Reporting Templates for MRI and Water-Soluble Contrast Enema in Patients With Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis: Experience From a Large Referral Center.

Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) surgery is the reference standard surgical procedure for treatment of ulcerative colitis and most patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. This procedure allows preservation of fecal continence and gastrointestinal continuity. However, it is associated with a wide variety of complications, which often have nonspecific and overlapping clinical presentations, making imaging an important part of workup for pouch dysfunction. The purpose of this article is to propose structured reporting templates for MRI and water-soluble contrast enema (WSCE), based on our referral pouch center's experience, in patients who have undergone IPAA surgery. We review salient surgical technique, pouch anatomy, and imaging protocols, with an emphasis on a systematic search pattern for evaluation of ileal pouch complications using proposed structured reporting templates for MRI and WSCE.

Permanent ostomy after ileoanal pouch failure: pouch in situ or pouch excision?

BACKGROUND: The risks and benefits of pouch excision and end ileostomy creation when compared to the alternative option of a permanent diversion with the pouch left in situ when restoration of intestinal continuity is not pursued for patients who develop pouch failure after IPAA have not been well characterized. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the early and long-term outcomes after permanent diversion with the pouch left in situ vs pouch excision with end ileostomy creation for pouch failure. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective review of prospectively gathered data. SETTINGS: This investigation was conducted at a tertiary center. PATIENTS: Patients with pouch failure who underwent a permanent ileostomy with the pouch left in situ and those who underwent pouch excision were included in the study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were the perioperative outcomes and quality of life using the pouch and Short Form 12 questionnaires. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-six patients with pouch failure underwent either pouch left in situ (n = 31) or pouch excision (n = 105). Age (p = 0.72), sex (p = 0.72), ASA score (p = 0.22), BMI (p = 0.83), disease duration (p = 0.74), time to surgery for pouch failure (p = 0.053), diagnosis at pouch failure (p = 0.18), and follow-up (p = 0.76) were similar. The predominant reason for pouch failure was septic complications in 15 (48.4%) patients in the pouch left in situ group and 39 (37.1%) patients in the pouch excision group (p = 0.3). Thirty-day complications, including prolonged ileus (p = 0.59), pelvic abscess (p = 1.0), wound infection (p = 1.0), and bowel obstruction (p = 1.0), were similar. At the most recent follow-up (median, 9.9 y), quality of life (p = 0.005) and health (p = 0.008), current energy level (p = 0.026), Cleveland Global Quality of Life score (p = 0.005), and Short Form 12 mental (p = 0.004) and physical (p = 0.014) component scales were significantly higher after pouch excision than after pouch left in situ. Urinary and sexual function was similar between the groups. Anal pain (n = 4) and seepage with pad use (n = 8) were the predominant concerns of the pouch left in situ group on long-term follow-up. None of the 18 patients with pouch in situ, for whom information relating to long-term pouch surveillance was available, developed dysplasia or cancer. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: Although technically more challenging, pouch excision, rather than pouch left in situ, is the preferable option for patients who develop pouch failure and are not candidates for restoration of intestinal continuity. Because pouch left in situ was not associated with neoplasia, this option is a reasonable intermediate or long-term alternative when pouch excision is not feasible or advisable.

