Protective diverting stomas are frequently constructed after low anterior resection or colorectal anastomosis to mitigate the consequences of anastomotic leakage, one of the most feared complications in colorectal surgery.
Both loop ileostomy (LI) and loop transverse colostomy (TC) are accepted methods of diversion. Randomized and observational studies have shown that faecal diversion significantly reduces the clinical severity of leaks and the need for reoperation compared with no diversion.
The choice between LI and TC remains controversial. Loop ileostomy is technically straightforward and associated with shorter operative time and fewer septic complications at closure. However, it carries specific risks, including high-output stoma, dehydration, electrolyte imbalance, and renal impairment, which may lead to hospital readmissions. Conversely, loop transverse colostomy is associated with fewer fluid and electrolyte issues, but has higher rates of prolapse, skin irritation, and wound complications at closure.
Meta-analyses comparing LI and TC indicate no clear superiority, with each approach demonstrating distinct patterns of morbidity. Some randomized trials have suggested lower major morbidity with LI, while others found no significant difference. Given the heterogeneity of outcomes and limited high-quality, adequately powered trials, further randomized evidence is needed to guide optimal stoma selection in colorectal surgery.