Long-term ileoanal pouch survival after pouch urinary tract fistulae.

BACKGROUND: Ileoanal pouch is a demanding procedure with many potential technical complications including bladder or ureteral injury, while inflammation or stricture of the anastomosis or anal transition zone may lead to the formation of strictures and fistulae, including to the adjacent urethra. Pouch urinary tract fistulae are rare. We aimed to describe the presentation, diagnostic workup, and management of patients with pouch urinary at our center. METHODS: Our prospectively maintained pouch registry was queried using diagnostic codes and natural language processing free-text searches to identify ileoanal pouch patients diagnosed with any pouch-urinary tract fistula from 1997 to 2022. Descriptive statistics and pouch survival using Kaplan-Meier curves are presented. Numbers represent frequency (proportion) or median (range). RESULTS: Over 25 years, urinary fistulae were observed 27 pouch patients; of these, 16 of the index pouches were performed at our institution [rate 0.3% (16/5236)]. Overall median age was 42 (27-62) years, and 92.3% of the patients were male. Fistula locations included pouch-urethra in 13 patients (48.1%), pouch-bladder in 12 patients (44.4%), and anal-urethra in 2 (7.4%). The median time from pouch to fistula was 7.0 (0.3-38) years. Pouch excision and end ileostomy were performed in 12 patients (bladder fistula, n = 3; urethral fistula, n = 9), while redo ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) was performed in 5 patients (bladder fistula, n = 3; urethral fistula, n = 2). The 5-year overall pouch survival after fistula to the bladder was 58.3% vs. 33.3% with urethral fistulae (p = 0.25). CONCLUSION: Pouch-urinary tract fistulae are a rare, morbid, and difficult to treat complication of ileoanal pouch that requires a multidisciplinary, often staged, surgical approach. In the long term, pouches with bladder fistulae were more likely to be salvaged than pouches with urethral fistulae.

A Rat Model of Pouchitis Following Proctocolectomy and Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis Using Dextran Sulfate Sodium.

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic immune-mediated disease that affects the entire colon and rectum with a relapsing and remitting course, causing lifelong morbidity. When medical treatment is ineffective, especially in cases of massive gastrointestinal bleeding, perforation, toxic megacolon, or carcinogenesis, surgery becomes the last line of defense to cure UC. Total colorectal resection and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) offer the best chance for long-term treatment. Pouchitis is the most common and troublesome postoperative complication. In this investigation, microsurgery is employed to create an ileal pouch model in experimental rats via IPAA surgery. Subsequently, a sustained rat model of pouchitis is established by inducing inflammation of the ileal pouch with dextran sulfate sodium (DSS). The successful establishment of rat pouchitis is validated through analysis of postoperative general status, weight, food and water intake, fecal data, as well as pouch tissue pathology, immunohistochemistry, and inflammatory factor analysis. This experimental animal model of pouchitis provides a foundation for studying the pathogenesis and treatment of the condition.

Controversies in IPAA for Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review of Different Anastomotic Techniques.

BACKGROUND: Available techniques for IPAA in ulcerative colitis include handsewn, double-stapled, and single-stapled anastomoses. There are controversies, indications, and different outcomes regarding these techniques. OBJECTIVE: To describe technical details, indications, and outcomes of 3 specific types of anastomoses in restorative proctocolectomy. DATA SOURCE: Systematic literature review for articles in the PubMed database according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria. STUDY SELECTION: Studies describing outcomes of the 3 different types of anastomoses, during pouch surgery, in patients undergoing restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis. INTERVENTION: IPAA technique. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postoperative outcomes (anastomotic leaks, overall complication rates, and pouch function). RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were initially included: 6 studies exclusively on single-stapled IPAA, 2 exclusively on double-stapled IPAA, 6 studies comparing single-stapled to double-stapled techniques, 6 comparing double-stapled to handsewn IPAA, and 1 comprising single-stapled to handsewn IPAA. Thirty-seven studies were added according to authors' discretion as complementary evidence. Between 1990 and 2015, most studies were related to double-stapled IPAA, either only analyzing the results of this technique or comparing it with the handsewn technique. Studies published after 2015 were mostly related to transanal approaches to proctectomy for IPAA, in which a single-stapled anastomosis was introduced instead of the double-stapled anastomosis, with some studies comparing both techniques. LIMITATIONS: A low number of studies with handsewn IPAA technique and a large number of studies added at authors' discretion were the limitations of this strudy. CONCLUSIONS: Handsewn IPAA should be considered if a mucosectomy is performed for dysplasia or cancer in the low rectum or, possibly, for re-do surgery. Double-stapled IPAA has been more widely adopted for its simplicity and for the advantage of preserving the anal transition zone, having lower complications, and having adequate pouch function. The single-stapled IPAA offers a more natural design, is feasible, and is associated with reasonable outcomes compared to double-stapled anastomosis. See video from symposium.

