Adenomatous polyps develop commonly in the ileal pouch of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis

The Cumulative Incidence and Progression of Ileal Pouch Adenomas in Patients With Familial Adenomatous Polyposis

BACKGROUND

Patients with familial adenomatous polyposis who have undergone restorative proctocolectomy can develop adenomas in the pouch.

OBJECTIVE

To review experience with pouch surveillance and create a classification system for polyposis severity.

DESIGN

A retrospective review of patients undergoing IPAA and follow-up at 1 institution.

SETTING

A center for hereditary colorectal cancer within a quaternary referral center.

PATIENTS

All patients undergoing IPAA and followed endoscopically after surgery by the center.

INTERVENTIONS

Yearly pouchoscopy and treatment of polyps as required.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome measure was incidence and severity of pouch neoplasia and its changes with time.

METHODS

A retrospective study of patients who had a restorative proctocolectomy for familial adenomatous polyposis at Cleveland Clinic. Severity of polyposis was classified on the basis of size, number, and histology.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-five patients were analyzed. The median age at IPAA was 31 years and 52% were male. The median follow-up was 10.1 years; the median number of pouchoscopies per patient was 4. The median interval between pouchoscopies was 21.9 months. Overall, the incidence of pouch adenomas was found in 47 patients (28.5%). The median time from pouch to first pouch adenoma diagnosis was 10.3 years. The estimated cumulative incidence rates of pouch adenoma at 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 years after IPAA were 5.9%, 21.7%, 40%, 54.8%, and 69.9%, respectively. At the first diagnosis of pouch adenoma, 25 patients had stage 1, 10 had stage 2, 8 had stage 3, and 4 had stage 4. Twenty of 47 patients progressed to a higher stage. No patient developed cancer.

LIMITATIONS

Genotype was not available for all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

There is an increasing incidence of pouch neoplasia after restorative proctocolectomy, reaching a plateau at 25 years. The polyposis is usually mild but sometimes increases in severity.

LA INCIDENCIA ACUMULADA Y LA PROGRESIN DE LOS ADENOMAS DE LA BOLSA ILEAL EN PACIENTES CON POLIPOSIS ADENOMATOSA FAMILIAR

ANTECEDENTES:Los pacientes con poliposis adenomatosa familiar que se han sometido a una proctocolectomía restauradora pueden desarrollar adenomas en la bolsa.OBJETIVO:Revisamos nuestra experiencia con la vigilancia de la bolsa y creamos un sistema de clasificación para la gravedad de la poliposis.DISEÑO:Una revisión retrospectiva de pacientes sometidos a anastomosis de bolsa ileoanal y seguimiento en una institución.ESCENARIO:Un centro para el cáncer colorrectal hereditario dentro de un centro de referencia cuaternarioPACIENTES:Todos los pacientes sometidos a anastomosis reservorio ileoanal y seguidos por vía endoscópica tras la cirugía por el centro.INTERVENCIONES:Bolsascopia anual y tratamiento de pólipos según sea necesarioPRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Primaria: Incidencia y gravedad de la neoplasia del reservorio y sus cambios con el tiempo.MÉTODOS:Un estudio retrospectivo de pacientes que se sometieron a una proctocolectomía restauradora por poliposis adenomatosa familiar en la Clínica Cleveland. La gravedad de la poliposis se clasificó según el tamaño, el número y la histología.RESULTADOS:Se analizaron 165 pacientes. La mediana de edad del IPAA fue de 31 años y el 52% eran hombres. La mediana de seguimiento fue de 10,1 años; número medio de reservorioscopias por paciente = 4. El intervalo medio entre reservorioscopias fue de 21,9 meses. Incidencia global de adenomas de reservorio = 47/165 (28,5%). Tiempo mediano desde el reservorio hasta el primer diagnóstico de adenoma en reservorio = 10,3 años. La tasa de incidencia acumulada estimada de adenoma de bolsa a los 5, 10, 15, 20, y 30 años después de la IPAA es del 5,9%, 21,7%, 40%, 54,8%, y 69,9%, respectivamente. En el primer diagnóstico de adenoma de la bolsa, 25 pacientes tenían estadio 1, 10 estadio 2, 8 estadio 3 y 4 estadio 4. 20/47 pacientes progresaron a un estadio superior Ningún paciente desarrolló cáncer.LIMITACIONES:Genotipo no disponible para todos los pacientesCONCLUSIONES:Hay una incidencia creciente de neoplasia de la bolsa después de la proctocolectomía restauradora, alcanzando una meseta a los 25 años. La poliposis suele ser leve, pero a veces aumenta en severidad. (Traducción-Dr. Yesenia Rojas-Khalil ).

