Contemporary Assessment of Adhesiolysis and Resection for Adhesive Small Bowel Obstruction in the State of New York.

BACKGROUND: Adhesive small bowel obstruction (aSBO) is a common surgical problem, with some advocating for a more aggressive operative approach to avoid recurrence. Contemporary outcomes in a real-world setting were examined. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study was performed using the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative database to identify adults admitted with aSBO, 2016-2020. Patients were stratified by the presence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and cancer history. Diagnoses usually requiring resection were excluded. Patients were categorized into four groups: non-operative, adhesiolysis, resection, and 'other' procedures. In-hospital mortality, major complications, and odds of undergoing resection were compared. RESULTS: 58,976 patients were included. 50,000 (84.8%) underwent non-operative management. Adhesiolysis was the most common procedure performed (n = 4,990, 8.46%), followed by resection (n = 3,078, 5.22%). In-hospital mortality in the lysis and resection groups was 2.2% and 5.9% respectively. Non-IBD patients undergoing operation on the day of admission required intestinal resection 29.9% of the time. Adjusted odds of resection were highest for those with a prior aSBO episode (OR 1.29 95%CI 1.11-1.49), delay to operation ≥3 days (OR1.78 95%CI 1.58-1.99), and non-New York City (NYC) residents being treated at NYC hospitals (OR1.57 95%CI 1.19-2.07). CONCLUSION: Adhesiolysis is currently the most common surgery for aSBO, however nearly one-third of patients will undergo a more extensive procedure, with an increased risk of mortality. Innovative therapies are needed to reduce the risk of resection.

Creating the Future of (Endoluminal) GI Interventions.

Major innovation into how we pursue diagnosis and therapies for gastrointestinal (GI) diseases is urgently needed to seek better, less invasive, and less costly innovations in diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in the GI tract. Learning from prior paradigm shifts in cardiac and vascular we present here several initial steps we have undertaken to follow the endoluminal path, using advanced imaging methods, including endoscopy, and data management with avoidance of entry into a body cavity when possible. We will review the benefit and ease of incorporating routine fluoroscopy with endoscopy to improve safety and efficiency. We describe the development of "hybrid" procedure rooms for GI interventions and rationale for their use. We also emphasize the importance of collaborating with interventional radiologists, software engineers, and data specialists. We predict major improvement in outcomes in both diagnosis and treatment will follow.

Use of a novel endoscopic overtube with bilateral tool channels for endoscopic resection of experimental lesions and repair of intestinal defects in the right colon: preclinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic tumor resection and intestinal defect repair are technically challenging leading to invasive surgery and colectomy performed for resection of benign polyps. In this study, we evaluated the use of an endoscopic overtube with bilateral tool channels for these procedures. METHODS: Using a fresh porcine colorectum in a 3D ex vivo model, 3 cm lesions at the posterior wall of the transverse colon were removed by two different techniques: standard endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) technique (STD, n = 12) and ESD using the overtube with an endoscopic snare and grasper through the bilateral channels (OT, n = 12). Procedure times and the number of muscular injuries were evaluated. Using the same model, 5-10 mm full-thickness perforations within a 3 cm mucosal defect at the posterior wall of the transverse colon were closed by two different techniques: standard endoscopic closure technique (STD, n = 12) and endoscopic closure using the overtube with two graspers (OT, n = 12). The outcomes measured included bursting pressure and the number of endoscopic clips used for closure. RESULTS: Endoscopic resection of lesions was performed by the OT group in a significantly shorter total procedure time (STD vs. OT = median 38.9 min vs. 17.3, p < 0.001) and with fewer muscular injuries (median 0 vs. 2, p = 0.002), compared with the STD group. After repair of intestinal defects, the OT group showed higher median bursting pressures (STD vs. OT = 11.2 mmHg vs. 57.1, p = 0.008) despite using fewer clips (median 13 vs. 10, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates a novel traction technique with an endoscopic overtube using multiple instruments to remove lesions and repair intestinal defects in the colon more effectively. This endoscopic platform could provide a safe alternative to invasive surgical treatment.

A pilot randomized controlled trial comparing THUNDERBEAT to the Maryland LigaSure energy device in laparoscopic left colon surgery.