Transanal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of technical approaches and clinical outcomes.

PURPOSE: Transanal minimally invasive surgery has theoretical advantages for ileal pouch-anal anastomosis surgery. We performed a systematic review assessing technical approaches to transanal IPAA (Ta-IPAA) and meta-analysis comparing outcomes to transabdominal (abd-IPAA) approaches. METHODS: Three databases were searched for articles investigating Ta-IPAA outcomes. Primary outcome was anastomotic leak rate. Secondary outcomes included conversion rate, post operative morbidity, and length of stay (LoS). Staging, plane of dissection, anastomosis, extraction site, operative time, and functional outcomes were also assessed. RESULTS: Searches identified 13 studies with 404 unique Ta-IPAA and 563 abd-IPAA patients. Anastomotic leak rates were 6.3% and 8.4% (RD 0, 95% CI -0.066 to 0.065, p = 0.989) and conversion rates 2.5% and 12.5% (RD -0.106, 95% CI -0.155 to -0.057, p = 0.104) for Ta-IPAA and abd-IPAA. Average LoS was one day shorter (MD -1, 95% CI -1.876 to 0.302, p = 0.007). A three-stage approach was most common (47.6%), operative time was 261(± 60) mins, and total mesorectal excision and close rectal dissection were equally used (49.5% vs 50.5%). Functional outcomes were similar. Lack of randomised control trials, case-matched series, and significant study heterogeneity limited analysis, resulting in low to very low certainty of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis demonstrated the feasibility and safety of Ta-IPAA with reduced LoS, trend towards less conversions, and comparable anastomotic leak rates and post operative morbidity. Though results are encouraging, they need to be interpreted with heterogeneity and selection bias in mind. Robust randomised clinical trials are warranted to adequately compare ta-IPAA to transabdominal approaches.

Three-stage versus modified two-stage surgery for ulcerative colitis: a patient-centred treatment trade-off study.

AIM: There is ongoing debate about whether ileal pouch-anal anastomosis needs temporary diversion at the time of construction. Stomas may reduce risk for anastomotic leak (AL) but are also associated with complications, emergency department visits and readmissions. This treatment trade-off study aims to measure patients' preferences by assessing the absolute risk of AL and pouch failure (PF) they are willing to accept to avoid a diverting ileostomy. METHODS: Fifty-two patients with ulcerative colitis, with or without previous pouch surgery, from Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, participated in this study. Standardized interviews were conducted using the treatment trade-off threshold technique. An online anonymous survey was used to collect patient demographics. We measured the absolute increased risk in AL and PF that patients would accept to undergo modified two-stage surgery as opposed to traditional three-stage surgery. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients (mean age 38.7 ± 15.3) with previous surgery and 20 patients (mean age 39.5 ± 11.9) with no previous surgery participated. Patients were willing to accept an absolute increased leak rate of 5% (interquartile range 4.5%-15%) to avoid a diverting ileostomy. Similarly, patients were willing to accept an absolute increased PF rate of 5% (interquartile range 2.5%-10%). Younger patients, aged 21-29, had lower tolerance for PF, accepting an absolute increase of only 2% versus 5% for patients older than 30 (P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Patients were willing to accept a 5% increased AL rate or PF rate to avoid a temporary diverting ileostomy. This should be taken into consideration when deciding between modified two- and three-stage pouch procedures.

Outcome of incidental versus preoperatively diagnosed colorectal cancer during total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for inflammatory bowel disease.

