Development of invasive adenocarcinoma following colectomy with ileoanal anastomosis for familial polyposis coli. Report of a case

Endoscopic management of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis after prophylactic colectomy or restorative proctocolectomy - systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) develop early colorectal adenomas and if left untreated, progression to cancer is an inevitable event. Prophylactic surgery does not prevent further development of cancer in the rectal remnant, rectal cuff in patients with ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) and even on the ileal mucosa of the pouch body. The aim of this review is to assess long-term rates of cancer and adenoma development in patients with FAP after prophylactic surgery and to summarise current recommendations for endoscopic management and surveillance of these patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature search of studies from January 1946 through to June 2023 was conducted using the PRISMA checklist. The electronic database PubMed was searched.

RESULTS

Fifty-four papers involving 5010 patients were reviewed. Cancer rate in the rectal remnant was 8.8-16.7% in the western population and 37% in the eastern population. The cumulative risk of cancer 30 years after surgery was 24%. Mortality due to cancer in the rectal remnant is 1.1-11.1% with a 5-year survival rate of 55%. The adenoma rate after primary IPAA was 9.4-85% with a cumulative risk of 85% 20 years after surgery and a cumulative risk of 12% for advanced adenomas 10 years after surgery. Cumulative risk for adenomas after ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) was 85% after 5 and 100% after 10 years. Adenomas developed more frequently after stapled (33.9-57%) compared to hand-sewn (0-33%) anastomosis. We identified reports of 45 cancers in patients after IPAA of which 30 were in the pouch body and 15 in the rectal cuff or at the anastomosis.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a significant incidence of cancer and adenomas in the rectal remnant and ileal pouch of FAP patients during the long-term follow-up. Regular endoscopic surveillance is recommended, not only in IRA patients, but also in pouch patients after proctocolectomy.

Incidence and Risk Factors of Cancer in the Anal Transitional Zone and Ileal Pouch following Surgery for Ulcerative Colitis and Familial Adenomatous Polyposis

Proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is the intervention of choice for ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis requiring surgery. One of the long-term complications is pouch cancer, having a poor prognosis. The risk of high-grade dysplasia and cancer in the anal transitional zone and ileal pouch after 20 years is estimated to be 2 to 4.5% and 3 to 10% in ulcerative colitis and familial polyposis, respectively. The risk factors for ulcerative colitis are the presence of pre-operative dysplasia or cancer, disease duration > 10 years and severe villous atrophy. For familial polyposis, the risk factors are the number of pre-operative polyps > 1000, surgery with stapled anastomosis and the duration of follow-up. In the case of ulcerative colitis, a pouchoscopy should be performed annually if one of the following is present: dysplasia and cancer at surgery, primary sclerosing cholangitis, villous atrophy and active pouchitis (every 5 years without any of these factors). In the case of familial polyposis, endoscopy is recommended every year including chromoendoscopy. Even if anal transitional zone and ileal pouch cancers seldom occur following proctectomy for ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis, the high mortality rate associated with this complication warrants endoscopic monitoring.

Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) guidelines 2020 for the Clinical Practice of Hereditary Colorectal Cancer

Hereditary colorectal cancer (HCRC) accounts for < 5% of all colorectal cancer cases. Some of the unique characteristics commonly encountered in HCRC cases include early age of onset, synchronous/metachronous cancer occurrence, and multiple cancers in other organs. These characteristics necessitate different management approaches, including diagnosis, treatment or surveillance, from sporadic colorectal cancer management. There are two representative HCRC, named familial adenomatous polyposis and Lynch syndrome. Other than these two HCRC syndromes, related disorders have also been reported. Several guidelines for hereditary disorders have already been published worldwide. In Japan, the first guideline for HCRC was prepared by the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR), published in 2012 and revised in 2016. This revised version of the guideline was immediately translated into English and published in 2017. Since then, several new findings and novel disease concepts related to HCRC have been discovered. The currently diagnosed HCRC rate in daily clinical practice is relatively low; however, this is predicted to increase in the era of cancer genomic medicine, with the advancement of cancer multi-gene panel testing or whole genome testing, among others. Under these circumstances, the JSCCR guidelines 2020 for HCRC were prepared by consensus among members of the JSCCR HCRC Guideline Committee, based on a careful review of the evidence retrieved from literature searches, and considering the medical health insurance system and actual clinical practice settings in Japan. Herein, we present the English version of the JSCCR guidelines 2020 for HCRC.

Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) Guidelines 2016 for the Clinical Practice of Hereditary Colorectal Cancer (Translated Version)

Hereditary colorectal cancer accounts for less than 5% of all colorectal cancer cases. Some of the unique characteristics that are commonly encountered in cases of hereditary colorectal cancer include early age at onset, synchronous/metachronous occurrence of the cancer, and association with multiple cancers in other organs, necessitating different management from sporadic colorectal cancer. While the diagnosis of familial adenomatous polyposis might be easy because usually 100 or more adenomas that develop in the colonic mucosa are in this condition, Lynch syndrome, which is the most commonly associated disease with hereditary colorectal cancer, is often missed in daily medical practice because of its relatively poorly defined clinical characteristics. In addition, the disease concept and diagnostic criteria for Lynch syndrome, which was once called hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer, have changed over time with continual research, thereby possibly creating confusion in clinical practice. Under these circumstances, the JSCCR Guideline Committee has developed the "JSCCR Guidelines 2016 for the Clinical Practice of Hereditary Colorectal Cancer (HCRC)," to allow delivery of appropriate medical care in daily practice to patients with familial adenomatous polyposis, Lynch syndrome, or other related diseases. The JSCCR Guidelines 2016 for HCRC were prepared by consensus reached among members of the JSCCR Guideline Committee, based on a careful review of the evidence retrieved from literature searches, and considering the medical health insurance system and actual clinical practice settings in Japan. Herein, we present the English version of the JSCCR Guidelines 2016 for HCRC.

Laparoscopic-assisted proctocolectomy with prolapsing technique for familial adenomatous polyposis

PURPOSE

The role of laparoscopic total proctocolectomy (TPC) and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) for familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) has been controversial, given its technical difficulty of selecting the appropriate distal transection line and achieving safe anastomosis. We herein describe our initial experience with the prolapsing technique for laparoscopic-assisted TPC and IPAA (J-pouch) in the treatment of FAP.

METHODS

A consecutive series of patients with FAP undergoing laparoscopic-assisted TPC with IPAA were identified from a prospectively collected database between June 2004 and February 2012. Medical records were reviewed for patient demographics, operative outcomes, and follow-up.

RESULTS

The surgery was successfully completed in all 6 patients without any conversion to open surgery. The median operating time was 279 minutes (range, 240 to 386 min) and the median blood loss was 17.5 mL (range, 5 to 161 mL). No patient required blood transfusion. The median length of diet resumption and postoperative hospital stay were 7 days (range, 6 to 10 d) and 15 days (range, 13 to 21 d), respectively. A postoperative complication, wound infection, occurred in 1 patient. No anastomotic leakages or small bowel obstructions occurred. At a median follow-up of 59 months (range, 14.2 to 107.5 mo), no carcinoma had developed at the pouch or at the anastomotic site. Sexual function and fertility were unchanged as compared with preoperatively in 2 male patients. None of the patients experienced night-time incontinence or had to use a pad.

