The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Randomized clinical trial comparing loop ileostomy and loop transverse colostomy for faecal diversion following total mesorectal excision
Open accessAbstract
Background: The aim of this study was to compare loop ileostomy and loop transverse colostomy as the preferred mode of faecal diversion following low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Methods: Patients who required proximal diversion after low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision were randomized to have either a loop ileostomy or a loop transverse colostomy. Postoperative morbidity, stoma-related problems and morbidity following closure were compared. Results: From April 1999 to November 2000, 42 patients had a loop ileostomy and 38 had a loop transverse colostomy constructed following low anterior resection. Postoperative intestinal obstruction and prolonged ileus occurred more commonly in patients with an ileostomy (P = 0·037). There was no difference in time to resumption of diet, length of hospital stay following stoma closure and incidence of stoma-related complications after discharge from hospital. A total of seven patients had intestinal obstruction from the time of stoma creation to stoma closure (six following ileostomy and one following colostomy; P = 0·01). Conclusion: Intestinal obstruction and ileus are more common after loop ileostomy than loop colostomy. Loop transverse colostomy should be recommended as the preferred method of proximal faecal diversion.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Matthiessen, P., Hallböök, O., Rutegård, J., Simert, G., & Sjödahl, R. (2007) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e3180603024 · Cited by 1,123
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Role of Defunctioning Stoma in Low Rectal Cancer Surgery
Hüser, N., Michalski, C. W., Erkan, M., Schuster, T., Rosenberg, R., Kleeff, J., & Friess, H. (2008) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e318176bf65 · Cited by 616
Chow, A., Tilney, H. S., Paraskeva, P., Jeyarajah, S., Zacharakis, E., & Purkayastha, S. (2009) · International Journal of Colorectal Disease · doi:10.1007/s00384-009-0660-z · Cited by 428
Protective defunctioning stoma in low anterior resection for rectal carcinoma
Gastinger, I., Marusch, F., Steinert, R., Wolff, S., Koeckerling, F., & Lippert, H. (2005) · British Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1002/bjs.5045 · Cited by 360
Metadata
- Authors
- Law, W. L., Chu, K. W., & Choi, H. K.
- Venue
- British Journal of Surgery
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2002-06
- Volume
- 89
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 704-708
- ISSN
- 0007-1323 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2168
- OpenAlex
- W2037286119
- Cited by
- 175
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Randomized clinical trial comparing loop ileostomy and loop transverse colostomy for faecal diversion following total mesorectal excision. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2168.2002.02082.x
- The paper
- Law, W. L., Chu, K. W., & Choi, H. K. (2002). Randomized clinical trial comparing loop ileostomy and loop transverse colostomy for faecal diversion following total mesorectal excision. British Journal of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2168.2002.02082.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.