Reconstructive surgery for failed ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: a viable surgical option with acceptable results

Transabdominal IPAA Revision: Does Indication Dictate Outcome?

BACKGROUND

Following IPAA failure, select patients are eligible for IPAA revision. Presently, there is limited evidence describing long-term revision outcomes and predictors of revision failure. This represents an important knowledge gap when selecting and counseling patients.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to define long-term IPAA survival outcomes after transabdominal IPAA revision and identify preoperative clinical factors associated with revision failure.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at a tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

This study included all patients who underwent revisional IPAA surgery between 1982 and 2017 for pouch failure.

INTERVENTION

Transabdominal IPAA revision was included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was pouch failure, defined as pouch excision or permanent pouch diversion, after IPAA revision.

RESULTS

A total of 159 patients (64.2% women) were included with a median age of 36 years (interquartile range, 28.5-46.5) at revision. Eighty percent of patients had a primary diagnosis of ulcerative colitis. The most common indication for revision was leak/pelvic sepsis, representing 41% of the cohort, followed by pouch-vaginal fistula (22.2%), mechanical factors (20.4%), and poor pouch function (14.6%). During the study period, 56 patients (35.2%) experienced pouch failure. The 3-year pouch survival probability was 82.3% (95% CI, 75.5%-87.5%), 5-year pouch survival probability was 77.2% (95% CI, 69.8%-83.0%), and 10-year pouch survival probability was 70.6% (95% CI, 62.6%-77.2%). Compared to mechanical factors, pouch failure was significantly associated with pelvic sepsis (HR, 4.25; 95% CI, 1.50-12.0) and pouch-vaginal fistula (HR, 4.37; 95% CI, 1.47-12.99). No significant association was found between revision failure and previous revision, redo ileoanal anastomosis, or new pouch construction.

LIMITATIONS

This study is limited by its retrospective design.

CONCLUSIONS

Revisional IPAA can be undertaken with favorable long-term outcomes at high-volume centers. Consideration should be given to indication for revision when counseling patients regarding the risk of failure. Further research on risk stratifying patients before revision is required. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B966 .

REVISIN DE LA ANASTOMOSIS ANAL DE LA BOLSA ILEAL TRANSABDOMINAL LA INDICACIN DICTA EL RESULTADO

ANTECEDENTES:Después de la falla en la anastomosis del reservorio ileoanal, los pacientes seleccionados son elegibles para la revisión de la anastomosis del reservorio ileoanal. Actualmente, hay evidencias limitadas que describen los resultados de la revisión a largo plazo y los predictores del fracaso de la revisión. Esto representa un importante vacío de investigación a la hora de seleccionar y asesorar a los pacientes.OBJETIVO:Definir los resultados de supervivencia a largo plazo de la IPAA después de la revisión de la anastomosis del reservorio ileoanal transabdominal e identificar los factores clínicos preoperatorios asociados con el fracaso de la revisión.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.ENTORNO CLINICO:Este estudio se realizó en un centro de referencia terciario.PARTICIPANTES:Todos los pacientes que se sometieron a una cirugía de revisión de la anastomosis ileoanal del reservorio entre 1982 y 2017, por falla del reservorio.INTERVENCIÓN:Revisión de la anastomosis de reservorio ileoanal transabdominal.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado primario es el fracaso del reservorio, definido como escisión del reservorio o derivación permanente del reservorio, después de la revisión de la anastomosis del reservorio ileoanal.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron un total de 159 pacientes (64,2% mujeres) con una mediana de edad a la revisión de 36 años (RIC: 28,5-46,5). El ochenta por ciento tenía un diagnóstico primario de colitis ulcerosa. La indicación más común para la revisión fue la fuga/sepsis pélvica, que representó el 41 % de la cohorte, seguida de la fístula vaginal del reservorio (22,2 %), factores mecánicos (20,4 %) y mala función del reservorio 14,6 %. Durante el período de estudio, 56 pacientes (35,2 %) experimentaron fallas en la bolsa. Las probabilidades de supervivencia de la bolsa a los 3, 5 y 10 años fueron del 82,3% (IC del 95%: 75,5%-87,5%), del 77,2% (IC del 95%: 69,8%-83,0%) y del 70,6% (IC del 95%: 62,6%- 77,2%), respectivamente. En comparación con los factores mecánicos, la falla de la bolsa se asoció significativamente con sepsis pélvica (HR = 4,25, IC del 95 %: 1,50 a 12,0) y fístula vaginal de la bolsa (HR = 4,37, IC del 95 %: 1,47 a 12,99). No hubo una asociación significativa entre el fracaso de la revisión y la revisión previa, el rehacer la anastomosis ileoanal o la construcción de una nueva bolsa.LIMITACIONES:El estudio está limitado por su diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:La revisión de la anastomosis del reservorio ileoanal se puede realizar con resultados favorables a largo plazo en centros de alto volumen. Se debe considerar la indicación de revisión al asesorar a los pacientes sobre el riesgo de fracaso. Se requiere investigación adicional sobre la estratificación del riesgo de los pacientes antes de la revisión. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B966 . (Traducción - Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy ).

Ileoanal pouch-related fistulae: A systematic review with meta-analysis on incidence, treatment options and outcomes

BACKGROUND

Ileoanal pouch related fistulae (PRF) are a complication of restorative proctocolectomy often requiring repeated surgical interventions and with a high risk of long-term recurrence and pouch failure.

AIMS

To assess the incidence of PRF and to report on the outcomes of available surgical treatments.

METHODS

A PRISMA-compliant systematic literature search for articles reporting on PRF in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) or familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) from 1985 to 2020.

RESULTS

34 studies comprising 770 patients with PRF after ileal-pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) were included. Incidence of PRF was 1.5-12%. In IBD patients Crohn's Disease (CD) was responsible for one every four pouch-vaginal fistulae (PVF) (OR 24.7; p=0.001). The overall fistula recurrence was 49.4%; procedure-specific recurrence was: repeat IPAA (OR 42.1; GRADE +); transvaginal repair (OR 52.3; GRADE ++) and transanal ileal pouch advancement flap (OR 56.9; GRADE ++). The overall failure rate was 19%: pouch excision (OR 0.20; GRADE ++); persistence of diverting stoma (OR 0.13; GRADE +) and persistent fistula (OR 0.18; GRADE +).

CONCLUSION

PVFs are more frequent compared to other types of PRF and are often associated to CD; surgical treatment has a risk of 50% recurrence. Repeat IPAA is the best surgical approach with a 42.1% recurrence rate.

