Correspondence
Response to: Ileostomy closure in an enhanced recovery setting
Reply to Bhalla et al. doi:10.1111/codi.13024
doi:10.1111/codi.13025
Dear Sir, The paper by Bracey et al. successfully uses an enhanced recovery programme to expedite discharge following ileostomy closure, with a median stay of 2 days [1]. We feel that we should draw to the attention of the authors that there is more evidence than ‘the only published studies of ileostomy closure within an enhanced recovery programme are from a single institution in the USA (Case Medical, Cleveland)’ [1]. Our own study, published in 2013, successfully implemented an enhanced recovery programme for 23-h ileostomy reversal [2]. Subsequently over 100 patients have been discharged within 23 h of ileostomy reversal. Furthermore the authors also state ‘ileostomy closure in a day-case setting may be feasible, but none yet have demonstrated that it is achievable’ [1]. Earlier this year our paper in Colorectal Disease demonstrated just that, together with results indicating that day-case ileostomy reversal is not only safe but entirely achievable [3].
A. Bhalla, O. Peacock and J. N. Lund Department of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Derby Hospital NHS Trust, Uttoxeter Road, Derby, DE22 3NE, UK E-mail: [email protected] Received 24 May 2015; accepted 29 May 2015; Accepted Article online 11 June 2015
Dear Sir, We would like to thank Bhalla et al. for their correspondence regarding our paper on ileostomy closure within an enhanced recovery setting. Their recent publication is a positive step towards day-case ileostomy closure within the colorectal community [1]. As their paper was published in Colorectal Disease at the time that our paper was accepted for publication, it was not included in our discussion [2]. We acknowledge their contribution to the literature, particularly in relation to reducing the length of stay following ileostomy closure. We understood from their article on 23-h stay ileostomy closure, however, published in 2013 [3], that the patients were specifically selected for inclusion in the 23-h stay and a new protocol was drawn up for those patients included in the study. This differs from our publication of consecutive unselected patients undergoing ileostomy closure within an established enhanced recovery programme. Similarly, the publication from Delaney and colleagues in Cleveland, USA [4], demonstrated ileostomy closure of consecutive patients within an established standard enhanced recovery programme. We would like to commend Bhalla et al. on their publication demonstrating that day-case ileostomy closure is achievable.
E. Bracey and G. Branagan Department of Colorectal Surgery, Salisbury District Hospita, SP2 8BJ, UK E-mail: [email protected]
References 1 Bracey E, Chave H, Agombar A et al. Ileostomy closure in an enhanced recovery setting. Colorectal Dis 2015; 17: 917– 21 (this issue). 2 Peacock O, Bhalla A, Simpson JA et al. Twenty-three-hour stay loop ileostomy closures: a pilot study. Tech Coloproctol 2013; 17: 45–9. 3 Peacock O, Tierney GM, Tou S et al. Day-case closure of ileostomy: feasible, safe and efficient. Colorectal Dis 2015; 17: 820–3.
Received 5 June 2015; accepted 8 June 2015; Accepted Article online 11 June 2015
References 1 Bhalla A, Peacock O, Tierney GM et al. Day-case closure of ileostomy: feasible, safe and efficient. Colorectal Dis 2015; 17: 820–3. 2 Bracey E, Chave H, Agombar A et al. Ileostomy closure in an enhanced recovery setting. Colorectal Dis 2015; 17: 917– 21 (this issue). 3 Peacock O, Bhalla A, Simpson JA et al. Twenty-three-hour stay loop ileostomy closures: a pilot study. Tech Coloproctol 2013; 17: 45–9. 4 Joh YG, Lindsetmo RO, Stulberg J, Obias V, Champagne B, Delaney CP. Standardized postoperative pathway: accelerating recovery after ileostomy closure. Dis Colon Rectum 2008; 51: 1786–9.
