Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
ANZ J Surg ; 92(9): 2180-2184, 2022 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35434821

RESUMO

AIM: We aimed to determine pouch function and retention rate for restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) for ulcerative colitis (UC) in elderly patients. METHODS: We identified patients over 50 years old subjected to IPAA for confirmed pathological UC from 1980 until 2016. Patients were grouped according to age: 50-59, 60-69 and 70+ years. Short and long-term outcomes and quality of life (QOL) were compared among the groups. RESULTS: Six hundred and one patients were identified (399 (66.4%) between 50-59 181 (30.1%) between 60-69, and 21 (3.5%) over 70 years of age). More males were in the 70+ arm, and more two-stage procedures were performed in this group. Wound infection increased with age (P = 0.023). There was a trend of more fistula and pouchitis in the 70+ patients (P = 0.052 and P = 0.055, respectively). Pouch failure rate increased with age, and it was statistically significant in the 70+ cohort (P = 0.015). Multivariate stepwise logistic regression showed that pelvic sepsis (HR 4.8 (95% CI 1.5-15.4), P = 0.009), fistula (HR 6.0 (95% CI 1.7-21.5), and mucosectomy with handsewn anastomosis (HR 4.5 (95% CI 1.4-14.7)), were independently associated with pouch failure. No difference was observed in the QOL among the groups, but pouch function was better for patients younger than 60 years. CONCLUSION: In elderly patients with UC, IPAA may be offered with reasonable functional outcomes, and ileal pouch retention rates, as an alternative to the permanent stoma. Stapled anastomosis increases the chance of pouch retention and should be recommended as long as the distal rectum does not carry dysplasia.


Assuntos
Colite Ulcerativa , Bolsas Cólicas , Proctocolectomia Restauradora , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Anastomose Cirúrgica/efeitos adversos , Anastomose Cirúrgica/métodos , Colite Ulcerativa/complicações , Colite Ulcerativa/cirurgia , Bolsas Cólicas/efeitos adversos , Contraindicações , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Proctocolectomia Restauradora/efeitos adversos , Proctocolectomia Restauradora/métodos , Qualidade de Vida , Resultado do Tratamento
2.
Dis Colon Rectum ; 61(5): 573-578, 2018 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29630002

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: A laparoscopic approach to total proctocolectomy with IPAA has been suggested to have better short-term outcomes and cosmesis, whereas open surgery by midline incision may result in shorter operative times. We hypothesized that a modified Pfannenstiel open approach would combine the advantages of both techniques. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of open total proctocolectomy with IPAA using a modified Pfannenstiel incision versus those following the laparoscopic approach. DESIGN: This was a retrospective study comparing patients submitted to open IPAA using modified Pfannenstiel incision versus laparoscopy from 1998 to 2014. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a high-volume tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Among 1275 patients, 119 patients underwent the laparoscopic approach and 33 underwent the modified Pfannenstiel approach. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Short- and long-term outcomes were evaluated, and quality-of-life questionnaires were assessed. RESULTS: Patients who underwent the modified Pfannenstiel approach were younger, more often women, and had lower BMI and ASA classification compared with those who underwent laparoscopy. Surgical time was lower in Pfannenstiel, and no difference was observed in length of hospital stay. No difference was observed in postoperative complications, pouch failure rate, or quality of life. Patients were then matched 1:1 by diagnosis, sex, age (±5 y) and BMI (±5 kg/m). The Pfannenstiel approach still had a shorter surgical time. No difference was observed in the length of hospital stay, complications, pouch failure, or quality of life. In long-term follow-up, pouchitis symptoms occurred more frequently in Pfannenstiel (mean follow-up = 7.3 y), and seepage was more frequently observed in the laparoscopy group (mean follow-up = 4.2 y). These differences were not observed in matched patients. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its retrospective design and inherent selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: The modified Pfannenstiel approach provides equivalent short- and long-term outcomes and similar quality of life compared with laparoscopy but with a significantly shorter operative time. The modified Pfannenstiel approach to total proctocolectomy with IPAA may be the most efficient method in selected patients. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A562.


Assuntos
Colectomia/métodos , Colite Ulcerativa/cirurgia , Bolsas Cólicas , Laparoscopia/métodos , Qualidade de Vida , Adulto , Anastomose Cirúrgica/métodos , Colite Ulcerativa/psicologia , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Incidência , Masculino , Ohio/epidemiologia , Duração da Cirurgia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA