Is ileostomy mandatory for ileal pouch-anal anastomosis? A propensity matched analysis of 388 procedures

Routine diversion following delayed IPAA construction does not reduce the incidence of pouch-related sepsis or failure in patients with ulcerative colitis

AIM

The aim of this study was to compare modified 2-stage and 3-stage IPAA construction techniques to evaluate the effect of diverting loop ileostomy following completion proctectomy and IPAA for ulcerative colitis. In addition, our overall institutional experience was reviewed to describe long-term outcomes and changes in staging trends over time.

METHODS

Our institutional database was searched to identify all cases of IPAA for ulcerative colitis between 1981 and 2018. Patient, pouch and outcome characteristics were abstracted. Primary study outcomes were the incidence of primary pouch failure and pouch-related sepsis. Failure was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival over time. The adjusted effect of pouch stage was evaluated using multivariable Cox and logistic regression models. Exploratory analysis evaluated the effect of stage on failure in the pouch related sepsis subgroup.

RESULTS

A total of 2105 patients underwent primary IPAA over the study period. The 5, 10 and 20-year pouch survival probabilities were 95.2%, 92.7% and 86.6%. The incidence of pouch related sepsis was 12.3%. Adjusted analysis demonstrated no difference in pouch failure (HR = 0.64: 95% 0.39-1.07, p = 0.09) or post-operative sepsis (aOR = 0.79: 95% CI 0.53-1.17, p = 0.24) by stage of construction. Among patients experiencing pouch sepsis, there was no difference in Kaplan-Meier estimates of pouch survival by stage (p = 0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

Pouch related sepsis and IPAA failure did not differ between modified 2-stage and 3-stage construction techniques. Among the sub-group of patients experiencing pouch related sepsis, there was no difference in failure between groups. The results suggest diverting ileostomy may be safely avoided following delayed pouch reconstruction in appropriately selected patients.

Staged Approaches to Restorative Proctocolectomy with Ileoanal Pouch-When and Why?

Restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) with ileal pouch anal-anastomosis (IPAA) is commonly performed for patients with ulcerative colitis, familial adenomatous polyposis, and selected phenotypes of Crohn's disease (CD). Due to concerns about the effects of surgical complications on pouch functional outcomes, debate remains surrounding when and whether RPC with IPAA should be performed in a staged manner. Particularly debated are the timings of the IPAA, whether it is constructed at time of the proctocolectomy and whether to utilize temporary fecal diversion with a loop ileostomy. RPC with IPAA can be performed in one, two, or three stages, with each stage typically separated by 3-6 months. Proponents of a staged approach argue that poor pouch function, which is often a result of IPAA complications, including leak and infection, can be difficult to overcome and mandate additional, major surgeries, and that staging pouch creation and pairing with a protective ileostomy reduce those complications. However, subjecting patients to multiple surgeries and prolonging their time with an ileostomy present unique risks as well. Surgeons' experience and preference and patient characteristics need to be considered when determining operative planning. Highly selected patients with CD can be considered for RPC with IPAA, although with an acknowledgment of inherently higher pouch failure rates. Understanding the short- and long-term consequences of RPC with IPAA construction can help surgeons determine the appropriate approach.