Is extended venous thromboprophylaxis required in patients undergoing ileal pouch procedure for ulcerative colitis?

AIM: Venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) are relatively common adverse surgical complications. Extended VTE prophylaxis for 4 weeks is recommended after colorectal cancer surgery, but its use in inflammatory bowel disease surgery lacks high-quality evidence. This retrospective study aimed to assess and characterize VTEs within the first 30 days after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) procedures and subtotal colectomies (STCs) for ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS: All patients who underwent IPAA for UC between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2021 were included. VTE rates after IPAA, in-hospital or at-home occurrences, utilization of in-hospital thromboprophylaxis, and prescribed anticoagulant treatment were evaluated. Retrospectively, the same variables were analysed if patients of the cohort underwent STC before the IPAA construction. RESULTS: In all, 204 patients underwent IPAA (61.8% men, 73% laparoscopic), with an average hospital stay of 6.8 days. Among them, 116 patients underwent STC prior to IPAA. Thirteen patients (6.3%) experienced VTEs after IPAA, with 76.9% (10/13) of cases occurring during hospitalization and under adequate thromboprophylaxis. The VTE rate after STC was 10.3% (12/116), with 58.2% (7/12) occurring in hospital and under appropriate thromboprophylaxis. No reoperations or mortality were attributed to thrombotic events. The type and duration of anticoagulant treatment varied considerably. CONCLUSION: The VTE rate after IPAA for UC was 6.3%, with the majority of events occurring in hospital and under adequate thromboprophylaxis. These findings suggest that routine use of extended VTE prophylaxis in our cohort may not be supported. Further research is needed to clarify the optimal VTE prophylaxis strategy for inflammatory bowel disease surgery.

Routine diversion following delayed IPAA construction does not reduce the incidence of pouch-related sepsis or failure in patients with ulcerative colitis.

AIM: The aim of this study was to compare modified 2-stage and 3-stage IPAA construction techniques to evaluate the effect of diverting loop ileostomy following completion proctectomy and IPAA for ulcerative colitis. In addition, our overall institutional experience was reviewed to describe long-term outcomes and changes in staging trends over time. METHODS: Our institutional database was searched to identify all cases of IPAA for ulcerative colitis between 1981 and 2018. Patient, pouch and outcome characteristics were abstracted. Primary study outcomes were the incidence of primary pouch failure and pouch-related sepsis. Failure was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival over time. The adjusted effect of pouch stage was evaluated using multivariable Cox and logistic regression models. Exploratory analysis evaluated the effect of stage on failure in the pouch related sepsis subgroup. RESULTS: A total of 2105 patients underwent primary IPAA over the study period. The 5, 10 and 20-year pouch survival probabilities were 95.2%, 92.7% and 86.6%. The incidence of pouch related sepsis was 12.3%. Adjusted analysis demonstrated no difference in pouch failure (HR = 0.64: 95% 0.39-1.07, p = 0.09) or post-operative sepsis (aOR = 0.79: 95% CI 0.53-1.17, p = 0.24) by stage of construction. Among patients experiencing pouch sepsis, there was no difference in Kaplan-Meier estimates of pouch survival by stage (p = 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: Pouch related sepsis and IPAA failure did not differ between modified 2-stage and 3-stage construction techniques. Among the sub-group of patients experiencing pouch related sepsis, there was no difference in failure between groups. The results suggest diverting ileostomy may be safely avoided following delayed pouch reconstruction in appropriately selected patients.