The Surgical Management of Ileal Pouch Strictures

BACKGROUND

Total proctocolectomy with IPAA reconstruction is the surgical approach of choice in ulcerative colitis, indeterminate colitis, familial adenomatous polyposis, and selected patients with Crohn's disease. Pouch stricture is a common complication after IPAA.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to identify surgical management options for pouch stricture and offer a treatment algorithm.

DATA SOURCES

A computer-assisted search of the online bibliographic databases MEDLINE and Embase from 1990 to 2021 was performed.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, observational studies, and case reports were considered.

INTERVENTIONS

Mechanical dilation, strictureplasty, stapler resection, pouch advancement, bypass, and repeat IPAA were included.

MAIN OUTCOMES

Twenty-three articles were considered eligible. Overall incidence of strictures varied from 5% to 38%. Strictures were categorized into 3 areas: pouch inlet (with a reported incidence of 9% to 56%), mid-pouch (with a reported incidence of 2%), and pouch-anal anastomosis (with a reported incidence of 43% to 87%). Pouch-anal strictures were initially managed using bougie or Hegar dilation, with various surgical procedures advocated when initial dilation failed. Mid-pouch strictures are relatively unstudied with scant data. Pouch inlet strictures can be surgically managed by various transabdominal techniques' including resection and reconnection, strictureplasty, or bypass.

RESULTS

Pouch-anal strictures should be managed in a step-up strategy as conservative procedures are associated with acceptable success rates. Initial mechanical dilation using bougie or Hegar dilation has a success rate of >80%, although it is likely to require repeat dilations. When these measures fail, transanal surgical approaches using strictureplasty, stapler resection' or pouch advancement should be offered. Transabdominal pouch revision should be offered to patients refractory to a transanal approach. In mid-pouch strictures, the treatment of choice is pouch revision and reanastomosis. Pouch inlet strictures can be managed by resection, strictureplasty, or bypass depending on the location and length of the stricture and surgeon experience.

LIMITATIONS

Studies were often small and retrospectively analyzed. There were no randomized controlled trials or comparison between different treatment options.

Pelvic Pouch Failure: Treatment Options

Up to 30% of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) will require surgical management of their disease during their lifetime. An ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the gold standard of care, giving patients the ability to be free from UC's bowel disease and avoid a permanent ostomy. Despite surgical advancements, a minority of patients will still experience pouch failure which can be debilitating and often require further surgical interventions. Signs and symptoms of pouch failure should be addressed with the appropriate workup and treatment plans formulated according with the patient's wishes. This article will discuss the identification, workup, and treatment options for pouch failure after IPAA.

Colectomy Followed by J-Pouch Reconstruction to Correct Total Colonic Aganglionosis

Background: Patients suffering from complete colonic aganglionosis (TCA) require the best surgical care possible. Only a few studies reported J-Pouch repair as the primary reconstructive surgery in TCA patients. This study adds to the current literature a thorough clinical and functional outcomes group. Methods: Between 2011 and 2021, medical records of Hirschsprung disease (HD) patients who underwent J-Pouch reconstruction during infancy (n = 12) were reviewed. In close follow-up, bowel function and satisfaction with operation results were evaluated. The median age at the time of J-Pouch reconstruction was 16 months, and covering ileostomies were closed four months later. There were no postoperative problems. After the final repair, Pouch-related problems (PRP) occurred in 27% of the children and were treated conservatively. There was no histological evidence of pouchitis in any of the individuals. The median 24-h stooling frequency was 4–5 at the latest follow-up 51 months following enterostomy closure. Conclusions: The current study’s findings support the existing literature and advocate for J-pouch repair in TCA patients. However, more research will be needed to determine the best time to undergo pouch surgery and ileostomy closure in TCA patients.

Systematic review on the management of ileoanal pouch-vaginal fistulas after restorative proctocolectomy in the treatment of ulcerative colitis

AIM

Ileoanal pouch-vaginal fistula (PVF) is a relatively common complication of restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. There are several operative approaches in the management of PVF. There is currently no consensus as to which approach is the most effective or which should be attempted first.

METHOD

A systematic review was undertaken following a publicly available protocol registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019133750) in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Online searches of databases MEDLINE and Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, EU Clinical Trials and ISRCTN registry were performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven articles met the criteria for inclusion in the study: 13 retrospective cohort studies, two prospective cohort studies, eight case series, three case reports and a case-control study. A narrative synthesis was performed due to heterogeneity between included articles. Our study included 577 PVFs, and the incidence rate was 2.1%-17.1%. Both local and abdominal approaches were used in the management of PVF. The overall success of local and abdominal procedures was 44.9% and 60.2% respectively. ROBINS-I assessment revealed a critical risk of bias. GRADE assessment indicated a very low certainty in effect size and evidence quality.

CONCLUSION

Local interventions and abdominal approaches have a high failure rate. The results of this review will aid the counselling of patients with this condition. Furthermore, we provide an algorithm for discussion on the management of PVF based on experience at our local centre. The studies available on the management of PVF are low quality; a large prospective registry and Delphi consensus are required to further this area of research.

Revisional ileoanal pouch surgery: a systematic literature review assessing outcomes over the last 40 years

AIM

Failure of primary ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) occurs in up to 15% of patients. Revision surgery may be offered to patients wishing to maintain gastrointestinal continuity. This paper explores the literature relating to IPAA revision surgery, focusing on pouch function after revision and factors associated with pouch failure.

METHODS

Search of PubMed database was carried out for 'ileal pouch anal anastomoses', 'ileoanal pouch', 'restorative proctocolectomy', 'revision surgery', 'redo surgery', 'failure', 'refashion surgery', 'reconstruction surgery' and 'salvage surgery'. Papers were screened using the PRISMA literature review strategy. Studies of adults published after 1980 in English with an available abstract were included. Case reports and studies that were superseded using the same data were excluded.

RESULTS

Nineteen papers (1424 patients) were identified. Bowel motion frequency doubled following revision surgery compared to primary IPAA although the increase was not always statistically significant. In patients failing primary IPAA, frequency of daytime bowel motions improved following revision in three studies but only reached significance in one (12.1 vs. 6.9, P = 0.021). Risk of pouch failure is increased in patients who develop pelvic sepsis after the primary procedure with the largest study demonstrating a four-fold increased risk (hazard ratio 3.691, P < 0.0001). A final diagnosis of Crohn's causes a four-fold increased risk of pouch failure (n = 81; OR 3.92, 95% CI 1.1-15.9, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing revisional surgery, improved outcomes are observed but are inferior compared to primary IPAA patients. Pelvic sepsis after primary IPAA and a final diagnosis of Crohn's are associated with increased risk of pouch failure.

