Restorative Proctocolectomy In Patients Research Articles

Small-bowel obstruction after restorative proctocolectomy in patients with ulcerative colitis

The reported risk of small-bowel obstruction (SBO) after major abdominal surgery varies. The aim of this study was to study frequency and risk factors of SBO after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis. Review of the medical records of 188 patients operated with restorative proctocolectomy between 1985 and 1997. All admissions to the hospital were registered and symptoms and X-ray findings consistent with ileus were analysed in relation to preoperative and operative data. SBO was the dominating cause of hospitalization. Forty-eight patients (25.5%) had developed SBO after a median of 76 (range 6-196) months of follow-up, of whom 26 were operated on. The cause of obstruction was adhesion in all but one patient. Early obstruction events were common and accounted for 27% of all operations. Twenty-five of 26 patients who were operated on had a diverting loop-ileostomy compared to 111/162 in the not-operated-on group (p < 0.01). In total, 696 days were spent at the hospital because of SBO. SBO is common following pouch surgery and is the dominating cause of hospitalization postoperatively. About 25% of patients developed SBO and half of them needed surgery. The use of a diverting loop-ileostomy was related to an increased risk of surgery for SBO.

Timing of restorative proctectomy following subtotal colectomy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

There is no general consensus regarding the timing of restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) in patients who have undergone subtotal colectomy with end ileostomy (STC). The aim of this study was to determine the impact of timing of RPC in patients who have undergone subtotal colectomy and end ileostomy for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). A retrospective medical record review of patients who had undergone RPC after STC was undertaken. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to timing of the completion proctectomy: <or= 3 months, 4-7 months and > 7 months. From 1990 to 2000, 91 patients had undergone RPC after STC for IBD. There were no statistically significant differences among the three groups relative to mean age, gender, final diagnosis, duration of disease, body mass index, comorbidity, extraintestinal manifestations, use of immunuosuppressives, or operative time. The number of intra-operative complications were significantly higher in the <or= 3 month group compared to the other groups. There was no significant difference in the overall incidence of postoperative complications among the 3 groups. Postoperative fistulas were significantly more common after RPC in Groups 1 and 2 as compared to Group 3. Restorative proctocolectomy performed within 3 months after the initial subtotal colectomy was associated with a significant increase in the incidence of intra-operative complications. Although this increase was not statistically significant, there was a significantly higher incidence of fistula formation when RPC was undertaken at up to 7 months after the subtotal colectomy for IBD. Thus, if possible, early RPC after subtotal colectomy should be discouraged.

Three-Step Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis under Total Laparoscopic Approach for Acute or Severe Colitis Complicating Inflammatory Bowel Disease

A two- or three-step procedure is mandatory for restorative proctocolectomy in patients presenting with severe or acute colitis complicating inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The aim of this study was to analyze the feasibility of a total laparoscopic approach for consecutive subtotal colectomy (STC) and secondary ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA). All patients underwent a three-step procedure that included first, a laparoscopic STC with ileostomy and sigmoidostomy; second, a laparoscopic proctectomy and IPAA, and third, closure of the temporary ileostomy. Eighteen consecutive patients (7 women and 11 men), with a mean age of 39+/-14 years (range 15 to 59 years) were included. Mean lengths of the procedures were 252+/-59 minutes for STC, and 286+/-46 minutes for IPAA, respectively. Two patients (11%) after laparoscopic IPAA required conversion into laparotomy. No patient died postoperatively. Four patients had reoperations after laparoscopic IPAA for intraperitoneal hemorrhage by laparotomy (n=2) and by a transanal approach for anastomotic leakage (n=2). The overall morbidity rate was 33% (12 of 36 procedures). Mean hospital stay was 8+/-2 days after STC, and 10+/-2 days after IPAA. After a mean follow up of 13 months, all patients underwent intestinal continuity restoration. Our study suggests that a total laparoscopic approach is feasible and safe in inflammatory bowel disease patients with acute or severe colitis, not only for STC but also for IPAA after STC, with no mortality and an acceptable morbidity rate.

Temporary loop ileostomy following restorative proctocolectomy

A retrospective study compared the outcome of restorative proctocolectomy in patients who had a covering ileostomy (n = 53) with those who had no proximal stoma (n = 32). Those who had a loop ileostomy had a higher incidence of anastomotic leakage (21 per cent), pelvic abscess (32 per cent) and postoperative fistula (28 per cent) than those with no covering ileostomy (6, 12 and 12 per cent respectively). Intestinal obstruction occurred in 23 per cent of those with an ileostomy, compared with 6 per cent in those who had no stoma. The functional outcome was identical.

