Staging Pouch Surgery in Ulcerative Colitis in the Biological Era.

Restorative proctocolectomy, or ileal pouch anal anastomosis, is considered the standard treatment for intractable ulcerative colitis. When the pelvic pouch was first introduced in 1978, a two-stage procedure with proctocolectomy, construction of the pelvic pouch, and a diverting loop with subsequent closure were suggested. Over the decades that the pelvic pouch has been around, some principal technical issues have been addressed to improve the method. In more recent days the laparoscopic approach has been additionally introduced. During the same time-period the medical arsenal has developed far more with the increasing use of immune modulators and the introduction of biologicals. Staging of restorative proctocolectomy with a pelvic pouch refers to how many sessions, or stages, the procedure should be divided into. The main goal with restorative proctocolectomy is a safe operation with optimal short- and long-term function. In this paper we aim to review the present knowledge and views on staging of the pouch procedure in ulcerative colitis, especially with consideration to the treatment with biologicals.

Anorectal Function After Ileo-Rectal Anastomosis Is Better than Pelvic Pouch in Selected Ulcerative Colitis Patients.

BACKGROUND: With a lifelong perspective, 12% of ulcerative colitis patients will need a colectomy. Further reconstruction via ileo-rectal anastomosis or pouch can be affected by patients' perspective of their quality of life after surgery. AIM: To assess the function and quality of life after restorative procedures with either ileo-rectal anastomosis or ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in relation to the inflammatory activity on endoscopy and in biopsies. METHOD: A total of 143 UC patients operated with subtotal colectomy and ileo-rectal anastomosis or pouches between 1992 and 2006 at Linköping University Hospital were invited to participate. Those who completed the validated questionnaires (Öresland score, SF-36, Short Health Scale) were offered an endoscopic evaluation including multiple biopsies. Associations between anorectal function and quality of life with type of restorative procedure and severity of endoscopic and histopathologic grading of inflammation were evaluated. RESULTS: Some 77 (53.9%) eligible patients completed questionnaires, of these 68 (88.3%) underwent endoscopic evaluation after a median follow-up of 12.5 (range 3.5-19.4) years after restorative procedure. Patients with ileo-rectal anastomosis reported better overall Öresland score: median = 3 (IQR 2-5) for ileo-rectal anastomosis (n = 38) and 10 (IQR 5-15) for pouch patients (n = 39) (p < 0.001). Anorectal function (Öresland score) and endoscopic findings (Baron-Ginsberg score) were positively correlated in pouch patients (tau: 0.28, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Patients operated with ileo-rectal anastomosis reported better continence compared to pouches. Minor differences were noted regarding the quality of life. Ileo-rectal anastomosis is a valid option for properly selected ulcerative colitis patients if strict postoperative endoscopic surveillance is carried out.

Risk of Rectal Cancer After Colectomy for Patients With Ulcerative Colitis: A National Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) have an increased risk of rectal cancer, therefore reconstruction with an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) generally is preferred to an ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) after subtotal colectomy. Similarly, completion proctectomy is recommended for patients with ileostomy and a diverted rectum, although this approach has been questioned because anti-inflammatory agents might reduce cancer risk. We performed a national cohort study in Sweden to assess the risk of rectal cancer in patients with UC who have an IRA, IPAA, or diverted rectum after subtotal colectomy. METHODS: We collected data from the Swedish National Patient Register for a cohort of 5886 patients with UC who underwent subtotal colectomy with an IRA, IPAA, or diverted rectum from 1964 through 2010. Patients who developed rectal cancer were identified from the Swedish National Cancer Register. The risk of rectal cancer was compared between this cohort and the general population by standardized incidence ratio analysis. RESULTS: Rectal cancer occurred in 20 of 1112 patients (1.8%) who received IRA, 1 of 1796 patients (0.06%) who received an IPAA, and 25 of 4358 patients (0.6%) with a diverted rectum. Standardized incidence ratios for rectal cancer were 8.7 in patients with an IRA, 0.4 in patients with an IPAA, and 3.8 in patients with a diverted rectum. Risk factors for rectal cancer were primary sclerosing cholangitis in patients with an IRA (hazard ratio, 6.12), and colonic severe dysplasia or cancer before subtotal colectomy in patients with a diverted rectum (hazard ratio, 3.67). CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of the Swedish National Patient Register, we found that the risk for rectal cancer after colectomy in patients with UC is low, in relative and absolute terms, after reconstruction with an IPAA. An IRA and diverted rectum are associated with an increased risk of rectal cancer, compared with the general population, but the absolute risk is low. Patients and their health care providers should consider these findings in making decisions to leave the rectum intact, perform completion proctectomy, or reconstruct the colon with an IRA or IPAA.

Survival of ileal pouch anal anastomosis constructed after colectomy or secondary to a previous ileorectal anastomosis in ulcerative colitis patients: a population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) affects bowel function, sexual function and reproduction less negatively than ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA), the standard reconstruction after colectomy for ulcerative colitis (UC). In younger UC patients, IRA may have a role postponing pelvic surgery and IPAA. The aim of the present study was to investigate the survival of IPAA secondary to IRA compared to IPAA as primary reconstruction, as this has not previously been studied in UC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients with UC diagnosis between 1960 and 2010 in Sweden were identified from the National Patient Registry. From this cohort, colectomized patients reconstructed with primary IPAA and patients reconstructed with IPAA secondary to IRA were identified. The survival of the IPAA was followed up until pouch failure, defined as pouchectomy and ileostomy or a diverting ileostomy alone. RESULTS: Out of 63,796 patients, 1796 were reconstructed with IPAA, either primarily (n = 1720) or secondary to a previous IRA (n = 76). There were no demographic differences between the groups, including length of follow-up (median 12.6 (IQR 6.7-16.6) years and 10.0 (IQR 3.5-15.9) years, respectively). Failure of the IPAA occurred in 103 (6.0%) patients with primary and in 6 (8%) patients after secondary IPAA (P = 0.38 log-rank). The 10-year pouch survival was 94% (95% CI 93-96) for primary IPAA and 92% (81-97) for secondary. CONCLUSIONS: Patients choosing IRA as primary reconstruction do not have an increased risk of failure of a later secondary IPAA in comparison with patients with primary IPAA.