Surgery for pouch inflow limb-related complications: Crohn's disease or something else?

PURPOSE: A total proctocolectomy with subsequent creation of an ileal-pouch, such as a J-pouch or a Kock pouch, has been the most common surgery performed for ulcerative colitis (UC). A small portion of these patients will develop complications with the inflow limb into the pouch requiring operative intervention. The objective was to establish a better understanding as to the pathological mechanism by which these pouch inflow limb problems develop. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted at a single tertiary care inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) center. A database was created of all the patients who underwent pouch-related procedures, following completion of their original pouch, between 2006 and 2018. The patients requiring operative resection for inflow limb complications were identified among this cohort. Operative and pathological data were collected. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-eight UC patients underwent surgeries on their pouches between 2006 and 2018. Sixteen patients required operative resection for inflow limb problems. Reoperations for inflow limb problems included inflow limb resection with pouch excision (n = 4) and inflow limb resection with pouch revision (n = 12). The pathology findings of the inflow limb were consistent with Crohn's disease in 9 patients (56%). Two other patients (total 69%) were eventually diagnosed with Crohn's disease due to other pathological specimens or perianal pathology. The remaining patients had chronic, non-specific enteritis/serositis. CONCLUSIONS: A small proportion of pouch patients will eventually require surgery for inflow limb complications. Among these, there was a high rate of Crohn's disease of the inflow limb and overall change in diagnosis to Crohn's disease (Plietz et al. in Official Journal of the American College of Gastroenterology | ACG 114:S453, 2019).

Hartmann's reversal: factors affecting complications and outcomes.

AIM: Hartmann's procedure is commonly performed emergently for infectious, inflammatory, or malignant processes. Most patients historically do not undergo reversal, and those who do have been found to suffer significant morbidity. The aim of this study was to study factors associated with complications after Hartmann's reversal and to provide information and guidance to surgeons. METHOD: A retrospective review of patients undergoing Hartmann's reversal between May 2002 and October 2017 was conducted at a tertiary medical center. Data included patient characteristics at the time of surgery and intra- and postoperative complications. Chi-square test was used for categorical variables. The Wilcoxon signed rank or t test where appropriate was used for multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-nine patients were included. Mean age at reversal was 58.8 years, and 114 (58%) were male. Sixty-two (31.8%) patients experienced a major complication following reversal. Eight (4%) patients had an anastomotic leak. Thirteen (6.67%) patients had an intra-abdominal abscess which required either IR or operative drainage. Patients who experienced a major complication were more likely to have an ASA 4 at time of reversal (14.3% vs. 4.24%, p = 0.019), liver disease (6.6% vs. 0.8%, p = 0.021), and BMI < 30 (35% vs. 17.3%, p = 0.020). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly one-third of patients who had reversal surgery experienced a major complication. Four percent of patients undergoing reversal had an anastomotic leak, comparable to previously reported rates. Patients with ASA 4, liver disease, and BMI < 30 were at higher risk of a major complication following reversal. Patients who underwent laparoscopic reversal had no significant difference in outcomes. AIM: What does this paper add to the literature? The decision of whether to reverse a colostomy after Hartmann's procedure. Our study aims to identify risk factors associated with complications after Hartmann's reversal to better guide surgeon's facing the dilemma of whether or not to reverse the stoma.

Diverted versus undiverted restorative proctocolectomy for chronic ulcerative colitis: an analysis of long-term outcomes after pouch leak short title: outcomes after pouch leak.

BACKGROUND: The safety of undiverted restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) is debated. This study compares long-term outcomes after pouch leak in diverted and undiverted RPC patients. METHODS: Data were obtained from a prospectively maintained registry from a single surgical practice. One-stage and staged procedures with an undiverted pouch were considered undiverted pouches; all others were considered diverted pouches. The outcomes measured were pouch excision and long-term diversion defined as the need for loop ileostomy at 200 weeks after pouch creation. Regression models were used to compare outcomes. RESULTS: There were 317 diverted and 670 undiverted pouches, of which 378 were one-stage procedures. Pouch leaks occurred in 135 patients, 92 (13.7%) after undiverted, and 43 (13.6%) after diverted pouches. Eighty-six (64%) leaks were diagnosed within 6 months of pouch creation. Undiverted patients underwent more emergent procedures within 30 days of pouch creation (p < 0.01). Pouch excision occurred in 14 (33%) diverted patients and 13 (14%) undiverted patients (p = 0.01). Thirteen (32%) diverted patients and 18 (21%) undiverted patients (p = 0.17) had ileostomies at 200 weeks after surgery. In multivariable analyses, diverted patients had a higher risk of pouch excision (HR 3.67 p < 0.01), but similar rates of ileostomy at 200 weeks (HR 1.8, p = 0.19) compared to undiverted patients. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a likely selection bias in which "healthier" patients undergo an undiverted pouch, our data suggest that diversion does not prevent pouch excision and the need for long-term diversion after pouch leak. These findings suggest that undiverted RPC is a safe procedure in appropriately selected patients.

Assessment of Bowel End Perfusion After Mesenteric Division: Eye Versus SPY.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic complications related to tissue ischemia cause morbidity in gastrointestinal (GI) surgery. Surgeons' standard practice to predict bowel perfusion is inspection of mesenteric perfusion before anastomosing bowel ends. Augmenting this assessment with fluorescent imaging is under study. A standardized system to evaluate this imaging has not yet been developed. This study compared the surgeon's intraoperative assessment to a novel GI-specific imaging analysis method. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-nine consecutive patients undergoing open or laparoscopic-assisted bowel resections were enrolled. After mesenteric division, the surgeon marked the site for bowel transection. Near-infrared fluorescence imaging was performed on the marked bowel ends. Imaging analysis identified theoretical transection sites based on the quantification of arterial and microvascular inflow (Perfusion) and venous outflow (Timing). The primary outcome was the measured disparity between the site marked by the surgeon using current standard of care parameters and the imaging-determined site. No clinical outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: Seventy-two bowel end segments from 46 patients were analyzed. Disparity was found in 11 of 72 (15%) bowel end segments. In five (7%), the disparity was due to either Perfusion or Timing (single), and in six (8%), due to both Perfusion and Timing (combined). In the single disparity group, the median disparity distance was 2.0 cm by Perfusion and 4.0 cm by Timing, and in the combined group, 3.8 cm by Perfusion and 3.5 cm by Timing. Disparity (either single or combined) was in 25% of colon and 11.5% of small bowel (P = NS). Combined and single disparity had equivalent lengths of disparity distance (P = NS). CONCLUSIONS: Imaging coupled with this GI-specific analysis provides objective, real-time, and interpretable data of intramural blood supply. A 15% disparity rate from current clinical practice was observed.