Results after restorative proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis and coexisting colorectal cancer.

Although the operation of choice for patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA), its place in the management of patients with FAP and cancer has not been defined. The authors have reviewed their experience with these patients to determine the safety of IPAA and its efficacy as a cancer operation. The records of 55 patients with FAP who had undergone IPAA were examined. Follow-up studies included an annual questionnaire and physical examination. Eight patients had FAP with coexisting colorectal cancer. Median age at diagnosis was 25 (range 13-46) years, and at operation 33 (range 22-36) years. Of the eight patients (four men), four had colonic cancer and four had rectal cancer. Synchronous colorectal carcinoma was found in two patients. Staging according to the tumor node metastasis classification showed that five patients had stage 1 tumour, two had stage 2 and one had stage 3. Tumours were well, moderately or poorly differentiated in one, five and two patients respectively. During a median follow-up of 56 (range 14-98) months, metastasis developed in the liver of one patient 66 months after surgery. Two patients suffered complications: one had small bowel obstruction and the other mucosal prolapse. Tubular adenomas were found in the pouch of two patients and in the anal transitional zone of one. Pouch function is good to excellent in all surviving patients. Restorative proctocolectomy for patients with FAP and coexisting colorectal cancer can be undertaken with a favourable prognosis and function. It is compatible with curative intent.

Restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis complicated by colorectal cancer.

Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is widely accepted as the procedure of choice for patients requiring surgery for chronic ulcerative colitis. The role of restorative proctocolectomy in the setting of chronic ulcerative colitis complicated by colorectal carcinoma is not clear. This study was undertaken to explore the clinical outcomes of chronic ulcerative colitis patients with coexisting colorectal carcinoma who underwent restorative proctocolectomy. A total of 756 patients with chronic ulcerative colitis were followed prospectively after restorative proctocolectomy. Forty-five (5.9 percent) were found to have invasive carcinoma of the colon (n = 31) or rectum (n = 14). These patients were followed with special attention to cancer stage, adjuvant therapy, oncologic outcome, and functional results after restorative proctocolectomy. Twenty-one patients (45.6 percent) had staged surgery (colon, 14; rectum, 7). Twenty-seven patients received adjuvant chemotherapy (colon, 22; rectum, 5). Fourteen patients (51.8 percent) who received chemotherapy were not diverted during this treatment. Two node-positive rectal cancer patients had pelvic radiotherapy: one before restorative proctocolectomy and one after restorative proctocolectomy. Mean time to restoration of intestinal continuity among staged patients did not differ between cancer and noncancer patients. Six patients died of metastatic disease (colon, 3; rectum, 3). Five deaths occurred among patients with Stage III disease (colon, 3/13, 23.1 percent; rectum, 2/3, 66.7 percent). One patient with Stage I cancer at the time of restorative proctocolectomy died. Thirty-nine patients are alive without evidence of disease at a mean interval from surgery of 76.5 months. Thirty-six patients have functioning pelvic pouches. Bowel frequency, continence, and complication rates are similar among restorative proctocolectomy patients with and without cancer. Restorative proctocolectomy as a single or staged procedure is a viable therapeutic option for selected chronic ulcerative colitis patients with associated colorectal cancers. Prognosis seems to be related to cancer stage. Adjuvant chemotherapy can safely be given to nondiverted patients. Appropriate use of preoperative and postoperative radiotherapy for rectal cancer patients who are otherwise candidates for restorative proctocolectomy is unknown. Long-term functional results for cancer patients are similar to those seen in chronic ulcerative colitis patients without cancer.

Restorative proctocolectomy in patients with ulcerative colitis having a recto‐vaginal fistula

Recto-vaginal fistula is a rare complication of ulcerative colitis. There are few reports of restorative proctocolectomy carried out in patients with ulcerative colitis having a rectovaginal fistula. We report our experience with this condition. Between 1 January 1976 and 31 December 2001, 838 patients underwent restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis at one hospital. These included 400 women of whom 4 (1%) had an already present rectovaginal fistula. We reviewed all patients who presented with a rectovaginal fistula. These patients were contacted by telephone to establish function and satisfaction. The mean age was 30.0 years (range 19-39 years). The mean age at onset of ulcerative colitis was 21.5 years (range 13-34 years). One patient was asymptomatic, the fistula being discovered at operation. In the other three patients the recto-vaginal fistula had occurred at a mean of 108 months (range 72-192 months) after the onset of ulcerative colitis. Three of four patients had had previous episodes of acute severe disease. Three patients had a narrow rectum with deep ulceration. The mean distance between the anorectal junction and the site of fistulation was 2.7 cm (range 0-7 cm). Three patients had a three-stage and one patient a two-stage procedure. Mean follow-up after closure of the loop ileostomy was 107 months (range 17-276 months). All patients were treated successfully but 2 (50%) had a recurrence at 156 and 40 months after the closure of the loop ileostomy. One patient was diverted and the fistula was closed by a subsequent transanal repair and the other patient was treated with success by temporary loose seton technique. Two patients had excellent functional results whereas two other had some difficulties in continence. Nevertheless all patients were satisfied with the outcome. Patients with ulcerative colitis and a recto-vaginal fistula can be successfully treated by restorative proctocolectomy, nevertheless they are at risk of late recurrence of the fistula.