AIM: Total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the treatment of choice for colorectal cancer (CRC) in inflammatory bowel disease. CRC may also be discovered incidentally at IPAA for other indications. We sought to determine whether incidentally found CRC at IPAA was associated with worse outcomes. METHODS: Our institutional pouch registry (1983-2021) was retrospectively reviewed. Patients with CRC at pathology after IPAA were divided into two groups: a preoperative diagnosis (PreD) group and an incidental diagnosis (InD) group. Their long-term outcomes (overall survival, disease-free survival and pouch survival) were compared. RESULTS: We included 164 patients: 53 (32%) InD and 111 (68%) PreD. There were no differences in cancer staging, differentiation and location. After a median follow-up of 11 (IQR 3-25) years for InD and 9 (IQR 3-20) years for the PreD group, deaths were 14 (26%) in the InD group and 18 (16%) in the PreD group. Pouch failures were five (9%) in the InD group and nine (8%) in the PreD group, of which two (5%) and four (4%) were cancer related. Ten-year overall survival was 94% for InD and 89% for PreD (P = 0.41), disease-free survival was 95% for InD and 90% for PreD (P = 0.685) and pouch survival was 89% for InD and 97% for PreD (P = 0.80). Pouch survival at 10 years was lower in rectal versus colon cancer (87% vs. 97%, P = 0.01). No difference was found in outcomes in handsewn versus stapled anastomoses. CONCLUSION: Inflammatory bowel disease patients with incidentally found CRC during IPAA appear to have similarly excellent oncological and pouch outcomes to patients with a preoperative cancer diagnosis.

Transanal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcomes.

AIM: Restorative proctocolectomy with transabdominal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (abd-IPAA) has become the standard surgical treatment for medically refractory ulcerative colitis (UC). However, it requires a technically difficult distal anorectal dissection and anastomosis due to the bony confines of the deep pelvis. To address these challenges, the transanal IPAA approach (ta-IPAA) was developed. This novel approach may offer increased visibility and range of motion compared with abd-IPAA, although its postoperative benefits remain unclear. The aim of this work was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare and inform the frequency of postoperative outcomes between ta-IPAA and abd-IPAA for patients with UC. METHOD: Several databases were searched from inception until May 2022 for studies reporting postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing ta-IPAA. Reviewers, working independently and in duplicate, evaluated studies for inclusion and graded the risk of bias. Odds ratios (OR), mean differences (MD) and prevalence ratio (PR) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models. Sensitivity analysis was performed. RESULTS: Ten retrospective studies comprising 284 patients with ta-IPAA were included. Total mesorectal excision was performed in 61.8% of cases and close rectal dissection in 27.9%. There was no difference in the odds of Clavien-Dindo (CD) I-II complications, CD III-IV and anastomotic leak (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.27-3.40; OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.65-2.16; OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.58-3.23; respectively) between ta-IPAA and abd-IPAA. The ta-IPAA pooled CD I-II complication rate was 18% (95% CI 5%-35%) and for CD III-IV 10% (95% CI 5%-17%), and the anastomotic leak rate was 6% (95% CI 2%-10%). There were no deaths reported. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis compared the novel ta-IPAA procedure with abd-IPAA and found no difference in postoperative outcomes. While the need for randomized controlled trails and comparison of functional outcomes between both approaches remains, this evidence should assist colorectal surgeons to decide if ta-IPAA is a viable alternative.

Ouch, my pouch! a clinician's guide to pouchitis.

Pouchitis is defined as inflammation of the ileal pouch created during a restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Although the incidence of this inflammatory condition is high, the exact etiology often remains unclear and the management challenging. In this review, we summarize the clinical presentation, pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management of this common complication.

Robotic-assisted reoperative ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: robotic pouch excision and pouch revision.

