Leaks From the Tip of the J-pouch: Diagnosis, Management, and Long-term Pouch Survival.

BACKGROUND: The standard of care for surgical treatment of ulcerative colitis is restorative proctocolectomy with ileal J-pouch. Leaks from the tip of the J-pouch are a known complication, but there is a paucity of literature regarding this type of leak. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe the diagnosis, management, and long-term clinical outcomes of leaks from the tip of the J-pouch at our institution. DESIGN: This was a retrospective study of a prospectively maintained pouch registry. SETTING: This study was conducted at a quaternary IBD referral center. PATIENTS: Patients included those with ileal J-pouches diagnosed with leaks from the tip of the J-pouch. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main measures of outcomes were pouch salvage rate, type of salvage procedures, and long-term Kaplan-Meier pouch survival. RESULTS: We identified 74 patients with leaks from the tip of the J-pouch. Pain (68.9%) and pelvic abscess (40.9%) were the most common presentations, whereas 10.8% of patients presented with an acute abdomen. The leak was diagnosed by imaging and/or endoscopy in 74.3% of patients but only discovered during surgical exploration in 25.6% of patients. Some 63.5% of patients were diagnosed only after loop ileostomy closure, whereas 32.4% of patients were diagnosed before ileostomy closure. The most common methods used for diagnosis were pouchoscopy (31.1%) and gastrograffin enema (28.4%). A definitive nonoperative approach was attempted in 48.6% of patients but was successful in only 10.8% of patients overall. Surgical repair was attempted in 89.2% of patients, whereas 4.5% of patients had pouch excision. Salvage operations (n = 63) included sutured or stapled repair of the tip of the J (65%), pouch excision with neo-pouch (25.4%), and pouch disconnection, repair, and reanastomosis (9.5%). Ultimately' 10 patients (13.5%) required pouch excision, yielding an overall 5-year pouch survival rate of 86.3%. LIMITATIONS: This was a retrospective review; referral bias may limit the generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: Leaks from the tip of the J-pouch have variable clinical presentations and require a high index of suspicion. Pouch salvage surgery is required in the majority of patients and is associated with a high pouch salvage rate. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C50 . FUGAS DEL EXTREMO DE LA BOLSA EN J DIAGNSTICO, MANEJO Y SUPERVIVENCIA A LARGO PLAZO DE LA BOLSA: ANTECEDENTES:El estándar de atención para el tratamiento quirúrgico de la colitis ulcerosa es la proctocolectomía restauradora con bolsa ileal en J. Las fugas del extremo de la bolsa en J son una complicación conocida, pero hay escasez de literatura sobre este tipo de fuga.OBJETIVO:Describir el diagnóstico, manejo y resultados clínicos a largo plazo de las fugas del extremo de la bolsa en J en nuestra institución.DISEÑO:Estudio retrospectivo de registro de bolsa mantenido prospectivamente.ENTORNO CLINICO:Centro de referencia de enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal cuaternaria.PACIENTES:Pacientes con bolsas ileales en J diagnosticadas con fugas del extremo de la J.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACIÓN:Tasa de rescate de la bolsa, tipo de procedimientos de rescate y supervivencia a largo plazo de la bolsa Kaplan-Meier.RESULTADOS:Identificamos 74 pacientes con fugas del extremo de la bolsa en J. El dolor (68,9%) y el absceso pélvico (40,9%) fueron las presentaciones más comunes, mientras que el 10,8% de los pacientes presentaron abdomen agudo. La fuga se diagnosticó por imagen y/o endoscopia en el 74,3%, pero solo se descubrió durante la exploración quirúrgica en el 25,6%. El 63,5% fueron diagnosticados solo después del cierre de la ileostomía en asa, mientras que el 32,4% lo fueron antes del cierre de la ileostomía. Los métodos más comunes utilizados para el diagnóstico fueron la endoscopia (31,1%) y el enema de gastrografín (28,4%). Se intentó un abordaje no quirúrgico definitivo en el 48,6%, pero tuvo éxito en solo el 10,8% de los pacientes en general. Se intentó la reparación quirúrgica en el 89,2% de los pacientes, mientras que en el 4,5% se realizó la escisión del reservorio. Las operaciones de rescate (n = 63) incluyeron la reparación con sutura o grapas del extremo de la J (65%), la escisión del reservorio con neo-reservorio (25,4%) y la desconexión, reparación y reanastomosis del reservorio (9,5%). Finalmente, 10 (13,5%) pacientes requirieron la escisión de la bolsa, lo que se asocio con una alta tasa de supervivencia general de la bolsa a los 5 años del 86,3%.LIMITACIONES:Revisión retrospectiva; el sesgo de referencia puede limitar la generalización.CONCLUSIONES:Las fugas del extremo de la bolsa en J tienen presentaciones clínicas variables y requieren un alto índice de sospecha. La cirugía de rescate de la bolsa se requiere en la mayoría y se asocia con una alta tasa de rescate de la bolsa. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C50 . (Traducción- Dr. Ingrid Melo ).

Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in elderly patients - is advanced age a contraindication?

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.

Is routine use of adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer with complete pathological response justified?

BACKGROUND: Patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) can have a complete pathologic response (pCR), and are given postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT). METHODS: A prospectively maintained outcomes database was queried for patients who had pCR to nCRT for LARC from 2000 to 2012. Local recurrence and survival were analyzed according to whether patients received ACT. RESULTS: We identified 139 patients and excluded 9 due to lack of follow-up. Mean age was 58.9 ± 11.8 years. 83 patients (63.8%) did not receive ACT (Group A) and 47 (36.2%) did (Group B). Mean follow-up was 5.7 ± 3 and 5.6 ± 3.5 years for Groups A and B respectively (p = 0.51). Groups were comparable in age, gender, tumor differentiation, and clinical staging. There were no differences in oncological outcomes. CONCLUSION: Avoiding routine use of ACT in patients with a pCR may be considered. Further justification of this approach warrants prospective randomized studies.