A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Single-Port vs. Multi-Port Laparoscopic Total Abdominal Colectomy with End Ileostomy for Medically Refractory Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND: Medically refractory ulcerative colitis (UC) necessitates surgical intervention, with total abdominal colectomy with end ileostomy being a definitive treatment. The comparison between single-port and multi-port laparoscopic surgery outcomes remains underexplored. OBJECTIVE: To compare the surgical outcomes of single-port versus multi-port laparoscopic surgery in patients undergoing total abdominal colectomy with end ileostomy for medically refractory UC. DESIGN: A retrospective analysis comparing single-port to multi-port surgery in UC patients from 2010 to 2020. Patients were propensity score-matched 3:1 (multi-port to single-port) on baseline characteristics. SETTINGS: Single center academic hospital. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Binary outcomes were compared using a multivariable logistic regression model, and a subset analysis was conducted for postoperative stump leak based on stump implantation during surgery. These metrics were compared between the single-port and multi-port groups to assess the differences in surgical outcomes. RESULTS: The multi-port and single-port groups included 642 and 114 patients, respectively. Matched cohort included 342 multi-ports and 114 single-ports. We observed a statistically significant difference in mean operation time, with the single-port procedure taking 43 minutes less than the multi-port laparoscopy. There were no significant differences between the two groups in postoperative stump leaks, postoperative ileus, stoma site complications, postoperative readmission within 30 days, postoperative reoperation within 30 days, and subsequent IPAA surgery. In the subset analysis, stump implantation was associated with a higher risk of stump leak in the multiport group. The single-port group had a shorter hospital stay. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective nature, being conducted at a single center. CONCLUSION: Single-incision laparoscopic total abdominal colectomy in the treatment of mucosal ulcerative colitis is a safe, effective, and efficient approach. In our cohort, as compared to multi-port approach, single incision laparoscopy has shown shorter operation times and better overall length of stay. Taking into account less invasive approach, decreased abdominal trauma, and faster recovery, single-port surgery is a viable alternative to multi-port surgery. See Video Abstract.

Postoperative Crohn's Disease Recurrence Risk and Optimal Biologic Timing After Temporary Diversion Following Ileocolic Resection.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative recurrence of Crohn's disease (CD) is common. While most patients undergo resection with undiverted anastomosis (UA), some individuals also have creation of an intended temporary diversion (ITD) with an ileostomy followed by ostomy takedown (OT) due to increased risk of anastomotic complications. We assessed the association of diversion with subsequent CD recurrence risk and the influence of biologic prophylaxis timing to prevent recurrence in this population. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of CD patients who underwent ileocolic resection between 2009 and 2020 at a large quaternary health system. Patients were grouped by continuity status after index resection (primary anastomosis or ITD). The outcomes of the study were radiographic, endoscopic, and surgical recurrence as well as composite recurrence postoperatively (after OT in the ITD group). Propensity score-weighted matching was performed based on risk factors for diversion and recurrence. Multivariable regression and a Cox proportional hazards model adjusting for recurrence risk factors were used to assess association with outcomes. Subgroup analysis in the ITD group was performed to assess the impact of biologic timing relative to OT (no biologic, biologic before OT, after OT) on composite recurrence. RESULTS: A total of 793 CD patients were included (mean age 38 years, body mass index 23.7 kg/m2, 52% female, 23% active smoker, 50% penetrating disease). Primary anastomosis was performed in 67.5% (n = 535) and ITD in 32.5% (n = 258; 79% loop, 21% end) of patients. Diverted patients were more likely to have been males and to have had penetrating and perianal disease, prior biologic use, lower body mass index, and lower preoperative hemoglobin and albumin (all P < .01). After a median follow-up of 44 months, postoperative recurrence was identified in 83.3% patients (radiographic 40.4%, endoscopic 39.5%, surgical 13.3%). After propensity score matching and adjusting for recurrence risk factors, no significant differences were seen between continuity groups in radiographic (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91-1.91) or endoscopic recurrence (aHR, 1.196; 95% CI, 0.84-1.73), but an increased risk of surgical recurrence was noted in the ITD group (aHR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.02-2.54). Most (56.1%) ITD patients started biologic prophylaxis after OT, 11.4% before OT, and 32.4% had no postoperative biologic prophylaxis. Biologic prophylaxis in ITD was associated with younger age (P < .001), perianal disease (P = .04), and prior biologic use (P < .001) but not in recurrence (P = .12). Despite higher rates of objective disease activity identified before OT, biologic exposure before OT was not associated with a significant reduction in composite post-OT recurrence compared with starting a biologic after OT (52% vs 70.7%; P = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Diversion of an ileocolic resection is not consistently associated with a risk of postoperative recurrence and should be performed when clinically appropriate. Patients requiring diversion at time of ileocolic resection are at high risk for recurrence, and biologic initiation prior to stoma reversal may be considered.

Diversion of an ileocolic resection is not consistently associated with a risk of postoperative recurrence and should be performed when clinically appropriate. Patients requiring diversion at time of ileocolic resection are high risk for recurrence, and biologic initiation prior to stoma reversal may be considered.