CONCLUSIONS

Our limited experience suggests that this prolapsing technique helps prevent problems with laparoscopic-assisted TPC and IPAA for FAP patients.

Risk of neoplastic change in ileal pouches in familial adenomatous polyposis

INTRODUCTION

Neoplastic change in ileal reservoirs after proctocolectomy has been reported in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. We aim to determine the incidence and progression of neoplastic change in the ileal pouch of familial adenomatous polyposis patients at our institution.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients who underwent proctocolectomy for familial adenomatous polyposis with construction of an ileal pouch from 1972 to 2007 was performed. Data and status at follow-up were retrieved from the Mayo Clinic Colorectal Surgery Pouch database.

RESULTS

One hundred seventeen patients were identified with a median age of 26, 52 were male. Ileal reservoirs included J-pouch (a = 104), Kock pouch (n = 9), S-pouch (n = 3), and W-pouch (n = 1). Median follow-up was 125 months. Polyps were biopsied in 33 patients: non-dysplastic polyps (n = 2), low-grade dysplasia (n = 30), and adenocarcinoma (n = 1). No patients had high-grade dysplasia. Median time to development of dysplasia was 149 months. Adenocarcinoma developed in one patient after 284 months. Risk of dysplasia at 10, 20, and 25 years was 17, 45, and 69%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Though there is a high incidence of low-grade dysplasia in the ileal reservoir in familial adenomatous polyposis patients, high-grade dysplasia and cancer occur rarely. Patients with low-grade dysplasia may still necessitate regular follow-up.

Adenoma formation and malignancy after restorative proctocolectomy with or without mucosectomy in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis

BACKGROUND

There is controversy concerning whether or not to perform mucosectomy after IPAA in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. Although more frequent adenoma formation at the anastomotic site in patients without a mucosectomy is documented, the interpretation of the theoretical reflections and empirical findings are ambiguous.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the differences in adenoma formation at the anastomotic site and in the ileal pouch among patients with familial adenomatous polyposis after IPAA with or without mucosectomy.

DESIGN

Data were gathered from The Norwegian Polyposis Registry and The Cancer Registry of Norway.

PATIENTS

Sixty-one patients with familial adenomatous polyposis who had IPAA were included in the Norwegian Polyposis Registry.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The frequency of adenoma development in the pouch or at the anastomotic site was measured.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients had a pelvic pouch performed with mucosectomy and 22 patients without. The observational time was 15.5 and 13.7 years. Adenoma formation at the anastomotic site was 4 in 39 and 14 in 22, and the estimated rate was 17% vs 75% (p = 0.0001). One patient without mucosectomy had a cancer (Dukes A) at the anastomotic site. There was no estimated long-term difference in adenoma formation in the ileal pouches between the 2 surgical procedures (38%) (p = 0.10).

LIMITATIONS

The study is retrospective, in part, and relies on data from registries. There is a limited number of cases, and selection bias because of surgeon preference may exist.

CONCLUSION

In patients with familial adenomatous polyposis who undergo IPAA, adenoma formation at the anastomotic site is significantly reduced after mucosectomy. Mucosectomy may be the preferable procedure to prevent adenomas at the anastomotic site.

Adenocarcinomas After Prophylactic Surgery For Familial Adenomatous Polyposis

The incidence of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is one in 7,000 to 12,000 live births. Virtually, all surgically untreated patients with FAP inevitably develop colorectal-cancer in their lifetime because they carry the adenomatous polyposis coli gene. Thus prophylactic proctocolectomy is indicated. Surgical treatment of FAP is still controversial. There are however, four surgical options: ileorectal anastomosis, restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis, proctocolectomy with ileostomy, and proctocolectomy with continent-ileostomy. Conventional proctocolectomy options largely lie between colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis or ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Detractors of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis prefer ileorectal anastomosis because of better functional results and quality of life. The functional outcome of total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis is undoubtedly far superior to that of the ileoanal pouch; however, the risk for rectal cancer is increased by 30%. Even after mucosectomy, inadvertent small mucosal residual islands remain. These residual islands carry the potential for the development of subsequent malignancy. We reviewed the literature (1975-2012) on the incidence, nature, and possible etiology of subsequent ileal-pouch and anal transit zone adenocarcinoma after prophylactic surgery procedure for FAP. To date there are 24 studies reporting 92 pouch-related cancers; 15 case reports, 4 prospective and 5 retrospective studies. Twenty three of 92 cancers (25%) developed in the pouch mucosa and 69 (75%) in anal transit zone (ATZ). Current recommendation for pouch surveillance and treatment are presented. Data suggest lifetime surveillance of these patients.

Effects of intervention with sulindac and inulin/VSL#3 on mucosal and luminal factors in the pouch of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis

BACKGROUND/AIM

In order to define future chemoprevention strategies for adenomas or carcinomas in the pouch of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), a 4-weeks intervention with (1) sulindac, (2) inulin/VSL#3, and (3) sulindac/inulin/VSL#3 was performed on 17 patients with FAP in a single center intervention study. Primary endpoints were the risk parameters cell proliferation and glutathione S-transferase (GST) detoxification capacity in the pouch mucosa; secondary endpoints were the short chain fatty acid (SCFA) contents, pH, and cytotoxicity of fecal water.

METHODS

Before the start and at the end of each 4-week intervention period, six biopsies of the pouch were taken and feces was collected during 24 h. Cell proliferation and GST enzyme activity was assessed in the biopsies and pH, SCFA contents, and cytotoxicity were assessed in the fecal water fraction. The three interventions (sulindac, inulin/VSL#3, sulindac/inulin/VSL#3) were compared with the Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

Cell proliferation was lower after sulindac or VSL#3/inulin, the combination treatment with sulindac/inulin/VSL#3 showed the opposite. GST enzyme activity was increased after sulindac or VSL#3/inulin, the combination treatment showed the opposite effect. However, no significance was reached in all these measures. Cytotoxicity, pH, and SCFA content of fecal water showed no differences at all among the three treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

Our study revealed non-significant decreased cell proliferation and increased detoxification capacity after treatment with sulindac or VSL#3/inulin; however, combining both regimens did not show an additional effect.

Adenocarcinoma in ileal pouch after proctocolectomy for familial adenomatous polyposis: report of a case

Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is one of the surgical treatments of choice for patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. Although the risk of cancer developing in an ileal pouch is not yet clear, a few cases of adenocarcinoma arising in an ileal pouch have been reported. We report a case of adenocarcinoma in ileal pouch after proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. A 56-yr-old woman was diagnosed as having familial adenomatous polyposis. Total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis was performed. Six years later, she underwent completion-proctectomy with ileal J pouch-anal anastomosis including anorectal mucosectomy for rectal cancer. After 7 yr, she presented with anal spotting. Endoscopic biopsies revealed adenocarcinoma at the ileal pouch. Resection of the ileal pouch and permanent ileostomy were performed. The risk of cancer in an ileal pouch and its prevention with regular surveillance must be emphasized.

