Absolute and Relative Risks of Kidney and Urological Complications in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Risk of Kidney Failure in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease Undergoing Colectomy: A Nationwide Cohort Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is frequently accompanied by kidney complications. Potential triggers or subpopulations at high-risk of kidney problems are not well-elucidated. We hypothesized that surgical interventions, specifically colectomy, might in part explain this risk.

METHODS

This study was a nationwide Swedish cohort study comprising 82,051 individuals with biopsy-proven IBD diagnosed during 1965 to 2017, with follow-up until 2019. We investigated the association between incident colectomy (time-varying exposure) and future risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) and kidney failure (diagnosis of end-stage kidney disease or death due to chronic kidney disease) using Cox proportional hazard models. We also examined the impact of partial vs total colectomy and the presence/duration of a stoma. Covariates included demographics, education level, and selected comorbidities.

RESULTS

Over a median follow-up of 14 years, 16,479 individuals underwent colectomy, and 2556 AKI and 1146 kidney failure events occurred. Colectomy was associated with an increased relative risk of both AKI (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.37; 95% confidence interval, 2.17-2.58) and kidney failure (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.54; 95% confidence interval, 1.34-1.76). Compared with pre-colectomy periods, undergoing total colectomy and colectomy with prolonged stoma showed higher risks of both kidney outcomes versus partial colectomy or colectomy with a temporary stoma, respectively. Subgroup analyses suggested higher risks in patients with ulcerative colitis.

CONCLUSIONS

In people with IBD, rates of AKI and kidney failure are higher among those undergoing colectomy, particularly among those following total colectomy, or colectomy with a prolonged stoma. This study identifies a high-risk population that may benefit from established protocols for kidney function monitoring/surveillance and referral to nephrologist care.

Enhancing surgical precision: unveiling the impact of preoperative colonoscopy in anal fistula patients

BACKGROUND

Anal fistula is a common benign anorectal disease that often requires surgical intervention for effective treatment. In recent years, preoperative colonoscopy as a diagnostic tool in patients with anal fistula has garnered increasing attention due to its potential clinical application value. By investigating underlying inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), polyps, and other abnormalities, preoperative colonoscopy can offer insights to refine surgical strategies and improve patient outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective study focused on 1796 patients with various benign anorectal diseases who underwent preoperative intestinal endoscopy and met surgical criteria within the preceding three years at the First Affiliated Hospital of Guizhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine. Among these patients, 949 diagnosed with anal fistula comprised group A, while 847 patients without anal fistula were assigned to group B for comparison. The investigation encompassed an analysis of general patient information, endoscopic findings, polyp histopathology, distribution of bowel inflammation sites, and results of inflammatory bowel disease assessments between the two patient cohorts. A subgroup analysis was also conducted on 2275 anal fistula patients with no surgical contraindications. This subgroup was categorized into Group A (949 patients who underwent preoperative intestinal endoscopy) and Group C (1326 patients who did not undergo preoperative colonoscopy). The study compared the rates of detecting endoscopic lesions and IBD-related findings between the two subgroups.

RESULTS

The study initially confirmed the comparability of general patient information between groups A and B. Notably, the abnormal detection rate in group A was significantly higher than in group B (P < 0.01). In terms of endoscopic findings, the anal fistula group (group A) exhibited higher rates of detecting bowel inflammation, inflammatory bowel disease, and polyps compared to the non-anal fistula group (group B) (P < 0.05). The distribution of inflammation locations indicated higher detection rates in the terminal ileum, ileocecal region, and ascending colon for group A compared to group B (P < 0.05). Although the incidence of IBD in group A was higher than in group B, this difference did not reach statistical significance (P > 0.05). Subsequently, the analysis of the subgroup (groups A and C) revealed a significant disparity in intestinal endoscopic detection rates (P < 0.01) and statistically significant differences in detecting IBD (P < 0.05) and Crohn's disease (P < 0.05) between the two anal fistula subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study underscore the substantial clinical value of preoperative colonoscopy in the comprehensive evaluation of patients with anal fistula. Preoperative colonoscopy aids in ruling out localized perianal lesions caused by underlying inflammatory bowel disease, thereby mitigating the likelihood of missed diagnoses and enhancing treatment outcomes. This research highlights the importance of incorporating preoperative colonoscopy as a valuable diagnostic tool in managing anal fistula patients.