Ulcerative colitis and polyposis coli. Surgical options

Imaging of the postsurgical small bowel

The small bowel is subject to a variety of surgical interventions for the treatment of a broad spectrum of disease processes. Most operative procedures applied to the small bowel are straightforward techniques encumbered by few complications, whereas other procedures are considerably more complex and can be associated with significant postoperative morbidity. Familiarity with the anatomic alterations related to the various operations is essential, both for evaluation of early postoperative complications and those abnormalities that manifest late in the postoperative course. The surgeon and radiologist should carefully coordinate clinical suspicion with the strengths of the various imaging modalities to optimize postsurgical assessment and provide timely and accurate diagnosis. Enteric anastomoses, the different forms of enterostomy, and the varied constructions of small bowel pouches and reservoirs are each associated with unique anatomy and therefore optimal techniques of assessment. Small bowel contrast studies such as enteroclysis--including its recent modification, CT enteroclysis--and CT imaging represent the primary modalities for imaging of the postoperative bowel and its related abnormalities. Small bowel transplantation continues to progress as a realistic treatment for intestinal failure, and the role of diagnostic imaging in these unique and challenging patients is evolving.

Quality of life in patients undergoing ileal pouch-anal anastomosis at the University of Cincinnati

BACKGROUND

In 1978, Drs. Fischer and Martin were among the first to preserve anorectal continence and create a pelvic reservoir in adult patients, in what has become the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA).

METHODS

Here we review our institutions' experience with 379 of these procedures from 1978 to present. To assess the specific health concerns of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) and determine the effects of IPAA on health-related quality of life, we evaluated patients with the SF-36, the Rating Form of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patient Concerns (RFIPC), time trade-off questions, and a gamble question.

RESULTS

IPAA patients did not differ from the general population in seven of eight general health categories assessed by the SF-36. When compared with the UC population as a whole using the RFIPC they had reduced concerns in almost all areas. In addition, time trade-off and gamble questions indicated that these patients, as a group, are willing to accept a significant risk of dying in order to achieve their results of the IPAA.

CONCLUSIONS

This high level of satisfaction has led to the referral of patients who would not have otherwise considered a procedure requiring permanent ileostomy.

Restorative proctocolectomy in elective and emergency cases of ulcerative colitis

A consecutive series of restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis was reviewed to determine whether an emergency restorative proctocolectomy procedure leads to a higher morbidity, more especially anastomotic leakage. Severity of illness and nature of surgery were divided in two categories: (1) no acute disease and elective surgery (18 patients), (2) acute disease requiring emergency surgery either immediately or within one week of admission (12 patients). Morbidity after elective surgery was 27% and after emergency surgery 66% (P < 0.06). Pouch-anal leakage occurred in 11% and 41% respectively (P = 0.08). Five risk factors significantly influenced the leak rate including preoperative white blood cell count > 10,000/microliter (P < 0.02), urgent nature of surgery (P < 0.02), the combination of leucocytosis and urgent nature of surgery (P = 0.02), the combination of leucocytosis and preoperative corticosteroid dose equivalent to > or = 200 mg hydrocortisone/24 h (P = 0.006), postoperative pelvic haematoma (P < 0.05). In conclusion, restorative proctocolectomy is contraindicated in emergency circumstances, especially in patients with signs of sepsis on a high corticosteroid dose. To reduce operative risk and number of procedures required, patients with relapsing ulcerative colitis should be referred for restorative proctocolectomy while being in remission.

Predicting the functional result of anastomoses to the anus: the paradox of preoperative anal resting pressure

This article examines the effect of ileal pouch-anal (n = 134) and coloanal (n = 16) anastomoses on resting anal canal pressures in 150 patients.

METHODS

Patients underwent anal manometry before ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) and coloanal anastomosis (CAA) and again six weeks after ileostomy closure following these procedures. A water-perfused catheter system with four radial ports was used for manometry, pressures being recorded during both station and continuous pull through.

RESULTS

Patients with IPAA were younger than those with CAA (34 years vs. 50 years) and had a different ratio of hand-to-stapled anastomosis (1:2.6 vs. 1.3:1). All CAA patients had had rectal cancer while IPAA patients suffered mainly from ulcerative colitis (n = 114) or familial polyposis (n = 10). The mean preoperative resting pressure for all patients was 79 mmHg (75-87, 95 percent confidence limit) and the mean fall in this pressure after surgery was 25 mmHg (-21 to -29, 95 percent confidence limit). There was no difference in preoperative pressure or fall between handsewn and stapled anastomoses, or between IPAA and CAA.

CONCLUSION

There was a significant relationship between preoperative pressure and change in pressure that held true for all subgroups (change = -0.7 x preoperative pressure + 31, r = 0.69). Analysis of the functional results confirmed that patients with high preoperative pressure are at risk for severe falls after surgery and are not guaranteed a good result. Conversely, patients with low preoperative pressures may actually have an increase with surgery and are not always incontinent. Patients with low preoperative anal resting pressures should not be denied anastomosis to the anus if they are continent.

Pouch-anal anastomosis without diverting ileostomy

Ileal diversion is an important adjunct to restorative proctocolectomy but may produce increased morbidity and requires a second-stage closure. This study reports results utilizing a one-stage procedure designed to retain the benefits of proximal decompression without the liabilities of additional surgical procedures. Eight patients, three men (with ulcerative colitis) and five women (one with familial polyposis coli and four with ulcerative colitis), were selected for the single-stage restorative proctocolectomy with intraluminal decompression in lieu of diverting loop ileostomy. The abdominal proctocolectomy was performed to the level of the anorectal junction. In five patients, the rectum was closed using the TA 55 (U.S. Surgical Corporation, Norwalk, CT), 4.8-mm stapler. AJ-pouch was constructed with multiple firings of the GIA90 (U.S. Surgical Corporation) stapler. These patients had continuity restored utilizing a transanal, circular stapler. Three patients had an S-pouch constructed by suture technique. Fecal diversion was accomplished with a 25-mm intraluminal bypass tube (Coloshield; Deknetel, Fall River, MA) in all cases. There was no mortality. There were no anastomotic complications or morbidity related to the bypass tube. The tube dislodged and passed between days 18 and 26 (mean, 22.1 days). All patients had three to six bowel movements per 24 hours, and all are continent day and night. This experience suggests that, in selected patients, the intraluminal bypass tube may be an excellent alternative to diverting ileostomy.