Adenocarcinoma arising in the middle of ileoanal pouches: report of five cases

Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis with or without mucosectomy has become the procedure of choice in patients with long-standing ulcerative colitis complicated by malignancy or medically refractory disease and for familial polyposis syndrome. Some reports have demonstrated the development of malignancy at the ileoanal anastomosis. We present a recent series of five patients who developed adenocarcinoma in the middle of their ileal pouch including the first case of pouch carcinoma in a patient who underwent pouch formation for ulcerative colitis. We discuss their presentation and management. Development of ileal pouch cancers, while rare, has been seen with increasing frequency in our practice. Patients with long-standing ileal pouches may benefit from routine surveillance of the pouch as often as every six months, which can be performed quickly and easily in the office using flexible endoscopy.

Rectal and pouch recurrences after surgical treatment for familial adenomatous polyposis

BACKGROUND

Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is a genetic disease characterized by multiple adenomatous colorectal polyps and different extracolonic manifestations (ECM). The present work is aimed to analyze the outcome after surgical treatment regarding complications and cancer recurrence.

METHODS

Charts from patients treated between 1977 and 2006 were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical and endoscopic data, results of treatment, pathological reports and information about recurrence were collected.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight patients (41 men [46.6%] and 47 women [53.4%]) were assisted. At diagnosis, associated colorectal cancer (CRC) was detected in 53 patients (60.2%), whose average age was higher than those without CRC (40.0 vs. 29.5 years). At colonoscopy, polyposis was classified as attenuated in 12 patients (14.3%). Surgical treatment consisted in total proctocolectomy with ileostomy (PCI, 15 [17.4%]), restorative proctocolectomy (RPC, 27 [31.4%]), total colectomy with ileal-rectum anastomosis (IRA, 42 [48.8%]), palliative segmental resection (1 [1.2%]) and internal bypass (1 [1.2%]). Two patients were not operated on due to religious reasons and advanced disease. Complications occurred in 25 patients (29.0%), more commonly after RPC (48.1%). There was no operative mortality. Local or distant metastases were detected in six (11.3%) patients with CRC treated to cure. During the follow-up of 36 IRA, cancer developed in the rectal cuff in six patients (16.6%), whose average age was higher than in patients without rectal recurrence (45.8 vs. 36.6 years). Five of them have had colonic cancer in the resected specimen. Among the 26 patients followed after RPC, cancer in the ileal pouch developed in 1 (3.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

(1) Within the present series, FAP patients presented a high incidence of associated CRC and diagnosis was generally established after the third decade of life; (2) operative complications occurred in about one third of the patients, being more frequent after the confection of an ileal reservoir; (3) rectal cancer after IRA was detected in 16.6% of patients and it was associated with greater age and previous colonic carcinoma; (4) both continuous and long-term surveillance of the rectal stump and ileal pouch are necessary during follow-up.

Risk of developing adenomas and carcinomas in the ileal pouch in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

At present, more than half of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) are treated with a proctocolectomy and an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA). Originally it was thought that this procedure would eliminate the risk of developing rectal cancer. However, an increasing number of studies reported development of adenoma and carcinoma in the pouch. The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term risk of developing adenomas and carcinomas in the pouch in a large cohort of Dutch FAP patients.

METHODS

A total of 254 patients with FAP who underwent an IPAA were selected from the Dutch Polyposis Registry. The results of the surveillance examinations and the pathology reports were analyzed. Surveillance with chromoendoscopy was offered to a subgroup of patients.

RESULTS

Full information on follow-up was available in 212 (84%) patients. These patients (56% male) underwent a total of 761 endoscopies. The mean follow-up was 7.9 years (range, 0.4-20.3 years). The cumulative risk of developing an adenoma in the pouch at 10-year follow-up was 45%. Twenty-five patients (11.8%) developed an adenoma with advanced pathology, and 4 (1.9%) developed a carcinoma. The cumulative risk of developing a pouch carcinoma at 10-year follow-up was 1%. A very high prevalence (75.7%) of adenomas was found in a subgroup of patients who were examined with chromoendoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that although the risk of developing adenomas in the pouch after an IPAA is high, the risk of malignant degeneration appears to be low. The use of chromoendoscopy improves the detection of small adenomas.

Review article: restorative proctocolectomy, indications, management of complications and follow-up--a guide for gastroenterologists

BACKGROUND

Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is the procedure of choice for the majority of patients with ulcerative colitis who require surgery. Over 2500 patients in the UK have undergone restorative proctocolectomy. It is now increasingly being performed in district general hospitals as well as in specialist inflammatory bowel disease units. Gastroenterologists are increasingly involved in the management of patients following restorative proctocolectomy.

AIM

To provide gastroenterologists with a clear understanding of the investigation and evidence-based management of complications and the aftercare required in patients who have undergone restorative proctocolectomy.

RESULTS

Following restorative proctocolectomy, most patients have an excellent long-term functional outcome. Pouchitis, pelvic sepsis and poor function are the most common causes of failure. The development of cancer is rare; nevertheless, long-term follow-up is required.

CONCLUSIONS

The investigation and management of patients who develop complications require a multidisciplinary team approach to optimize the outcome. Protocols are suggested for investigation and management of patients with complications and for long-term cancer surveillance.

Increased epithelial cell proliferation in the ileal pouch mucosa of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis

To eliminate the risk of colorectal cancer in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), reconstructive proctocolectomy is performed. Although most colonic mucosa is resected during the ileal pouch anal anastomosis, adenomas and carcinomas may develop in the pouch. This may be caused by altered cell kinetics due to intraluminal changes in the pouch. In 32 patients with FAP, biopsy specimens from the mucosa of the pouch and also of the afferent ileal loop were taken. Tissue sections were immunohistochemically processed with the monoclonal antibodies M30 and MIB-1 to assess apoptotic and proliferative indices, respectively. Cell proliferation was also assessed by a modified sign test. There were no significant differences in apoptotic rates between the mucosa of the pouch and the mucosa of the afferent ileal loop. However, cell proliferation was significantly higher in the mucosa of the pouch vs afferent ileal loop, both by using the quantitative (68.3% vs 61.6%, p = 0.001) and semiquantitative methods (p < 0.05). Our newly developed semiquantitative approach outperformed previously described methods. The higher cell proliferation in the pouch as compared to the afferent ileal loop may contribute to the increased risk for adenomas and carcinomas in the pouch of patients with FAP and emphasizes the need for regular endoscopic surveillance.

Should ileal pouch-anal anastomosis include mucosectomy?

OBJECTIVE

Debate exists as to the benefits of performing mucosectomy as part of pouch surgery for ulcerative colitis (UC) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Whilst mucosectomy results in a more complete removal of diseased mucosa, this benefit may be at the price of poorer function. We examined these issues.

METHOD

Using Medline, Embase, Ovid and Cochrane database searches papers were identified relating to the outcome following pouch surgery with and without mucosectomy. Potential reasons for functional problems were investigated, as were rates of 'cuffitis', dysplasia, polyposis and cancer in the ileal pouch and anal canal.

