Does laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis reduce infertility compared with open approach?

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the association of the mode of surgery on female fertility after restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. METHODS: All female patients aged 18 to 44 years who underwent restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis, familial adenomatous polyposis, or Crohn's disease at the Cleveland Clinic Ohio or the Cleveland Clinic Florida from 1983 to 2012 were sent a standardized fertility questionnaire. Infertility was defined as lack of pregnancy after 1 year of unprotected sexual intercourse. Patients who had attempted to conceive after restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis were compared based on the surgical approach: laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis versus open ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. RESULTS: A total of 890 female patients were surveyed, of which 519 (58.3%) responded. Of these, 161 (31%) had attempted pregnancy after surgery 18 (12%) had laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and 143 (88%) had open ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. There were no significant differences regarding demographics between groups. There was no difference in reported infertility rates (61.1% vs 65%, respectively, P = 0.69) between the laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and open ileal pouch-anal anastomosis groups. The median time to pregnancy (3.5 months vs 9 months, respectively, log-rank P = 0.01) was reduced in patients who underwent laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis compared with those who underwent open ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. CONCLUSION: Postoperative infertility rates were higher after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis regardless of mode of surgery. However, laparoscopy was associated with a significantly reduced time to conceive compared with the open approach.