BACKGROUND: Up to 20% of patients with ileal pouch will develop pouch failure, ultimately requiring surgical reintervention. As a result of the complexity of reoperative pouch surgery, minimally invasive approaches were rarely utilized. In this series, we present the outcomes of the patients who underwent robotic-assisted pouch revision or excision to assess its feasibility and short-term results. METHODS: All the patients affected by inflammatory bowel diseases and familial adenomatous polyposis who underwent robotic reoperative surgery of an existing ileal pouch were included. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were included; 54.6% were female. The average age at reoperation was 51 ± 16 years, with a mean body mass index of 26.1 ± 5.6 kg/m2. Fourteen (63.7%) had a diagnosis of ulcerative colitis at reoperation, and seven (31.8%) had Crohn's disease. The mean time to pouch reoperation was 12.8 ± 11.8 years. Seventeen (77.3%) patients underwent pouch excision, and five (22.7%) had pouch revision surgery. The mean operative time was 372 ± 131 min, and the estimated blood loss was 199 ± 196.7 ml. The conversion rate was 9.1%, the 30-day morbidity rate was 27.3% (with only one complication reaching Clavien-Dindo grade IIIB), and the mean length of stay was 5.8 ± 3.9 days. The readmission rate was 18.2%, the reoperation rate was 4.6%, and mortality was nihil. All patients in the pouch revisional group are stoma-free. CONCLUSION: Robotic reoperative pouch surgery in highly selected patients is technically feasible with acceptable outcomes.

Complications following ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in pediatric ulcerative colitis.

Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the procedure of choice for reconstruction after total proctocolectomy in pediatric patients with ulcerative colitis. 30-60 % of patients undergoing IPAA will experience a postoperative complication. The primary objective of this article is to address the most common complications specific to IPAA in the pediatric population and provide an up-to-date review of their presentation, risk factors, workup, and management. We also share our preferred approaches to management and prevention of complications, where relevant. We intend to provide a concise review on the topic aimed at pediatric surgeons and healthcare providers involved in the care of this population with the goal of contributing to improved outcomes and patient quality of life.

Long-term prognosis after stapled and hand-sewn ileal pouch-anal anastomoses for familial adenomatous polyposis: a multicenter retrospective study.

PURPOSE: The long-term prognosis of stapled and hand-sewn ileal pouch-anal anastomoses in familial adenomatous polyposis patients in Japan remains unknown. This study aimed to compare the overall survival in familial adenomatous polyposis patients who underwent stapled or hand-sewn ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study was conducted at 12 institutions in Shizuoka Prefecture, Japan. The clinical outcomes of 53 eligible familial adenomatous polyposis patients who underwent stapled (n = 24) and hand-sewn (n = 29) ileal pouch-anal anastomosis were compared. RESULTS: The median follow-up duration was 171.5 months. The incidence of adenoma in the remnant rectum or anal transitional zone and metachronous rectal cancer was significantly more common in stapled ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (adenoma: stapled, 45.8%, vs. hand-sewn, 10.3%, p = 0.005; metachronous rectal cancer: 29.2%, vs. none, p = 0.002). The number of deaths was remarkably higher in stapled ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (p = 0.002). Metachronous rectal cancer was the most common cause of death. Overall survival was worse in stapled ileal pouch-anal anastomosis than in hand-sewn ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (120 months, 90.7% vs. 96.6%; 240 months, 63.7% vs. 96.6%; p = 0.044). Cox regression analysis revealed the independent effects of preoperative advanced colorectal cancer and stapled ileal pouch-anal anastomosis on overall survival. CONCLUSION: Stapled ileal pouch-anal anastomosis negatively affected the overall survival of familial adenomatous polyposis patients. Therefore, hand-sewn ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is recommended for better prognosis in these patients.

State of the Art: Pouch Surgery in the 21st Century.