RESULTS

The available evidence suggests that performing a mucosectomy leads to a worse functional outcome. Meta-analysis suggested that nighttime seepage of stool and resting and squeeze pressure were worse after mucosectomy. The most likely reason for functional impairment following pouch surgery was the degree of anal manipulation. Mucosectomy does seem to confer benefit in terms of disease control but this benefit does not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

Stapled anastomosis avoiding mucosectomy is the approach of choice for ileal pouch anal anastomosis because this leads to superior functional outcome. Performing mucosectomy results in some clinical benefits in terms of lower rates of inflammation and dysplasia in the retained mucosa in UC patients and lower rates of cuff polyposis in FAP patients. However, on the basis of available evidence mucosectomy is only indicated in those cases where the patient is at a high risk of disease in the retained rectal cuff.

Risk of dysplasia and adenocarcinoma following restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis

OBJECTIVE

Restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) with or without mucosectomy is the treatment of choice for most patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) requiring surgery. The ileal mucosa in the reservoir and the anorectal columnar epithelium below the ileo-anal anastomosis are at risk of neoplastic transformation.

METHOD

The literature has been reviewed to identify patients developing this complication and an attempt has been made to develop a rational follow-up policy based on the data available.

RESULTS

Dysplasia in the ileal reservoir is rare. It is associated with histological type C changes, sclerosing cholangitis and unremitting pouchitis in the ileal mucosa and to the presence of sclerosing cholangitis. Nine patients who have developed adenocarcinoma in the residual anorectal mucosa and seven in the reservoir have been reported in the literature. A further hitherto unreported patient treated by the authors brings the total to 17 patients. Twelve of these had histopathological data on either dysplasia or carcinoma in the original operative specimen. The time intervals from the onset of UC and from the RPC to the development of cancer were 120-528 (median 246) and 16-216 (median 60) months respectively. Cancer appeared to be related to the duration of disease rather than to the interval from RPC. In all the reported patients the interval from the onset of UC was 10 years.

CONCLUSION

Based on these data a surveillance programme should begin at 10 years from the onset of disease. Patients with dysplasia or carcinoma in the original specimen, those with type C ileal mucosal changes and patients with sclerosing cholangitis should be selected for surveillance. This will involve multiple biopsies of the ileal reservoir and the anorectal mucosa below the ileo-anal anastomosis.

Restorative proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis revisited

Since restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) with ileal-pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) removes the entire diseased mucosa, it has become firmly established as the standard operative procedure of choice for familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Many technical controversies still persist, such as mesenteric lengthening techniques, close rectal wall proctectomy, endoanal mucosectomy vs. double stapled anastomosis, loop ileostomy omission and a laparoscopic approach. Despite the complexity of the operation, IPAA is safe (mortality: 0.5-1%), it carries an acceptable risk of non-life-threatening complications (10-25%), and it achieves good long-term functional outcome with excellent patient satisfaction (over 95%). In contrast to the high incidence in patients operated for ulcerative colitis (UC) (15-20%), the occurrence of pouchitis after IPAA seems to be rare in FAP patients (0-11%). Even after IPAA, FAP patients are still at risk of developing adenomas (and occasional adenocarcinomas), either in the anal canal (10-31%) or in the ileal pouch itself (8-62%), thus requiring lifelong endoscopic monitoring. IPAA operation does not jeopardise pregnancy and childbirth, but it does impair female fecundity and has a low risk of impairment of erection and ejaculation in young males. The latter can almost completely be avoided by a careful "close rectal wall" proctectomy technique. Some argue that low risk patients (e.g. <5 rectal polyps) can be identified where ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) might be reasonable. We feel that the risk of rectal cancer after IRA means that IPAA should be recommended for the vast majority of FAP patients. We accept that in some very selected cases, based on clinical and genetics data (and perhaps influenced by patient choice regarding female fecundity), a stepwise surgical strategy with a primary IPA followed at a later age by a secondary proctectomy with IPAA could be proposed.

Meta-analysis of observational studies of ileorectal versus ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis

BACKGROUND

Surgery for familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) aims to minimize cancer risk while providing good functional outcome. Colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis and proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis both offer this, but there is no clear consensus about which is better.

METHODS

This is a meta-analysis of comparative studies published between 1991 and 2003 reporting early and late postoperative adverse events, functional outcomes and quality of life.

RESULTS

Twelve studies containing 1002 patients (53.4 per cent ileal pouch, 46.6 per cent ileorectal anastomosis) were identified. Bowel frequency (weighted mean difference 1.62 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 1.05 to 2.20)), night defaecation (odds ratio (OR) 6.64 (95 per cent c.i. 2.99 to 14.74)) and use of incontinence pads (OR 2.72 (95 per cent c.i. 1.02 to 7.23)) were significantly less in the ileorectal group, although faecal urgency was reduced with the ileal pouch (odds ratio 0.43 (95 per cent c.i. 0.23 to 0.80)). Reoperation within 30 days was more common after ileal pouch construction (23.4 versus 11.6 per cent; OR 2.11 (95 per cent c.i. 1.21 to 3.70)). There was no significant difference between the techniques in terms of sexual dysfunction, dietary restriction, or postoperative complications. Rectal cancer was a diagnosis only in the ileorectal group (5.5 per cent).

CONCLUSION

Ileal pouch and ileorectal anastomoses have individual merits. Further research is needed to determine which most benefits patients with FAP.

Familial adenomatous polyposis

Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is an autosomal-dominant colorectal cancer syndrome, caused by a germline mutation in the adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) gene, on chromosome 5q21. It is characterized by hundreds of adenomatous colorectal polyps, with an almost inevitable progression to colorectal cancer at an average age of 35 to 40 yr. Associated features include upper gastrointestinal tract polyps, congenital hypertrophy of the retinal pigment epithelium, desmoid tumors, and other extracolonic malignancies. Gardner syndrome is more of a historical subdivision of FAP, characterized by osteomas, dental anomalies, epidermal cysts, and soft tissue tumors. Other specified variants include Turcot syndrome (associated with central nervous system malignancies) and hereditary desmoid disease. Several genotype-phenotype correlations have been observed. Attenuated FAP is a phenotypically distinct entity, presenting with fewer than 100 adenomas. Multiple colorectal adenomas can also be caused by mutations in the human MutY homologue (MYH) gene, in an autosomal recessive condition referred to as MYH associated polyposis (MAP). Endoscopic screening of FAP probands and relatives is advocated as early as the ages of 10-12 yr, with the objective of reducing the occurrence of colorectal cancer. Colectomy remains the optimal prophylactic treatment, while the choice of procedure (subtotal vs proctocolectomy) is still controversial. Along with identifying better chemopreventive agents, optimizing screening of extracolonic cancers and applying new radiological and endoscopic technology to the diagnosis and management of extracolonic features are the major challenges for the future.

Development of two cancers in the same patient after ileorectal and ileal pouch anal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis

OBJECTIVE

To report a case of a patient with familial adenomatous polyposis.

CLINICAL PRESENTATION AND INTERVENTION

A 36-year-old male patient who suffered from rectal bleeding was treated with colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) in 1974. After 19 years, in situ adenocarcinoma was detected in the rectal stump. Completion proctectomy, mucosectomy, and hand-sewn ileal pouch anal anastomosis with protective ileostomy were performed. In 2002, a metachronous cancer was detected at the anastomosis and abdominoperineal resection of the pouch and end ileostomy were performed. Later on, the perineum was excised locally because of cancer recurrence.

CONCLUSION

This case shows that lifetime surveillance of the FAP patients after surgery is crucial.