Long-term outcomes of pouch surveillance and risk of neoplasia in familial adenomatous polyposis

BACKGROUND

Long-term pouch surveillance outcomes for familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) are unknown. We aimed to quantify surveillance outcomes and to determine which of selected possible predictive factors are associated with pouch dysplasia.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of collected data on 249 patients was performed, analyzing potential risk factors for the development of adenomas or advanced lesions ( ≥ 10 mm/high grade dysplasia (HGD)/cancer) in the pouch body and cuff using Cox proportional hazards models. Kaplan-Meier analyses included landmark time-point analyses at 10 years after surgery to predict the future risk of advanced lesions.

RESULTS

Of 249 patients, 76 % developed at least one pouch body adenoma, with 16 % developing an advanced pouch body lesion; 18 % developed an advanced cuff lesion. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a 10-year lag before most advanced lesions developed; cumulative incidence of 2.8 % and 6.4 % at 10 years in the pouch body and cuff, respectively. Landmark analysis suggested the presence of adenomas prior to the 10-year point was associated with subsequent development of advanced lesions in the pouch body (hazard ratio [HR] 4.8, 95 %CI 1.6-14.1; P = 0.004) and cuff (HR 6.8, 95 %CI 2.5-18.3; P < 0.001). There were two HGD and four cancer cases in the cuff and one pouch body cancer; all cases of cancer/HGD that had prior surveillance were preceded by ≥ 10-mm adenomas.

CONCLUSIONS

Pouch adenoma progression is slow and most advanced lesions occur after 10 years. HGD and cancer were rare events. Pouch phenotype in the first decade is associated with the future risk of developing advanced lesions and may guide personalized surveillance beyond 10 years.

Development of ileal adenomas after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis versus end ileostomy in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) undergo (procto)colectomy to prevent colorectal cancer from developing. Interestingly, after proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA), most patients develop adenomas in the pouch. This is not well described for patients with end ileostomy. We aimed to compare ileal adenoma development in patients with IPAA with those with end ileostomy.

METHODS

This historical cohort study included FAP patients with IPAA or end ileostomy who underwent surveillance endoscopies between 2001 and 2021. Primary outcomes were the proportion of patients with ileal adenomas, location of adenomas, and proportion of patients undergoing surgical excision of pouch/end ileostomy.

RESULTS

Overall, 144 patients with IPAA (n = 111) and end ileostomy (n = 33) were included. Five years after surgery, 15% of patients with IPAA had ileal adenomas versus 4% after ileostomy. At 10 years, these estimates were 48% versus 9% and at 20 years were 85% versus 43% (log-rank P < .001). Adenomas developed more often in the pouch body (95%) in the IPAA group and more often at the everted site of the ileostomy (77%) in the ileostomy group. Numbers for surgical excision of the pouch (n = 9) or ileostomy (n = 3) for polyposis or cancer were comparable. Taking into account potential confounders in a multivariable Cox regression analysis, having an IPAA was significantly associated with ileal adenoma development.

CONCLUSIONS

After proctocolectomy, FAP patients with IPAA more often developed ileal adenomas than patients with end ileostomy. This could potentially affect long-term management, and patients with end ileostomy might benefit from less-frequent endoscopic surveillance.

Incidence and Risk Factors of Cancer in the Anal Transitional Zone and Ileal Pouch following Surgery for Ulcerative Colitis and Familial Adenomatous Polyposis

Proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is the intervention of choice for ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis requiring surgery. One of the long-term complications is pouch cancer, having a poor prognosis. The risk of high-grade dysplasia and cancer in the anal transitional zone and ileal pouch after 20 years is estimated to be 2 to 4.5% and 3 to 10% in ulcerative colitis and familial polyposis, respectively. The risk factors for ulcerative colitis are the presence of pre-operative dysplasia or cancer, disease duration > 10 years and severe villous atrophy. For familial polyposis, the risk factors are the number of pre-operative polyps > 1000, surgery with stapled anastomosis and the duration of follow-up. In the case of ulcerative colitis, a pouchoscopy should be performed annually if one of the following is present: dysplasia and cancer at surgery, primary sclerosing cholangitis, villous atrophy and active pouchitis (every 5 years without any of these factors). In the case of familial polyposis, endoscopy is recommended every year including chromoendoscopy. Even if anal transitional zone and ileal pouch cancers seldom occur following proctectomy for ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis, the high mortality rate associated with this complication warrants endoscopic monitoring.

Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) guidelines 2020 for the Clinical Practice of Hereditary Colorectal Cancer

Hereditary colorectal cancer (HCRC) accounts for < 5% of all colorectal cancer cases. Some of the unique characteristics commonly encountered in HCRC cases include early age of onset, synchronous/metachronous cancer occurrence, and multiple cancers in other organs. These characteristics necessitate different management approaches, including diagnosis, treatment or surveillance, from sporadic colorectal cancer management. There are two representative HCRC, named familial adenomatous polyposis and Lynch syndrome. Other than these two HCRC syndromes, related disorders have also been reported. Several guidelines for hereditary disorders have already been published worldwide. In Japan, the first guideline for HCRC was prepared by the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR), published in 2012 and revised in 2016. This revised version of the guideline was immediately translated into English and published in 2017. Since then, several new findings and novel disease concepts related to HCRC have been discovered. The currently diagnosed HCRC rate in daily clinical practice is relatively low; however, this is predicted to increase in the era of cancer genomic medicine, with the advancement of cancer multi-gene panel testing or whole genome testing, among others. Under these circumstances, the JSCCR guidelines 2020 for HCRC were prepared by consensus among members of the JSCCR HCRC Guideline Committee, based on a careful review of the evidence retrieved from literature searches, and considering the medical health insurance system and actual clinical practice settings in Japan. Herein, we present the English version of the JSCCR guidelines 2020 for HCRC.

Eflornithine plus Sulindac for Prevention of Progression in Familial Adenomatous Polyposis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of combination therapy with eflornithine and sulindac, as compared with either drug alone, in delaying disease progression in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis are unknown.

METHODS

We evaluated the efficacy and safety of the combination of eflornithine and sulindac, as compared with either drug alone, in adults with familial adenomatous polyposis. The patients were stratified on the basis of anatomical site with the highest polyp burden and surgical status; the strata were precolectomy (shortest projected time to disease progression), rectal or ileal pouch polyposis after colectomy (longest projected time), and duodenal polyposis (intermediate projected time). The patients were then randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive 750 mg of eflornithine, 150 mg of sulindac, or both once daily for up to 48 months. The primary end point, assessed in a time-to-event analysis, was disease progression, defined as a composite of major surgery, endoscopic excision of advanced adenomas, diagnosis of high-grade dysplasia in the rectum or pouch, or progression of duodenal disease.

RESULTS

A total of 171 patients underwent randomization. Disease progression occurred in 18 of 56 patients (32%) in the eflornithine-sulindac group, 22 of 58 (38%) in the sulindac group, and 23 of 57 (40%) in the eflornithine group, with a hazard ratio of 0.71 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39 to 1.32) for eflornithine-sulindac as compared with sulindac (P = 0.29) and 0.66 (95% CI, 0.36 to 1.24) for eflornithine-sulindac as compared with eflornithine. Among 37 precolectomy patients, the corresponding values in the treatment groups were 2 of 12 patients (17%), 6 of 13 (46%), and 5 of 12 (42%) (hazard ratios, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.07 to 1.32] and 0.20 [95% CI, 0.03 to 1.32]); among 34 patients with rectal or ileal pouch polyposis, the values were 4 of 11 patients (36%), 2 of 11 (18%), and 5 of 12 (42%) (hazard ratios, 2.03 [95% CI, 0.43 to 9.62] and 0.84 [95% CI, 0.24 to 2.90]); and among 100 patients with duodenal polyposis, the values were 12 of 33 patients (36%), 14 of 34 (41%), and 13 of 33 (39%) (hazard ratios, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.34 to 1.52] and 0.76 [95% CI, 0.35 to 1.64]). Adverse and serious adverse events were similar across the treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this trial involving patients with familial adenomatous polyposis, the incidence of disease progression was not significantly lower with the combination of eflornithine and sulindac than with either drug alone. (Funded by Cancer Prevention Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01483144; EudraCT number, 2012-000427-41.).