BACKGROUND: The THUNDERBEAT is a multi-functional energy device which delivers both ultrasonic and bipolar energy, but there are no randomized trials which can provide more rigorous evaluation of the clinical performance of THUNDERBEAT compared to other energy-based devices in colorectal surgery. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical performance of THUNDERBEAT energy device to Maryland LigaSure in patients undergoing left laparoscopic colectomy. METHODS: Prospective randomized trial with two groups: Group 1 THUNDERBEAT and Group 2 LigaSure in a single university hospital. 60 Subjects, male and female, of age 18 years and above undergoing left colectomy for cancer or diverticulitis were included. The primary outcome was dissection time to specimen removal (DTSR) measured in minutes from the start of colon mobilization to specimen removal from the abdominal cavity. Versatility (composite of five variables) was measured by a score system from 1 to 5 (1 being worst and 5 the best), and adjusted/weighted by coefficient of importance with distribution of the importance as follow: hemostasis 0.275, sealing 0.275, cutting 0.2, dissection 0.15, and tissue manipulation 0.1. Other variables were: dryness of surgical field, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and mortality. Follow-up time was 30 days. RESULTS: 60 Patients completed surgery, 31 in Group 1 and 29 in Group 2. There was no difference in the DTSR between the groups, 91 min vs. 77 min (p = 0.214). THUNDERBEAT showed significantly higher score in dissecting and tissue manipulation in segment 3 (omental dissection), and in overall versatility score (p = 0.007) as well as versatility score in Segment 2 (retroperitoneal dissection p = 0.040) and Segment 3 (p = 0.040). No other differences were noted between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both energy devices can be employed effectively and safely in dividing soft tissue and sealing mesenteric blood vessels during laparoscopic left colon surgery, with THUNDERBEAT demonstrating some advantages over LigaSure during omental dissection and tissue manipulation. CLINICALTRIAL: gov # NCT02628093.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection of large polyps in the right colon using an endoscopic snare with a double-balloon endolumenal interventional platform: an ex vivo study in a porcine colorectal model.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a challenging procedure for the removal of colorectal tumors, especially tumors located in the right colon. The use of traction could make this procedure technically easier and reduce procedure times and complication rates. In this study, we demonstrated the feasibility and utility of a traction technique utilizing an endoscopic snare through an overtube, a double-balloon endolumenal interventional platform (DEIP) in a porcine colorectal model. METHODS: A total of 120 procedures were performed using three different techniques: standard ESD technique (STD), ESD with DEIP (DEIP alone), and ESD with DEIP and a snare (DEIP + Snare). The snare was passed inside the overtube and used as a grasper on the tissue to provide traction. Lesions 3 or 4 cm in diameter were removed with a 5 mm margin from the anterior and posterior walls of the proximal Transverse Colon, the Hepatic Flexure, and the posterior wall of the Cecum. The outcomes measured included procedure times and the number of muscularis propria injuries. RESULTS: The DEIP + Snare group showed significantly shorter total procedure and submucosal dissection times for lesions in all locations (median 28.1 min (DEIP + Snare, n = 32) vs 39.8 (STD, n = 32) vs 39.7 (DEIP alone, n = 32); 7.5 min vs 25.3 vs 25.1) and had fewer muscularis propria injuries (median 0 [range 0-2] vs 2 [0-7] vs 1 [0-6]) than the two other groups. Larger lesions (4 cm) were successfully removed by regrasping the tissue in DEIP + Snare group, which showed significantly shorter total procedure time [31.4 min (DEIP + Snare, n = 8) vs 40.1 (STD, n = 8) vs 45.6 (DEIP alone, n = 8)] and submucosal dissection time (12.3 min vs 27.6 vs 29.1) than the two other groups. CONCLUSIONS: ESD traction technique with an endolumenal platform and snare enables faster removal of large polyps in the right colon with fewer injuries than standard methods of ESD.

Correction to: Facilitating endoscopic submucosal dissection: double balloon endolumenal platform significantly improves dissection time compared with conventional technique (with video).

Gerd Silberhumer's name was misspelled in the original publication; it is correct as displayed here.

Facilitating endoscopic submucosal dissection: double balloon endolumenal platform significantly improves dissection time compared with conventional technique (with video).