Ileal-anal pouches: A review of its history, indications, and complications

The ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) has revolutionised the surgical management of ulcerative colitis (UC) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Despite refinement in surgical technique(s) and patient selection, IPAA can be associated with significant morbidity. As the IPAA celebrated its 40^th anniversary in 2018, this review provides a timely outline of its history, indications, and complications. IPAA has undergone significant modification since 1978. For both UC and FAP, IPAA surgery aims to definitively cure disease and prevent malignant degeneration, while providing adequate continence and avoiding a permanent stoma. The majority of patients experience long-term success, but “early” and “late” complications are recognised. Pelvic sepsis is a common early complication with far-reaching consequences of long-term pouch dysfunction, but prompt intervention (either radiological or surgical) reduces the risk of pouch failure. Even in the absence of sepsis, pouch dysfunction is a long-term complication that may have a myriad of causes. Pouchitis is a common cause that remains incompletely understood and difficult to manage at times. 10% of patients succumb to the diagnosis of pouch failure, which is traditionally associated with the need for pouch excision. This review provides a timely outline of the history, indications, and complications associated with IPAA. Patient selection remains key, and contraindications exist for this surgery. A structured management plan is vital to the successful management of complications following pouch surgery.

Transabdominal re-do pouch surgery in pediatric patients for failed ileal pouch anal anastomosis: a case matched study

PURPOSE

Data regarding safety and feasibility of re-do ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) for failed ileal pouch in children are limited. In this study, we compared the short- and long-term outcomes of re-do IPAA in pediatric and adult populations in a case-matched setting.

METHODS

Between March 2007 and June 2017, pediatric patients undergoing a transabdominal re-do IPAA by single surgeon were reviewed and case matched with adult counterparts. Short- and long-term outcomes including complications, functional outcomes, and quality of life of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

60 patients were included (pediatric, n = 30; adult, n = 30). Time between index IPAA and re-do IPAA was shorter in the pediatric group (30 ± 26 vs 86 ± 74 months, p = 0.001). In the pediatric population, the existing pouch was more commonly used to construct the re-do pouch (n = 19 vs n = 12, p = 0.07). There was a trend towards the presence of less postoperative complications in pediatric group (n = 13 vs n = 20, p = 0.07). There were no reoperations or mortality. Long-term pouch survival was comparable between two groups (p = 0.96). Six re-do IPAAs failed in the study period.

CONCLUSION

Re-do IPAA is safe and feasible in pediatric population with failed IPAA and can be performed with similar short- and long-term outcomes compared to adults in experienced hands.

The ABC's of re-do ileoanal pouches, what every gastroenterologist should know

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To describe the development of re-do pouch surgery, what it entails, its indications and role in the management of patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

RECENT FINDINGS

Re-do pouch surgery has very good outcomes and excellent patient satisfaction when performed on carefully selected patients in specialized centers.

SUMMARY

The ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) procedure, which was developed 40 years ago, is a mainstay in the reconstruction of patients who undergo a proctoclectomy for ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). It allows these patients to avoid a permanent ileostomy, with the majority having a very good quality of life and functional outcomes. Unfortunately, a small but not insignificant number of patients will develop technical complications that may severely affect their quality of life and function of the pouch. In the past, pouch excision with permanent diversion or Koch pouch were the only option available to these patients. Recent advances have resulted in the development of corrective surgical measures to restore pouch function. We will discuss strategies to evaluate and select the right patients for a re-do pouch surgery, how to surgically optimize them, and describe the proper technique of ileal pouch revision and reconstruction.

Redo ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: outcomes from a case-controlled study

AIM

To assess short- and long-term outcomes of redo ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (redo-IPAA) for failed IPAA, comparing them with those of successful IPAA.

METHOD

This was a case-control study. Data were collected retrospectively from prospectively maintained databases from two tertiary care centres. Patients who had a redo-IPAA between 1999 and 2016 were identified and matched (1:2) with patients who had a primary IPAA (p-IPAA), according to diagnosis, age and body mass index.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine redo-IPAAs (16 transanal and 23 abdominal procedures) were identified, and were matched with 78 p-IPAAs. After a mean follow-up of 56 ± 51  (2.6-190) months, failure rates after transanal and abdominal approaches were 50% and 15%, respectively. Reoperation after the transanal approach was higher than after p-IPAA (69% vs 7%; P < 0.001). No differences were noted between the abdominal approach for redo-IPAA and p-IPAA in terms of morbidity (61% for redo-IPAA vs 38% for p-IPAA; P = 0.06), major morbidity (9% vs 8%; P = 0.96), anastomotic leakage (13% vs 10%; P = 0.74), mean daily bowel movements (6 vs 5.5; P = 0.68), night-time bowel movements (1.2 vs 1; P = 0.51), faecal incontinence (13% vs 7%; P = 0.40), urgency (31% vs 27%; P = 0.59), use of anti-diarrhoeal drugs (47% vs 37%; P = 0.70), mean Cleveland Global Quality-of-Life score (7 vs 7; P = 0.83) or sexual function.

CONCLUSION

The abdominal approach for redo-IPAA is justified in cases of pouch failure because it achieves functional results comparable with those observed after p-IPAA, without higher postoperative morbidity. The transanal approach should be chosen sparingly.

Ileal pouch revision vs excision: short-term (30-day) outcomes from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program

AIM

Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) failure occurs in approximately 5%-10% of patients. We aimed to compare short-term (30-day) postoperative outcomes associated with pouch revision and pouch excision using a large international database. Our null hypothesis was that there is no statistically significant difference in overall postoperative complications between patients selected for pouch revision vs pouch excision.

METHODS

Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Participant User File from 2005 to 2016 we identified patients who underwent either IPAA revision via the combined abdominoperineal approach [Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) 46712] or IPAA excision (CPT 45136). Differences in baseline characteristics and short-term outcomes between groups were assessed with univariate and matched analyses.

RESULTS

We identified 593 reoperative IPAA procedures: revision group 78 (13%) and excision group 515 (86%). The groups had similar age and body mass index (kg/m² ), but the revision group had more women (65.4% vs 51.8%, P = 0.02) and fewer were on chronic steroids (3.9% vs 17.9%, P = 0.0008) relative to the excision group. Revision IPAA patients were more likely to have received a preoperative transfusion (5.1% vs 0.97%, P = 0.02). Revision and excision were associated with similar postoperative length of stay (9.3 vs 8.6 days, 0.44), mortality (nil vs 0.58%, respectively; P = 0.99) and short-term morbidity (34.6% vs 40.2%, respectively; P = 0.88) at 30 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Pouch revision and excision have comparable short-term postoperative outcomes, but pouch excision appears to be more commonly utilized. Increased awareness of the indications for pouch revision or referral to specialized centres may improve pouch revision rates.