Acute colonic pseudo-obstruction: a retrospective review of the surgical outcomes.

PURPOSE: Limited data exist regarding the surgical outcomes of acute colonic pseudo-obstruction (ACPO), commonly referred to as Ogilvie syndrome, in modern clinical practice. The prevailing belief is that surgery should be avoided due to previously reported high mortality rates. We aimed to describe the surgical results of ACPO treated within our institution. METHODS: Our prospectively maintained colorectal surgery registry was queried for patients diagnosed with ACPO, who underwent surgery between 2009 and 2022. Postoperative complications were graded according to Clavien-Dindo (CD) classification. The primary outcome was postoperative mortality. RESULTS: A total of 32 patients who underwent surgery for ACPO were identified. Overall, nonoperative therapy was initially administered to 21 patients (65.6%). The surgeries performed included total abdominal colectomy (15, 43.1%), ascending colectomy with end ileostomy (8, 25%), transverse colostomy (5, 15.6%), ileostomy and transverse colostomy (3, 9.4%), and Hartmann's operation (1, 3.1%). Severe postoperative complications (CD grade 3 or 4) occurred in five patients (15.6%). No recurrence of ACPO was observed and no patient required reoperation. The average postoperative length of stay was 14.5 days, 30-day mortality was 6.3% (n = 2), and 90-day mortality was 15.6% (n = 5) due to complications of underlying comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical treatment was effective for patients with ACPO refractory to medical therapy or presenting with acute complications. Although postoperative complications were frequent, both the 30- and 90-day mortality rates were lower than previously documented in the literature. Further investigations are warranted to determine the optimal surgical strategy, which may involve total or segmental colectomy, or diversion alone without resection.

Clinical Decision Making in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Mimics: Practice Management from Inflammatory Bowel Disease LIVE.

Background: Since 2009, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) specialists have utilized "IBD LIVE," a weekly live video conference with a global audience, to discuss the multidisciplinary management of their most challenging cases. While most cases presented were confirmed IBD, a substantial number were diseases that mimic IBD. We have categorized all IBD LIVE cases and identified "IBD-mimics" with consequent clinical management implications. Methods: Cases have been recorded/archived since May 2018; we reviewed all 371 cases from May 2018-February 2023. IBD-mimics were analyzed/categorized according to their diagnostic and therapeutic workup. Results: Confirmed IBD cases made up 82.5% (306/371; 193 Crohn's disease, 107 ulcerative colitis, and 6 IBD-unclassified). Sixty-five (17.5%) cases were found to be mimics, most commonly medication-induced (n = 8) or vasculitis (n = 7). The evaluations that ultimately resulted in correct diagnosis included additional endoscopic biopsies (n = 13, 21%), surgical exploration/pathology (n = 10, 16.5%), biopsies from outside the GI tract (n = 10, 16.5%), genetic/laboratory testing (n = 8, 13%), extensive review of patient history (n = 8, 13%), imaging (n = 5, 8%), balloon enteroscopy (n = 5, 8%), and capsule endoscopy (n = 2, 3%). Twenty-five patients (25/65, 38%) were treated with biologics for presumed IBD, 5 of whom subsequently experienced adverse events requiring discontinuation of the biologic. Many patients were prescribed steroids, azathioprine, mercaptopurine, or methotrexate, and 3 were trialed on tofacitinib. Conclusions: The diverse presentation of IBD and IBD-mimics necessitates periodic consideration of the differential diagnosis, and reassessment of treatment in presumed IBD patients without appropriate clinical response. The substantial differences and often conflicting treatment approaches to IBD versus IBD-mimics directly impact the quality and cost of patient care.

What is the Optimal Strategy for Pouch Salvage at the Time of Redo Ileal-Pouch Anal Anastomosis? Pouch Repair with Re-Anastomosis vs Pouch Excision with Neo-Pouch.

BACKGROUND: The long-term risk of pouch failure after restorative proctocolectomy with ileal-pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) range from 5 and 15%. Salvage surgery for failing IPAA's may be achieved by disconnecting the IPAA and either repairing and re-using the existing pouch (REP) or constructing a neo-pouch (NEO). We aimed to evaluate whether there are differences in long-term functional pouch survival and functional outcomes between the REP group and the NEO group. We hypothesized patients undergoing REP have higher long-term pouch survival rates compared to patients who require NEO pouch construction. METHODS: Our prospectively maintained Pouch Registry was queried for patients who underwent a pouch salvage surgery with either pouch REP or NEO from 1988 - 2020. Patients who underwent pouch repair without disconnection from the anus were excluded. The primary endpoint was long-term pouch survival after redo pouch surgery. Secondary outcomes were patient reported quality of life and pouch function. RESULTS: Of 653 patients undergoing redo IPAA, 462 met inclusion criteria of transabdominal redo surgery with pouch reconnection: 243 (52.6%) had REP and 219 (47.4%) had NEO. Median age was 39 years and 59% were female. Median time between index and redo IPAA was 34 months for REP vs 54 months for NEO (p=0.002). The 5-year pouch survival after redo IPAA was similar between REP (79.5%) and NEO (76.8%) groups (p=0.4). Fewer patients in the REP group reported nighttime pad use (51.4% vs 68.2%, p=0.04). CONCLUSION: Pouch survival and functional outcomes after salvage surgery for failing ileoanal pouch was similar regardless of pouch salvage procedure. When performing redo pouch surgery, surgeons should not hesitate to construct a new pouch if indicated.

