Restorative Proctocolectomies Research Articles

Surgical Management of an Ileal J-Pouch-Anal Anastomosis Volvulus.

A restorative proctocolectomy with an IPAA is the surgical treatment of choice for medically refractory ulcerative colitis. Until now, a pouch volvulus has been considered a rare complication, only described in case reports and small case series. The aim of this technical note was to develop a standardized approach to allow a minimally invasive treatment. First, an endoscopic decompression of the pouch is attempted. Subsequently, an exploratory laparoscopy is performed. If the endoscopic decompression was successful, a complete laparoscopic reduction is feasible. Once the integrity of the pouch is confirmed, a bilateral pouchopexy is performed, using multifilament interrupted sutures. Finally, the pouch patency is tested by pouchoscopy. Between December 2010 and December 2018, 151 minimally invasive restorative proctocolectomies with an IPAA were performed. Eighty-nine IPAAs were constructed with the mesentery positioned anteriorly, 35 posteriorly, and 27 on the right side. Three patients were diagnosed with an IPAA volvulus. All 3 of the patients were in the anterior group (3.4%) compared with 0 patients in the nonanterior group. One patient (33%) was treated laparoscopically, after a successful endoscopic reduction. In the other 2 cases, conversion to a laparotomy was needed because an endoscopic decompression could not be achieved. An endoscopic decompression was required to allow a laparoscopic treatment, and a bilateral pouchopexy was needed to avoid recurrence. This standardized approach might be a good treatment option, and we are awaiting additional follow-up to determine its long-term durability. In addition to the already described risk factors (minimally invasive technique, female sex, and low BMI), an anterior positioning of the pouch mesentery might be a potential risk factor as well for pouch volvulus. However, these observations should be carefully interpreted, considering the small number of cases.

Single-Port Laparoscopic Surgery for Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Background. Single Port Laparoscopic Surgery (SPLS) is being increasingly employed in colorectal surgery for benign and malignant diseases. The particular role for SPLS in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has not been determined yet. In this review article we summarize technical aspects and short term results of SPLS resections in patients with Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis. Methods. A systematic review of the literature until January 2012 was performed. Publications were assessed for operative techniques, equipment, surgical results, hospital stay, and readmissions. Results. 34 articles, published between 2010 and 2012, were identified reporting on 301 patients with IBD that underwent surgical treatment in SPLS technique. Surgical procedures included ileocolic resections, sigmoid resections, colectomies with end ileostomy or ileorectal anastomosis, and restorative proctocolectomies with ileum-pouch reconstruction. There was a wide variety in the surgical technique and the employed equipment. The overall complication profile was similar to reports on standard laparoscopic surgery in IBD. Conclusions. In experienced hands, single port laparoscopic surgery appears to be feasible and safe for the surgical treatment of selected patients with IBD. However, evidence from prospective randomized trials is required in order to clarify whether there is a further benefit apart from the avoidance of additional trocar incisions.

Recent results of laparoscopic surgery in inflammatory bowel disease

Inflammatory bowel diseases are an ideal indication for the laparoscopic surgical approach as they are basically benign diseases not requiring lymphadenectomy and extended mesenteric excision; well-established surgical procedures are available for the conventional approach. Inflammatory alterations and fragility of the bowel and mesentery, however, may demand a high level of laparoscopic experience. A broad spectrum of operations from the rather easy enterostomy formation for anal Crohn's disease (CD) to restorative proctocolectomies for ulcerative colitis (UC) may be managed laparoscopically. The current evidence base for the use of laparoscopic techniques in the surgical therapy of inflammatory bowel diseases is presented. CD limited to the terminal ileum has become a common indication for laparoscopic surgical therapy. In severe anal CD, laparoscopic stoma formation is a standard procedure with low morbidity and short operative time. Studies comparing conventional and laparoscopic bowel resections, have found shorter times to first postoperative bowel movements and shorter hospital stays as well as lower complication rates in favour of the laparoscopic approach. Even complicated cases with previous surgery, abscess formation and enteric fistulas may be operated on laparoscopically with a low morbidity. In UC, restorative proctocolectomy is the standard procedure in elective surgery. The demanding laparoscopic approach is increasingly used, however, mainly in major centers; its feasibility has been proven in various studies. An increased body mass index and acute inflammation of the bowel may be relative contraindications. Short and long-term outcomes like quality of life seem to be equivalent for open and laparoscopic surgery. Multiple studies have proven that the laparoscopic approach to CD and UC is a safe and successful alternative for selected patients. The appropriate selection criteria are still under investigation. Technical considerations are playing an important role for the complexity of both diseases.

