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

Abstract

BackgroundThe 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. MethodsAll 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. ResultsA 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. ConclusionPostoperative 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.