Prophylaktische Chirurgie der familiären adenomatösen Polyposis coli

Familial adenomatous polyposis coli (FAP) may not be considered a single disease entity with standardized guidelines for operative treatment. However, prophylactic colectomy after the manifestation of polyps but prior to the development of colorectal cancer is essential. The optimal timing of prophylactic surgery remains a clinical decision taken independently of mutation analysis. In case of the classic FAP phenotype, restorative proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is the procedure of choice. The development of reliable guidelines for attenuated FAP variants requires further evidence from clinical studies on surgical strategy and the advantages of prophylactic surgery over regular endoscopic screening with removal of polyps.

Ileoanal pouch neoplasia in familial adenomatous polyposis: an underestimated threat

PURPOSE

Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is one of the two main options available for the surgical treatment of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. Its main advantage is the minimal risk of rectal cancer but a possible Achilles heel is the recurrence of epithelial neoplasia at the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and within the ileal pouch. The significance of ileoanal anastomotic and ileal pouch adenomas is not yet fully appreciated, and there is a false sense of security about this operation. The consequences of worsening pouch polyposis are serious in that endoscopic treatment is unlikely to be an effective way of controlling it. This study has been done to alert those caring for patients with familial adenomatous polyposis to the looming danger of pouch polyposis and to suggest ways to deal with it.

METHODS

Studies reporting ileoanal pouch adenomas, ileal pouch-anal anastomotic cancers, and ileal pouch cancers in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis were reviewed. Reports of adenomas in Kock pouches and in Brooke ileostomies in the setting of familial adenomatous polyposis were included. The primary end points of the study were the time between pouch construction and the diagnosis of neoplasia, the age of the patients at the diagnosis of neoplasia, and the severity of the neoplasia.

RESULTS

There were 18 studies reporting pouch neoplasia, 15 with adenomas, and 3 with cancer. Ten were case reports, five were retrospective studies, and three were prospective studies. All three prospective studies showed that the incidence of pouch adenomas increases with time of follow-up and that the severity of the polyposis varies. The median time from pouch construction to diagnosis of pouch adenomas was 4.7 years and the range was 0.5 to 12 years. There were six studies reporting eight patients with cancer at the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis, diagnosed a median of 8 years after pouch construction (range, 3-20 years). One-half of the cancers were locally advanced (T4) and one-half were not (T1 or T2). One-half followed stapled anastomosis and one-half were after mucosectomy. There were eight case reports of cancer described in an ileostomy in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. The median time from ileostomy construction to the ileostomy cancers was 25 (range, 9-40) years.

DISCUSSION

The combination of fecal stasis, adenomatous epithelium, and a germline APC mutation is a potent recipe for epithelial neoplasia. There is increasing evidence that this happens in an ileostomy but that the process is much faster in an ileal pouch. Endoscopic treatment of ileal adenomas is likely to be difficult, reducing the options for their control to excising the entire pouch or chemoprevention.

Adenocarcinoma after ileoanal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis: review of risk factors and current surveillance apropos of a case

Restorative proctocolectomy has become the most common surgical option for familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) patients, based on the premise that it provides good functional results and reduces colorectal cancer risk. But several adenomas may develop in the pouch mucosa over the years, and even cancer at the anastomosis or in the pouch mucosa has been reported rarely. This article aims to describe a case of pouch cancer after restorative proctocolectomy for FAP, reviewing the possible causes of this unfortunate outcome. A 40-year-old man started presenting with fecal blood loss 12 years after restorative proctocolectomy with mucosectomy and hand-sewn anastomosis for FAP. Proctologic examination revealed an elevated mass 3 cm from the anal margin, which biopsy determined to be a mucinous adenocarcinoma. The patient underwent pouch excision and terminal ileostomy. Histologic analysis showed a 2.2 cm mucinous adenocarcinoma between the ileal and anal mucosa (T2N0Mx) and multiple tubular microadenomas in the ileal pouch. The present case and the data presented here suggest that restorative proctocolectomy is not a "cancer-free" alternative to ileorectal anastomosis, because it does not remove the risk of metachronous intestinal neoplasia. Although the long-term risk of malignancy is not known, lifelong follow-up seems to be necessary after restorative proctocolectomy. Current recommendations for pouch surveillance are presented.

Prevalence and morphology of pouch and ileal adenomas in familial adenomatous polyposis

PURPOSE

In familial adenomatous polyposis, the long-term risk of pouch polyposis and potential for pouch cancer are unknown. Our aim was to evaluate prospectively the prevalence, nature, and etiology of pouch ileal adenomas with that of nonpouch ileal adenomas in familial adenomatous polyposis.

METHODS

Sixty patients with familial adenomatous polyposis pouch, 47 familial adenomatous polyposis patients with ileorectal anastomosis, and 20 younger patients with familial adenomatous polyposis who had prophylactic colectomy were examined with videoendoscopy.

RESULTS

Adenomatous polyps were found in the pouches of 34 patients (57 percent). A total of 362 polyps were identified (range, 0-50 per patient). A logistic regression model confirmed that there was a significant association between the increasing age of the patient and the presence of pouch adenomas (P < 0.02) and the length of follow-up since pouch surgery (P < 0.05). There was no apparent relationship between the development of pouch adenomas and the severity of either colonic or duodenal polyposis and there were no clear genotype or phenotype correlations. Most polyps were tubular adenomas with mild dysplasia, but 11 patients had more advanced histology, including two patients with large villous adenomas. Nonpouch ileal mucosa was spared from visually observed adenomas, with only 1 of 48 (2 percent) patients with ileorectal anastomosis adenomas and 0 of 20 (0 percent) younger, precolectomy patients having terminal ileal adenomas. However, microadenomas were present on random biopsy in 4 percent to 5 percent of nonpouch ileum.

CONCLUSION

The risk of pouch cancer in familial adenomatous polyposis is unclear, but follow-up periods since surgery remain relatively short. Long-term endoscopic surveillance of familial adenomatous polyposis pouches is thus recommended along with evaluation of potential therapeutic options for pouch adenomas.

Long-term outcome of familial adenomatous polyposis patients after restorative coloproctectomy

BACKGROUND

Restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) eliminates the risk of colorectal adenocarcinoma in familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) patients, but desmoid tumors, duodenal, and ileal adenomas can still develop. Our aim was to assess the long-term outcome of FAP patients after RPC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

FAP patients who had RPC between 1983 and 1990 were contacted for interview and upper gastrointestinal (GI) and ileal pouch endoscopy.

RESULTS

Sixty-two males and 48 females had undergone hand-sewn RPC during this period. One patient died postoperatively (0.9%). Among 96 patients available for a minimal follow-up of 11 years, 7 patients died: 3 from causes unrelated to FAP, 2 from metastatic colorectal cancer, and 2 from mesenteric desmoid tumor (MDT). Thirteen patients had a symptomatic MDT (13.5%). Of 73 patients who had an upper GI endoscopy, 52 developed duodenal and/or ampullary adenomas. Four patients required surgical treatment of their duodenal lesions. Among 54 patients who underwent ileal pouch endoscopy, pouch adenomas were noted in 29. No invasive duodenal or ileal pouch carcinoma were detected. Functional results of RPC were significantly worse in MDT patients.