Outcome of incidental versus preoperatively diagnosed colorectal cancer during total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for inflammatory bowel disease.

AIM: Total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the treatment of choice for colorectal cancer (CRC) in inflammatory bowel disease. CRC may also be discovered incidentally at IPAA for other indications. We sought to determine whether incidentally found CRC at IPAA was associated with worse outcomes. METHODS: Our institutional pouch registry (1983-2021) was retrospectively reviewed. Patients with CRC at pathology after IPAA were divided into two groups: a preoperative diagnosis (PreD) group and an incidental diagnosis (InD) group. Their long-term outcomes (overall survival, disease-free survival and pouch survival) were compared. RESULTS: We included 164 patients: 53 (32%) InD and 111 (68%) PreD. There were no differences in cancer staging, differentiation and location. After a median follow-up of 11 (IQR 3-25) years for InD and 9 (IQR 3-20) years for the PreD group, deaths were 14 (26%) in the InD group and 18 (16%) in the PreD group. Pouch failures were five (9%) in the InD group and nine (8%) in the PreD group, of which two (5%) and four (4%) were cancer related. Ten-year overall survival was 94% for InD and 89% for PreD (P = 0.41), disease-free survival was 95% for InD and 90% for PreD (P = 0.685) and pouch survival was 89% for InD and 97% for PreD (P = 0.80). Pouch survival at 10 years was lower in rectal versus colon cancer (87% vs. 97%, P = 0.01). No difference was found in outcomes in handsewn versus stapled anastomoses. CONCLUSION: Inflammatory bowel disease patients with incidentally found CRC during IPAA appear to have similarly excellent oncological and pouch outcomes to patients with a preoperative cancer diagnosis.

3-Dimensional Pouchography: A Proof-of-Concept Study of a Novel Technique for Visualizing Ileoanal Pouch Anatomy & Morphology in Normal and Mechanical Pouch Complication Patients.

BACKGROUND: Herein, we present a proof-of-concept study of 3-dimensional (3D) pouchography using virtual and printed 3D models of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) in patients with normal pouches and in cases of mechanical pouch complications. MATERIALS & METHODS: We performed a retrospective, descriptive case series of a convenience sample of 10 pouch patients with or without pouch dysfunction who had CT scans appropriate for segmentation were identified from our pouch registry. The steps involved in clinician-driven automated 3D reconstruction are presented. RESULTS: Three patients who underwent CT imaging and were found to have no primary pouch pathology, and seven patients with known pouch pathology identifiable with 3D reconstruction including pouch strictures, megapouch, pouch volvulus, and twisted pouches underwent 3D virtual modeling; one normal and one twisted pouch were 3D printed. We discovered that 3D pouchography reliably identified staple lines (pouch body, anorectal circular and transverse, and tip of J), the relationship between staple lines, and variations in pouch morphology, and pouch pathology. CONCLUSIONS: Three-dimensional reconstruction of IPAA morphology is highly feasible using readily available technology. In our practice, we have found 3D pouchography to be an extremely useful adjunct to diagnose various mechanical pouch complications and improve planning for pouch salvage strategies. Given its ease of use and helpfulness in understanding the pouch structure and function, we have started to routinely integrate 3D pouchography into our clinical pouch referral practice. Further study is needed to formally assess to value of this technique to aid in the diagnosis of pouch pathology.

Transanal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcomes.

AIM: Restorative proctocolectomy with transabdominal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (abd-IPAA) has become the standard surgical treatment for medically refractory ulcerative colitis (UC). However, it requires a technically difficult distal anorectal dissection and anastomosis due to the bony confines of the deep pelvis. To address these challenges, the transanal IPAA approach (ta-IPAA) was developed. This novel approach may offer increased visibility and range of motion compared with abd-IPAA, although its postoperative benefits remain unclear. The aim of this work was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare and inform the frequency of postoperative outcomes between ta-IPAA and abd-IPAA for patients with UC. METHOD: Several databases were searched from inception until May 2022 for studies reporting postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing ta-IPAA. Reviewers, working independently and in duplicate, evaluated studies for inclusion and graded the risk of bias. Odds ratios (OR), mean differences (MD) and prevalence ratio (PR) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models. Sensitivity analysis was performed. RESULTS: Ten retrospective studies comprising 284 patients with ta-IPAA were included. Total mesorectal excision was performed in 61.8% of cases and close rectal dissection in 27.9%. There was no difference in the odds of Clavien-Dindo (CD) I-II complications, CD III-IV and anastomotic leak (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.27-3.40; OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.65-2.16; OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.58-3.23; respectively) between ta-IPAA and abd-IPAA. The ta-IPAA pooled CD I-II complication rate was 18% (95% CI 5%-35%) and for CD III-IV 10% (95% CI 5%-17%), and the anastomotic leak rate was 6% (95% CI 2%-10%). There were no deaths reported. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis compared the novel ta-IPAA procedure with abd-IPAA and found no difference in postoperative outcomes. While the need for randomized controlled trails and comparison of functional outcomes between both approaches remains, this evidence should assist colorectal surgeons to decide if ta-IPAA is a viable alternative.