BACKGROUND: An ileoanal pouch with IPAA is the preferred method to restore intestinal continuity in patients who require a total proctocolectomy. Pouch surgery has evolved during the past decades thanks to increased experience and research, changes in the medical management of patients who require an ileal pouch, and technological innovations. OBJECTIVE: To review the main changes in pouch surgery over the past 2 decades, with a focus on staging, minimally invasive and transanal approaches, pouch design, and anastomotic configuration. RESULTS: The decision on the staging approach depends on the patient's conditions, their indication for surgery, and the risk of anastomotic leak. A minimally invasive approach should be performed whenever feasible, but open surgery still has a role in this technically demanding operation. Transanal IPAA may be performed in experienced centers and may reduce conversion to open surgery in the hostile pelvis. The J-pouch is the easiest, fastest, and most commonly performed design, but other designs may be used when a J-pouch is not feasible. A stapled anastomosis without mucosectomy can be safely performed in the majority of cases, with a low incidence of rectal cuff neoplasia and better functional outcomes than handsewn. Finally, Crohn's disease is not an absolute contraindication to an ileoanal pouch, but pouch failure may be higher compared to other indications. CONCLUSIONS: Many technical nuances contribute to the success of an ileoanal pouch. The current standard of care is a laparoscopic J-pouch with double-stapled anastomosis, but this should not be seen as a dogma, and the optimal approach and design should be tailored to each patient. See video from symposium.

Functional Disorders of the Ileal-Anal Pouch: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The IPAA is a boon to patients needing proctocolectomy but maintains per anal function through anatomic and physiologic compromises. The state of pouch function is hard to define because pouch anatomy is not normal and pouch physiology is a distortion of normal defecation. Patients with pouches develop multiple symptoms: some are expected, some are disease related, and some are the result of surgical complications. It is important to understand the cause of pouch-related symptoms so that appropriate management is offered. OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to review pouch symptoms and discuss their likely cause, review the literature on pouch function and dysfunction, and provide clarity to clear the confusion. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and Cochrane databases were searched using the terms "ileoanal pouch function" and "ileoanal pouch dysfunction." STUDY SELECTION: From 1983 to 2023, 553 articles related to "ileoanal pouch function" and 178 related to "ileoanal pouch dysfunction" were reviewed. Nine studies appeared under both headings. Case studies, duplicate publications, and articles concerning pouch diseases were excluded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Definitions of pouch function and dysfunction, methods of describing and scoring symptoms, and understanding of expected changes in pouch function given the nature of the surgery. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies were reviewed from the ileoanal pouch dysfunction search and 38 from ileoanal pouch function. Three studies tried to define normal pouch function, 10 attempted to measure pouch function, and 4 aimed to score pouch function. Only 3 studies addressed pouch physiology. LIMITATIONS: A full discussion of pouch dysfunction is limited by the lack of studies focussing on the anatomic and physiologic consequences of turning the terminal ileum into an organ of storage. CONCLUSIONS: Most studies of pouch function and dysfunction do not consider expected changes in the physiology of defecation that follow restorative proctocolectomy. Thus, most studies of pouch function produce conclusions that lack an important dimension. See video from symposium.

Radiographic Evaluation of Ileal Pouch Disorders: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Radiographic imaging of the abdomen and pelvis plays an important role in the diagnosis and management of ileal pouch disorders with modalities including CT, MRI, contrasted pouchography, and defecography. OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic review of the literature and describe applications of cross-sectional imaging, pouchography, defecography, and ultrasonography. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane database. STUDY SELECTION: Relevant articles on endoscopy in ileal pouches published between January 2003 and June 2023 in English were included on the basis of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. INTERVENTION: Main abdominal and pelvic imaging modalities and their applications in the diagnosis of ileal pouch disorders were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Accuracy in characterization of ileal pouch disorders. RESULTS: CT is the test of choice for the evaluation of acute anastomotic leaks, perforation, and abscess(es). MRI of the pelvis is suitable for the assessment of chronic anastomotic leaks and their associated fistulas and sinus tracts, as well as for the penetrating phenotype of Crohn's disease of the pouch. CT enterography and magnetic resonance enterography are useful in assessing intraluminal, intramural, and extraluminal disease processes of the pouch and prepouch ileum. Water-soluble contrast pouchography is particularly useful for evaluating acute or chronic anastomotic leaks and outlines the shape and configuration of the pouch. Defecography is the key modality to evaluate structural and functional pouch inlet and outlet obstructions. Ultrasonography can be performed to assess the pouch in experienced IBD centers. LIMITATIONS: This is a qualitative, not quantitative, review of mainly case series and case reports. CONCLUSIONS: Abdominopelvic imaging, along with clinical and endoscopic evaluation, is imperative for accurately assessing structural, inflammatory, functional, and neoplastic disorders. See video from symposium .