Long-term outcomes of metachronous neoplasms in the ileal pouch and rectum after surgical treatment in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis

Background and study aims  Restorative proctocolectomy has become the most common surgical option for patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). However, adenomas and even carcinomas may develop in the ileal pouch over time. The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term incidence and nature of ileal pouch or distal ileal adenomas and carcinomas in patients with FAP. Patients and methods  This was a retrospective study of 47 FAP patients with Kock's continent ileostomy (Kock) (n = 8), ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) (n = 13), and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) (n = 26). Patients were followed with a standardized protocol including chromoendoscopy and biopsies of visible polyps in the ileal pouch, distal ileum, and rectum every 6 to 12 months. Results  Median follow-up was 21.0 years. Overall risk of adenoma development was significantly higher in IRA patients, with incidence rates of 85 % and 100 % at 5 and 10 years' follow-up, respectively, compared to pouch patients (Kock + IPAA) ( P  < 0.001). However, there was also a high frequency of adenomas in the ileal pouch mucosa, with rates of 12 %, 33 %, and 68 %, at 5, 10, and 20 years of follow-up, respectively. Maximum size of ileal pouch adenomas was significantly related to time since surgery ( P  = 0.0214). Six cases of advanced adenomas including two cases of adenocarcinomas developed in the ileal pouch mucosa. Conclusions  There is a significant incidence of adenoma(s) in the ileal pouch of FAP patients on long-term follow-up. Regular endoscopic surveillance is recommended, not only in IRA patients, but also in pouch patients after proctocolectomy.

MutYH-associated polyposis

MutYH-associated polyposis is the only polyposis syndrome with an autosomal recessive type of inheritance, often phenotypically similar to a weakened form of familial adenomatous polyposis. For the development of the disease mutations in both alleles of the gene are required, but an increased risk of developing colorectal cancer in carriers of monoallelic mutations is noted. The diagnosis of MutYH-associated polyposis should be suspected in a patient with colorectal cancer over 45 years old on the background of polyps in the colon. The review presents modern algorithms for diagnostic and treatment of the disease.

Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) Guidelines 2016 for the Clinical Practice of Hereditary Colorectal Cancer (Translated Version)

Hereditary colorectal cancer accounts for less than 5% of all colorectal cancer cases. Some of the unique characteristics that are commonly encountered in cases of hereditary colorectal cancer include early age at onset, synchronous/metachronous occurrence of the cancer, and association with multiple cancers in other organs, necessitating different management from sporadic colorectal cancer. While the diagnosis of familial adenomatous polyposis might be easy because usually 100 or more adenomas that develop in the colonic mucosa are in this condition, Lynch syndrome, which is the most commonly associated disease with hereditary colorectal cancer, is often missed in daily medical practice because of its relatively poorly defined clinical characteristics. In addition, the disease concept and diagnostic criteria for Lynch syndrome, which was once called hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer, have changed over time with continual research, thereby possibly creating confusion in clinical practice. Under these circumstances, the JSCCR Guideline Committee has developed the "JSCCR Guidelines 2016 for the Clinical Practice of Hereditary Colorectal Cancer (HCRC)," to allow delivery of appropriate medical care in daily practice to patients with familial adenomatous polyposis, Lynch syndrome, or other related diseases. The JSCCR Guidelines 2016 for HCRC were prepared by consensus reached among members of the JSCCR Guideline Committee, based on a careful review of the evidence retrieved from literature searches, and considering the medical health insurance system and actual clinical practice settings in Japan. Herein, we present the English version of the JSCCR Guidelines 2016 for HCRC.

Efficacy and safety of eflornithine (CPP-1X)/sulindac combination therapy versus each as monotherapy in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP): design and rationale of a randomized, double-blind, Phase III trial

Background

Molecular studies suggest inhibition of colorectal mucosal polyamines (PAs) may be a promising approach to prevent colorectal cancer (CRC). Inhibition of ornithine decarboxylase (ODC) using low-dose eflornithine (DFMO, CPP-1X), combined with maximal PA export using low-dose sulindac, results in greatly reduced levels of normal mucosal PAs. In a clinical trial, this combination (compared with placebo) reduced the 3-year incidence of subsequent high-risk adenomas by >90 %. Familial Adenomatous Polyposis (FAP) is characterized by marked up-regulation of ODC in normal intestinal epithelial and adenoma tissue, and therefore PA reduction might be a potential strategy to control progression of FAP-related intestinal polyposis. CPP FAP-310, a randomized, double-blind, Phase III trial was designed to examine the safety and efficacy of sulindac and DFMO (alone or in combination) for preventing a clinically relevant FAP-related progression event in individuals with FAP.