CONCLUSIONS

RPC eliminates the risk of colorectal cancer, and close upper GI surveillance may help prevent duodenal malignancy. MDTs are the principal cause of death, once colorectal cancer has been prevented, and the main reason for worsening functional results.

Adenocarcinoma in the anal canal after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis using a double-stapled technique: report of two cases

Restorative proctocolectomy with an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is thought to abolish the risk of colorectal adenoma development in patients suffering from familial adenomatous polyposis. Both after mucosectomy with a handsewn anastomosis and after a double-stapled anastomosis, rectal mucosa is left behind at the anastomotic site. This carries the potential for the development of polyps and a subsequent malignancy. In our clinic, two patients recently developed an adenocarcinoma at the anastomotic site, despite a yearly follow-up endoscopy.A 40-year-old female underwent an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis with a double-stapled anastomosis in 1991. She refrained from follow-up for several years, but returned eight years postoperatively with a fistula at the anastomotic site. Biopsies revealed an adenocarcinoma infiltrating in the fistula tract T2N0M0. The patient was treated with preoperative radiotherapy (60 Gy), abdominoperineal resection, and a permanent ileostomy.A 27-year-old male underwent an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis with a double-stapled anastomosis in 1990. Because of his profession, endoscopy was performed only once every two years. Endoscopic biopsies ten years postoperatively revealed adenocarcinoma T4N0M0. The patient underwent an abdominoperineal resection with partial resection of the prostate, and a permanent ileostomy was constructed.

Pouch reconstruction in the pelvis

ILEAL POUCH RECONSTRUCTION: Proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the procedure of choice in mucosal ulcerative colitis (MUC) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Because the disease is cured by surgical resection, functional results, pouch survival prognosis, and disease or dysplasia control are the major determinants of success. There is controversy as to whether the IPAA should be handsewn with mucosectomy or stapled, preserving the mucosa of the anal transitional zone. Crohn's disease is a contraindication for IPAA, but long-term outcome after IPAA is similar to that for MUC in patients with indeterminate colitis who do not develop Crohn's disease. As development of dysplasia and cancer in the ileal pouch have been reported, a standardized surveillance program is mandatory in cases of MUC, FAP, and chronic pouchitis. COLONIC POUCH RECONSTRUCTION: Construction of a colonic pouch is a widely accepted technique to improve functional outcome after low or intersphincteric resection for rectal cancer. Several randomized studies comparing colo-pouch-anal anastomosis (CPA) with straight coloanal anastomosis (CAA) have found the pouch functionally superior. Most controlled studies cover only 1-year follow-up, but randomized studies with 2-year follow-up show similar functional results of CPA and CAA. Evacuation difficulty as initially observed was related to pouch size, and the results with smaller pouches (5-6 cm) are more favorable, showing adequate reservoir function without compromising neorectal evacuation. The transverse coloplasty pouch may offer several advantages to J-pouch reconstruction. Current series question whether the neorectal reservoir is the physiological key of the pouch, but rather the decreased motility. The major advantage reported with colonic pouch reconstruction is the lower incidence of anastomotic complications.

Dysplasia in the ileoanal pouch

Formation of an ileo-anal pouch is an accepted technique following colectomy in the surgical management of ulcerative colitis (UC) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). The configuration of pouches and anastomotic techniques has varied over the last two decades. The increased use of stapling devices in formation of the pouch-anal anastomosis avoids the need for endoanal mucosal stripping and may contribute to improved functional results, but leaves a 'columnar cuff' of residual rectal mucosa in situ. Concerns regarding the long-term safety of the ileo-anal pouch have been raised by reports of the occurrence of dysplasia in the pouch mucosa and 15 cases of adenocarcinoma. In UC, persistence of underlying disease in the residual rectal mucosa, anal transition zone and columnar cuff provides the site for development of dysplasia and malignancy. Pouchitis is unlikely to be a major cause of dysplasia or malignancy, as long-term follow-up of patients with Koch pouches has demonstrated. In FAP, any persistent rectal mucosa and mucosa of the small intestine is at risk of adenomatous dysplasia due to the genetic alterations causing the disease. Long-term surveillance should focus on all FAP pouch patients, and in UC patients should be directed towards the diagnosis of residual rectal mucosa in the area distal to the pouch anastomosis. Specialist histopathological opinion is essential in the diagnosis of dysplasia in the ileo-anal pouch.

Decision analysis in the surgical treatment of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis: a Dutch-Scandinavian collaborative study including 659 patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The choice of colorectal surgery in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis lies between the morbidity of proctocolectomy and ileum-pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) and the mortality from rectal cancer after total colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis (IRA). The aims of the present study were: (1) to assess the risk of dying from rectal cancer after IRA, (2) to compare the life expectancy between patients with an IRA and those with an IPAA, and (3) to investigate whether regular endoscopic examination of the rectum leads to detection of cancer at an earlier stage.

METHODS

Clinical and pathological data on 659 patients who underwent colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis were collected from four national polyposis registries-that is, in Denmark, Finland, Sweden, and the Netherlands. Data were analysed using survival analysis methods. Decision analysis was used to compare the life expectancy between patients with an IRA and those with an IPAA.

RESULTS

A total of 47 patients developed rectal cancer after IRA. The risk of dying from rectal cancer was 12.5% (95% confidence interval 7.1--17.9%) by age 65. Compared with IRA, IPAA would lead to an increase in life expectancy of 1.8 years. Seventy five per cent of patients with rectal cancer had a negative rectoscopy within 12 months before the diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

IRA is associated with substantial mortality due to rectal cancer. Follow up examinations of the rectum does not have sufficient preventive effect on morbidity and mortality of rectal cancer.

Adenocarcinoma at the site of ileoanal anastomosis in Crohn's disease: report of a case

PURPOSE

Proctocolectomy with ileoanal anastomosis has gained acceptance for the treatment of patients with ulcerative colitis. However, there are some patients with Crohn's disease who received ileoanal anastomosis, because some Crohn's colitis is difficult to differentiate from ulcerative colitis. The risk of cancer development at the site of ileoanal anastomosis has not been emphasized in Crohn's disease.

METHODS

A 12-year-old patient with Crohn's disease was treated by proctocolectomy with straight ileoanal anastomosis. Twenty-five years after the operation, the patient noticed the tumor that developed at the site of ileoanal anastomosis.

RESULTS

This article presents a patient with Crohn's disease who developed invasive adenocarcinoma at the site of ileoanal anastomosis 25 years after proctocolectomy with ileoanal anastomosis.

CONCLUSIONS

An ileoanal anastomosis does not eliminate the risk of cancer development, and surveillance after this operation seems advisable.

Adenomatous polyps develop commonly in the ileal pouch of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to establish the prevalence of adenomatous polyps in the ileal pouch of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis.

