ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT06633133Updated Oct 16, 2024

Virtual Ileostomy Versus Diverting Ileostomy in Patients Undergoing Total Mesorectal Excision

An interventional study of Virtual ileostomy in Rectal Cancer, sponsored by Daping Hospital and the Research Institute of Surgery of the Third Military Medical University. Recruiting at 1 site in China. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-10-16.

Sponsored by Daping Hospital and the Research Institute of Surgery of the Third Military Medical University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Prevention

From the registry’s dates

  • Started Oct 2024; still recruiting 2 years later.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
620
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The goal of this clinical trial is to learn to compare the safety and efficacy of virtual ileostomy versus diverting ileostomy in patients undergoing sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. The main questions it aims to answer are:

  • Is the virtual ileostomy a safe and effective alternative to the ileostomy?
  • Is it scientifically reasonable to perform diverting ileostomy intraoperatively? Researchers will compare virtual ileostomy to diverting ileostomy to see if the virtual ileostomy works to reduce rates of stoma.

Participants will:

  • Performing diverting ileostomy or virtual ileostomy undergoing sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer
  • Continuous follow-up of their complications after the first surgery
Read the detailed description

This study is a national multicenter, large-sample, randomized controlled study

02

Conditions studied

  • Rectal Cancer

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • virtual ileostomy
  • diverting ileostomy
03

In context

Rectal Neoplasms

1,804 studies on the registry are indexed under Rectal Neoplasms; 520 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 620 is above the median of 66 across 1,330 interventional studies indexed under Rectal Neoplasms.

Browse Rectal Neoplasms studies →

Lead sponsor

Daping Hospital and the Research Institute of Surgery of the Third Military Medical University is the lead sponsor of 120 studies on the registry; 42 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Diagnosis of rectal cancer confirmed by pathology
  • Age ≥ 18 years
  • Total mesorectal excision (TME) surgical procedures and colon-rectum or colon-anal anastomosis:1.anterior resection (AR/ PME), 2. low anterior resection (LAR) , 3.intersphincteric abdominoperineal resection (ISR), 4.transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME)
  • Signed informed consent
  • Ability to understand the nature and risks of participating in the trial

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Emergency surgery, open surgery
  • ASA score >3points
  • Patients with combined complete intestinal obstruction
  • Long-term history of using immunosuppressants or glucocorticoids
  • Combined severe cardiac disease: with congestive heart failure or NYHA cardiac function ≥ grade 2. Patients with a history of myocardial infarction or coronary artery surgery within 6 months before the procedure
  • Chronic renal failure (requiring dialysis or glomerular filtration rate \<30 mL/min)
  • Intraoperative combined multi-organ resection
  • Combined cirrhosis of the liver
  • Intraoperative findings of incomplete anastomosis and positive insufflation test
  • Modified Bacon procedure(Two-Stage Turnbull-Cutait Pull-Through Coloanal Anastomosis)
  • Due to an intraoperative accident the surgeon felt that a diverting ileostomy was necessary.
  • Currently participating in other clinical trials
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
620 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Virtual ileostomy

    A pre-stage ileostomy, anchored under the abdominal wall by a vascular sling or rubber tape through the mesenteric window, is delivered to the outside of the abdomen, where the VI is pulled through the abdominal wall.

    Procedure: Virtual ileostomy

  • No intervention
    Diverting ileostomy

    Diverting ileostomy (DI) is a common fecal diversion procedure performed in patients undergoing total mesorectal excision (TME) procedure for rectal cancer to protect the anastomosis and reduce the risk of complications.

Interventions

  • ProcedureVirtual ileostomy

    A pre-stage ileostomy, anchored under the abdominal wall by a vascular sling or rubber tape through the mesenteric window, is delivered to the outside of the abdomen, where the VI is pulled through the abdominal wall.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Comprehensive Complication index (CCI) at the 6th postoperative month

    The Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI)summarises all postoperative complications based on the established Clavien-Dindo classification (ranging from mild complications not leading to a deviation from the normal clinical course (grade I) up to postoperative death (grade V)) at an individual patient level according to their grade of severity.