BACKGROUND: Flexible endoscopes ability to manipulate the intestinal environment is limited. As a result, complex endolumenal procedures are often technically demanding and result in long procedure times, impacting institutional resources. Single- and double-balloon add-on endoscopic devices have been employed throughout the GI tract to facilitate tissue control e.g., small bowel enteroscopy, with recent reports suggesting a possible colonic utility for complex procedures e.g., ESD. Our objective was to objectively analyze the efficacy of a new double-balloon device in performing ESD. METHODS: Ex vivo-12 simulated colonic lesions were created in porcine rectum using a standard 40 mm diameter template. Two categories were evaluated, standard cap technique ESD and double-balloon assisted ESD with retraction (ESD-R). Cases were performed sequentially. In vivo-Six, 40 mm lesion ESD-R's were performed in a porcine model. The primary outcomes of this study were total procedure and dissection times. RESULTS: In ex vivo studies, the median total procedure time with the double-balloon platform was significantly shorter than the traditional ESD technique (29 ± 18 vs. 57 ± 21 min, p = 0.03). In the in vivo studies, lesions were successfully removed in a mean time of 48 min, with a dissection time of 20 min with no significant complications. Balloon-clip retraction and specimen retrieval capabilities were used in all double-balloon assisted cases. After 6 cases, times were significantly shorter (ex vivo 47 vs. 17 min; in vivo 57 vs. 27 min). CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated the development of a unique technical ESD method facilitated by a new double-balloon device. Ex and in vivo investigation demonstrated superiority of ESD-R over the conventional ex vivo method. The DB device provided increased stability, improved visualization and tissue traction, which significantly reduced dissection time. Such an approach may increase safety, improve patient outcomes, and may prevent unnecessary surgeries for benign conditions.

Surgeon Annual and Cumulative Volumes Predict Early Postoperative Outcomes after Rectal Cancer Resection.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if 5-year surgeon cumulative and annual volumes predict improved early postoperative outcomes in patients with rectal cancer. BACKGROUND: Operative experience has been shown to effect surgical outcomes. The differential role of cumulative versus annual volume has not yet been explored for rectal surgery. METHODS: The Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database was used to capture patients undergoing surgery in New York State from 2000 to 2013. A population-based sample of patients undergoing major rectal or rectosigmoid resection as their principal procedure during hospitalization between 2000 and 2013 were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification procedure codes. Surgeons were identified using a unique physician number from 1995 to 2013. RESULTS: The percentage of surgeries performed by high cumulative/high annual (HC/HA) surgeons increased from 38.3% to 58.4% (P < 0.01) with a simultaneous decrease in that performed by low cumulative/low annual (LC/LA) surgeons (52.5% to 29.8%, P < 0.01). HC/HA volume surgeons had a significantly lower rate of surgical complications (odd ratio = 0.71, 95% confidence interval = 0.60-0.83, P < 0.05) as compared with LC/LA volume surgeons. There was no significant difference in rates of anastomotic leak, nonroutine discharges or readmission among all four groups. CONCLUSIONS: The best early postoperative surgical outcomes are achieved in centers where there are high cumulative and high annual volume surgeons caring for these patients. This suggests the need for specialized designation of rectal cancer centers to support ongoing regionalization of care.

Evaluation of Trends in the Use of InterStim for Fecal Incontinence.

BACKGROUND: Fecal incontinence (FI) represents a large source of morbidity and is a challenging clinical problem to manage. InterStim was approved to treat FI in 2011. Little is known about its adoption. We sought to characterize patterns of use of Interstim since Food and Drug Administration approval for FI. METHODS: The New York State SPARCS database was used to evaluate InterStim use for FI from 2011 to 2014. The primary endpoint was the number of successful implantations of InterStim. Secondary endpoints included device removal, median time to removal of device, 90-day infection rates, and percentage of procedures performed by surgeon specialty and geographic location. RESULTS: A total of 369 patients with FI underwent "Stage 1" of InterStim from 2011 to 2014. A total of 302 patients underwent "Stage 2," yielding a trial period failure rate of 18.2%. The majority of patients who underwent successful implantation were female (87.7%) and White (78.8%). Twenty-nine patients underwent device removal after a median duration of 147 days. Estimated risk of removal at median follow-up of 2 years was 11.8%. Colorectal surgeons comprised 51.1% of all providers followed by gynecologic (24.4%) and urologic surgeons (17.8%). A total of 71.7% of providers performed <5 procedures, while 3 of the highest volume providers performed 50.7% of all procedures. CONCLUSIONS: InterStim for FI has been used by a wide variety of providers in New York State although only a few high-volume providers have performed the majority of procedures. White, female patients with Medicare are the most common recipients of InterStim. Further work must be done to develop strategies for improving access to this technology and to determine whether volume relates to outcomes.