METHOD

Forty-three patients who had an ileal pouch for familial adenomatous polyposis were invited to have a careful endoscopic examination of their pouch, including dye spraying. The number of polyps was recorded, and up to ten were biopsied. In addition, four random biopsy specimens were taken from the proximal and four from the distal pouch.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients with a median age of 36 (range, 14-63) years who had a pouch (5 Kock and 28 pelvic) for a median of 7 (range, 1-19) years accepted the invitation. Twenty-one patients (64 percent) had endoscopically identified polyps, the number of polyps ranging from 1 to 100 (median, 10) and varying in size from 1 to 3 mm. Fourteen patients (42 percent) had adenomatous polyps and 4 of these also had microadenomas on random biopsies. Nine of the 14 patients with adenomas also had lymphoid polyps. Seven patients had lymphoid polyps only and two of these patients had a microadenoma on random biopsy. Four of 12 patients with no visible polyps had microadenomas in their random biopsies. The presence of adenomatous polyps (Pearson's correlation; P < 0.01) increased with the age of the pouch. In total, 20 of 33 (60 percent) patients had adenomas and or microadenomas.

CONCLUSION

Adenomatous polyps occur frequently in ileal pouches. These findings are of concern, and therefore, regular surveillance seems warranted until the natural history of these adenomatous polyps is determined.

Familial adenomatous polyposis: prevalence of adenomas in the ileal pouch after restorative proctocolectomy

OBJECTIVES

To determine the prevalence of adenomas in ileal pouches from patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) and to determine whether a correlation exists between the presence of pouch adenomas and duodenal adenomas and the site of the adenomatous polyposis coli gene mutation.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Restorative proctocolectomy can markedly reduce the risk of colorectal adenocarcinoma in FAP patients. However, adenomas with the potential to progress to adenocarcinoma can develop in the duodenum, ileum, and continent ileostomy after restorative proctocolectomy. More recently, adenomas have been described in the ileal pouch after ileoanal anastomosis.

METHODS

Pouch endoscopy was offered to 167 patients with FAP who had undergone restorative proctocolectomy between January 1984 and December 1996.

RESULTS

Adenomas were found in 35% of the 85 ileal pouches examined. No invasive carcinomas were noted. The risk of developing one or more adenomas at 5, 10, and 15 years was 7%, 35%, and 75%, respectively. Patients with adenomas were more likely to have duodenal and ampullary adenomas. No correlation was detected between adenoma development and the site of the adenomatous polyposis coli mutation.

CONCLUSIONS

Adenomas are frequently found in the ileal pouch of patients after restorative proctocolectomy for FAP. Regular endoscopic surveillance of the pouch is recommended at a frequency similar to that of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Functional outcome of stapled ileal pouch-anal canal anastomosis versus handsewn pouch-anal anastomosis

This study was conducted to determine whether stapled ileal pouch-anal canal anastomosis (IACA) preserving the anal transitional zone (ATZ) or hand-sewn ileal pouch-anal anastomosis with mucosectomy (IPAA) is more beneficial in achieving disease eradication and better postoperative function. IACA was performed in 10 patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and 10 patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), 15 of whom were examined proctoscopically. IPAA was performed in 4 patients with UC and 8 patients with FAP. The mean maximum resting pressure (MRP) was 55 mmHg in the IACA group and 34 mmHg in the IPAA group (P < 0.01). The anorectal inhibitory reflex was positive in 18 patients (90%) from the IACA group and 5 (42%) from the IPAA group (P < 0.05). The pre- and postoperative MRPs were 61 mmHg and 55 mmHg, respectively, in the IACA group vs 63 mmHg and 34 mmHg, respectively, in the IPAA group (P < 0.01). Whereas 16 (80%) of the 20 IACA patients could discriminate feces from gas, only 4 (33%) of the 12 IPAA patients could (P < 0.05). The mean observation period was 2.3 years, the mean length of the columnar cuff was 2.8 cm, and no case of dysplasia or adenoma was seen. Postoperative function is more favorable following IACA than following IPAA, both physiologically and symptomatically. However, long-term surveillance of the residual mucosa is necessary before making a final recommendation.

Ileorectal anastomosis is appropriate for a subset of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

This study reevaluates the risk of rectal cancer and the frequency of subsequent proctectomy for nonmalignant causes in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) who have undergone colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis (IRA). Potential risk factors for rectal cancer in this setting are also examined, and recommendations for the choice of surgical procedure are made.

METHODS

The national polyposis registries in Denmark, Finland, The Netherlands, and Sweden included 659 patients undergoing surgery with IRA in 1940-1997. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression analysis were performed to evaluate cumulative risk, survival, and predictive risk factors.

RESULTS

Rectal carcinoma was diagnosed in 47 patients, with a cumulative 40-year risk of 0.32. The cumulative risk according to chronologic age was 0.30 at age 60, and higher in patients undergoing surgery above age 25 (P = 0.0016). Chronologic age was the only independent risk factor (P = 0.0016). The cumulative 5-year survival rate after rectal carcinoma was 0.60. The apc mutation was known in 167 patients, of whom 7 had rectal cancer. The cumulative 40-year risk of secondary proctectomy was 0.70, and higher in patients with a mutation in codon 1250-1500 than outside this region (P = 0.005). However, all 7 rectal cancers were found in the latter group. None of the 18 patients with attenuated FAP (mutation in codon 0-200 or >1500) had a secondary proctectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

IRA is recommended in (1) young patients with few rectal adenomas and a family history of a mild phenotype and (2) patients with attenuated FAP (a mutation in codon 0-200 or >1500), provided there is acceptance of life-long rectal surveillance. Patients with many rectal polyps and/or a family history of severe polyposis should be offered a restorative proctocolectomy with an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis.

Impact of screening examinations on survival in familial adenomatous polyposis

BACKGROUND

Prophylactic family screening and surgery has improved the outcome of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) largely preventing deaths due to colorectal cancer. The present study compared the mortality rates and causes of death of FAP patients diagnosed by symptoms (probands) or by family screening (call-up).

METHODS

The study comprised all 236 FAP patients registered in the Finnish Polyposis Registry until the end of June 1998. There were 116 probands and 120 call-up patients with a median age of 36.8 and 22.8 at diagnosis and median follow-up times of 6.3 and 9.9 years, respectively. Cumulative crude and relative survival estimates were calculated for each group and the causes of death were determined.

RESULTS

The life expectancy was significantly better in the call-up group than in the probands after colectomy (P < 0.001). The survival rates of the call-up group equaled those expected for a comparable group in the general population up to 18 years after colectomy. The main cause of death was colorectal cancer accounting for 54 out of 68 deaths: four in the call-up group (all rectal stump cancer) and 50 in probands. Upper GI-tract cancer caused four deaths (periampullary cancer two, stomach cancer two) and two deaths were due to postoperative pulmonary embolism.

CONCLUSION

The survival of FAP patients is significantly improved by prophylactic screening and surgery. Further improvement may be possible by using restorative proctocolectomy instead of colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis and by regular upper GI-tract endoscopic surveillance.

Familial adenomatous polyposis: results after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in teenagers

PURPOSE

Virtually all untreated patients with familial adenomatous polyposis develop colorectal carcinoma. Thus, prophylactic colectomy is indicated. Detractors of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis prefer ileorectal anastomosis for teenagers because of the potential negative impact of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis on quality of life. The aim of this study was to assess the effects on quality of life of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in teenagers with familial adenomatous polyposis.