Influence of ileal pouch anal anastomosis on bone loss in ulcerative colitis patients.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) are at an increased risk for low bone mineral density (BMD). It is unclear whether proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) for UC alters the risk of bone loss. The aim of this study was to compare BMD in UC patients with and without IPAA. METHODS: A total of 267 patients with UC and IPAA (study group) were compared to 119 UC patients without IPAA (control group) in this cross-sectional study. The demographic and clinical variables including dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scan results were compared. Patients were classified as having normal or low BMD, based on the criteria by the International Society for Clinical Densitometry. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess risk factors associated with low BMD. Age, gender, race, smoking status, steroid use, alcohol use, body mass index, years of absent estrogen protection, use of calcium, vitamin D supplements and disease duration were selected as covariates. RESULTS: 83 (31.1%) had low BMD in the study group vs. 18 (15.1%) in the control group (p=0.001). 2/13 (15.4%) had low BMD before surgery. The mean age of patients in the study and control groups were 44.7 ± 14.1 vs. 52.4 ± 17.7 years, respectively (p<0.001). The hip BMD was lower in the study group (0.93 ± 0.17 g/cm2) than that in the control group (0.98 ± 0.17 g/cm2) (p=0.038). Fragility fracture was documented in 23 (8.6%) patients in the study group vs. 3 (2.5%) in the control group (p=0.038) Sixty-four (24.0%) of the study group patients were using corticosteroids after surgery in contrast to 93 (78.2%) in the control group (p<0.001). On multivariable analyses, covariate adjusted factors associated with a low BMD in UC patients were advanced age [odds ratio (OR) 1.51 per 5 years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34-1.71], low body mass index (OR=2.37 per 5 kg/m(2) decrease; 95% CI, 1.68-3.36), and the presence of IPAA (OR=6.02; 95% CI, 2.46-14.70). For the 13 IPAA patients who had information available, BMD before IPAA was low. After a median of 46 (Range 7-84) months after IPAA, BMD improved in 7/13 patients (53.8%), while it continued to be low in 6/13 (46.2%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Low BMD is common in patients with UC. The risk appears to persist even after colectomy and IPAA surgery suggesting that these patients need to be monitored for bone loss.

Management of leak from the tip of the "J" in ileal pouch-anal anastomosis.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis and management of leak from the tip of the J-pouch after IPAA has not been systematically studied. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to report our experience in the diagnosis and management of these leaks following primary IPAA. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective review of prospectively gathered data. SETTINGS: Data were obtained from a prospectively maintained single-institution pelvic pouch database. PATIENTS: Included in this study were patients with a leak from the tip of the J-pouch after primary IPAA. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main measures of outcomes after salvage surgery were pouch failure, pouch function, and quality of life. RESULTS: There were 27 (14 male) patients. Median age was 37 years (range, 20-73). Underlying disease in these patients was ulcerative colitis in 22 patients. Predominant symptoms were abdominal pain (n = 15) and fever (n = 5). Twenty patients had either a pelvic abscess detected by CT or MRI or a leak demonstrated at gastrografin enema or pouchoscopy. In 6 patients, the diagnosis was only made at salvage surgery. In 1 patient, the leak-associated abscess was detected during emergent laparotomy for acute peritonitis before salvage surgery. Of 27 patients, 1 had successful CT-guided drainage without the need for further surgery. Another patient had pouch resection with end ileostomy. Salvage surgery was performed in 25 patients by means of pouch repair (n = 23) and new pouch creation (n = 2); 8 patients had a repeat anastomosis. Median time from primary IPAA to salvage surgery was 0.9 years (0.13-9.8). Twenty-four patients with salvage surgery have a functioning pouch after a mean follow-up of 3.2 ± 1.9 years. LIMITATIONS: : The study was limited by its retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: Leak from the tip of the J-pouch is indolent and diagnosis can be difficult. Satisfactory outcomes in terms of pouch retention may be expected after appropriate surgical management.

Risk factors for low bone mass in patients with ulcerative colitis following ileal pouch-anal anastomosis.

OBJECTIVES: Bone mineral density (BMD) can be adversely affected by the chronic nature of inflammatory bowel disease. Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the surgical treatment of choice for patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) who require proctocolectomy. There are few data on BMD in UC patients with IPAA. The aim of the study was to assess the prevalence and risk factors associated with low BMD in UC patients after IPAA. METHODS: A total of 327 eligible patients with UC and IPAA from the Pouchitis Clinic were enrolled. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry was performed. Patients were classified as having normal or low BMD, based on the criteria by the International Society for Clinical Densitometry. A total of 39 demographic and clinical variables were evaluated with logistic regression models. RESULTS: Of 327 patients with a median of 4 years after IPAA, 105 (32.1%) had low BMD. Fragility fracture was documented in 11 patients (10.5%) in the low BMD group and in 13 of 222 patients (5.9%) in the normal BMD group (P=0.14). In the multivariable analysis, covariate-adjusted factors associated with a low BMD were advanced age (odds ratio (OR) =1.64 per 5 years; 95% CI, 1.44-1.87), low body mass index (OR=0.43 per 5 kg/m(2); 95% CI, 0.30-0.62), and non-use of daily calcium supplement (OR=0.53; 95% CI, 0.29-0.96). Pouch-associated factors were not found to be significantly associated with the bone loss. CONCLUSIONS: Low BMD was common in patients with UC, even after colectomy and IPAA. Low BMD in this patient population was associated with certain risk factors, some of which may be modifiable.

Repeat pouch surgery by the abdominal approach safely salvages failed ileal pelvic pouch.

PURPOSE: : This study evaluated outcomes of patients with abdominal salvage operations for failed ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. METHODS: : Patients undergoing laparotomy for ileoanal pouch salvage were reviewed from a prospectively maintained pouch database and records. RESULTS: : From 1983 to 2007, 241 abdominal reconstructions were performed. The median follow-up was 5 years (range, 0.04-20.8). Diagnoses before primary ileal pouch-anal anastomosis were ulcerative colitis in 187, familial adenomatous polyposis in 22, indeterminate colitis in 20, Crohn's disease in 9, and other in 3. The most common indications for salvage were fistula (n = 67), leak (n = 65), stricture (n = 42) pouch dysfunction (n = 40), pelvic abscess (n = 25). Seventy-one cases had a new pouch constructed. One hundred and seventy cases had the original pouch salvaged. Twenty-nine cases had either pouch excision or ileostomy without pouch excision the result of failure after reconstruction. To assess functional results and quality of life, patients with reconstruction were matched to those with a primary ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Significantly higher proportions of patients with reconstruction reported seepage during daytime (P = 0.002), at night (P = 0.015), and daytime pad usage (P = 0.02). Other parameters and quality of life were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: : Repeat abdominal surgery was a good alternative for pouch failure. Functional and quality of life outcomes were encouraging.

Ileal pouch rectal anastomosis: a viable alternative to permanent ileostomy in Crohn's proctocolitis patients.

BACKGROUND: Ileal pouch rectal anastomosis (IPRA) is a possible alternative to permanent ileostomy when a short, normal-appearing rectal stump remains after total colectomy. Its outcomes in Crohn colitis (CC) patients have not been reported. STUDY DESIGN: CC patients who underwent IPRA from 1992 to 2004 were identified. Operative and morbidity data were collected. Functional outcomes and quality-of-life (QOL) data were obtained using a mailed questionnaire and compared with matched patients who underwent straight ileorectal anastomosis (SIRA). RESULTS: Twenty-three CC patients underwent IPRA. Perioperative complications included three pelvic septic fluid collections and five small bowel obstructions or ileus, and were treated nonoperatively. Twenty-two patients were available for longterm followup (median 98 months). Fourteen patients (64%) had disease recurrence. Two (9%) have lost a functioning anastomosis. Nine (41%) required additional operations. Matched SIRA patients had higher level of anastomosis (23.4 +/- 5.5 versus 9.0 +/- 4.1 cm above the dentate line; p < 0.0001). Bowel movement frequency (median 6.5/24 hours in both groups), incontinence, and urgency rates were similar. Nighttime seepage and pad usage were more frequent in IPRA. No differences were found in QOL parameters (Cleveland Global QOL score: 0.78 versus 0.73 [0 = worst, 1 = best], IPRA versus SIRA, respectively; p = 0.31). All patients with a functioning IPRA stated they would have their operation again if needed, and 94% would recommend it to others. CONCLUSIONS: IPRA offers durable preservation of bowel continuity and good function and QOL in selected CC patients who might otherwise require a permanent ileostomy.

A randomized multicenter trial to compare long-term functional outcome, quality of life, and complications of surgical procedures for low rectal cancers.

INTRODUCTION: Colonic pouches have been used for 20 years to provide reservoir function after reconstructive proctectomy for rectal cancer. More recently coloplasty has been advocated as an alternative to a colonic pouch. However there have been no long-term randomized, controlled trials to compare functional outcomes of coloplasty, colonic J-Pouch (JP), or a straight anastomosis (SA) after the treatment of low rectal cancer. AIM: : To compare the complications, long-term functional outcome, and quality of life (QOL) of patients undergoing a coloplasty, JP, or an SA in reconstruction of the lower gastrointestinal tract after proctectomy for low rectal cancer. METHODS: A multicenter study enrolled patients with low rectal cancer, who were randomized intraoperatively to coloplasty (CP-1) or SA if JP was not feasible, or JP or coloplasty (CP-2) if a JP was feasible. Patients were followed for 24 months with SF-36 surveys to evaluate the QOL. Bowel function was measured quantitatively and using Fecal Incontinence Severity Index (FISI). Urinary function and sexual function were also assessed. RESULTS: Three hundred sixty-four patients were randomized. All patients were evaluated for complications and recurrence. Mean age was 60 +/-12 years, 71% were male. Twenty-three (7.4%) died within 24 months of surgery. No significant difference was observed in the complications among the 4 groups. Two hundred ninety-seven of 364 were evaluated for functional outcome at 24 months. There was no difference in bowel function between the CP-1 and SA groups. JP patients had fewer bowel movements, less clustering, used fewer pads and had a lower FISI than the CP-2 group. Other parameters were not statistically different. QOL scores at 24 months were similar for each of the 4 groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing a restorative resection for low rectal cancer, a colonic JP offers significant advantages in function over an SA or a coloplasty. In patients who cannot have a pouch, coloplasty seems not to improve the bowel function of patients over that with an SA.

Combined ciprofloxacin and tinidazole therapy in the treatment of chronic refractory pouchitis.

PURPOSE: Management of chronic refractory pouchitis, a common cause for pouch failure with pouch resection or diversion, is often challenging. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of a combination therapy of ciprofloxacin and tinidazole in patients with chronic refractory pouchitis compared with mesalamine therapy. METHODS: Sixteen consecutive ulcerative colitis patients with chronic refractory pouchitis (disease>4 weeks and failure to respond to>4 weeks of single-antibiotic therapy) were treated with a four-week course of ciprofloxacin 1 g/day and tinidazole 15 mg/kg/day. A historic cohort of ten consecutive patients with chronic refractory pouchitis treated with oral (4 g/day), enema (8 g/day), or suppository (1 g/day) mesalamine served as controls. The Pouchitis Disease Activity Index, clinical remission, clinical response, the Cleveland Global Quality of Life, the Irritable Bowel Syndrome-Quality of Life, and the Short Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaires scores were calculated before and after therapy and compared between the two treatment groups. RESULTS: Patients taking ciprofloxacin and tinidazole had a significant reduction in the total Pouchitis Disease Activity Index scores and subscores and a significant improvement in quality-of-life scores (P < 0.002). For patients in the mesalamine group, there was a significant reduction in the total Pouchitis Disease Activity Index scores only. Patients in the antibiotic group had a greater reduction in the total Pouchitis Disease Activity Index scores and a greater improvement in the quality-of-life scores than those in the mesalamine group (P

Long-term outcome and quality of life after continent ileostomy.

INTRODUCTION: This study was designed to evaluate long-term outcomes for patients undergoing Kock continent ileostomy, identify factors associated with adverse outcomes, and compare changes in quality of life after removal of the reservoir. METHODS: The records of all patients (n = 330) undergoing continent ileostomy at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation between 1974 and 2001 were reviewed. Patient-related, intraoperative, and postoperative factors were evaluated as predictor variables of long-term pouch survival. Quality of life was evaluated using the continent ileostomy surgery follow-up questionnaire and the Cleveland Global Quality of Life scale (n = 216). These were compared between patients with continent ileostomy (n = 181) and patients who underwent removal of the continent ileostomy and conversion to an end stoma (n = 35). RESULTS: The median patient follow-up was 11 (range, 1-27) years. The median revision-free pouch interval was 14 (95 percent confidence interval, 11-17) months. The 10-year and 20-year pouch survival was 87 and 77 percent, respectively. Patients had an average of 3.7(range, 1-28) complications and 2.9 (range, 1-27) pouch revisions during follow-up. On multivariate analysis, Crohn's disease (hazard ratio = 4.5), female gender (hazard ratio = 2.4), fistula development (hazard ratio = 3), and body mass index (hazard ratio = 2.4 per 5 unit increase) were independent predictors of pouch failure. Quality of life measurements for patients with a continent ileostomy were higher on all scales in comparison with patients who had the Kock reservoir and then reverted to a Brooke ileostomy. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the associated morbidity with continent ileostomy surgery, long-term results and quality of life were encouraging. Continent ileostomy may be offered as an attractive long-term option to select patients whose only alternative is an end ileostomy.

Functional outcome and quality of life after repeat ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for complications of ileoanal surgery.

PURPOSE: Disconnection of an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis with repeat ileal pouch-anal anastomosis has been proposed for treatment of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis failure caused by septic or functional complications. We report our experience with repeat ileal pouch-anal anastomosis, and document functional outcome and quality of life. METHODS: Of 101 patients undergoing laparotomy, ileoanal disconnection, and repeat ileal pouch-anal anastomosis, 80 were referred from other institutions. Indications included: chronic anastomotic leak (n=27), perineal or pouch-vaginal fistula (n=47), anastomotic stricture (n=22), dysfunction/long efferent limb of S-pouch (n=36), and previous ileal pouch-anal anastomosis excision or exclusion (n=6). In 64 cases a "septic" indication was observed. Pathologic features of Crohn's disease were present in 4 patients preoperatively and 15 more after repeat ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Four patients had clinical features of Crohn's disease. RESULTS: Three patients had no ileostomy, and 82 patients had temporary ileostomy closure. Of these, 82 percent have a functioning pouch, with a median follow-up of 32 functioning months. Two were rediverted and 13 had the pouch excised. Five-year pouch survival was 74 percent, higher for ulcerative colitis (79 percent) than Crohn's disease (53 percent; P=0.06). No differences were seen between those having repeat ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for septic or nonseptic indications, or whether using a new or repaired pouch. Patients defecated 6.3 +/- 2.8 (mean +/- standard deviation) times per day, and 2 +/- 1.9 per night. Thirty-five percent of patients never described urgency. Fecal seepage occurred in 50 percent during the day and 69 percent at night. Using the Cleveland Global Quality of Life Score to assess the patient's quality of life, health, level of energy, and happiness with surgery (each scored from 0-10), quality of life was 8.2 +/- 1.6, and happiness with surgery was 9 +/- 2. Ninety-seven percent would undergo repeat ileal pouch-anal anastomosis again, and 99 percent would recommend it to others. CONCLUSIONS: Repeat ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is a valid alternative for patients with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis failure. A controlled septic condition should not preclude salvage surgery. Although pouch failure occurs more frequently than after primary ileal pouch-anal anastomosis, patient satisfaction and quality of life are high.

Prospective, randomized, controlled trial between a pathway of controlled rehabilitation with early ambulation and diet and traditional postoperative care after laparotomy and intestinal resection.

INTRODUCTION: In an era of dwindling hospital resources and increasing medical costs, safe reduction in postoperative stay has become a major focus to optimize utilization of healthcare resources. Although several protocols have been reported to reduce postoperative stay, no Level I evidence exists for their use in routine clinical practice. METHODS: Sixty-four patients undergoing laparotomy and intestinal or rectal resection were randomly assigned to a pathway of controlled rehabilitation with early ambulation and diet or to traditional postoperative care. Time to discharge from hospital, complication and readmission rates, pain level, quality of life, and patient satisfaction scores were determined at the time of discharge and at 10 and 30 days after surgery. Subgroups were defined to evaluate those who derived the optimal benefit from the protocol. RESULTS: Pathway patients spent less total time in the hospital after surgery (5.4 vs. 7.1 days; P = 0.02) and less time in the hospital during the primary admission than traditional patients. Patients younger than 70 years old had greater benefits than the overall study group (5 vs. 7.1 days; P = 0.01). Patients treated by surgeons with the most experience with the pathway spent significantly less time in the hospital than did those whose surgeons were less experienced with the pathway (P = 0.01). There was no difference between pathway and traditional patients for readmission or complication rates, pain score, quality of life after surgery, or overall satisfaction with the hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: Patients scheduled for a laparotomy and major intestinal or rectal resection are suitable for management by a pathway of controlled rehabilitation with early ambulation and diet. Pathway patients have a shorter hospital stay, with no adverse effect on patient satisfaction, pain scores, or complication rates. Patients younger than 70 years of age derive the optimal benefit, and increased surgeon experience improves outcome.