Transabdominal salvage surgery after pouch failure in a tertiary center: A case-matched study

BACKGROUND

Salvage surgery after failure of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) could be offered to selected patients. However, the results vary widely in different centers.

AIMS

To assess the outcomes of salvage surgery by comparison with a control group matched for confounding variables.

METHODS

From a prospective database of 1286 IPAA, patients undergoing transabdominal salvage surgery were compared for perioperative and functional outcomes and quality of life (QOL) to a 1:3 control group of primary IPAA cases.

RESULTS

Salvage surgery patients (30) had a higher rate of hand-sewn anastomoses (80 vs 20%, p <0.0001) and reoperations (10 vs 2.2%, p 0.02) than control group (90). A higher number of daytime and nighttime bowel movements (7.4 vs 4.1, p <0.0001, and 2.6 vs 1.8, p=0.002), a lower median CGQL score (0.7 vs 0.8, p=0.0001) and a higher rate of pouch fistulae (13.3 vs 1.1%, p=0.003) were reported after salvage surgery. Pouch failure rate after salvage surgery was 10.1%, 18.7% and 26.8% at 1, 5 and 10 years (vs 0%, 3.5% and 8.4% in control group, p=0.0085).

CONCLUSIONS

Although worse functional outcomes and decreased QOL have to be expected, salvage surgery after pouch failure is associated with acceptable outcomes when performed in a referral center.

A Systematic Review: The Management and Outcomes of Ileal Pouch Strictures

BACKGROUND

Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis removes the diseased tissue in ulcerative colitis but also allows gastrointestinal continuity and stoma-free living. Pouch strictures are a complication with a reported incidence of 5-38%. The three areas where pouch strictures occur are in the pouch inlet, mid-pouch and pouch-anal anastomosis.

AIM

To undertake a systematic review of the literature and to identify management strategies available for pouch-anal, mid-pouch and pre-pouch ileal strictures and their outcomes.

METHODS

A computer-assisted search of the online bibliographic databases MEDLINE and EMBASE limited to 1966 to February 2016 was performed. Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, observational studies and case reports were considered. Those where data could not be extracted were excluded.

RESULTS

Twenty-two articles were considered eligible. Pouch-anal strictures have been initially managed using predominately dilators which include bougie and Hegar dilators with various surgical procedures advocated when initial dilatation fails. Mid-pouch strictures are relatively unstudied with both medical, endoscopic and surgical management reported as successful. Pouch inlet strictures can be safely managed using a combined medical and endoscopic approach.

CONCLUSION

The limited evidence available suggests that pouch-anal strictures are best treated in a stepwise fashion with initial treatment to include digital or instrumental dilatation followed by surgical revision or resection. Management of mid-pouch strictures requires a combination of medical, endoscopic and surgical management. Pouch inlet strictures are best managed using a combined medical and endoscopic approach. Future studies should compare different treatment modalities on separate stricture locations to enable an evidenced-based treatment algorithm.

Outcomes of salvage surgery for ileal pouch complications and dysfunctions. the experience of a referral centre and review of literature

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Failure rates of restorative proctocolectomy with ileo pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) range between 3.5 and 15%. Salvage surgery aims to preserve the pouch and transanal evacuation. We report our experience with salvage, review the outcomes of revisional pouch surgery, and propose a classification of pouch dysfunction.

METHODS

We collected data on patients undergoing pouch salvage surgery between 1987 and 2014 at our hospital. Pre- and post-salvage functional data were assessed. Function at the 3-year follow-up was compared with that of matched IPAA controls (study patients:controls, 1:3).

RESULTS

Considering only patients who underwent primary IPAA at our centre (n = 31), 5-year failure was higher after salvage compared with primary IPAA (28.8 vs 5.7% log rank test, p = 0.005). Overall, we included 39 patients, with eight additional patients who received primary IPAA elsewhere, undergoing 46 procedures. Most patients had a J-pouch (74.4%) and needed salvage for septic complications. A transperineal approach was used in 22 patients, whereas 17 underwent abdominal salvage, with 77.3 and 64.7% success rates, respectively. Minor surgery was effective but required repeated procedures. Overall failure was 28.2% at a median follow-up of 42 (1-153) months. A significant decrease in bowel frequency (p = 0.021) and rate of urgency (p = 0.009) was observed at the 3-year follow-up after salvage in 25 patients available for comparison. Functional results after major salvage procedures were poorer compared with healthy IPAA controls (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Salvage surgery is effective and safe in experienced teams, but the 5-year failure rate is higher after salvage than after successful primary pouch surgery. Sepsis brings about a higher risk of failure compared with mechanical causes of dysfunction.

Functional and manometric outcomes after redo-ileal pouch anal anastomosis in patients with ulcerative colitis

AIM

To retrospectively analyze manometric findings in patients with ulcerative colitis who underwent redo-ileo anal anastomosis for pouch-related complications.

METHODS

Functional and anal manometric parameters were analyzed before, immediately after, and 6 months after the procedure in 17 patients who underwent redo-ileo anal anastomosis between 2001 and 2012.

RESULTS

Of the 17 patients, 13 showed stoma closure and 9 have maintained gastrointestinal continuity with functional pouches. Manometric findings were similar before and immediately after redo-ileo anal anastomosis, including length of high-pressure zone (p = 0.11) and maximum resting and (p = 0.060) squeezing (p = 0.69) pressures, but maximum resting pressure improved significantly 6 months later (p = 0.021). Univariate analysis showed that ulcerative colitis duration <3 years before ileo anal anastomosis (p = 0.0073), interval between pouch-related complications and ileo anal anastomosis <2 years (p = 0.040), and persistent abscess before diversion ileostomy (p = 0.0024) were significant risk factors for pouch failure after redo-ileo anal anastomosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Although maximum resting pressure was significantly reduced 3 months after redo-ileo anal anastomosis, it returned to preoperative levels after 6 months. The length of the high-pressure zone and the maximum squeezing pressure were not affected by this procedure.