Methods

Eligible adults with FAP will be randomized to: CPP-1X 750 mg and sulindac 150 mg, CPP-1X placebo and sulindac 150 mg, or CPP-1X 750 mg and sulindac placebo once daily for 24 months. Patients will be stratified based on time-to-event prognosis into one of the three treatment arms: best (ie, longest time to first FAP-related event [rectal/pouch polyposis]), intermediate (duodenal polyposis) and worst (pre-colectomy). Stage-specific, “delayed time to” FAP-related events are the primary endpoints. Change in polyp burden (upper and/or lower intestine) is a key secondary endpoint.

Discussion

The trial is ongoing. As of February 1, 2016, 214 individuals have been screened; 138 eligible subjects have been randomized to three treatment groups at 15 North American sites and 6 European sites. By disease strata, 26, 80 and 32 patients are included for assessment of polyp burden in the rectum/pouch, duodenal polyposis and pre-colectomy groups, respectively. Median age is 40 years; 59 % are men. The most common reasons for screening failure include minimal polyp burden (n = 22), withdrawal of consent (n = 9) and extensive polyposis requiring immediate surgical intervention (n = 9). Enrollment is ongoing.

Trial registration

This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01483144; November 21, 2011) and the EU Clinical Trials Register(EudraCT 2012-000427-41; May 15, 2014).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12876-016-0494-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Surveillance using capsule endoscopy is safe in post-colectomy patients with familial adenomatous polyposis: a prospective Japanese study

The utility of capsule endoscopy (CE) for the surveillance of small intestinal lesions in familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) patients has been reported. However, few studies have investigated the safety of CE in FAP patients who have undergone colon surgery. We aimed to assess the safety of surveillance CE in post-colectomy FAP patients and the endoscopic findings associated with small intestinal lesions. We assessed the safety of CE surveillance of small intestinal lesions in 41 FAP patients who had undergone colectomies. Forty-two CEs were performed in 41 patients at our facility from April 2012 to July 2014. CE was conducted safely and none of the capsules were retained, despite the inclusion of patients who had undergone several abdominal surgeries previously. Thirty-nine out of 42 capsules (93 %) were retrieved within the examination timeframe; hence, the retrieval rate was favorable. The findings from this study indicate that surveillance CE can be safely conducted in post-colectomy FAP patients.

Pouch adenomas in Familial Adenomatous Polyposis after restorative proctocolectomy

INTRODUCTION

Australian Clinical Practice Guidelines suggest six to twelve-monthly endoscopic pouch surveillance in patients after restorative proctocolectomy for Familial Adenomatous Polyposis (FAP). There are several reports of adenomas and carcinomas forming within the ileum, ileal pouch mucosa or residual rectal mucosa. A retrospective clinical study was performed to audit pouch endoscopic surveillance at a large Sydney tertiary referral Hospital. The aim was to evaluate adenoma development after restorative proctocolectomy for FAP and the adherence rate to published clinical guidelines.

METHODS

Thirty-nine patients who had restorative proctocolectomy for FAP from 1985 to 2011 were identified. Demographic data, details of surgery, original histopathology and details of follow-up pouch endoscopy and pathology findings were obtained.

RESULTS

Of the thirty-nine patients, twenty-seven patients were included in this study. Adenomas were found in twelve of 27 (44%) patients. Mean time to first polyp formation was 88 months and median time was 72 months (range 18-249 months). All polyps were either tubular or tubulovillous in histology. One polyp had high grade dysplasia. The remainder had mild or moderate dysplasia. Polyps were excised either endo-anally or during pouchoscopy. None of the five patients who had a hand-sewn ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) developed polyps on follow-up, compared with 12 of the 22 (55%) with a double stapled anastomosis (fishers exact test; p=0.047 (two-tailed)). Of those who developed pouch adenomas, eight (67%) developed further pouch adenomas on follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports guidelines recommending lifelong pouch surveillance after restorative proctocolectomy for FAP. Those who develop pouch adenomas may be at greater risk of developing further adenomas. Residual rectal mucosa at the pouch-anal anastomosis should be carefully examined.