Laparoscopic Versus Open 2-Stage Ileal Pouch: Laparoscopic Approach Allows for Faster Restoration of Intestinal Continuity

Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the treatment of choice for patients with ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous. This study examined the impact of the surgical approach (laparoscopic versus open) to IPAA on short-term outcomes and time to ileostomy closure in 2-stage restorative proctocolectomies. A retrospective review was performed on a prospectively maintained database at Washington University School of Medicine for patients undergoing elective 2-stage restorative proctocolectomy and IPAA from April of 1999 through July of 2008. Outcomes for patients were analyzed according to laparoscopic versus open technique. A total of 124 patients (55 laparoscopy, 69 open) were included in this study. Laparoscopic IPAA took, on average, 79.2 minutes longer to complete than open IPAA (p < 0.0001) and required significantly more intravenous fluid administration (p = 0.0004). There was no significant difference between laparoscopic and open IPAA with respect to estimated blood loss, blood transfusions, postoperative narcotic usage, return of bowel function, length of stay, and hospital readmission rates. Total complications were not statistically significant between the 2 groups. Patients in the laparoscopic IPAA group underwent ileostomy closure an average of 24.1 days sooner than patients in the open group (p = 0.045). Multivariate analysis revealed that surgical approach (p = 0.018) and length of stay (p = 0.004) were associated with faster time to closure of loop ileostomy. Laparoscopic IPAA is safe, with postoperative morbidity comparable with open IPAA. Laparoscopic IPAA can lead to faster recovery and result in faster progression to restoration of intestinal continuity in patients undergoing 2-stage restorative proctocolectomy.

Infliximab in Ulcerative Colitis is Associated with an Increased Risk of Postoperative Complications After Restorative Proctocolectomy

Little data exist regarding infliximab use in surgical decision making and postoperative complications in ulcerative colitis. Our goals were to determine the rate of postoperative complications in infliximab-treated ulcerative colitis patients undergoing restorative proctocolectomy and to determine whether three-stage procedures are more often necessary. We studied a group of infliximab-treated patients and matched control subjects who underwent two-stage restorative proctocolectomy between 2000 and 2006. Postoperative complications were compared. In addition, the rate of three-stage procedures was compared between all infliximab- and noninfliximab-treated patients. A total of 523 restorative proctocolectomies were performed. In the infliximab group, there were 46 two-stage and 39 three-stage procedures. Covariate-adjusted odds of early complication for the infliximab group was 3.54 times that of controls (P = 0.004; 95 percent confidence interval (CI), 1.51-8.31). The odds of sepsis were 13.8 times greater (P = 0.011; 95 percent CI, 1.82-105) and the odds of late complication were 2.19 times greater (P = 0.08; 95 percent CI, 0.91-5.28) for infliximab. The odds of requirement for three-stage procedures was 2.07 times greater in the infliximab group (P = 0.011; 95 percent CI, 1.18-3.63). Infliximab increases the risk of postoperative complications after restorative proctocolectomy and has altered the surgical approach to ulcerative colitis. Potential benefits of infliximab should be balanced against these risks.

Low section of the rectum using the Contour™ device: An alternative technique

We read with great interest the technical report on Low section of the rectum during laparoscopic total mesorectal excision using the Contour device by Targarona and coworkers, published in the February 2007 issue of Surgical Endoscopy. We do agree with the author regarding the important role that laparoscopy may play in the field of colorectal surgery for both benign and malignant diseases [1–3]. Rectal transection is undoubtedly a crucial step in rectal resections with total mesorectal excision and also during restorative proctocolectomy for familial adenomatous polyposis or ulcerative colitis. Available devices, as mentioned by Targarona, are not that effective for several reasons: their length, the impossibility of firing the device along an optimal line of transection due to the lack of articulation or the dimension of the stapler’s jaws and cartridge when working in a narrow pelvis, the need for multiple applications to accomplish the task, and sometime the need for a further cannula to overcome the difficulties in approaching the lower rectum from a right angle. A new stapler for closure-division of the lower rectum designed for open surgery (Contour, Ethicon) may be used even in laparoscopic surgery to perform safer low rectal transection and double-stapling anastomosis. Targarona describes the use of the Contour stapler through a hand-assisted device (LapDisc, Ethicon) and a 6cm-long Pfannenstiel incision after a five-port approach to laparoscopic rectal resection with total mesorectal excision (TME). In our early experience with the Contour stapler, we have used a different approach in three rectal resections with TME and three restorative proctocolectomies with Jpouch-anal canal double-stapling anastomosis, avoiding the use of rather expensive hand-assisted devices.

Laparoscopic emergency and elective surgery for ulcerative colitis

To analyse surgical outcomes of fulminate and medically resistant ulcerative colitis (UC) carried out laparoscopically. A prospective database identified 69 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for UC under the senior author over a 5-year period to April 2006. Thirty-two patients (18 male patients), median BMI 26, underwent laparoscopic subtotal colectomy (LSTC): 22 acute emergencies, 10 refractory to medical therapy and unfit for restorative proctocolectomy. All were receiving iv steroids; azathioprine (7), cyclosporin (5). The median operation time was 135 min (65-280). There was one conversion. Twenty-nine patients have subsequently undergone completion proctectomy and W-pouch formation [24 patients were performed laparoscopically - laparoscopic completion proctectomy (LCP)]; widespread adhesions precluded in five patients. Twenty-six patients underwent restorative laparoscopic proctocolectomy (LRP) - one conversion. Twenty patients underwent W-pouch reconstruction via a Pfannenstiel incision. Six J-pouches were constructed and returned via the ileostomy site. Three underwent a laparoscopic pan-proctocolectomy (LPPC); one conversion. Eight patients underwent open STC. The median time to normal diet was 48 h (1-7 days) for LSTC/LCP and 36 h (1-5 days) for LRP. There were two major complications following LRP, two following LSTC, one following LCP, one following LPPC and five following open surgery. Median hospital stay was 8 days (6-72) for LSTC, 7 days (6-9) for LCP and 5 days (3-45) for LRP. There were six 30-day readmissions following laparoscopic surgery (DVT, reactive depression, ileostomy hold up (2), abdominal pain and high output ileostomy). Laparoscopic subtotal and restorative proctocolectomies in fulminate and medically resistant UC are feasible, safe and largely predictable operations that allow for early hospital discharge. Laparoscopic colectomy facilitates subsequent proctectomy and pouch construction.

Rod in loop ileostomy: just an insignificant detail for ileostomy-related complications?

The aim of this prospective study was to validate a variant in the loop ileostomy construction to reduce peristomal pressure ulcers and, subsequently, the need of stoma therapist assistance and the frequency of changing the stoma appliance. We have enrolled 33 consecutive patients who underwent two stage restorative proctocolectomies. The first consecutive 13 patients operated on had their ileostomies constructed with a standard rod. In the following 20 patients, we placed a 5.3-mm suction catheter tube closed with a stitch to form a "ring" and without any stitches fixing it to the skin. In the "ring" rod group 40% of patients did not report any complication compared to the 8% of patients in the standard rod group (p = 0.046). Pressure ulcers were absent in this group, while it affected 61% of the patients in the standard rod group (p < 0.001). Patients in the "ring" rod group needed significantly less assistance time by the stoma therapist (p < 0.01) and required significantly fewer stoma appliance changes (p < 0.01). In our institution, the overall cost for the complete management of a standard rod ileostomy was 73.16 (29.83-130.49) euro compared to 46.65 (23.15-93.48) euro for a "ring" rod ileostomy (p = 0.002). The adoption of a "ring" rod configuration led to an elimination of pressure ulcers due to the rigid rod, a shorter time requirement for stoma care and a decreased number of appliances required and was subsequently associated with lower costs of assistance. A tighter fitting around the ileostomy that avoided stool infiltration improved the practical management of the stoma with a "ring" rod.

Fistula complicating restorative proctocolectomy.