Segmental Colectomy in Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND: Segmental colectomy in ulcerative colitis is performed in select patients who may be at increased risk for postoperative morbidity. OBJECTIVE: To identify ulcerative colitis patients who underwent segmental colectomy and assess their postoperative and long-term outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. SETTING: A tertiary-care inflammatory bowel disease center. PATIENTS: Ulcerative colitis patients who underwent surgery between 1995 and 2022. INTERVENTION: Segmental colectomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postoperative complications, early and late colitis, metachronous cancer development, completion proctocolectomy-free survival rates and stoma at follow-up. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients were included [20 (36.4%) female; 67.8 (57.4-77.1) years of age at surgery; body mass index 27.7 (24.2-31.1) kg/m2; median follow-up 37.3 months]. ASA score was III in 32 (58.2%) patients, 48 (87.3%) had at least one comorbidity, 48 (87.3%) had Mayo endoscopic subscore of 0-1. Patients underwent right hemicolectomy (28, 50.9%), sigmoidectomy (17, 30.9%), left hemicolectomy (6, 10.9%), low anterior resection (2, 3.6%), or a non-anatomic resection (2, 3.6%) for; endoscopically unresectable polyps (21, 38.2%), colorectal cancer (15, 27.3%), symptomatic diverticular disease (13, 23.6%), and stricture (6, 10.9%). Postoperative complications occurred in 16 (29.1%) patients [7 (12.7%) Clavien-Dindo Class III-V]. Early and late postoperative colitis rates were 9.1% and 14.5%, respectively. Metachronous cancer developed in 1 patient. 4 (7.3%) patients underwent subsequent completion proctocolectomy with ileostomy. Six (10.9%) patients had stoma at the follow-up. Two and 5-year completion proctocolectomy-free survival rates were 91% and 88%, respectively. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study, small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: Segmental colectomy in ulcerative colitis is associated with low postoperative complication rates, symptomatic early colitis and late colitis rates, metachronous cancer development and the need for subsequent completion proctocolectomy. Therefore, it can be safe to consider select patients, such as the elderly with quiescent colitis and other indications for colectomy. See Video Abstract.

Colosplenic fistula diagnosis and management: a case series and review of literature.

BACKGROUND: A colosplenic fistula (CsF) is an extremely rare complication. Its diagnosis and management remain poorly understood, owing to its infrequent incidence. Our objective was to systematically review the etiology, clinical features, diagnosis, management, and prognosis to help clinicians gain a better understanding of this unusual complication and provide aid if it is to be encountered. METHODS: A systematic review of studies reporting CsF diagnosis in Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Wiley Cochrane Library from 1946 to June 2022. Additionally, a retrospective review of four cases at our institution were included. Cases were evaluated for patient characteristics (age, sex, and comorbidities), CsF characteristics including causes, symptoms at presentation, diagnosis approach, management approach, pathology findings, intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, 30-day mortality, and prognosis were collected. RESULTS: Thirty patients with CsFs were analyzed, including four cases at our institution and 26 single-case reports. Most of the patients were male (70%), with a median age of 56 years. The most common etiologies were colonic lymphoma (30%) and colorectal carcinoma (17%). Computed tomography (CT) was commonly used for diagnosis (90%). Approximately 87% of patients underwent a surgical intervention, most commonly segmental resection (81%) of the affected colon and splenectomy (77%). Nineteen patients were initially managed surgically, and 12 patients were initially managed nonoperatively. However, 11 of the nonoperative patients ultimately required surgery due to unresolved symptoms. The rate of postoperative complications was (17%). Symptoms resolved with surgical intervention in 25 (83%) patients. Only one patient (3%) had had postoperative mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Our review of 30 cases worldwide is the largest in literature. CsFs are predominantly complications of neoplastic processes. CsF may be successfully and safely treated with splenectomy and resection of the affected colon, with a low rate of postoperative complications.

Perioperative outcomes of ileorectal anastomosis - an analysis of 823 patients.

