Update of complications and functional outcome of the ileo-pouch anal anastomosis: overview of evidence and meta-analysis of 96 observational studies.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to provide a comprehensive update of the outcome of the ileo-pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA). DATA SOURCES: An extensive search in PubMed, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library was conducted. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All studies published after 2000 reporting on complications or functional outcome after a primary open IPAA procedure for UC or FAP were selected. Study characteristics, functional outcome, and complications were extracted. DATA SYNTHESIS: A review with similar methodology conducted 10 years earlier was used to evaluate developments in outcome over time. Pooled estimates were compared using a random-effects logistic meta-analyzing technique. Analyses focusing on the effect of time of study conductance, centralization, and variation in surgical techniques were performed. RESULTS: Fifty-three studies including 14,966 patients were included. Pooled rates of pouch failure and pelvic sepsis were 4.3% (95% CI, 3.5-6.3) and 7.5% (95% CI 6.1-9.1), respectively. Compared to studies published before 2000, a reduction of 2.5% was observed in the pouch failure rate (p = 0.0038). Analysis on the effect of the time of study conductance confirmed a decline in pouch failure. Functional outcome remained stable over time, with a 24-h defecation frequency of 5.9 (95% CI, 5.0-6.9). Technical surgery aspects did not have an important effect on outcome. CONCLUSION: This review provides up to date outcome estimates of the IPAA procedure that can be useful as reference values for practice and research. It is also shows a reduction in pouch failure over time.

Optimizing Patient Selection for Laparoscopic and Open Colorectal Cancer Resections: A National Surgical Quality Improvement Program-Matched Analysis.

The aim of this study was to identify patients undergoing colorectal cancer (CRC) resection who might benefit specifically from either an open or laparoscopic approach. From the NSQIP database (2012-2013), patients who underwent laparoscopic colectomy (LC) or open colectomy (OC) for CRC were identified. The two groups were matched and compared in terms of any, medical, and surgical complications. A wide range of patient characteristics were collected and analyzed. Interaction analysis was performed in a multivariable regression model to identify risk factors that may make LC or OC more beneficial in certain subgroups of patients. Overall, OC (n = 6593) was associated with a significantly higher risk of any [odds ratio (OR) 2.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.87-2.20], surgical (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.82-2.16), and medical (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.51-1.94) complications than LC (n = 6593). No subgroup of patients benefited from an open approach. Patients with obesity (BMI > 30) (P = 0.03) and older age (>65 years) (P = 0.01) benefited more than average from a laparoscopic approach. For obese patients, LC was associated with less overall complications (OC vs LC: OR 1.92 obese vs 1.21 nonobese patients). For elderly patients, LC was more preferable regarding the risk of medical complications (OC vs LC OR of 1.91 vs 1.34 for younger patients). No subgroup of CRC patients benefited specifically more from an open colorectal resection. This supports that the laparoscopic technique should be performed whenever feasible. For the obese and elderly patients, the benefits of the laparoscopic approach were more pronounced.

Correction: Worldwide trends in volume and quality of published protocols of randomized controlled trials.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173042.].