Twenty-seven patients developed a fistula after 168 restorative proctocolectomies. Thirteen fistulas were enterocutaneous (two with communication to the bladder); their origins were from the pouch (three patients), the ileoanal anastomosis (three), the pouch appendage (three), a previous loop ileostomy (two) and iatrogenic small bowel injury (two). Two patients had Crohn's disease. The pouch was removed in four patients, one of whom died from chronic small bowel obstruction; the remaining nine have satisfactory pouch function after fistula excision. Ten pouch-vaginal fistulas occurred, all from the ileoanal anastomosis; four were extrasphincteric. Four of these patients had underlying Crohn's disease. Only two patients, with Crohn's disease and indeterminate colitis, required pouch excision; the remainder have good pouch function after treatment of the fistula. There were three pouch-perineal fistulas, all from the ileoanal anastomosis; these were successfully managed by seton fistulotomy. There was one pouch-vesical fistula, successfully treated by excision of the fistula and pouch appendage.

A study of the complications and pelvic visceral function after restorative proctocolectomy and W pouch construction.

Aspects of ileal pouch surgery remain controversial. The authors' single practice experience of 107 operations illustrates many of them. It was hoped that its study would contribute usefully to the debate. Details of all 107 restorative proctocolectomies carried out since the operation was started in Gloucester in 1984 until the study period ended have been kept prospectively. All patients had proctectomy by mesorectal dissection, and 106 had W pouch restoration. Four suffered functional failure requiring reversion to ileostomy and three patients have died. The remaining 99 were sent a questionnaire concerning pelvic visceral function and evidence of pouchitis. Records of all but one of the patients have been reviewed. Surgical morbidity was low with neither chronic pelvic sepsis, pouch related fistula, pouch haemorrhage nor pouch ischaemia. Mucosectomised patients had similar bowel control to the stapled group. The policy change from routine to selective protective ileostomy proved satisfactory. W pouch function was found to be comparable to that reported from major J pouch series, although anti-diarrhoeal usage was reduced, and was not influenced by either gender, age or time since surgery. None of the following reasonably intuitive assumptions seem supported by our findings: that mesorectal excision necessarily poses a greater danger to pelvic visceral function than close rectal dissection, that the greater capacity of W pouches will be reflected in markedly less frequency, that mucosectomy would impair anal control, or that a defunctioning ileostomy is a mandatory precaution. Pouch frequency is less if wind can be passed separately; otherwise functional outcome seems determined by other, non-technical, factors.

Mucosectomy and the Ileoanal Pouch

Anal canal mucosectomy was originally an essential part of a restorative proctocolectomy. It allowed complete removal of mucosa at risk for inflammation (ulcerative colitis) and for the formation of polyps (polyposis coli). Development of a double-staple technique has led to questions about the necessity of mucosectomy. Several clinical situations (severe rectal dysplasia or carcinoma) argue strongly for a mucosectomy, and technical difficulties with a double-staple technique make it necessary that surgeons performing restorative proctocolectomies have the capability to perform a safe and effective mucosectomy. Mucosectomy techniques as well as the advantages and disadvantages of the technique are described.

What should be the standard of care for cancer surveillance, diagnosis of dysplasia, and the decision for colectomy in chronic inflammatory bowel disease?

