.
- Background: PubMed 11260099Edwards DP, Leppington-Clarke A, Sexton R, Heald RJ, Moran BJ. Stoma-related complications are more frequent after transverse colostomy than loop ileostomy: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Br J Surg. 2001 Mar;88(3):360-3. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2168.2001.01727.x.
- Background: PubMed 17432286Bada-Yllan O, Garcia-Osogobio S, Zarate X, Velasco L, Hoyos-Tello CM, Takahashi T. [Morbi-mortality related to ileostomy and colostomy closure]. Rev Invest Clin. 2006 Nov-Dec;58(6):555-60. Spanish.
- Background: PubMed 8449139Goldstein ET, Williamson PR. A more functional loop ileostomy rod. Dis Colon Rectum. 1993 Mar;36(3):297-8. doi: 10.1007/BF02053516.
- Background: PubMed 1935478Unti JA, Abcarian H, Pearl RK, Orsay CP, Nelson RL, Prasad ML, Duarte B, Leff MM, Tan AB. Rodless end-loop stomas. Seven-year experience. Dis Colon Rectum. 1991 Nov;34(11):999-1004. doi: 10.1007/BF02049964.
Related trials for Ileostomy
Active, not recruiting
The Effect of Planned Group Interaction on Ostomy Adaptation, Quality of Life, and Stoma Care Self-Efficacy Levels in Individuals With an Ostomy
Ostomy - Ileostomy or Colostomy
RecruitingPhase 2
Aquamin® for Prevention of Ulcerative Colitis J-Pouch-associate Intestinal Inflammation
Ulcerative Colitis, Ileal Pouch
Recruiting
Novel Post-Surgical Incision Management to Prevent Ostomy Complications
Ostomy, Enterocutaneous Fistula
Not yet recruiting
Phasix Mesh Underlay During Loop Ileostomy Closure
Incisional Hernia of Anterior Abdominal Wall
RecruitingObservational study
Exploratory Study of Peristomal and Non-Peristomal Skin Barrier Characteristics in People With a Stoma
Colostomy - Stoma, Ileostomy - Stoma
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Lukas E Bruegger, MD principal investigator
Bern University Hospital,Dep. of Visceral and Transplant Surgery Switzerland
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Diverting loop ileostomy with rod and diverting loop ileostomy without rod in people with Ileostomy and Rectal Neoplasms, run by Insel Gruppe AG, University Hospital Bern at 1 site in Switzerland.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: stopped early, as of the sponsor's last update on 14 Nov 2014. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Switzerland. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study was stopped early (reason given: Difference found in interim analysis, not ethical to continue). Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Severe stoma specific morbidity rate (time frame: postoperative during 2 weeks, 3 months postoperative). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00959738, which also lists 10 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 14 Nov 2014.