Colorectal Disease ª 2015 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland. 17, 929–929
929
Response to: Ileostomy closure in an enhanced recovery setting
Reply to Bhalla et al. doi:10.1111/codi.13024
doi:10.1111/codi.13025
Dear Sir, The paper by Bracey et al. successfully uses an enhanced recovery programme to expedite discharge following ileostomy closure, with a median stay of 2 days [1]. We feel that we should draw to the attention of the authors that there is more evidence than ‘the only published studies of ileostomy closure within an enhanced recovery programme are from a single institution in the USA (Case Medical, Cleveland)’ [1]. Our own study, published in 2013, successfully implemented an enhanced recovery programme for 23-h ileostomy reversal [2]. Subsequently over 100 patients have been discharged within 23 h of ileostomy reversal. Furthermore the authors also state ‘ileostomy closure in a day-case setting may be feasible, but none yet have demonstrated that it is achievable’ [1]. Earlier this year our paper in Colorectal Disease demonstrated just that, together with results indicating that day-case ileostomy reversal is not only safe but entirely achievable [3].
A. Bhalla, O. Peacock and J. N. Lund Department of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Derby Hospital NHS Trust, Uttoxeter Road, Derby, DE22 3NE, UK E-mail: [email protected] Received 24 May 2015; accepted 29 May 2015; Accepted Article online 11 June 2015
Dear Sir, We would like to thank Bhalla et al. for their correspondence regarding our paper on ileostomy closure within an enhanced recovery setting. Their recent publication is a positive step towards day-case ileostomy closure within the colorectal community [1]. As their paper was published in Colorectal Disease at the time that our paper was accepted for publication, it was not included in our discussion [2]. We acknowledge their contribution to the literature, particularly in relation to reducing the length of stay following ileostomy closure. We understood from their article on 23-h stay ileostomy closure, however, published in 2013 [3], that the patients were specifically selected for inclusion in the 23-h stay and a new protocol was drawn up for those patients included in the study. This differs from our publication of consecutive unselected patients undergoing ileostomy closure within an established enhanced recovery programme. Similarly, the publication from Delaney and colleagues in Cleveland, USA [4], demonstrated ileostomy closure of consecutive patients within an established standard enhanced recovery programme. We would like to commend Bhalla et al. on their publication demonstrating that day-case ileostomy closure is achievable.
E. Bracey and G. Branagan Department of Colorectal Surgery, Salisbury District Hospita, SP2 8BJ, UK E-mail: [email protected]
References 1 Bracey E, Chave H, Agombar A et al. Ileostomy closure in an enhanced recovery setting. Colorectal Dis 2015; 17: 917– 21 (this issue). 2 Peacock O, Bhalla A, Simpson JA et al. Twenty-three-hour stay loop ileostomy closures: a pilot study. Tech Coloproctol 2013; 17: 45–9. 3 Peacock O, Tierney GM, Tou S et al. Day-case closure of ileostomy: feasible, safe and efficient. Colorectal Dis 2015; 17: 820–3.
Received 5 June 2015; accepted 8 June 2015; Accepted Article online 11 June 2015
References 1 Bhalla A, Peacock O, Tierney GM et al. Day-case closure of ileostomy: feasible, safe and efficient. Colorectal Dis 2015; 17: 820–3. 2 Bracey E, Chave H, Agombar A et al. Ileostomy closure in an enhanced recovery setting. Colorectal Dis 2015; 17: 917– 21 (this issue). 3 Peacock O, Bhalla A, Simpson JA et al. Twenty-three-hour stay loop ileostomy closures: a pilot study. Tech Coloproctol 2013; 17: 45–9. 4 Joh YG, Lindsetmo RO, Stulberg J, Obias V, Champagne B, Delaney CP. Standardized postoperative pathway: accelerating recovery after ileostomy closure. Dis Colon Rectum 2008; 51: 1786–9.
Colorectal Disease ª 2015 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland. 17, 929–929
929