Comparison of Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Colectomies Using a Large National Database: Outcomes and Trends Related to Surgery Center Volume.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that high-volume centers and laparoscopic techniques improve outcomes of colectomy. These evidence-based measures have been slow to be accepted, and current trends are unknown. In addition, the current rates and outcomes of robotic surgery are unknown. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine current national trends in the use of minimally invasive surgery and to evaluate hospital volume trends over time. DESIGN: This was a retrospective study. SETTINGS: This study was conducted in a tertiary referral hospital. PATIENTS: Using the National Inpatient Sample, we evaluated trends in patients undergoing elective open, laparoscopic, and robotic colectomies from 2009 to 2012. Patient and institutional characteristics were evaluated and outcomes compared between groups using multivariate hierarchical-logistic regression and nonparametric tests. The National Inpatient Sample includes patient and hospital demographics, admission and treating diagnoses, inpatient procedures, in-hospital mortality, length of hospital stay, hospital charges, and discharge status. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In-hospital mortality and postoperative complications of surgery were measured. RESULTS: A total of 509,029 patients underwent elective colectomy from 2009 to 2012. Of those 266,263 (52.3%) were open, 235,080 (46.2%) laparoscopic, and 7686 (1.5%) robotic colectomies. The majority of minimal access surgery is still being performed at high-volume compared with low-volume centers (37.5% vs 28.0% and 44.0% vs 23.0%; p < 0.001). A total of 36% of colectomies were for cancer. The number of robotic colectomies has quadrupled from 702 in 2009 to 3390 (1.1%) in 2012. After adjustment, the rate of iatrogenic complications was higher for robotic surgery (OR = 1.73 (95% CI, 1.20-2.47)), and the median cost of robotic surgery was higher, at $15,649 (interquartile range, $11,840-$20,183) vs $12,071 (interquartile range, $9338-$16,203; p < 0.001 for laparoscopic). LIMITATIONS: This study may be limited by selection bias by surgeons regarding the choice of patient management. In addition, there are limitations in the measures of disease severity and, because the database relies on billing codes, there may be inaccuracies such as underreporting. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that the majority of colectomies in the United States are still performed open, although rates of laparoscopy continue to increase. There is a trend toward increased volume of laparoscopic procedures at specialty centers. The role of robotics is still being defined, in light of higher cost, lack of clinical benefit, and increased iatrogenic complications, albeit comparable overall complications, as compared with laparoscopic colectomy.

Dynamic Article: Full-Thickness Excision for Benign Colon Polyps Using Combined Endoscopic Laparoscopic Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Benign colon polyps are commonly encountered but may not always be amenable to endoscopic excision because of their size, shape, location, or scarring from previous attempts. The addition of laparoscopy allows a greater degree of bowel manipulation, but the current technique is still limited when encountering a polyp with inadequate lifting attributed to polyp morphology or scarring. We describe an extension to the existing combined endoscopic laparoscopic surgery technique using a full-thickness approach to increase polyp maneuverability and local excision of difficult but benign polyps. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to report the technical details and preliminary results of a new approach for full-thickness excision of difficult colon polyps, combined endoscopic laparoscopic surgery full-thickness excision. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective review of our experience from December 2013 to May 2015. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a single academic institution. PATIENTS: All of the patients had previous incomplete colonoscopic polypectomy performed at other institutions. Patients were selected for our technique if the polyp had a benign appearance but was unable to be resected by traditional endoscopic or combined endoscopic laparoscopic surgery methods because of polyp morphology or scarring from previous biopsies. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The safety and feasibility of this procedure were measured. RESULTS: Three patients underwent combined endoscopic laparoscopic surgery-full-thickness excision for difficult colon polyps. There were no intraoperative or postoperative complications. The length of stay was 1 day for all of the patients. All 3 of the patients had benign final pathology. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by the small number of patients in a single institution. CONCLUSIONS: Full-thickness excision for benign colon polyps using combined endoscopic laparoscopic surgery is safe and feasible. Using this technique, difficult polyps not amenable to traditional endoscopic approaches can be removed and colectomy may be avoided.