Clipless laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy using an electrothermal bipolar vessel sealer

Background: Recently, a new type of laparoscopic electrothermal bipolar vessel sealer (EBVS; LigaSure Atlas) was developed. The aim of the present study was to describe the feasibility and effectiveness of LigaSure Atlas in laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy for patients with ulcerative colitis. Methods: Between January and December 2002, eight patients with ulcerative colitis underwent laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy. The median age was 30 (range: 18–51) years and median follow up was 6 (range: 1–13) months. The entire procedure was performed using only LigaSure Atlas and diathermy, without using conventional hemoclips or ultrasonic coagulating shears. Results: There were no conversions to the open procedure. There were no intraoperative or postoperative hemorrhagic complications. The operative time was reduced by 40 min compared with the conventional laparoscopic procedure, and the cost was 350 US dollars less compared with the method using conventional hemoclips and ultrasonic coagulating shears. Conclusion: The laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy using LigaSure Atlas is safe, feasible and cost-effective in selected patients with ulcerative colitis.

Elimination of mucosectomy during restorative proctocolectomy in patients with ulcerative colitis may provide better results in low-volume centers

Background To compare the outcomes of hand-sewn and double-stapling techniques among ulcerative colitis patients undergoing restorative proctocolectomy at a center that has limited experience with restorative proctocolectomy. Methods Forty-four patients with ulcerative colitis were divided into two groups according to the anastomosis techniques: hand sewing and double stapling. Postoperative early and late complications, postoperative hospital stay, and long-term functional results were compared. Results Pelvic sepsis (9% versus 36%, P = 0.03), operation time (median 240 minutes versus 270 minutes, P = 0.01), postoperative hospital stay (median 9 days versus 12 days, P = 0.04), and night incontinence (42% versus 80%, P = 0.07) were less common in the double-stapling group. Conclusions We recommend the double-stapling technique to centers that do not have extensive experience with restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis. This technique provides a good postoperative course in most patients and provides satisfactory long-term results. The results of the double-stapling group were similar to the results of the high-volume centers.

One-stage laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy: an alternative to the conventional approach?

There is significant concern in the current literature over the safety of laparoscopic techniques in removal of the entire colon and rectum. The purpose of this study was to examine the results of a one-stage laparoscopic-assisted restorative proctocolectomy in patients with mucosal ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis in a single institution experience. All patients who underwent laparoscopic-assisted one-stage restorative proctocolectomy (29 mucosal ulcerative colitis; 3 familial adenomatous polyposis) over a 24-month period were followed up prospectively for short-term and long-term complications and functional outcome. There were 32 patients (17 males), with a median age of 32 years (range, 16-29 years). There were no conversions to open surgery. There were two intraoperative complications, an inconsequential rectal perforation during mobilization and one staple line misfire. There were 11 postoperative complications: 3 obstruction/ileus, 2 pouchitis, 2 wound infections, 2 strictures, 1 pelvic abscess, and 1 pouch leak (at the top of the "J"). Three patients required reoperation (1 temporary ileostomy, 1 lysis of adhesions, and 1 transpouch drainage). The median number of bowel movements was seven per day (range, 2-15). A one-stage laparoscopic-assisted restorative proctocolectomy can be performed effectively and safely. Given that techniques in laparoscopic large-bowel surgery are still evolving rapidly, the role of this operation in the surgical treatment of patients with mucosal ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis is likely to expand in the near future.

Colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis or restorative proctocolectomy for familial adenomatous polyposis

The choice of prophylactic operation for familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is controversial. Colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) is a time-honoured procedure but has recently been replaced by restorative proctocolectomy in many centres. The objective of this study was to compare the operative and functional outcomes following IRA and restorative proctocolectomy (RPC). The morbidity rate, operation time, blood loss and hospital stay were compared in 99 IRA and 33 RPC patients. The functional outcome following IRA and RPC were compared in 22 sex-matched pairs. The median hospital stay was 11 days after IRA and 12 days after RPC. The operation time was longer in RPC (216 vs 182 min) and blood loss greater (1253 vs 634 ml). The complication rates were 30% after RPC and 18% after IRA. None of 23 primary RPC operations failed, but two (20%) of the 10 patients with secondary RPC following IRA finally received a permanent ileostomy. The overall functional satisfaction was excellent in 82% and 88% after RPC and IRA, respectively. The mean basal anal pressure was higher in the IRA groups (54 vs 39 cmH2 O, P = 0.004) and the stool frequency slightly less (4.7 vs 5.8, P = 0.06) than after RPC. There is little difference in short-term surgical or functional results between IRA and RPC but a secondary RPC may be unsuccessful. Therefore, primary RPC may be a better option in FAP than IRA.

Malignant transformation in ulcerative colitis and surgical implications

Patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) are at higher risk for cancer. Risk factors are duration of disease, extent of colitis, associated primary sclerosing cholangitis and possibly early onset of UC in childhood. Epithelial dysplasias are considered as precursors of colorectal cancer within the concept of an inflammation-dysplasia-carcinoma sequence. Dysplasia originates multifocally and is difficult to identify by colonoscopy. Histomorphological diagnosis can also be problematical. Surveillance programs utilize colonoscopy with random biopsies to diagnose dysplasia in patients with risk factors. The efficiency of these programs can be markedly increased when certain rules are applied. The ultimate aim must be to perform a proctocolectomy in patients at higher risk before invasive cancer develops. With only a few exceptions, colorectal cancer in UC can be treated by restorative proctocolectomy. Partial resection of the colon should be avoided because of the high frequency of occult carcinomas and multifocal carcinogenesis. There are first results that indicate a higher risk for malignant deterioration in the terminal ileum. After an ileoanal pouch procedure patients with chronic pouchitis seem to have a higher risk for dysplasia. At the moment the risk for malignancy cannot be calculated because of the relatively short follow-up time after ileoanal pouch procedures. However, it is recommended that after restorative proctocolectomy patients be followed by endoscopy and random biopsies for the rest of their lives.

Long-term histomorphological surveillance of the pelvic ileal pouch: Dysplasia develops in a subgroup of patients

Background & Aims : Little is known about the longterm morphology of the pelvic ileal pouch after restorative proctocolectomy in patients with ulcerative colitis. This study analyzed the mucosal adaptation in the pouch during a long-term follow-up. Methods : Mucosal biopsy specimens were obtained from 87 patients during a follow-up of 6.3 years (SD, 2.7; range, 3–14 years). The villous surface density, degree of inflammation, and type of mucin were determined from glycolmethacrylate-embedded sections. Results : Three basic patterns of mucosal adaptation were observed: regular response with normal mucosa or mild villous atrophy and no or mild inflammation (type A, 51%), transient atrophy response with temporary moderate or severe villous atrophy followed by normalization of architecture (type B, 40%), and constant atrophy response with permanent subtotal or total villous atrophy developing from the early functioning period accompanied by severe pouchitis (type C, 9%). Low-grade dysplasia occurred in 3 patients with type C response. Conclusions : In a small group of patients with ulcerative colitis, the mucosa of the pelvic pouch adapts with constant severe villous atrophy accompanied by long-standing pouchitis. This group of patients should be identified and undergo regular endoscopic and histomorphological surveillance because of risk of developing neoplasia in the pouch mucosa.

Ulcerative colitis and coexisting colorectal cancer: Recurrence rate after restorative proctocolectomy

The association between mucosal ulcerative colitis (MUC) and adenocarcinoma is well established. Records of patients who had undergone restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) from 1983 through 1992 were examined. Of these, 604 had MUC and 27 (4.3%) had MUC with coexisting cancer. Patients were surveyed annually for recurrent disease. Pouch function and quality of life were evaluated with a questionnaire and physical examination. The duration of disease was longer (p = 0.001) in patients with cancer (16.1 +/- 8.0 years) than in those without cancer (9.1 +/- 7.1 years), although the mean age at diagnosis of MUC was the same. Of the 27 patients, 20 had colon cancer and seven had rectal cancer. Multicentricity was found in seven (25.9%) patients. Using the TNM staging classification, 14 patients (51.8%) had stage 1 cancer, eight (29.6%) had stage 2, four (14.8%) had stage 3, and one (3.8%) had stage 4. The patient with stage 4 cancer died 5 months after surgery and was excluded from the follow-up analysis. During a mean follow-up time of 4.3 +/- 2.6 years, cancer recurred in two of the remaining 26 patients (7.7%). In one patient, a local recurrence was found 8 months after surgery, and distant metastases were found in the other patient 35 months after surgery. Both recurrences were in patients with colon cancer. Two of the 26 patients died; one death was related to cancer recurrence (3.8%). Pouch function is good to excellent in all surviving patients. Restorative proctocolectomy for patients with MUC and coexisting colorectal cancer can be performed with a favorable prognosis and function. It is appropriate for curative intent, given that an adequate margin without tumor is obtained.