AIM: Ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) following total abdominal colectomy (TAC) allows for resortation of bowel continuity but prior studies have reported rates of anastomotic leak (AL) to be as high as 23%. We aimed to report rates of AL and complications in a large cohort of patients undergoing IRA. We hypothesized that AL rates were lower than previously reported and that selective use of diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) is associated with decreased AL rates. METHOD: Patients undergoing TAC or end-ileostomy reversal with IRA, with or without DLI, between 1980 and 2021 were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional database and retrospectively analysed. Redo IRA cases were excluded. Short-term (30-day) surgical outcomes were collected using our database. AL was defined using a combination of imaging and, in the case of return to the operating room, intraoperative findings. RESULTS: Of 823 patients in the study cohort, DLI was performed in 27% and performed more frequently for constipation and inflammatory bowel disease. The overall AL rate was 3% (1% and 4% in those with and without DLI, respectively) and diversion was found to be protective against leak (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.08-0.94, p = 0.04). However, patients undergoing diversion had a higher overall rate of postoperative complications (51% vs. 36%, p < 0.001) including superficial wound infection, urinary tract infection, dehydration, blood transfusion and portomesenteric venous thrombosis (all p < 0.04). CONCLUSION: Our study represents the largest series of patients undergoing IRA reported to date and demonstrates an AL rate of 3%. While IRA appears to be a viable surgical option for diverse indications, our study underscores the importance of careful patient selection and thoughtful consideration of staging the anastomosis and temporary faecal diversion when necessary.

State of the Art: Pouch Surgery in the 21st Century.

BACKGROUND: An ileoanal pouch with IPAA is the preferred method to restore intestinal continuity in patients who require a total proctocolectomy. Pouch surgery has evolved during the past decades thanks to increased experience and research, changes in the medical management of patients who require an ileal pouch, and technological innovations. OBJECTIVE: To review the main changes in pouch surgery over the past 2 decades, with a focus on staging, minimally invasive and transanal approaches, pouch design, and anastomotic configuration. RESULTS: The decision on the staging approach depends on the patient's conditions, their indication for surgery, and the risk of anastomotic leak. A minimally invasive approach should be performed whenever feasible, but open surgery still has a role in this technically demanding operation. Transanal IPAA may be performed in experienced centers and may reduce conversion to open surgery in the hostile pelvis. The J-pouch is the easiest, fastest, and most commonly performed design, but other designs may be used when a J-pouch is not feasible. A stapled anastomosis without mucosectomy can be safely performed in the majority of cases, with a low incidence of rectal cuff neoplasia and better functional outcomes than handsewn. Finally, Crohn's disease is not an absolute contraindication to an ileoanal pouch, but pouch failure may be higher compared to other indications. CONCLUSIONS: Many technical nuances contribute to the success of an ileoanal pouch. The current standard of care is a laparoscopic J-pouch with double-stapled anastomosis, but this should not be seen as a dogma, and the optimal approach and design should be tailored to each patient. See video from symposium.

Diagnosis and treatment of primary ileal pouch leaks: a 27-year experience at a referral center.

BACKGROUND: Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is considered the preferred restorative surgical procedure for patients with ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis requiring proctocolectomy. Unfortunately, postoperative leaks remain a complication with potentially significant ramifications. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive description of the evaluation, management, and outcomes of leaks after primary IPAA procedures. METHODS: Between 1995 and 2022, a total of 4058 primary IPAA procedures were performed at Cleveland Clinic. From a prospectively maintained pouch registry, we retrospectively reviewed the data of 237 patients who presented to the pouch center for management. Of these, 114 (3%) had undergone the index IPAA procedure at our clinic (de novo cases), whereas 123 patients had their index IPAA performed elsewhere. Data were missing for 43 patients, resulting in a final cohort of 194 patients. RESULTS: Our cohort had an average age of 41 years (range, 16-76) at the time of leak diagnosis. Overall, 55.2% were males, average body mass index was 24.4 kg/m2, and pain was the most prevalent presenting symptom (61.8%), followed by fever (34%). Leaks were confirmed through diagnostic testing in 141 cases, whereas 27.3% were detected intraoperatively. The most common initial diagnoses were pelvic abscess (47.4%) and enteric fistulas (26.8%), including cutaneous (9.8%), vaginal (7.2%), and bladder fistulas (3.1%). By location, leaks occurred at the tip of the "J" (52.6%), at the pouch-anal anastomotic site (35%), and in the body of the pouch (12.4%). A nonoperative management approach was initially attempted in 49.5% of cases, including antibiotic therapy, drainage, endoclip, and endo-sponge, with a success rate of 18.5%. Surgery was eventually required in 81.4% of patients, including (1) sutured or stapled pouch repair (52.5%), with diversion performed in 87.9% of these cases either before or during the salvage surgery; (2) pouch excision with neo-IPAA (22.7%), including 9 patients from the first group; and (3) pouch disconnection, repair, and reanastomosis (9.3%). Pouch failure occurred in 8.4%, with either pouch excision (11.1%) or permanent diversion (4.5%). Ultimately, 12.4% of patients (24 of 194) required permanent diversion, with all necessitating pouch excision. In the 30-day follow-up after salvage surgery, short-term complications arose in 38.7% of patients. The most common complications observed were ileus, pelvic abscess/sepsis, and fever. CONCLUSION: Leaks after primary IPAA procedures represent an infrequent, yet challenging, complication. Despite attempts at nonoperative management, the success rate is limited. Salvage surgery is associated with a high pouch retention rate, underscoring its importance in the management of post-IPAA leaks.

Redo IPAA for long rectal cuff syndrome after ileoanal pouch for inflammatory bowel disease.

