Bowel Stimulation Before Loop Ileostomy Closure Using Probiotics: A Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial at a Single Center (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<sec> <title>BACKGROUND</title> Rectal cancer patients who undergo sphincter-preserving surgery often develop low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), characterized by symptoms such as fecal incontinence and irregular bowel movements, often due to surgical injury and altered pelvic anatomy. Diverting ileostomy can exacerbate gut microbiota imbalances and increase harmful microbes. </sec> <sec> <title>OBJECTIVE</title> This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of probiotics administration prior to ileostomy closure to manage LARS. </sec> <sec> <title>METHODS</title> This single-center, randomized controlled trial will include patients with clinical stage II–III rectal cancer who underwent total mesorectal excision and diverting ileostomy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Participants will be randomly allocated to receive either 250 mL of normal saline with 4 g of Lacidofil® or normal saline alone via the distal limb of the ileostomy once daily for 2 weeks before closure. The primary outcome is the LARS score 3 months after ileostomy closure. Secondary outcomes include postoperative complications, bowel recovery, and hospital stay. </sec> <sec> <title>RESULTS</title> The study was approved by the Keimyung University Dongsan Medical Center IRB (DSMC-2024-03-016) and registered in the Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS 20250825-004). Recruitment will begin in March 2026, with completion anticipated by March 2029. As of submission, the trial is in the pre-enrollment phase, with no data analysis yet performed. Results are expected to be available and published by mid-2029. </sec> <sec> <title>CONCLUSIONS</title> This trial will provide evidence on whether probiotic bowel stimulation before ileostomy closure improves bowel function and alleviates LARS after rectal cancer surgery. </sec> <sec> <title>CLINICALTRIAL</title> Clinical Research Information Service 20250825-004. Registered on 25 August 2025. </sec>
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".