Risk of ileal pouch neoplasms in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis

Restorative proctocolectomy is the most common surgical option for patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). However, adenomas may develop in the ileal pouch mucosa over time, and even carcinoma in the pouch has been reported. We therefore reviewed the prevalence, nature, and treatment of adenomas and carcinoma that develop after proctocolectomy in the ileal pouch mucosa in patients with FAP. In 25 reports that were reviewed, the incidence of adenomas in the ileal pouch varied from 6.7% to 73.9%. Several potential factors that favor the development of pouch polyposis have been investigated, but many remain controversial. Nevertheless, it seems certain that the age of the pouch is important. The risk appears to be 7% to 16% after 5 years, 35% to 42% after 10 years, and 75% after 15 years. On the other hand, only 21 cases of ileal pouch carcinoma have been recorded in the literature to date. The diagnosis of pouch carcinoma was made between 3 to 20 years (median, 10 years) after pouch construction. Although the risk of malignant transformation in ileal pouches is probably low, it is not negligible, and the long-term risk cannot presently be well quantified. Regular endoscopic surveillance, especially using chromoendoscopy, is recommended.

Risk of neoplastic change in ileal pouches in familial adenomatous polyposis

INTRODUCTION

Neoplastic change in ileal reservoirs after proctocolectomy has been reported in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. We aim to determine the incidence and progression of neoplastic change in the ileal pouch of familial adenomatous polyposis patients at our institution.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients who underwent proctocolectomy for familial adenomatous polyposis with construction of an ileal pouch from 1972 to 2007 was performed. Data and status at follow-up were retrieved from the Mayo Clinic Colorectal Surgery Pouch database.

RESULTS

One hundred seventeen patients were identified with a median age of 26, 52 were male. Ileal reservoirs included J-pouch (a = 104), Kock pouch (n = 9), S-pouch (n = 3), and W-pouch (n = 1). Median follow-up was 125 months. Polyps were biopsied in 33 patients: non-dysplastic polyps (n = 2), low-grade dysplasia (n = 30), and adenocarcinoma (n = 1). No patients had high-grade dysplasia. Median time to development of dysplasia was 149 months. Adenocarcinoma developed in one patient after 284 months. Risk of dysplasia at 10, 20, and 25 years was 17, 45, and 69%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Though there is a high incidence of low-grade dysplasia in the ileal reservoir in familial adenomatous polyposis patients, high-grade dysplasia and cancer occur rarely. Patients with low-grade dysplasia may still necessitate regular follow-up.

Anal transitional zone neoplasia in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis after restorative proctocolectomy and IPAA: incidence, management, and oncologic and functional outcomes

BACKGROUND

Restorative proctocolectomy and IPAA in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis may leave residual anal transitional zone mucosa that is prone to neoplasia.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term control of neoplasia at the IPAA, the functional outcomes, and the influence of anastomotic technique on these results.

DESIGN

: This research is a retrospective cohort study from a prospective database.

SETTING

The investigation took place in a high-volume specialized colorectal surgery department.

PATIENTS

Patients with familial adenomatous polyposis who underwent IPAA between 1983 and 2010 were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were functional outcomes, quality of life, and the incidence of neoplasia in the anal transitional zone.

RESULTS

Eighty-six patients underwent mucosectomy and 174 underwent stapled anastomosis with mean 155 ± 99 and 95 ± 70 months follow-up. Eighteen patients (20.9%) in the mucosectomy group and 59 patients (33.9%) in the stapled group developed anal transitional zone adenomas (p = 0.03). One of 86 (1.2%) patients undergoing mucosectomy and 3 of 174 (1.7%) patients undergoing stapled anastomosis developed cancer in the anal transitional zone (p > 0.05). Three of these patients underwent an abdominoperineal resection, but one who refused abdominoperineal resection underwent transanal excision with neoileoanal anastomosis. Patients undergoing a mucosectomy had a significantly higher rate of anastomotic stricture, but other complications were similar. Incontinence, seepage, and pad usage were higher in the mucosectomy group. Cleveland global quality-of-life score was 0.8 ± 0.2 in patients with handsewn anastomoses and 0.8 ± 0.3 in patients with a stapled anastomoses (p > 0.05).

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by its nonrandomized retrospective design.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk for the development of adenomas in the anal transitional zone is higher after a stapled IPAA than after a mucosectomy with handsewn anastomosis. However, control of anal transitional zone neoplasia results in a similar risk of cancer development. Because the stapled procedure is associated with better long-term functional outcomes than a mucosectomy, stapled IPAA is the preferable procedure for most patients with familial adenomatous polyposis.