ABTRACT: BACKGROUND: When constructing an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA), the rectal cuff should ideally be 1-2 cm long to avoid subsequent complications. METHODS: We identified patients from our IBD center who underwent redo IPAA for a long rectal cuff. Long rectal cuff syndrome (LRCS) was defined as a symptomatic rectal cuff ≥ 4 cm. RESULTS: Forty patients met the inclusion criteria: 42.5% female, median age at redo surgery 42.5 years. The presentation was ulcerative proctitis in 77.5% of the cases and outlet obstruction in 22.5%. The index pouch was laparoscopically performed in 18 patients (45%). The median rectal cuff length was 6 cm. The pouch was repaired in 16 (40%) cases, whereas 24 (60%) required the creation of a neo-pouch. At the final pathology, the rectal cuff showed chronic active colitis in 38 (90%) cases. After a median follow-up of 34.5 (IQR 12-109) months, pouch failure occurred in 9 (22.5%) cases. The pouch survival rate was 78% at 3 years. Data on the quality of life were available for 11 (27.5%) patients at a median of 75 months after redo surgery. The median QoL score (0-1) was 0.7 (0.4-0.9). CONCLUSION: LRCS, a potentially avoidable complication, presents uniformly with symptoms of ulcerative proctitis or stricture. Redo IPAA was restorative for the majority.

Rediversion of the Failing Ileoanal Pouch: First Step in Pouch Salvage?

BACKGROUND: Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is a technically demanding procedure with many potential complications. Rediversion with an ileostomy is often the first step in pouch salvage; however, it may not be clear if an individual patient will undergo subsequent pouch salvage surgery. We aimed to describe the indications and short- and long-term outcomes of rediversion in our pouch registry. METHODS: We queried our institutional pouch registry for patients who underwent index 2- or 3-stage IPAA and subsequent rediversion at our institution between 1985 and 2022. Pouches constructed elsewhere, rediverted elsewhere, or those patients who underwent pouch salvage/excision without prior rediversion were excluded. Patients were selected for pouch salvage according to the surgeon's discretion. RESULTS: Overall, 177 patients (3.4% of 5207 index pouches) were rediverted. At index pouch, median patient age was 32 years and 50.8% were women. Diagnoses included ulcerative colitis (86.4%), indeterminate colitis (6.2%), familial adenomatous polyposis (4.0%), and others (3.4%). Median time from prior ileostomy closure to rediversion was 7.2 years. Indications for rediversion were inflammatory in 98 (55.4%) and noninflammatory in 79 (44.6%) patients. After rediversion, 52% underwent pouch salvage, 30% had no further surgery, and 18.1% underwent pouch excision. The 5-year pouch survival rates for inflammatory and noninflammatory indications were 71.5% and 94.5%, respectively (P = .02). CONCLUSION: Rediversion of ileoanal pouches is a safe initial strategy to manage failing pouches and is a useful first step in pouch salvage in many patients. Subsequent salvage surgery for noninflammatory indications had a significantly higher pouch salvage rate than those rediverted for inflammatory complications.

Rediversion with an ileostomy was a safe, useful first step in pouch salvage, and subsequent salvage surgery for noninflammatory indications had a significantly higher pouch salvage rate than those rediverted for inflammatory complications.

Third Time's the Charm? Indications and Outcomes for Redo-Redo IPAA.