The authors reviewed pathology reports of 590 patients who underwent total proctocolectomies or restorative proctocolectomies for chronic ulcerative colitis at the Mount Sinai Medical Center between 1987 and 1999. One hundred sixty of these patients had undergone colonoscopic examination within the year before surgery. To avoid variations in pathological interpretations, one pathologist at Mount Sinai Medical Center reviewed 92% of the operative specimens and 98% of all the positive specimens. Five pathologists reviewed 98% of all operative specimens. Generally, 10–15 areas were sampled per pathological specimen. Seventy-seven specimens (13.1%) contained at least one focus of dysplasia. Invasive cancers were significantly more common among specimens with dysplastic changes (33/77 vs 5/513, p < 0.001). Specimens with dysplasia of any grade were 36 times more likely to harbor invasive carcinoma. Stage III colorectal cancer was found with indefinite or low grade dysplasia in five of 26 cases (19.2%). Tumor stage did not correlate with dysplasia grade. Preoperative colonoscopy identified neoplastic changes in 57 cases (69.5%). Dysplasia, cancer, or both were missed in 25 cases. Dysplastic lesions were correctly identified in only 31 cases (39.7%). Colonoscopically diagnosed dysplasia as a marker for the presence of a synchronous cancer had a sensitivity of 81% and a specificity of 79%. The authors report that the positive predictive value of a finding of preoperative dysplasia of any grade was 50%. The positive predictive value of a finding of low grade mucosal dysplasia was 70%. The authors concluded that, until a better marker is found, a single confirmed diagnosis of dysplasia should be viewed as highly suspicious for the presence of a coexistent cancer. An advanced stage of colorectal cancer could be found in association with dysplastic changes of any grade. The authors thus conclude that, because dysplasia grade does not predict tumor stage and advanced cancer can be found in association with dysplastic changes of any grade, confirmed dysplasia of any grade was an indication for colectomy.

Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch anal anastomosis in obese patients.

Obesity is a relative contraindication to performing restorative proctocolectomy. The aim of this study was to assess the morbidity and functional results after restorative proctocolectomy in obese patients as compared to a matched cohort of non-obese patients. 334 patients who had restorative proctocolectomy were reviewed; obesity was defined as a body mass index (BMI) greater than or equal to 30 kg/m2. 31 obese patients were matched to 31 non-obese patients for age, gender, steroid use, and diagnosis. Operative time, length of hospitalization, and both perioperative (< 6 weeks) and long-term morbidity (> 6 weeks), especially sepsis, were evaluated. The BMI was significantly higher in the obese group (33.7 vs 23.2) (p < 0.0001), and no difference was found between the obese and non-obese groups relative to the matched parameters of age, gender, steroid use and diagnosis. There was no difference in the rate of mucosectomy performed between the obese and non-obese patients (9.6% vs 3.2%, p = NS). 16% of the obese patients underwent one stage restorative proctocolectomies as compared to 10% in the non-obese group. Operative time was longer in the obese group (229 min vs 196 min; p = 0.02), but overall hospital length of stay was similar (9.7 days vs 7.7 days; p = 0.13). Perioperative morbidity was higher in obese patients (32% vs 9.6%, p = 0.058). However, there was no statistical significance in long-term morbidity (23% vs 32%, p = 0.57) at a mean follow-up of 51 months in the obese group and 53 months in the non-obese group. Obese patients had more stomal complications (10 vs 0%) and incisional hernias (13 vs 3%) (p = NS). Overall the pelvic sepsis-rate was significantly higher in the obese group (16 vs 0%; p < 0.05). 60% of the obese patients who developed pelvic sepsis had pouch-anal anastomosis performed without proximal fecal diversion. Mean bowel movements/24 hours, pad use, nocturnal evacuation, accidents/24 hours and incontinence scores were not statistically significant between the groups. Obese patients have a higher rate of pelvic sepsis and peri-operative morbidity when compared to a matched non-obese cohort of patients; however, the functional outcome of restorative proctocolectomy in obese patients is not significantly different than in non-obese patients.

Treatment of colorectal and ileoanal anastomotic sinuses.

This study is designed to describe a technique and report results for treating low anastomotic sinuses. Restorative proctocolectomy and complicated low anterior resections were protected with diverting loop ileostomy. Contrast enemas identified anastomotic problems before ileostomy closure. Pouch-anal or colorectal anastomotic sinuses that failed to resolve with observation were treated before intestinal continuity was restored. With the patient receiving regional or general anesthesia, a rigid proctoscope or anoscope was used to identify the sinus opening. The common wall between the sinus and the bowel lumen was divided under direct vision with laparoscopic cautery scissors, and the sinus cavity was debrided with a suction cautery wand placed through the scope. Six patients with anastomotic sinuses have received outpatient treatment in the described manner during the past two years. Four patients had restorative proctocolectomies for ulcerative colitis, and two had low anastomosis for rectal cancer. Three patients presented with pelvic sepsis before the contrast study; the remainder were asymptomatic. Division of anastomotic sinus was performed one to eight months after diagnosis of the sinus. Following division, anastomotic cavities resolved in five patients by 1 month and in one patient by 12 months. In these six patients, there was one dilatable anastomotic stricture but no other anastomotic complications at follow-up 5 to 16 (mean, 9.2) months after sinus division. When used in conjunction with fecal diversion, sinus unroofing by division of the common wall between the sinus and bowel lumen treats low pelvic sinuses.