Redo Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis combined with anti-TNF-α maintenance therapy for Crohn's disease with pelvic fistula: report of two cases

Pouch failure has been reported to occur after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for Crohn's disease. We report two cases of patients with Crohn's disease, who underwent redo ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (redo-IPAA) combined with anti-TNF-α maintenance therapy, with good functional results. The first patient, a man with presumed ulcerative colitis, suffered pelvic fistula recurrence and anastomotic dehiscence. He underwent redo-IPAA, at which time longitudinal ulcers were found. Infliximab was started 4 days postoperatively and continued. The second patient, a woman treated for ulcerative colitis, underwent laparoscopic IPAA 8 years later. After the development of a pelvic fistula, twisted mesentery of the ileal pouch was found intraoperatively and Crohn's disease was diagnosed. Adalimumab therapy resulted in fistula closure. Redo-IPAA was performed to normalize the twisted mesentery of the ileal pouch. No complications have been observed in either patient, both of whom have experienced good functional results after closure of the covering stomas.

Intraoperative, postoperative and reoperative problems with ileoanal pouches

BACKGROUND

Proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) has been developed and refined since its introduction in the late 1970s. Nonetheless, it is a procedure associated with significant morbidity. The aim of this review was to provide a structured approach to the challenges that surgeons and physicians encounter in the management of intraoperative, postoperative and reoperative problems associated with ileoanal pouches.

METHODS

The review was based on relevant studies identified from an electronic search of MEDLINE, Embase and PubMed databases from 1975 to April 2011. There were no language or publication year restrictions. Original references in published articles were reviewed.

RESULTS

Although the majority of patients experience long-term success with an ileoanal pouch, significant morbidity surrounds IPAA. Surgical intervention is often critical to achieve optimal control of the situation.

CONCLUSION

A structured management plan will minimize the adverse consequences of the problems associated with pouches.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic treatment of ileal pouch strictures

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic management of ileal pouch strictures has not been systemically studied. The aim was to evaluate endoscopic balloon therapy of pouch strictures in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients with ileal pouches and to identify risk factors for pouch failure for those patients.

METHODS

Consecutive IBD patients with pouches from the Pouchitis Clinic who underwent nonfluoroscopy-guided outpatient endoscopic therapy were studied. The location, number, degree (range 0-3), and length of strictures and balloon size were documented. Efficacy and safety were evaluated with univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients with pouch strictures were studied. Stricture locations were at the pouch inlet (n = 96), outlet (n = 73), afferent limb (n = 33), and pouch body (n = 2). A cumulative of 646 strictures were endoscopically dilated, with a total of 406 pouchoscopies. The median stricture score was 1 (interquartile range [IQR] 1-2); the median stricture length was 1 (IQR 0.5-1.25) cm, and the median balloon size was 20 (IQR 18-20) mm. Of 406 therapeutic endoscopies performed, there were two perforations (0.46%) and four transfusion-required bleeding (0.98%). The 5-, 10-, and 25-year pouch retention rates were 97%, 90.6%, and 85.9%, respectively. In a median follow-up of 9.6 (IQR 6-17) years, 131 patients (87.3%) were able to retain their pouches. The number of strictures and underlying diagnosis were independent risk factors for pouch failure in the Cox regression model.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic treatment of pouch stricture appears to be efficacious and generally safe to perform in experienced hands. Underlying diagnosis of Crohn's disease of the pouch and surgery-related strictures and multiple strictures were the risk factors for pouch failure.

Reoperative inflammatory bowel disease surgery

With the advent of restorative proctocolectomy or ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) for ulcerative colitis (UC), not only has there been potential for cure of UC but also patients have enjoyed marked improvements in bowel function, continence, and quality of life. However, IPAA can be complicated by postoperative small bowel obstruction, disease recurrence, and pouch failure secondary to pelvic sepsis, pouch dysfunction, mucosal inflammation, and neoplastic transformation. These may necessitate emergent or expeditious elective reoperation to salvage the pouch and preserve adequate function. Local, transanal, and transabdominal approaches to IPAA salvage are described, and their indications, outcomes, and the clinical parameters that affect the need for salvage are discussed. Pouch excision for failed salvage reoperation is reviewed as well. Relaparotomy is also frequently required for recurrent Crohn's disease (CD), especially given the nature of this as yet incurable illness. Risk factors for CD recurrence are examined, and the various surgical options and margins of resection are evaluated with a focus on bowel-sparing policy. Stricturoplasty, its outcomes, and its importance in recurrent disease are discussed, and segmental resection is compared with more extensive procedures such as total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis. Lastly, laparoscopy is addressed with respect to its long-term outcomes, effect on surgical recurrence, and its application in the management of recurrent CD.

Can reoperative surgery be profitable? Maximizing reimbursement

It is interesting to review the topic of reoperative surgery from the aspect of cost-effectiveness or, worse yet, profitability for either the institution or surgeon. The majority of the published material focuses on indications, risk factors, and short- and long-term outcomes. The context of the discussion is framed by the question "Can you make money doing reoperative surgery?" The short answer is that if this is all you do, probably not. Few, if any, publications assess the impact a redo procedure has on the factors that directly affect the fee schedule: surgeon time consumption (intraoperative and postoperative), stress (physical and psychological), and malpractice effects. Far more work needs to be done to understand the cost and resource consumption effects of major reoperative surgery.

Complications of ileoanal pouches

Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is the surgical therapy of choice for patients with chronic ulcerative colitis and the majority of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. It restores gastrointestinal continuity, re-establishes transanal defecation, and avoids a permanent stoma. Although this technically demanding procedure is associated with low mortality rates, it is frequently accompanied by early and late complications. This article will review these complications and discuss the interventions that are needed to provide appropriate treatment.

Restorative proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in children

PURPOSE

This study was designed to evaluate the results of restorative proctocolectomy with distal rectal mucosectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in children.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective review of 100 consecutively referred children (<18 years old) who underwent reconstruction with a J-pouch of ileum and preservation of the transitional anorectal epithelium by the same two-surgeon team. Temporary diverting ileostomy was used. The main outcome measures were daytime and nocturnal fecal continence, bowel movements per day, and complications including pouchitis, ileoanal stricture, or postoperative small-bowel obstruction.