BACKGROUND: Up to 20% to 40% cases of redo IPAA procedures will result in pouch failure. Whether to offer a second redo procedure to maintain intestinal continuity remains a controversial decision. OBJECTIVE: To report our institutional experience of second redo IPAA procedures. DESIGN: This was a retrospective review. Patient-reported outcomes were compared between patients undergoing second redo procedures and those undergoing first redo procedures using propensity score matching to balance the 2 cohorts. SETTINGS: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent second redo IPAA procedures between 2004 and 2021 were included in this study. INTERVENTIONS: Second redo IPAA. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pouch survival and patient-reported outcomes were measured using the Cleveland Global Quality of Life survey. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were included (65% women), 20 (87%) with an index diagnosis of ulcerative colitis and 3 (13%) with indeterminate colitis. The final diagnosis was changed to Crohn's disease in 8 (35%) cases. The indication for pouch salvage was the same for the first and second redo procedures in 21 (91%) cases: 20 (87%) patients had both redo IPAAs for septic complications. After a median follow-up of 39 months (interquartile range, 18.5-95.5 months), pouch failure occurred in 8 (30%) cases (7 cases due to sepsis, of whom 3 never had their stoma closed, and 1 case due to poor function); all patients who experienced pouch failure underwent the second redo procedure due to septic complications. Overall pouch survival at 3 years was 76%: 62.5% in patients with a final diagnosis of Crohn's disease versus 82.5% in patients with ulcerative/indeterminate colitis ( p = 0.09). Overall quality-of-life score (0-1) was 0.6 (0.5-0.8). Quality of life and functional outcomes were comparable between first and second redo procedures, except incontinence, which was higher in second redo procedures. LIMITATIONS: Single-center retrospective review. CONCLUSIONS: A second pouch salvage procedure may be offered with acceptable outcomes to selected patients with high motivation to keep intestinal continuity. See Video Abstract . LA TERCERA ES LA VENCIDA INDICACIONES Y RESULTADOS DE LA RERECONFECCION DE LA ANASTOMOSIS ANAL CON BOLSA ILEAL: ANTECEDENTES:Hasta un 20-40% de los casos de rehacer anastomosis anal con bolsa ileal (IPAA) resultarán en falla de la bolsa. La posibilidad de ofrecer un segundo procedimiento para mantener la continuidad intestinal sigue siendo una decisión controvertida.OBJETIVO:Reportar nuestra experiencia institucional de una segunda re-confección de la anastomosis anal con bolsa ileal.DISEÑO:Revisión retrospectiva; los resultados informados por los pacientes se compararon entre los pacientes que se sometieron a una segunda re-confeccion con los de los pacientes que se sometieron a una la primera re-confeccion utilizando el puntaje de propensión para equilibrar las dos cohortes.AJUSTES ENTORNO CLINICO:Centro de referencia terciario.PACIENTES:Pacientes que se sometieron a una segunda re-confeccion de de la anastomosis anal con bolsa ileal entre 2004 y 2021.INTERVENCIONES:Segunda re-confeccion de la anastomosis anal con bolsa ileal.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Supervivencia de la bolsa, resultados informados por los pacientes medidos mediante la encuesta Cleveland Global Quality of Life.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron veintitrés pacientes (65% mujeres), 20 (87%) con diagnóstico inicial de colitis ulcerosa y 3 (13%) con colitis indeterminada. El diagnóstico final se cambió a enfermedad de Crohn en ocho (35%) casos. La indicación para el rescate de la bolsa fue la misma para la primera y segunda re-confeccion en 21 (91%) casos: 20 (87%) pacientes tuvieron ambas re-confecciones de la anastomosis anal con bolsa ileal por complicaciones sépticas. Después de una mediana de seguimiento de 39 meses (RIC 18,5 - 95,5), se produjo falla de la bolsa en 8 (30%) casos (7 casos debido a sepsis, de los cuales 3 nunca cerraron el estoma y 1 caso debido a una mala función); todos los pacientes que experimentaron falla de la bolsa se sometieron a una segunda re-confeccion debido a complicaciones sépticas. La supervivencia global de la bolsa a los 3 años fue del 76%: 62,5% en pacientes con diagnóstico final de enfermedad de Crohn, versus 82,5% en colitis ulcerativa/indeterminada ( p = 0,09). La puntuación general de calidad de vida (0 -1) fue 0,6 (0,5 - 0,8). La calidad de vida y los resultados funcionales fueron comparables entre la primera y la segunda re-confeccion, excepto la incontinencia, que fue mayor en la segunda re-confeccion.LIMITACIONES:Revisión retrospectiva de un solo centro.CONCLUSIONES:Se puede ofrecer un segundo procedimiento de rescate de la bolsa con resultados aceptables a pacientes seleccionados con alta motivación para mantener la continuidad intestinal. (Traducción- Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon ).

Ventral mesh rectopexy for recurrent rectal prolapse after Altemeier perineal proctosigmoidectomy: feasibility and outcomes.

PURPOSE: Recurrence of rectal prolapse following the Altemeier procedure is reported with rates up to 40%. The optimal surgical management of recurrences has limited data available. Ventral mesh rectopexy (VMR) is a favored procedure for primary rectal prolapse, but its role in managing recurrences after Altemeier is unclear. VMR for recurrent prolapse involves implanting the mesh on the colon, which has a thinner wall, more active peristalsis, no mesorectum, less peritoneum available for covering the mesh, and potential diverticula. These factors can affect mesh-related complications such as erosion, migration, or infection. This study assessed the feasibility and perioperative outcomes of VMR for recurrent rectal prolapse after the Altemeier procedure. METHODS: We queried our prospectively maintained database between 01/01/2008 and 06/30/2022 for patients who had experienced a recurrence of full-thickness rectal prolapse following Altemeier's perineal proctosigmoidectomy and subsequently underwent ventral mesh rectopexy. RESULTS: Ten women with a median age of 67 years (range 61) and a median BMI of 27.8 kg/m2 (range 9) were included. Five (50%) had only one Altemeier, and five (50%) had multiple rectal prolapse surgeries, including Altemeier before VMR. No mesh-related complications occurred during a 65-month (range 165) median follow-up period. Three patients (30%) experienced minor postoperative complications unrelated to the mesh. Long-term complications were chronic abdominal pain and incisional hernia in one patient, respectively. One out of five (20%) patients with only one previous prolapse repair had a recurrence, while all patients (100%) with multiple prior repairs recurred. CONCLUSION: Mesh implantation on the colon is possible without adverse reactions. However, high recurrence rates in patients with multiple previous surgeries raise doubts about using VMR for secondary or tertiary recurrences.