Restorative proctocolectomy and indeterminate colitis

One hundred seventy-five patients underwent restorative proctocolectomy between November 1984 and December 1992. The pathologic results were reviewed by two pathologists, one being a gastrointestinal pathologist. One hundred fifty-eight patients had a confirmed diagnosis of ulcerative colitis, and 16 patients were diagnosed with indeterminate colitis. In addition, one patient was diagnosed with familial adenomatous polyposis. Eight of the 158 patients with ulcerative colitis required removal of their pouches, and 3 of the 16 patients with indeterminate colitis required pouch removal. By this definition, the success rate for restorative proctocolectomy in patients with ulcerative colitis was 95% and the success rate for restorative proctocolectomy in patients with indeterminate colitis was 81%. Of the 16 patients with indeterminate colitis, 8 have satisfactory pouch function and 5 have some ongoing problems. We recommend this pathology-review approach to more clearly define which patients have indeterminate colitis and, therefore, to more accurately present to the patient the likelihood of success or failure of restorative proctocolectomy with this diagnosis.

Similar functional results after restorative proctocolectomy in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis and mucosal ulcerative colitis

Restorative proctocolectomy (RP) is generally considered to achieve better results in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) than in those with mucosal ulcerative colitis (MUC). We studied 39 pairs of patients (FAP versus MUC), individually matched for surgeon (n = 4), types of ileal pouch (19 S-pouches and 20 J-pouches), technique of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (21 stapled, 18 handsewn with mucosectomy), duration of follow-up after pouch function (median: 32 months; range: 6 months to 8.5 years), age (median: 30 years; range: 12 to 60 years), and gender (male-to-female ratio: 1.4:1.0). The median duration of operation (3.2 hours), hospital stay (9 days), and the amount of blood loss (about 650 mL) were similar between the two groups. The patients in the MUC group tended to have a higher overall complication rate (28% versus 21%) and more pouch-related septic complications (13% versus 8%, p = 0.6 by chi 2 analysis). Functional results were similar for daytime (median: 5 per day) and nighttime (median: 1 per night) stool frequency and the median duration that defecation could be deferred (median: about 1.5 hours). Perfect continence was present in 34 (87%) patients during the day and in 19 (49%) patients during the night in each group. The use of antidiarrheal medications did not differ between the two groups. According to an analogue scale (from 1 to 10, with 10 being best), the quality of life and health and satisfaction with outcome (median score: 9) were identical between the groups. Thus, in closely matched groups of patients with FAP and MUC, the functional outcome after RP was similar. However, pouchitis was more common in the MUC group (33% versus 10%, p < 0.05 by chi 2 analysis).

Restorative proctocolectomy in patients after previous intestinal or anal surgery.

Restorative proctocolectomy is now established as the procedure of choice in many patients with ulcerative colitis or familial polyposis coli as well as in some patients with multiple colorectal tumors, ischemia, trauma, or congenital abnormalities. Some patients, however, may have had previous pelvic, abdominal, or perineal surgery, which might be considered a contraindication to restorative proctocolectomy. In a consecutive series of 73 private patients undergoing restorative proctocolectomy under one surgeon, we have reviewed in detail 13 who had had previous "significant" abdominal, pelvic, or anal surgery. Eight patients had previously had surgery for fistula-in-ano or fissure-in-ano, two had had an anal sphincter repair, and three had undergone possibly compromising abdominal or pelvic surgery prior to restorative proctocolectomy. Twelve of the 13 made an uncomplicated recovery from restorative proctocolectomy, although one has since died from carcinomatosis. One patient died after closure of an ileostomy from a combination of enterocutaneous fistula, infection, bleeding, and a perforated duodenal ulcer. One patient developed sepsis, necessitating removal of the pouch, and is classified as a failure. Two of the remaining 11 have had minor long-term functional problems with nocturnal fecal incontinence, and one patient needs to catheterize the pouch to evacuate, but all three patients prefer a pouch to an ileostomy. Restorative proctocolectomy can be performed successfully even after previous pelvic, abdominal, or anal surgery with an acceptable complication rate when compared with pouch surgery in the uncompromised patient.