RESULTS

Average age of the 100 children (48 males/52 females) was 13.2 years (range, 2.95-17.99). All 25 children with familial adenomatous polyposis had proctocolectomy and reconstruction performed simultaneously. Of 75 children with ulcerative colitis, 50 (67%) had their colectomy followed by reconstruction after an interval ranging from 2 months to 4.4 years. Median postoperative follow-up was 2.6 years. Daytime fecal continence was achieved in 98 children, although 4 reported rare accidents. Nighttime continence was achieved in 93 children, of whom 14 reported rare accidents. The average frequency of bowel movements was 5.43/day (+/-2.22). Only one child with polyposis had pouchitis. Of 75 children with ulcerative colitis, 35 had symptoms consistent with pouchitis; of these 35 children, 10 required prolonged treatment. The most frequent postoperative complication was ileoanal stricture requiring operative dilatation and/or anoplasty (18 children). Bowel obstruction requiring surgery occurred in 18 children. One child eventually required pouchectomy for probable Crohn's disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Excellent results can be achieved with restorative proctocolectomy in children with respect to fecal continence and stool frequency. However, with ulcerative colitis, a substantial risk of pouchitis remains.

What are the outcomes of reoperative restorative proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis surgery?

PURPOSE

Restorative proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is the current surgical treatment of choice for most patients with ulcerative colitis. Complications of the ileal pouch may necessitate additional operations to salvage the pouch. The aims of this study were to review the outcomes of reoperative restorative proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis surgery and to define any predictors of successful pouch salvage surgery.

METHODS

The medical records of all patients who underwent reoperative ileoanal pouch surgery for either pouch salvage or pouch excision between 1988 and 2007 were reviewed. Successful ileoanal pouch salvage was considered to be an intact functioning pouch, after resolution of problem, with a follow-up of at least six months and good to excellent patient satisfaction and continence.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients underwent reoperation for pouch-related complications (44 mucosal ulcerative colitis, 6 familial adenomatous polyposis, and 1 indeterminate colitis), in addition to 8 patients with Crohn's disease. An additional 17 patients had primary pouch excision. Thirty-eight (74.4 percent) of the 51 patients who underwent pouch salvage had a successful outcome. Twenty-three patients had pouch reconstruction or revision via an abdominal approach with a 69.5 percent success rate. The remainder of patients had local perineal procedures for control of perianal sepsis, with 75 percent success rate. Patients required a mean of 2.1 procedures to achieve pouch salvage; there was no correlation between the number of ileoanal pouch salvage procedures and failure. Crohn's disease was ultimately diagnosed in more than half of the patients who underwent primary pouch excision. Among the patients with Crohn's disease who underwent pouch salvage only three retained their pouches, for a success rate of only 37 percent.

CONCLUSION

Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis salvage surgery can save a considerable number of patients from pouch excision and permanent ileostomy. Both local perineal and abdominal approaches yield acceptable results. The choice of procedure is based on the etiology and anatomy of the problem and the surgeon's preference and patient-related factors such as diagnosis.

Outcomes in patients with ulcerative colitis undergoing partial or complete reconstructive surgery for failing ileal pouch-anal anastomosis

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate outcomes of patients with an original diagnosis of ulcerative colitis (UC) who required partial or complete ileal pouch reconstruction due to poor function or infectious complications.

METHODS

A prospectively collected ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) database was reviewed retrospectively to identify UC patients undergoing major reconstructive revisions of their IPAA at our institution between 1981 and 2005. Functional results were derived from continued surveys of patients.

RESULTS

Fifty-one UC patients were identified but 22 subsequently proved to have Crohns disease (CD). The initial IPAA was constructed at our institution in 32 patients and elsewhere in 19 patients. Indications for revision included infectious/inflammatory complications (65%) and mechanical difficulties (35%). Pouch revision was partial in 57% of patients and complete in 43%. There were no postoperative deaths. Following reconstruction, patients reported on average 5 daytime and 1 nighttime bowel movements. Daytime incontinence was occasional in 43% and frequent in 4%. Nighttime incontinence was occasional in 54% and frequent in 7%. The probability of pouch survival after reconstruction was 93% at 1 year and 89% at 5 years. Of the pouches that subsequently failed, 75% occurred in patients with a later diagnosis of CD. Postreconstruction abscess was a significant risk factor for ultimate pouch failure.

CONCLUSIONS

In UC patients with failing IPAA, partial or complete pouch reconstruction can be done safely with good functional results, and may avoid pouch excision and permanent ileostomy in carefully selected patients, especially those with definite UC.

Repeat pouch surgery by the abdominal approach safely salvages failed ileal pelvic pouch

PURPOSE

: This study evaluated outcomes of patients with abdominal salvage operations for failed ileal pouch-anal anastomosis.

METHODS

: Patients undergoing laparotomy for ileoanal pouch salvage were reviewed from a prospectively maintained pouch database and records.

RESULTS

: From 1983 to 2007, 241 abdominal reconstructions were performed. The median follow-up was 5 years (range, 0.04-20.8). Diagnoses before primary ileal pouch-anal anastomosis were ulcerative colitis in 187, familial adenomatous polyposis in 22, indeterminate colitis in 20, Crohn's disease in 9, and other in 3. The most common indications for salvage were fistula (n = 67), leak (n = 65), stricture (n = 42) pouch dysfunction (n = 40), pelvic abscess (n = 25). Seventy-one cases had a new pouch constructed. One hundred and seventy cases had the original pouch salvaged. Twenty-nine cases had either pouch excision or ileostomy without pouch excision the result of failure after reconstruction. To assess functional results and quality of life, patients with reconstruction were matched to those with a primary ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Significantly higher proportions of patients with reconstruction reported seepage during daytime (P = 0.002), at night (P = 0.015), and daytime pad usage (P = 0.02). Other parameters and quality of life were similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

: Repeat abdominal surgery was a good alternative for pouch failure. Functional and quality of life outcomes were encouraging.

Improved outcome due to increased experience and individualized management of leaks after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical presentation, management, and outcome of leaks after the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) procedure.

METHODS

Of 1424 IPAA procedures performed at Mount Sinai Hospital from 1981 to 2003, 141 patients experienced leaks (9.9%). Data were reviewed retrospectively from the Inflammatory Bowel Disease database and clinic and hospital charts. Statistical comparisons were performed with the chi2 test.

RESULTS

There were 81 men and 60 women with a median age of 36 years (12-69). Indication for surgery was ulcerative colitis in 93% of patients. Twenty-three leaks (16.3%) originated from the pouch whereas 118 (84.1%) arose from the ileoanal anastomosis. Of ileoanal anastomosis leaks, 24.6% were associated with and 38.1% without an abscess, 12.7% were associated with a pouch-cutaneous fistula, 15.3% were associated with a pouch-vaginal fistula, and 9.3% were diagnosed radiologically. Of the 130 patients who developed symptoms, 67% had fever, 38% had abdominoperineal pain, and 6% had perineal abscess. Twenty-nine percent of those who did not have an ileostomy had increased stool frequency. Nonoperative treatment was attempted initially in 100 patients with an 80% success rate. An operative procedure was performed in 59 patients (including those who failed nonoperative treatment), including transanal repair in 34 patients with a success rate of 66%; laparotomy with direct suture repair in 7 with a success rate of 57% and combined abdominoperineal pouch reconstruction in 18 with a success rate of 72%. Overall, 119 patients (84%) have a functioning pouch. Pouch salvage after a leak increased from 67% in 1981-1984 to 88% in 2001-2003 (P = 0.0004, chi2).

CONCLUSIONS

A high rate of ileal pouch salvage can be achieved after leaks associated with the IPAA procedure if management is individualized. Improved salvage rate over time is likely a reflection of increased experience with the management of complications as well as the strategy of individualized management.

Intermittent torsion of a megapouch: report of a case

We report an unusual presentation of pouch dysfunction because of excessive pouch enlargement or "mega pouch" and probable torsion. The patient presented with abdominal pain that was positional. Contrast-enhanced computerized tomography showed pouch anastomotic staples extending into the right upper quadrant. At operation, gross pouch enlargement with dilation of the afferent ileum was confirmed. Reduction pouch-plasty resulted in pain resolution and maintenance of satisfactory function.

Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis: technical considerations

Total colectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis has emerged as the preferred surgical treatment for ulcerative colitis. The operation has evolved over the last few decades. Various technical issues are discussed, including types of reservoir, options for mesenteric lengthening, method and level of ileoanal anastomosis (hand-sewn versus stapled), and rationale for staging. Anticipated postoperative problems and strategies for management are discussed.

Effect of infliximab on short-term complications in patients undergoing operation for chronic ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND

Total proctocolectomy and ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the preferred operation for patients with chronic ulcerative colitis (CUC) refractory to medical therapy. Infliximab (IFX), an antitumor necrosis factor-alpha antibody, has demonstrated efficacy in medical management of CUC. The aim of this study is to determine if IFX before IPAA impacts short-term outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective institutional database was retrospectively reviewed for short-term complications after IPAA for CUC. Postoperative outcomes were compared between patients who received pre-IPAA IFX and those who did not.

RESULTS

Between 2002 and 2005, 47 patients received IFX before IPAA, and 254 patients received none. There were no gender (p = 0.16) or body mass index (p = 0.07) differences between groups. IFX patients were younger than non-IFX patients (mean age 28.1 to 39.3 years) (p < 0.001). In IFX patients, 70% were receiving preoperative IFX, azathioprine, and corticosteroids. Mortality was nil. Overall surgical morbidity was similar: 61.7% and 48.8%, IFX and non-IFX, respectively (p = 0.10). Anastomotic leaks (p = 0.02), pouch-specific (p = 0.01) and infectious (p < 0.01) complications were more common in IFX patients. Multivariable analysis revealed IFX as the only factor independently associated with infectious complications (odds ratio [OR] = 3.5; CI, 1.6-7.5). In a separate analysis, incorporating age, high-dose corticosteroids, azathioprine, and severity of colitis, IFX remained significantly associated with infectious complications (OR = 2.7; CI, 1.1-6.7).

CONCLUSIONS

CUC patients treated with IFX before IPAA have substantially increased the odds of postoperative pouch-related and infectious complications. Additional prospective studies are required to determine if IFX alone or other factors contribute to the observed increases in infectious complications.

Ileal pouch surgery for ulcerative colitis

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a relapsing and remitting disease characterised by chronic mucosal and submucosal inflammation of the colon and rectum. Treatment may vary depending upon the extent and severity of inflammation. Broadly speaking medical treatments aim to induce and then maintain remission. Surgery is indicated for inflammatory disease that is refractory to medical treatment or in cases of neoplastic transformation. Approximately 25% of patients with UC ultimately require colectomy. Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) has become the standard of care for patients with ulcerative colitis who ultimately require colectomy. This review will examine indications for IPAA, patient selection, technical aspects of surgery, management of complications and long term outcome following this procedure.

Surgical management of pouch-vaginal fistula after restorative proctocolectomy

BACKGROUND

Pouch-vaginal fistula (PVF) is a devastating complication after restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA). The aim of this study was to evaluate the surgical management of PVF.

METHODS

After Institutional Review Board approval, all patients treated for PVF between 1988 and 2003 were retrospectively reviewed. Success of treatment was defined as the complete absence of symptoms or no radiologic evidence of fistula.

RESULTS

The study included 23 female patients; indications for IPAA were mucosal ulcerative colitis in 20 (87%), indeterminate colitis in 1 (4.3%), and familial adenomatous polyposis in 2 (8.7%) patients. Seven patients with mucosal ulcerative colitis were postoperatively diagnosed with Crohn's disease. Mean time interval from initial IPAA to development of symptomatic fistula was 17.2 months. Mean number of surgical treatments was 2.2. Overall, success was achieved in 17 (73.9%) patients at a mean followup of 52.3 months. Fistulas in patients with Crohn's disease occurred relatively late after IPAA (p = 0.015) and required a median of three (p = 0.001) surgical procedures, compared with patients without Crohn's disease. Pelvic sepsis after original IPAA occurred in eight (35.8%) patients, four (50%) of whom ultimately required pouch excision.

CONCLUSIONS

Fecal diversion and local procedures are effective in the majority of patients with PVF after IPAA. Patients with Crohn's disease tend to have a delayed onset of fistula occurrence and require more extensive surgical management. Pelvic sepsis can be a predictive factor of poor outcomes.

Long-term results of abdominal salvage surgery following restorative proctocolectomy

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated outcomes of patients who underwent abdominal salvage ileal pouch redo surgery and identified factors associated with pouch failure following restorative proctocolectomy.

METHODS

Data on patients who underwent abdominal salvage surgery in a tertiary referral centre between 1985 and 2003 were collected. Outcomes studied included failure of salvage and bowel function of patients with an intact intestine.

RESULTS

One hundred and twelve patients underwent 117 pouch salvage procedures for ulcerative colitis (86), indeterminate colitis/ulcerative colitis (eight), indeterminate colitis/Crohn's disease (three), familial adenomatous polyposis (ten) and other conditions (five). The most common indications for pouch salvage were intra-abdominal sepsis (45 patients), anastomotic stricture (13) and retained rectal stump (35). Median follow-up was 46 (range 1-147) months. Twenty-four patients (21.4 per cent) experienced pouch failure, the incidence of which increased with time. The pouch failed in all patients with Crohn's disease. Successful salvage at 5 years was significantly associated with non-septic (85 per cent) rather than septic (61 per cent) indications (P = 0.016). Frequency of night-time defaecation and faecal urgency improved after salvage surgery (P = 0.036 and P = 0.016 respectively at 5-year follow-up; n = 32).

