Hand-assisted laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis

Usefulness of Hand-assisted Laparoscopic Restorative Proctocolectomy for Ulcerative Colitis in the Era of Laparoscopic Surgery - A Single-center Observational Study

Objectives

Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) combines the benefits of laparoscopic surgery with the tactile feedback from open surgery. In the current era of laparoscopic surgery, the significance of HALS as a technical transition has diminished. This study clarified the usefulness of HALS in restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) for ulcerative colitis (UC) in the era of laparoscopic surgery.

Methods

The 212 patients who underwent RPC with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis between 2007 and 2023 were included in this study. The patients were divided into three groups, open surgery (OS), HALS, and conventional laparoscopic surgery (LAP), and their characteristics, surgical outcomes, surgical complications, and functional outcomes were compared.

Results

The number of surgical techniques was OS in 21 cases, HALS in 184 cases, and LAP in 7 cases. The number of surgeons was two for OS and HALS, and four for LAP, with OS and HALS having fewer surgeons than LAP. The length of the skin incision was 13, 7, and 3 cm for OS, HALS, and LAP, respectively, and the operation times was 250, 286, and 576 minutes for OS, HALS, and LAP, respectively, with LAP having the longest operation time. The postoperative complications and function did not differ markedly among the three groups.

Conclusions

In RPC for UC, HALS involved fewer surgeons and a shorter operative time than LAP. Even in the era of laparoscopic surgery, HALS remains a useful option, especially when a shorter operation time is required or when the number of available surgeons is insufficient.

Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Ileoanal Pouch Surgery: a Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To summarise frequency, type, and heterogeneity of patient-reported outcomes measures [PROMs] in papers reporting on outcomes after ileal pouch anal anastomosis [IPAA].

BACKGROUND

Prevalence of ulcerative colitis [UC] has risen in Western countries, and one in three patients requires surgery. IPAA is a frequently performed procedure for UC, and a lack of standardisation is manifest in reporting outcomes for inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] despite the clear need for inclusion of PROMs as primary outcomes in IBD trials.

METHODS

Scopus, Pubmed, and Web of Science databases were searched from January 2010 to January 2023 for studies investigating outcomes in IPAA surgery. The primary outcome was the proportion of studies reporting outcomes for IPAA surgery for UC, which included PROMs.

RESULTS

The search identified a total of 8028 studies which, after de-duplication and exclusion, were reduced to 79 articles assessing outcomes after IPAA surgery. In all 44 [55.7%] reported PROMs, with 23 including validated questionnaires and 21 papers using authors' questions, 22 different PROMs were identified, with bowel function as the most investigated item. The majority of studies [67/79, 85%] were retrospective, only 14/79 [18%] were prospective papers and only two were [2.5%] randomised, controlled trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Only half of the papers reviewed used PROMs. The main reported item is bowel function and urogenital, social, and psychological functions are the most neglected. There is lack of standardisation for use of PROMs in IPAA. Complexity of UC and of outcomes after IPAA demands a change in clinical practice and follow-up, given how crucial PROMs are, compared with their non-routine use.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes after elective surgery for ulcerative colitis

AIM

Approximately 20%-30% of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) will undergo surgery during their disease course, the vast majority being elective due to chronic refractory disease. The risks of elective surgery are reported variably. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to summarize the outcomes after elective surgery for UC.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted that analysed studies reporting outcomes for elective surgery in the modern era (>2002). It was prospectively registered on the PROSPERO database (ref: CRD42018115513). Searches were performed of Embase and MEDLINE on 15 January 2019. Outcomes were split by operation performed. Primary outcome was quality of life; secondary outcomes were early, late and functional outcomes after surgery. Outcomes reported in five or more studies underwent a meta-analysis of incidence using random effects. Heterogeneity is reported with I² , and publication bias was assessed using Doi plots and the Luis Furuya-Kanamori index.

RESULTS

A total of 34 studies were included (11 774 patients). Quality of life was reported in 12 studies, with variable and contrasting results. Thirteen outcomes (eight early surgical complications, five functional outcomes) were included in the formal meta-analysis, all of which were outcomes for ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA). A further 71 outcomes were reported (50 IPAA, 21 end ileostomy). Only 14 of 84 outcomes received formal definitions, with high inter-study variation of definitions.

CONCLUSION

Outcomes after elective surgery for UC are variably defined. This systematic review and meta-analysis highlights the range of reported incidences and provides practical information that facilitates shared decision making in clinical practice.