    Time frame: An average of 6 month from the date of low anterior resection for rectal cancer until the date of when the patient's condition is stabilized without complications

Secondary outcomes

  1. Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) at the first postoperative, 3 months postoperative, 1 year postoperative,3 years postoperative,5 years postoperative

    The Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI)summarises all postoperative complications based on the established Clavien-Dindo classification (ranging from mild complications not leading to a deviation from the normal clinical course (grade I) up to postoperative death (grade V)) at an individual patient level according to their grade of severity.

    Time frame: 5 year

  2. First postoperative complications

    First postoperative complications(including abdominal abscess, peritonitis, anastomotic leakage, anastomotic bleeding, pelvic infection, surgical incision infection, peritonitis, anastomotic stenosis, intestinal obstruction, peri-wound complications, incisional hernia, and others) based on the established Clavien-Dindo classification (ranging from mild complications not leading to a deviation from the normal clinical course (grade I) up to postoperative death (grade V)) at an individual patient level according to their grade of severity.

    Time frame: From the date of randomization until the date of discharge, an average of 7 to 14 days

  3. Stoma-related complications

    Wounds/abscesses/edema/dermatitis/ulcers around the diverting Ileostomy; parastomal hernia; stoma prolapse; acute kidney injury; dehydration/output \>1500 mL/day; other stoma-related complications

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 5 year

  4. Complications after ileostomy closure

    Anastomotic leakage; intestinal anastomotic leakage; anastomotic stenosis; bowel obstruction; other wound complications (Wound dehiscence/bleeding/sinus tract/abscess/fat liquefaction); burst abdomen (dehiscence of abdominal fascia); incisional hernia; fecal incontinence; reoperation; other complications

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 5 year

  5. Postoperative hospitalization days(Initial and all subsequent hospitalizations)

    Patients in the virtual stoma group who did not have a second surgery due to complications recorded days of postoperative hospitalization after low anterior resection for rectal cancer, if the virtual stoma group required bedside or secondary surgery for diverting ileostomy due to complications and all patients in the diverting ileostomy group required reoperation for stoma reversal, record days of postoperative hospitalization due to complications and/or reoperation since the data of low anterior resection for rectal cancer.

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 5 year

  6. The number of hospitalizations(Initial and all subsequent hospitalizations)

    Patients in the virtual stoma group who did not have a second surgery due to complications recorded the number of hospitalizations after low anterior resection for rectal cancer. If the virtual stoma group required bedside or secondary surgery for diverting ileostomy due to complications and all patients in the diverting ileostomy group required reoperation for stoma reversal, record the number of hospitalization due to complications and/or reoperation since the data of low anterior resection for rectal cancer.

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 5 year

  7. Duration of bearing the stoma (months)

    If the virtual stoma group required bedside or secondary surgery for diverting ileostomy due to complications and all patients in the diverting ileostomy group required reoperation for stoma reversal, record the duration of bearing the stoma since the data of surgery of diverting ileostomy.

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 5 year

  8. Total hospitalization costs(Initial and all subsequent hospitalizations)

    Patients in the virtual stoma group who did not have a second surgery due to complications recorded the costs after the first surgery for rectal cancer, if the virtual stoma group required bedside or secondary surgery for converted to diverting ileostomy due to complications and all patients in the diverting ileostomy group required reoperation for stoma reversal, record the costs due to complications and reoperation since the data of the first surgery for rectal cancer.

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 5 year

  9. Number of participants with terminal ostomy

    Hartmann's procedure or for example, abdominoperineal extirpation,and transverse colostomy

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 5 year

  10. Number of Participants with unscheduled secondary surgery

    Patients performed unscheduled secondary surgery due to complications.

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 5 year

  11. The rate at which virtual ileostomy was converted to diverting ileostomy

    The virtual ileostomy group required bedside or secondary surgery to convert to diverting ileostomy due to complications

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 5 year

  12. Virtual ileostomy remove time(days)

    Duration of days from the date of radical resection of rectal cancer to virtual stoma removed.

    Time frame: During hospitalization,approximately 14 days

  13. Bile acid concentration of drainage fluid

    The investigators are monitoring the concentration of bile acids in the first postoperative drainage fluid.

    Time frame: During hospitalization,approximately 7 days

  14. Number of participants with stoma (terminal/loop) at 6 months after initial surgery

    Patients carrying stoma 6 months after the first surgery for rectal cancer

    Time frame: 6 months from the date of first surgery for rectal cancer

  15. Interventional drainage rate

    Patient requires interventional drainage due to complications.

