1. Compared to a temporary colostomy, construction of an ileostomy (19) results in fewer complications than in patients with colorectal cancer undergoing elective surgery. While there are less generalized and wound infections, however, restoration of the intestinal continuity in ileostomy appears to be associated with more complications. So far there is no convincing evidence as to whether patients undergoing colorectal surgery fare better with an ileostomy rather than colostomy. The answer to this question requires randomized controlled trials. In LAR (low anterior [rectal] resection), most surgeons prefer an ileostomy, since both construction and closure are generally easier, even if colostomy supposedly benefits from less complications with intestinal obstructions and ileus. In acute emergency surgery, there is no significant difference in the complication rate between ileostomy and colostomy. However, the complications after ileostomy appear to be more serious than following colostomy. (18)
2. This analysis comprised 12 comparative studies between 2007 and 2009 totaling 1529 patients. The overall risk was lower in ileostomy than in colostomy. This pertained to the risk of sepsis and stomal prolapse, peristomal hernia, stricture and stomal retraction, necrosis, and hemorrhage. In contrast, ileostomy was associated with a higher risk of dehydration, and the complication rate in restoration of intestinal continuity was also higher than in closure of a loop colostomy.(19)