Minimally invasive surgery and sphincter preservation in rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: National adoption of sphincter-preserving surgery (SPS) and minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has not been well documented. We examined national trends in use of SPS and MIS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample was used to evaluate open, laparoscopic, and robotic low anterior resection (LAR) or abdominoperineal resection (APR) for patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery from 2009 to 2011. Trends in SPS and MIS were stratified by hospital volume. Propensity score matching was used. RESULTS: A total of 24,999 (62.0%) patients underwent LAR, and 15,288 (38.0%) underwent APR from 2009 to 2011. A total of 22,310 (89.2%) LARs were open and 2689 (10.8%) MIS. A total of 11,600 (75.9%) APRs were open and 3688 (24.1%) MIS. Most procedures were at high-volume centers. In propensity-matched analysis, length of stay for LAR was longer in open surgery (6 versus 5 d; P = 0.01); in APR, MIS patients were less likely to have wound, infectious, urinary, and gastrointestinal complications, and length of stay was shorter (6 versus 8 d; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: SPS and MIS rates have increased nationally, especially in high-volume centers. In addition, the perioperative benefits seen in randomized clinical trials are maintained in a national database. Further studies should focus on understanding differences in survival and oncologic outcomes with MIS techniques.

Avoiding colorectal resection for polyps: is CELS the best method?

BACKGROUND: A significant proportion of colonic polyps are unsuitable for endoscopic removal. A combined endoscopic and laparoscopic approach is an alternative to conventional polypectomy or resection. In this review, we set out to determine whether avoiding segmental resection for benign colonic polyps was a viable option through combined endolaparoscopic surgery (CELS). We examined the methods and classification criteria different centers employed in their reporting. Finally, we determined whether CELS and procedures methodically similar should be considered as the standard of care today. METHODS: A systematic review was performed reporting the outcomes of CELS for benign colorectal polyps. Main outcomes measured included operating time, length of hospital stay and postoperative complications. The CELS data from reports with a larger number of polyps examined were compared to data from representative EMR, ESD and laparoscopic colectomy literature. RESULTS: Eighteen eligible studies with 532 patients were included. We identified three different CELS techniques: EMR, ESD and full-thickness excision. The operative time for CELS reported in 12 studies varied from 45 to 205 min. The successful endoscopic resection rate ranged from 58 to 100%. Conversion to open surgery was reported in <5%. The length of hospital stay varied from 0 to 7 days. Overall postoperative complications ranged from 0 to 18%. The reports of CELS with more than 20 polyps presented 74-91% successful rate. In comparison with laparoscopic group, CELS groups showed shorter operation time (92-145 vs 125-199 min) and length of hospital stay (1-1.5 vs 4-11 days). CONCLUSIONS: CELS and similar procedures are viable options for intestinal polyps removal. Moving forward, we suggest methods to standardize CELS procedure reporting. The reported outcomes of CELS indicate that it should be seen as a viable alternative to segmental resection when endoscopic methods alone do not suffice.

Driving Surgical Quality Using Operative Video.

Recent evidence suggests surgical quality may be demonstrated and evaluated using video capture during surgery. Operative video documentation may also aid in quality improvement initiatives. We discuss how operative video has the potential to help improve patient outcomes and increase professional accountability, patient safety, and surgical quality.

Disparities in the Use of Sacral Neuromodulation among Medicare Beneficiaries.