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 5 year

  16. Fecal Incontinence Scale(Wexner Score)

    The defecation function of all postoperative patients. Wexner score range is 0-20 points, with 0 points indicating normal and 20 points indicating complete incontinence.

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 5 year

  17. Quality of life(EORTC QLQ-C30)

    The quality of life of all patients was assessed using relevant scales\[EORTC (The European Organization for Reasearch and Treatment of Cancer) QLQ-C30(Quality of Life Questionnare-Core 30)\]. The EORTC QLQ-C30 (V3. O) consists of 30 entries, which can be divided into 15 domains, including 5 functional domains (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social functions), 3 symptom domains (fatigue, pain, nausea, and vomiting), 1 overall health/quality of life domain, and 6 individual entries (each as a domain). EORTC QLQ-C30 has a total of 30 entries. Among them, entries 29 and 30 are divided into seven levels, ranging from 1 to 7 points based on their answer options; the other entries are divided into 4 levels: none(1 point), a little(2 points), more(3 points), many(4 points). The QLQ-C30 scale is reversed except for items 29 and 30 (the higher the value, the worse the quality of life).

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 5 year

  18. Disease free survival (DFS)

    Disease free survival

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 5 year

  19. Overall survival (OS)

    Overall survival

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 5 year

  20. Rate of permanent ileostomy

    Patients who underwent diverting Ileostomy were converted to permanent ileostomy.

    Time frame: From the date of first surgery,an average of 3 year

  21. Completion of intended perioperative or adjuvant chemotherapy

    Completion of intended perioperative or adjuvant chemotherapy

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 5 year

  22. Low anterior resection syndrome for rectal cancer

    The investigators use LARS scale to evaluate the patient's defecation function.The LARS rating scale consists of 5 questions: voiding incontinence, fluid voiding incontinence, frequency of voiding, voiding aggregation, and voiding urgency. 0-20 is classified as no LARS, 21-29 is classified as mild LARS, 30-42 is classified as severe LARS.

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 5 year

  23. Quality of life for fecal incontinence

    The Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale (FIQL) is mainly used to evaluate the quality of life of patients with fecal incontinence. It includes four main aspects: lifestyle changes, psychological coping/behavioral limitations, depression/self-perception, and social embarrassment. The FIQL is analyzed as a total score; the higher the patient's score, the higher the patient's quality of life.

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 5 year

  24. Permanent ileostomy rate

    Patients with diverting ileostomy who underwent sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer were converted to permanent ileostomy.