Tofacitinib Is Associated With Increased Risk of Postoperative Venous Thromboembolism in Patients With Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND: In 2019, the Food and Drug Administration issued a black box warning for increased risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with rheumatoid arthritis exposed to tofacitinib. There are limited data regarding postoperative venous thromboembolism risk in patients with ulcerative colitis exposed to tofacitinib. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether preoperative exposure to tofacitinib is associated with increased odds of postoperative venous thromboembolism. DESIGN: Retrospective review. SETTINGS: Tertiary academic medical center. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients exposed to tofacitinib within 4 weeks before total abdominal colectomy or total proctocolectomy, with or without ileostomy, from 2014 to 2021, matched 1:2 for tofacitinib exposure or no exposure. INTERVENTION: Tofacitinib exposure versus no exposure. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Ninety-day postoperative venous thromboembolism rate. RESULTS: Forty-two patients with tofacitinib exposure and 84 case-matched patients without tofacitinib exposure underwent surgery for medically refractory ulcerative colitis. Nine (22.0%) tofacitinib-exposed patients and 7 (8.5%) unexposed patients were diagnosed with venous thromboembolism within 90 days of surgery. In univariate logistic regression, patients exposed to tofacitinib had 3.01 times increased odds of developing venous thromboembolism within 90 days after surgery compared to unexposed patients ( p = 0.04; 95% CI, 1.03-8.79). Other venous thromboembolism risk factors were not significantly associated with venous thromboembolisms. Venous thromboembolisms in both groups were most commonly portomesenteric vein thromboses (66.7% in the tofacitinib-exposed group and 42.9% in the unexposed group) and were diagnosed at a mean of 23.2 days (range, 3-90 days) postoperatively in the tofacitinib-exposed group and 7.9 days (1-19 days) in the unexposed group. There were no statistically significant differences in location or timing between the 2 groups. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective nature of the study and associated biases. Reliance on clinically diagnosed venous thromboembolisms may underreport the true incidence rate. CONCLUSIONS: Tofacitinib exposure before surgery for medically refractory ulcerative colitis is associated with 3 times increased odds of venous thromboembolism compared with patients without tofacitinib exposure. See Video Abstract . TOFACITINIB SE ASOCIA CON UN MAYOR RIESGO DE TROMBOEMBOLISMO VENOSO POSTOPERATORIO EN PACIENTES CON COLITIS ULCEROSA: ANTECEDENTES:En 2019, la FDA emitió una advertencia de recuadro negro sobre un mayor riesgo de tromboembolismo venoso en pacientes con artritis reumatoide expuestos a tofacitinib. Hay datos limitados sobre el riesgo de tromboembolismo venoso postoperatorio en pacientes con colitis ulcerosa expuestos a tofacitinib.OBJETIVO:Evaluar si la exposición preoperatoria a tofacitinib se asocia con mayores probabilidades de tromboembolismo venoso postoperatorio.DISEÑO:Revisión retrospectiva.LUGARES:Centro médico académico terciario.PACIENTES:Pacientes consecutivos expuestos a tofacitinib dentro de las 4 semanas previas a la colectomía abdominal total o proctocolectomía total, con o sin ileostomía, entre 2014 y 2021, emparejados 1:2 para exposición a tofacitinib o ninguna exposición.INTERVENCIÓN(S):Exposición a tofacitinib versus ninguna exposición.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Tasa de tromboembolismo venoso posoperatorio a los 90 días.RESULTADOS:Cuarenta y dos pacientes con exposición a tofacitinib y 84 pacientes de casos similares sin exposición a tofacitinib se sometieron a cirugía por colitis ulcerosa médicamente refractaria. Nueve (22,0%) pacientes expuestos a tofacitinib y 7 (8,5%) pacientes no expuestos fueron diagnosticados con tromboembolismo venoso dentro de los 90 días posteriores a la cirugía. En la regresión logística univariada, los pacientes expuestos a tofacitinib tuvieron 3,01 veces más probabilidades de desarrollar un tromboembolismo venoso dentro de los 90 días posteriores a la cirugía en comparación con los no expuestos ( p = 0,04, IC del 95 %: 1,03-8,79). Otros factores de riesgo de tromboembolismo venoso no se asociaron significativamente con el tromboembolismo venoso. Los tromboembolismos venosos en ambos grupos fueron más comúnmente trombosis de la vena portomesentérica (66,7% en los expuestos a tofacitinib y 42,9% en los no expuestos) y se diagnosticaron en una media de 23,2 días (rango, 3-90 días) después de la operación en los expuestos a tofacitinib y 7,9 días. (1-19 días) en los grupos no expuestos, respectivamente. No hubo diferencias estadísticamente significativas en la ubicación o el momento entre los dos grupos.LIMITACIONES:Carácter retrospectivo del estudio y sesgos asociados. La dependencia de tromboembolismos venosos diagnosticados clínicamente puede subestimar la tasa de incidencia real.CONCLUSIONES:La exposición a tofacitinib antes de la cirugía para la colitis ulcerosa médicamente refractaria se asocia con probabilidades 3 veces mayores de tromboembolismo venoso en comparación con los pacientes sin exposición a tofacitinib. (Traducción-Dr. Mauricio Santamaria ).