METHODS

Between 1981 and 1998, 48 teenagers underwent ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis. One patient had proctectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis after previous ileorectal anastomosis. A temporary diverting loop ileostomy was established in 42 patients (87.5 percent). One patient had colonic carcinoma diagnosed preoperatively. Two other patients were found to have unsuspected rectal cancer at surgery. Mean follow-up (+/- standard deviation) in 43 patients was 80.5 +/- 42 months.

RESULTS

There was no immediate postoperative mortality. Postoperative complications included pelvic sepsis (3 patients; 1 requiring reoperation) and bleeding (1 patient; no surgery required). One patient died of metastatic colonic carcinoma. Ten patients required reoperation, seven had bowel obstruction, one had portal hypertension, and two required an ileostomy. The mean (+/- standard deviation) daytime and nighttime stool frequency was 4 +/- 1.5 and 1 +/- 1, respectively. One patient reported daytime and nighttime incontinence, and two patients reported nighttime incontinence only. No patient experienced impotence or retrograde ejaculation. Social, sexual, sport, housework, recreation, family, travel, and work activities were improved or unchanged in 82.5, 87, 80, 90, 80, 92.5, 77.5, and 89 percent of patients, respectively. Three male patients fathered children, and three female patients had a total of six children after normal pregnancies and deliveries.

CONCLUSION

The impact of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis on quality of life was favorable in the majority of teenagers. The risk of rectal cancer should be the major consideration before proposing an operation to teenagers with familial adenomatous polyposis.

Comparison of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and ileorectal anastomosis in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the surgical complications and long-term outcome and assess the functional results and quality of life after ileorectal anastomosis and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis.

METHODS

From 1980 to 1997, 131 patients with familial adenomatous polyposis were operated on or were followed up or both at the Familial Gastrointestinal Cancer Registry at Mount Sinai Hospital. Demographic and operative data were prospectively collected in the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis group, and retrospectively in the ileorectal anastomosis group. A questionnaire or telephone interview or both were undertaken to evaluate functional outcome and quality of life.

RESULTS

The ileorectal anastomosis group consisted of 60 patients (mean age, 31 years; mean follow-up, 7.7 years). In the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis group there were 50 patients (mean age, 35 years; mean follow-up, 6 years). There were no statistically significant differences with respect to anastomotic leak rate in ileal pouch-anal anastomosis vs. ileorectal anastomosis (12 vs. 3 percent; P = 0.21), risk of small-bowel obstruction (24 vs. 15 percent; P = 0.58), and risk of intra-abdominal sepsis (3 vs. 2 percent; P = 0.86). Reoperation rate was similar in the two groups (14 vs. 16 percent; P = 0.94). Twenty-one patients (37 percent) with ileorectal anastomosis were converted to ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (12 patients) or proctocolectomy (9 patients), because of rectal cancer (5 patients), dysplasia (1 patient), or uncontrollable rectal polyps (15 patients). Two pelvic pouches were excised, and another one was defunctioned. Information regarding functional results and quality of life was obtained in 40 patients (66.6 percent) in the ileorectal anastomosis group and in 43 patients (86 percent) in the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis group. Patients with ileorectal anastomosis had a significantly better functional outcome with regard to nighttime continence and perineal skin irritation. But otherwise, functional results and quality of life were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Although ileorectal anastomosis has a better functional outcome, ileal pouch-anal anastomosis may be preferable because of the lower long-term failure rate. Ileorectal anastomosis is still an option in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis with rectal polyp sparing and good compliance for follow-up.

Functional outcome of conversion of ileorectal anastomosis to ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis and ulcerative colitis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to review the functional outcome in 20 patients with familial adenomatous polyposis and ulcerative colitis who were converted from ileorectal anastomosis to ileal pouch-anal anastomosis.

METHODS

From 1985 to 1997, 12 patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (5 males; mean age, 39.1 years) and 8 patients with ulcerative colitis (5 males; mean age, 36.7 years) underwent conversion from ileorectal anastomosis to ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Clinical and operative data were analyzed retrospectively. Functional results were obtained by telephone interview in 16 patients (94 percent) after pouch construction. Four patients were not interviewed (2 were deceased, 1 was lost to follow-up, and 1 was not reachable).

RESULTS

Indications for conversion were uncontrollable rectal polyps (10 patients) and colonic cancer found in the pathology specimen after ileorectal anastomosis in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (2 patients), intractable proctitis (5 patients), colonic cancer found in the pathology specimen of patients with ulcerative colitis after ileorectal anastomosis (2 patients), and rectal dysplasia (1 patients). Mean follow-up time was 5 (range, 1-11) years. Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis was handsewn in 14 patients, and the remaining cases were double-stapled in 4 patients with ulcerative colitis. No intraoperative difficulties were reported in 13 cases; technical problems were related to adhesions (3 cases), difficult rectal dissection (2 cases), and stapler-related difficulties (2 cases). Postoperative complications after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis included small-bowel obstruction (4 patients) and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis leak (1 patient). Patients with ileorectal anastomosis vs. those with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis had a better functional outcome with regard to nighttime continence (14 (88 percent) vs. 6 (38 percent) patients) and average bowel movements (<6/day; 12 (75 percent) vs. 4 (25 percent) patients). Complete daytime continence, 15 (94 percent) vs. 10 (62 percent) patients, was similar in the two groups. Physical and emotional well-being were similarly rated as very good to excellent.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with familial adenomatous polyposis and ulcerative colitis with ileorectal anastomosis, conversion to ileal pouch-anal anastomosis may be required. In view of the risk of rectal cancer or intractable proctitis, patients seem to accept the conversion in spite of poorer bowel function.

Cumulative risk of developing polyps or malignancy at the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis

Restorative proctocolectomy with an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is performed in an increasing number of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Two techniques are currently used to construct an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: (1) a double-stapled anastomosis between the pouch and the anal canal and (2) mucosectomy with a hand-sewn ileoanal anastomosis at the dentate line. Although this procedure is thought to abolish the risk of colorectal adenoma, an increasing number of case reports have been published concerning the development of adenoma at the anastomotic site. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the overall cumulative risk of developing adenomatous polyps after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and to compare the cumulative risk after either anastomotic technique. A total of 126 consecutive FAP patients undergoing a restorative proctocolectomy were identified from polyposis registries in The Netherlands, Denmark, Italy, Germany, and New York. Life-table analysis was used to calculate the cumulative risk of developing polyps in 97 patients with at least 1 year of endoscopic follow-up (median 66 months, range 12 to 188 months). A double-stapled anastomosis was used in 35 patients, whereas in 62 patients a hand-sewn anastomosis with a mucosectomy was performed. In 13 patients polyps developed at the anastomotic site, four with severe and four with moderate dysplasia. None of the patients developed a carcinoma at the anastomotic site. The cumulative risk of developing a polyp at the anastomotic site was 8% (95% confidence interval 2% to 14%) at 3.5 years and 18% (95% confidence interval 8% to 28%) at 7 years, respectively. The risk of developing a polyp at the anastomotic site within 7 years was 31% for patients with a double-stapled vs. 10% for patients with a hand-sewn anastomosis with mucosectomy (P = 0.03 [log-rank test]). Because FAP patients undergoing a restorative proctocolectomy with either a double-stapled or hand-sewn anastomosis have a substantial risk of developing adenomatous polyps at the anastomotic site, lifelong endoscopic surveillance is mandatory in both groups.