PURPOSE: Sacral neuromodulation with the InterStim® has been done to treat urinary and bowel control. There are limited data in the literature on use trends of sacral neuromodulation. We explored disparities in use among Medicare beneficiaries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We queried a 5% national random sample of Medicare claims for 2001, 2004, 2007 and 2010. All patients with an ICD-9 diagnosis code representing a potential urological indication for sacral neuromodulation were included. Patients who underwent device implantation were identified using CPT-4 codes. Statistical analysis was done with the chi-square and Fisher tests, and multivariate logistic regression using software. RESULTS: A total of 2,322,060 patients were identified with a diagnosis that could potentially be treated with sacral neuromodulation. During the 10-year study period the percent of these patients who ultimately underwent implantation increased from 0.03% to 0.91% (p <0.0001) for a total of 13,360 (0.58%). On logistic regression analysis women (OR 3.85, p <0.0001) and patients younger than 65 years (OR 1.00 vs 0.29 to 0.39, p <0.0001) were more likely to be treated. Minority patients (OR 0.38, p <0.0001) and those living in the western United States (OR 0.52, p <0.0001) were less likely to receive treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Sacral neuromodulation use significantly increased among Medicare beneficiaries in a 10-year period. Patients were more likely to be treated with sacral neuromodulation if they were female, white, younger (younger than 65 years) and living outside the western United States.

Laparoscopic resection of t4 colon cancers: is it feasible?

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic surgical treatment of T4 cancers remains a concern that is mostly associated with technical feasibility, high conversion rate, inadequate oncologic clearance, and surgical outcome. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this work was to evaluate the short- and long-term clinical and oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic and open surgeries for T4 colon cancers. DESIGN: This was a retrospective study of patients with T4 colon cancer without metastasis (M0) who had laparoscopic or open surgery from 2003 to 2011. SETTING: The study was conducted at a single institution. PATIENTS: A total of 83 patients with pT4 colon cancer were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: R0 resection rate, morbidity and mortality within 30 postoperative days, overall survival, and disease-free survival were measured. RESULTS: Laparoscopic surgery was performed on 61 and open surgery on 22 patients. The groups were similar in overall staging (p = 0.461), with 35 (42%) of the patients at stage 2 and 48 (58%) at stage 3. A complete R0 resection was achieved in 61 (100%) of the patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery and in 21 (96%) of the patients who underwent open surgery (p = 0.265). The average number of lymph nodes harvested was 21 in the laparoscopic group and 24 in the open group (p = 0.202). Thirty-day morbidity rate was similar between the groups (p = 0.467), and the mortality rate was 0. The length of hospital and postsurgical stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.002 and p = 0.008). The 3-year overall survival rates between the groups were 82% (range, 71%-93%) for patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery and 81% (range, 61%-100%) for those who underwent open surgery (p = 0.525), and disease-free survival was 67% (range, 54%-79%) for laparoscopic surgery and 64% (range, 43%-86%) for open surgery (p = 0.848). The follow-up time was 40 ± 25 in months in the laparoscopic group and 34 ± 26 months in the open surgery group (p = 0.325). LIMITATIONS: This was a retrospective study at a single institution. CONCLUSIONS: The study shows that laparoscopic surgery is feasible in T4 colon cancers. With comparable clinical and oncologic outcomes, this study suggests that laparoscopy may be considered as an alternative approach for T4 colon cancers with the advantage of faster recovery (see Video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/DCR/A156).

Adenocarcinoma of the ileal pouch mucosa: case report and literature review.

PURPOSE: Cancers developing near the site of the ileoanal pouch anastomosis (IPAA) have been reported, but uncommonly in the ileal pouch mucosa itself. We present a recently encountered case of ileal pouch cancer and review the literature to examine the prevalence, risk factors, and natural history of ileal pouch adenocarcinoma as well as pouch surveillance. METHODS: A chart review of the case from our institution was conducted, and a PubMed search was undertaken for articles describing adenocarcinoma arising from the ileal pouch mucosa. RESULTS: Twenty articles containing 26 cases were reviewed in addition to our described case. More than half were reported in the last decade. Only three cases were definitively stage 1. All seven patients who underwent regular surveillance were diagnosed with stage 1 or 2 disease. Seventeen patients had neoplasia in their original proctocolectomy specimen and six did not. The mean time from pouch creation to adenocarcinoma was 8.9 years. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of developing ileal pouch mucosa adenocarcinoma appears low. However, increasing reports of these cancers are concerning as most patients present with advanced disease after many years. Patients with a previous history of dysplasia/cancer may be at increased risk. We believe surveillance after IPAA should include the anal transition zone and the ileal pouch mucosa. The establishment of expert consensus guidelines on pouch surveillance should be considered in the near future.