ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The prevalence of obesity and the number of bariatric surgeries in both the general population and in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have increased significantly in recent years. Due to small sample sizes and the lack of adequate controls, no definite conclusions can be drawn from the available studies on the safety and efficacy of bariatric surgery (BS) in patients with IBD. Our aim was to assess safety, weight loss, and deficiencies in patients with IBD and obesity who underwent BS and compare findings to a control group. METHODS: Patients with IBD and a history of BS were retrospectively recruited to centers belonging to the Groupe d'Etude Thérapeutique des Affections Inflammatoires du Tube Digestif (GETAID). Patients were matched 1:2 for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), hospital of surgery, and type of BS with non-IBD patients who underwent BS. Complications, rehospitalizations, weight, and deficiencies after BS were collected in cases and controls. RESULTS: We included 88 procedures in 85 patients (64 Crohn's disease, 20 ulcerative colitis, 1 unclassified IBD) with a mean BMI of 41.6 ± 5.9 kg/m2. Bariatric surgery included Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (n = 3), sleeve gastrectomy (n = 73), and gastric banding (n = 12). Eight (9%) complications were reported, including 4 (5%) requiring surgery. At a mean follow-up of 34 months, mean weight was 88.6 ± 22.4 kg. No difference was observed between cases and controls for postoperative complications (P = .31), proportion of weight loss (P = .27), or postoperative deficiencies (P = .99). CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric surgery is a safe and effective procedure in patients with IBD and obesity; outcomes in this patient group were similar to those observed in a control population.
Subject(s)
Bariatric Surgery , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases , Laparoscopy , Obesity, Morbid , Bariatric Surgery/adverse effects , Bariatric Surgery/methods , Case-Control Studies , Chronic Disease , Humans , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/complications , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/surgery , Obesity/complications , Obesity/surgery , Obesity, Morbid/complications , Obesity, Morbid/epidemiology , Obesity, Morbid/surgery , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Weight LossABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The technique of intersphincteric resection permits sphincter preservation with good oncologic results in very low rectal cancer. This study aimed to investigate functional results and quality of life after intersphincteric resection compared with conventional coloanal anastomoses. METHODS: From 1990 to 2000, 170 patients underwent total mesorectal excision with coloanal anastomosis for low rectal tumors. Questionnaires were obtained from 77 patients alive without colostomy: 37 had a conventional coloanal anastomosis and 40 had intersphincteric resection. Both groups were similar according to age, gender, anastomotic stenosis, colonic pouch, anastomotic leakage, preoperative radiotherapy, and follow-up (median, 56 months). Assessment included one functional and two quality-of-life questionnaires: the SF-36 Health Status and the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life score. RESULTS: There was no difference in stool frequency, fragmentation, urgency, dyschesia, and alimentary restriction between patients with and without intersphincteric resection. Patients with intersphincteric resection had significantly worse continence (Wexner score, 10.8 vs. 6.9; P < 0.001) and needed more antidiarrheal drugs (60 vs. 35 percent; P = 0.04) than those without. Compared with conventional coloanal anastomoses, quality of life was altered by intersphincteric resection for the subscale embarrassment ( P < 0.01) in the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life score, whereas no difference of quality of life was observed with SF-36. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with conventional coloanal anastomoses, patients with intersphincteric resection have a higher risk of fecal incontinence and a slightly altered quality of life.