An audit of restorative proctocolectomy.

A total of 168 restorative proctocolectomies have been performed without mortality during the past nine years. Morbidity from pelvic sepsis (12%), ileoanal stricture (15%), and pouch related fistulas (16%) have become less with increasing experience of the operation. Pouch excision, which occurred in 30% of the first 50 patients was undertaken in only 4% in the last 68 patients. Despite this, intestinal obstruction (18%) continues to complicate the operation. We have abandoned restorative proctocolectomy after failed ileorectal anastomosis in patients with slow transit constipation as half have now requested pouch excision because of poor results. Failure to identify Crohn's disease continues to influence the outcome: in 10 patients now known to have Crohn's disease six developed post operative fistulas, three have required pouch excision. Sexual impairment has occurred in three male patients (4%). Ten women had children after operation, eight uncomplicated vaginal deliveries occurred without impaired continence. Seven of nine patients over 60 years of age have had a successful outcome. Our data also indicate that the operation may be justified in distal disease if urgency is socially inconvenient. Frequency of defecation is usually less than three per 24 hours in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis but remains variable in those with ulcerative colitis.

Early results with restorative proctocolectomy

The first 25 restorative proctocolectomies (RP) performed by one surgeon since 1986 are reviewed. Ulcerative colitis (23) and idiopathic megarectum (2) were the indications for surgery. The initial seven patients had a submucosal proctectomy and transanal hand sewn pouch-anal anastomosis. Eighteen patients had a totally stapled RP. One patient with malignancy died from factors unrelated to surgery. Complications developed in eight patients after pouch-anal anastomosis and in four patients after ileostomy closure. There was one pouch failure due to pelvic sepsis. No pelvic sepsis has occurred following a stapled ileal pouch-anal anastomosis with defunctioning ileostomy. After a mean follow up period of 20.5 months all patients are continent (mean stool frequency = 4/day and 0.5/night). Soiling occurred in three patients who had a transanal hand sewn pouch-anal anastomosis. All patients in the stapled group have satisfactory control. Restorative proctocolectomy produces satisfactory operative and functional results which have improved as our experience has increased.

Comparison of clinical and compliance characteristics between S and W Ileal reservoirs

Ileal reservoir reconstruction has become the preferred technique for restoration of bowel continuity in most patients after colectomy for ulcerative colitis or familial adenomatous polyposis. We analyzed and compared compliance characteristics of triple-limb S and quadruple-limb W reservoir designs and correlated changes in capacity with overall function. Fifty patients underwent colectomy and reservoir construction for ulcerative colitis or familial adenomatous polyposis; 12 received S reservoirs and 38 received W reservoirs. Reservoir compliance was assessed by means of a specially designed condom catheter that continuously recorded intrareservoir pressure and changes in perfused volume. During reservoir infusion, volumes and pressures at initial fullness, normal sensation of evacuation, and maximum tolerated volume were noted. Studies were performed at 2 and 12 months after ileostomy takedown. An increase in normal evacuation volume from 218 +/- 9 mL to 310 +/- 12 mL between 2 and 12 months (p less than or equal to 0.05) was observed in patients with W reservoirs. Similar changes were recorded in S reservoir reconstructions (201 +/- 14 mL to 291 +/- 22 mL, p less than or equal to 0.05). No significant differences were observed in the mean pressure at normal evacuation volume between the S and W groups at 2 and 12 months. The 24-hour stool frequency decreased an average of 3 per day for both reservoir designs between the 2- and 12-month study period (p less than or equal to 0.05). This frequency was most directly predicted by normal evacuation volume (r = 0.90 for W and 0.88 for S). The decrease in stool frequency correlated with increased reservoir compliance, as shown by larger tolerated volumes at similar pressures. Restorative proctocolectomies with S or modified W reservoirs are both acceptable alternatives and demonstrate similar compliance characteristics and functional results.