CONCLUSION

Abdominal salvage surgery was associated with a failure rate of 21.4 per cent. A successful outcome was less likely when the procedure was carried out for septic compared with non-septic indications. The rate of pouch failure increased with length of follow-up.

Revolution and evolution: 30 years of ileoanal pouch surgery

Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) has become the standard of care for the 25% of patients with ulcerative colitis who ultimately require colectomy. IPAA is favored by patients because it avoids the necessity for a long-term stoma. This review examines how 3 decades of experience with IPAA has molded current practice, highlighting 5- and 10-year follow-up of large series to determine durability and functional performance, in addition to causes of failure and the management of complications.

Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis-vaginal fistula: a review

BACKGROUND

Fistula between an ileal pouch and the vagina is an uncommon complication of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Its optimal management has not been determined because of its low incidence.

METHODS

The literature describing such fistulas was reviewed to determine the incidence, cause, and appropriate investigation and repair of these lesions. A literature search was performed with the PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases. Through this search we located English-language articles from 1970 to 2003 on pouch-vaginal fistulas following ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. References from these articles were searched manually for further references.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Pouch-vaginal fistula occurs in 6.3 (range, 3.3-15.8) percent of female patients with an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Sepsis and technical factors are the most common contributors. It is the cause of considerable morbidity. Management depends on the level of the fistula, the amount of pelvic scar tissue, and previous treatments. An algorithm for surgical treatment is suggested.

Salvage reoperation for complications after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis

BACKGROUND

Surgical revision may be possible in patients with a poor outcome following ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA), using either a transanal approach or a combined abdominoperineal approach with pouch revision and reanastomosis.

METHODS

Sixty-four patients underwent revisional surgery. The indication for salvage was sepsis in 47 patients, mechanical dysfunction in ten, isolated complications of the residual glandular epithelial cuff in three and previous intraoperative difficulties in four patients.

RESULTS

A transanal approach was used in 19 patients and a combined abdominoperineal procedure in 45. Six of the latter had pouch enlargement and 25 received a new pouch. During a mean(s.d.) follow-up of 30(25) months, three patients required pouch excision because of Crohn's disease. Two patients had poor continence after abdominoperineal surgery. At last follow-up 60 (94 per cent) of 64 patients had a functional pouch. Half of the patients experienced some degree of daytime and night-time incontinence, but it was frequent in only 15 per cent. Of 58 patients analysed, 27 of 40 who had an abdominoperineal procedure and 13 of 18 who had transanal surgery rated their satisfaction with the outcome as good to excellent.

CONCLUSION

Surgical revision after failure of IPAA was possible in most patients, yielding an acceptable level of bowel function in two-thirds of patients.

Pouch-vaginal fistula after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: treatment and outcomes

PURPOSE

Pouch-vaginal fistula is an uncommon but serious complication after ileal pouch anal anastomosis. The management of pouch-vaginal fistulas is challenging and a number of treatment options exist. The purpose of this study was to examine the outcomes after various procedures for pouch-vaginal fistula performed at our institution.

METHODS

Patients who were treated for pouch-vaginal fistula at Mount Sinai Hospital were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Demographic, disease history, treatment, and outcomes data were obtained. Treatment success was defined as no recurrence of the fistula with a functioning pouch and no ileostomy.

RESULTS

Since November 1982, 24 of 619 (3.9 percent) women who had primary ileal pouch-anal anastomosis performed at Mount Sinai Hospital developed a pouch-vaginal fistula. Five women had ileal pouch-anal anastomosis performed at another institution and were referred for management of their pouch-vaginal fistula. Local and/or combined abdominoperineal repairs were performed in 22 of 29 patients. Combined abdominoperineal repairs were associated with a higher success rate than that of local perineal repairs (52.9 vs. 7.9 percent, respectively, at 10 years after repair; p = 0.035). Overall, 50 percent (11/22) of patients who underwent surgical repair of a pouch-vaginal fistula had a successful result with a functioning pouch and no recurrence of the fistula, and 21 percent (6/29) of patients required pouch excision.

CONCLUSIONS

The management of pouch-vaginal fistula after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is associated with a high recurrence rate. Combined abdominoperineal repair appears to offer better results than those of local procedures.

Endoscopic balloon dilation of ileal pouch strictures

BACKGROUND

Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is the surgical treatment of choice in patients with ulcerative colitis. Strictures can occur at the inlet and outlet of the pouch. Endoscopic balloon dilation has been successfully used in patients with Crohn's strictures at the small intestine and colon. There are no published trials on endoscopic balloon therapy of ileal pouch strictures.

AIM

To evaluate outpatient endoscopic balloon dilation of strictures in ileal pouches.

METHODS

Patients underwent nonfluoroscopy-guided, nonsedated, outpatient endoscopic dilations with an 8.6-mm upper endoscope and through-the-scope balloons (size: 11-18 mm). Pre- and posttreatment Pouchitis Disease Activity Index symptom scores (range: 0-6), endoscopic stricture scores based on resistance in passing the endoscope (range: 0-4), and Cleveland Global Quality of Life were compared.

RESULTS

Nineteen patients with pouch strictures who had concurrent Crohn's disease of the pouch (n = 11), cuffitis (n = 5), and pouchitis (n = 3), including 14 inlet and 14 outlet strictures, were enrolled. The mean number of strictures for each patient was 1.61 +/- 0.78. All strictures were successfully dilated with the through-the-scope balloon, with a mean of 1.74 +/- 1.19 (range: 1-5) sessions for each patient. Nine patients had a second endoscopy at 8 wk and five patients had a third pouch endoscopy at 16 wk after the initial endoscopic dilation. Endoscopic stricture scores immediately (0.30 +/- 0.47), 8 wk (0.40 +/- 0.51), and 16 wk (0.44 +/- 0.76) after the dilation were significantly improved compared to the predilation stricture scores (2.67 +/- 0.78). The symptom scores and quality-of-life (QOL) scores improved at week 8 and 16 following dilation, with a mean follow-up of 6.10 +/- 5.83 months (2-25 months). No complications were experienced with the procedure. One patient with CD who failed endoscopic and medical therapy underwent pouch resection.

CONCLUSION

In conjunction with medical therapy, outpatient endoscopic balloon dilation appears safe and effective in treating pouch inlet and outlet strictures, by relieving symptoms, restoring pouch patency, and improving QOL in the majority of patients.