    Time frame: 3 years from the date of first surgery for rectal cancer

  25. Mortality

    30-day mortality

    Time frame: 30 days from the date of first surgery for rectal cancer

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • Daping Hospital, Third Military Medical University
    Chongqing, 400042, China
    Recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Degiuli M, Elmore U, De Luca R, De Nardi P, Tomatis M, Biondi A, Persiani R, Solaini L, Rizzo G, Soriero D, Cianflocca D, Milone M, Turri G, Rega D, Delrio P, Pedrazzani C, De Palma GD, Borghi F, Scabini S, Coco C, Cavaliere D, Simone M, Rosati R, Reddavid R; collaborators from the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology Colorectal Cancer Network Collaborative Group. Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer (RALAR study): A nationwide retrospective study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology Colorectal Cancer Network Collaborative Group. Colorectal Dis. 2022 Mar;24(3):264-276. doi: 10.1111/codi.15997. Epub 2021 Dec 6. PubMed 34816571 ↗
  • Zhao S, Zhang L, Gao F, Wu M, Zheng J, Bai L, Li F, Liu B, Pan Z, Liu J, Du K, Zhou X, Li C, Zhang A, Pu Z, Li Y, Feng B, Tong W. Transanal Drainage Tube Use for Preventing Anastomotic Leakage After Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection in Patients With Rectal Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Surg. 2021 Dec 1;156(12):1151-1158. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2021.4568. PubMed 34613330 ↗
  • Lightner AL, Vogel JD, Carmichael JC, Keller DS, Shah SA, Mahadevan U, Kane SV, Paquette IM, Steele SR, Feingold DL. The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Surgical Management of Crohn's Disease. Dis Colon Rectum. 2020 Aug;63(8):1028-1052. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001716. No abstract available. PubMed 32692069 ↗
  • Penna M, Hompes R, Arnold S, Wynn G, Austin R, Warusavitarne J, Moran B, Hanna GB, Mortensen NJ, Tekkis PP; TaTME Registry Collaborative. Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision: International Registry Results of the First 720 Cases. Ann Surg. 2017 Jul;266(1):111-117. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001948. PubMed 27735827 ↗
  • Palumbo P, Usai S, Pansa A, Lucchese S, Caronna R, Bona S. Anastomotic Leakage in Rectal Surgery: Role of the Ghost Ileostomy. Anticancer Res. 2019 Jun;39(6):2975-2983. doi: 10.21873/anticanres.13429. PubMed 31177138 ↗
  • Huttner FJ, Probst P, Mihaljevic A, Contin P, Dorr-Harim C, Ulrich A, Schneider M, Buchler MW, Diener MK, Knebel P. Ghost ileostomy versus conventional loop ileostomy in patients undergoing low anterior resection for rectal cancer (DRKS00013997): protocol for a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open. 2020 Oct 15;10(10):e038930. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038930. PubMed 33060088 ↗
  • Sacchi M, Legge PD, Picozzi P, Papa F, Giovanni CL, Greco L. Virtual ileostomy following TME and primary sphincter-saving reconstruction for rectal cancer. Hepatogastroenterology. 2007 Sep;54(78):1676-8. PubMed 18019692 ↗
  • Baloyiannis I, Perivoliotis K, Diamantis A, Tzovaras G. Virtual ileostomy in elective colorectal surgery: a systematic review of the literature. Tech Coloproctol. 2020 Jan;24(1):23-31. doi: 10.1007/s10151-019-02127-2. Epub 2019 Dec 9. PubMed 31820192 ↗
  • Zenger S, Gurbuz B, Can U, Balik E, Yalti T, Bugra D. Comparative study between ghost ileostomy and defunctioning ileostomy in terms of morbidity and cost-effectiveness in low anterior resection for rectal cancer. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2021 Mar;406(2):339-347. doi: 10.1007/s00423-021-02089-w. Epub 2021 Feb 4. PubMed 33537875 ↗
  • Miccini M, Amore Bonapasta S, Gregori M, Barillari P, Tocchi A. Ghost ileostomy: real and potential advantages. Am J Surg. 2010 Oct;200(4):e55-7. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.12.017. PubMed 20887836 ↗
  • Cerroni M, Cirocchi R, Morelli U, Trastulli S, Desiderio J, Mezzacapo M, Listorti C, Esperti L, Milani D, Avenia N, Gulla N, Noya G, Boselli C. Ghost Ileostomy with or without abdominal parietal split. World J Surg Oncol. 2011 Aug 18;9:92. doi: 10.1186/1477-7819-9-92. PubMed 21849090 ↗
  • Mori L, Vita M, Razzetta F, Meinero P, D'Ambrosio G. Ghost ileostomy in anterior resection for rectal carcinoma: is it worthwhile? Dis Colon Rectum. 2013 Jan;56(1):29-34. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0b013e3182716ca1. PubMed 23222277 ↗
  • McKechnie T, Lee J, Lee Y, Tessier L, Amin N, Doumouras A, Hong D, Eskicioglu C. Ghost Ileostomy Versus Loop Ileostomy Following Oncologic Resection for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Surg Innov. 2023 Aug;30(4):501-516. doi: 10.1177/15533506231169066. Epub 2023 Apr 4. PubMed 37013791 ↗
  • Flor-Lorente B, Sanchez-Guillen L, Pellino G, Frasson M, Garcia-Granero A, Ponce M, Domingo S, Paya V, Garcia-Granero E. "Virtual ileostomy" combined with early endoscopy to avoid a diversion ileostomy in low or ultralow colorectal anastomoses. A preliminary report. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2019 May;404(3):375-383. doi: 10.1007/s00423-019-01776-z. Epub 2019 Mar 27. PubMed 30919049 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Oct 16, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06633133
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Oct 9, 2024
Start date
Oct 10, 2024
Primary completion
Dec 1, 2026 (estimated)
Completion
Oct 1, 2030 (estimated)
Last update
Oct 16, 2024

Study contacts

fan li, PhD
Contact
levinecq@163.com
18696539200
fan li
study chair · Daping Hospital and the Research Institute of Surgery of the Third Military Medical University

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion