Waist circumference and waist/hip ratio are better predictive risk factors for mortality and morbidity after colorectal surgery than body mass index and body surface area.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether body fat distribution, measured by waist circumference (WC) and waist/hip ratio (WHR), is a better predictor of mortality and morbidity after colorectal surgery than body mass index (BMI) or body surface area (BSA). BACKGROUND: Obesity measured by BMI is not a consistent risk factor for postoperative mortality and morbidity after abdominal surgery. Studies in metabolic and cardiovascular diseases have shown WC and WHR to be better outcome predictors than BMI. METHODS: A prospective multicenter international study was conducted among patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. The WHR, BMI, and BSA were derived from body weight, height, and waist and hip circumferences measured preoperatively. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed to identify risk factors for postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 1349 patients (754 men) from 38 centers in 11 countries were included. Increasing WHR significantly increased the risk of conversion [odds ratio (OR) = 15.7, relative risk (RR) = 4.1], intraoperative complications (OR = 11.0, RR = 3.2), postoperative surgical complications (OR = 7.7, RR = 2.0), medical complications (OR = 13.2, RR = 2.5), anastomotic leak (OR = 13.7, RR = 3.3), reoperations (OR = 13.3, RR = 2.9), and death (OR = 653.1, RR = 21.8). Both BMI (OR = 39.5, RR = 1.1) and BSA (OR = 4.9, RR = 3.1) were associated with an increased risk of abdominal wound complication. In multivariate analysis, the WHR predicted intraoperative complications, conversion, medical complications, and reinterventions, whereas BMI was a risk factor only for abdominal wall complications; BSA did not reach significance for any outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The WHR is predictive of adverse events after elective colorectal surgery. It should be used in routine clinical practice and in future risk-estimating systems.

Restorative proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis revisited.

Since restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) with ileal-pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) removes the entire diseased mucosa, it has become firmly established as the standard operative procedure of choice for familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Many technical controversies still persist, such as mesenteric lengthening techniques, close rectal wall proctectomy, endoanal mucosectomy vs. double stapled anastomosis, loop ileostomy omission and a laparoscopic approach. Despite the complexity of the operation, IPAA is safe (mortality: 0.5-1%), it carries an acceptable risk of non-life-threatening complications (10-25%), and it achieves good long-term functional outcome with excellent patient satisfaction (over 95%). In contrast to the high incidence in patients operated for ulcerative colitis (UC) (15-20%), the occurrence of pouchitis after IPAA seems to be rare in FAP patients (0-11%). Even after IPAA, FAP patients are still at risk of developing adenomas (and occasional adenocarcinomas), either in the anal canal (10-31%) or in the ileal pouch itself (8-62%), thus requiring lifelong endoscopic monitoring. IPAA operation does not jeopardise pregnancy and childbirth, but it does impair female fecundity and has a low risk of impairment of erection and ejaculation in young males. The latter can almost completely be avoided by a careful "close rectal wall" proctectomy technique. Some argue that low risk patients (e.g. <5 rectal polyps) can be identified where ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) might be reasonable. We feel that the risk of rectal cancer after IRA means that IPAA should be recommended for the vast majority of FAP patients. We accept that in some very selected cases, based on clinical and genetics data (and perhaps influenced by patient choice regarding female fecundity), a stepwise surgical strategy with a primary IPA followed at a later age by a secondary proctectomy with IPAA could be proposed.

The influence of genetic polymorphisms of cytochrome P450 3A5 and ABCB1 on starting dose- and weight-standardized tacrolimus trough concentrations after kidney transplantation in relation to renal function.

BACKGROUND: Cytochrome P450 3A5 (CYP3A5) and ABCB1 polymorphisms have been shown to influence tacrolimus (Tc) blood concentrations in the stable phase after organ transplantation. We hypothesized that Tc pharmacokinetics may be affected by genetic mutations subsequent to starting doses. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from a cohort of 59 kidney transplant recipients, in whom CYP3A5 (intron 3) and ABCB1 (exons 12, 21 and 26) genotypes were correlated to dose- and weight-standardized Tc trough concentrations obtained after initial Tc doses. Renal function, expressed as glomerular filtration rate (GFR) (MDRD equation), on days 7 and 14 after transplantation was evaluated and its relationship with Tc concentrations was analyzed. RESULTS: Dose- and weight-standardized Tc trough concentrations were lower in patients carrying the CYP3A5 *1 allele (p<0.01). There was no statistically significant association with ABCB1 polymorphisms. In a multivariate analysis, both the presence of at least one CYP3A5 *1 allele (p=0.006) and age at the time of transplantation (p=0.010) were significant independent variables affecting Tc trough blood concentrations standardized to the first dosages (model r2=0.23). GFR was not affected by Tc concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: Prospective trials are needed to prove that a genetic approach to Tc pharmacokinetics and its related side effects during the early period after grafting may improve patient outcome.