Adenoma formation and malignancy after restorative proctocolectomy with or without mucosectomy in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis

BACKGROUND

There is controversy concerning whether or not to perform mucosectomy after IPAA in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. Although more frequent adenoma formation at the anastomotic site in patients without a mucosectomy is documented, the interpretation of the theoretical reflections and empirical findings are ambiguous.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the differences in adenoma formation at the anastomotic site and in the ileal pouch among patients with familial adenomatous polyposis after IPAA with or without mucosectomy.

DESIGN

Data were gathered from The Norwegian Polyposis Registry and The Cancer Registry of Norway.

PATIENTS

Sixty-one patients with familial adenomatous polyposis who had IPAA were included in the Norwegian Polyposis Registry.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The frequency of adenoma development in the pouch or at the anastomotic site was measured.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients had a pelvic pouch performed with mucosectomy and 22 patients without. The observational time was 15.5 and 13.7 years. Adenoma formation at the anastomotic site was 4 in 39 and 14 in 22, and the estimated rate was 17% vs 75% (p = 0.0001). One patient without mucosectomy had a cancer (Dukes A) at the anastomotic site. There was no estimated long-term difference in adenoma formation in the ileal pouches between the 2 surgical procedures (38%) (p = 0.10).

LIMITATIONS

The study is retrospective, in part, and relies on data from registries. There is a limited number of cases, and selection bias because of surgeon preference may exist.

CONCLUSION

In patients with familial adenomatous polyposis who undergo IPAA, adenoma formation at the anastomotic site is significantly reduced after mucosectomy. Mucosectomy may be the preferable procedure to prevent adenomas at the anastomotic site.

Adenocarcinomas After Prophylactic Surgery For Familial Adenomatous Polyposis

The incidence of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is one in 7,000 to 12,000 live births. Virtually, all surgically untreated patients with FAP inevitably develop colorectal-cancer in their lifetime because they carry the adenomatous polyposis coli gene. Thus prophylactic proctocolectomy is indicated. Surgical treatment of FAP is still controversial. There are however, four surgical options: ileorectal anastomosis, restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis, proctocolectomy with ileostomy, and proctocolectomy with continent-ileostomy. Conventional proctocolectomy options largely lie between colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis or ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Detractors of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis prefer ileorectal anastomosis because of better functional results and quality of life. The functional outcome of total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis is undoubtedly far superior to that of the ileoanal pouch; however, the risk for rectal cancer is increased by 30%. Even after mucosectomy, inadvertent small mucosal residual islands remain. These residual islands carry the potential for the development of subsequent malignancy. We reviewed the literature (1975-2012) on the incidence, nature, and possible etiology of subsequent ileal-pouch and anal transit zone adenocarcinoma after prophylactic surgery procedure for FAP. To date there are 24 studies reporting 92 pouch-related cancers; 15 case reports, 4 prospective and 5 retrospective studies. Twenty three of 92 cancers (25%) developed in the pouch mucosa and 69 (75%) in anal transit zone (ATZ). Current recommendation for pouch surveillance and treatment are presented. Data suggest lifetime surveillance of these patients.

Evaluating pouch problems

IPAA is a technically demanding procedure that requires appropriate skills and expertise. Adverse sequelae of IPAA are common. Accurate diagnosis and classification of pouch disorders and associated complications are important for proper management and prognosis. Based on presenting symptoms, appropriate and combined diagnostic modalities should apply. A multidisciplinary approach involving gastroenterologists, colorectal surgeons, gastrointestinal pathologists, and gastrointestinal radiologists is advocated for diagnosis and treatment of pouch disorders.

Familial adenomatous polyposis: challenges and pitfalls of surgical treatment

Surgical management of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is complex and requires both sound judgment and technical skills. Because colorectal cancer risk approaches 100%, prophylactic colorectal surgery remains a cornerstone of management. Both patient factors and disease characteristics influence surgical decision-making regarding the timing of prophylactic surgery, the extent of resection, and types of reconstruction. Making appropriate choices can be challenging and there is continued debate regarding optimal strategies. This chapter reviews the controversies in colorectal surgery for FAP.

Comprehensive analysis of the bacterial content of stool from patients with chronic pouchitis, normal pouches, or familial adenomatous polyposis pouches

BACKGROUND

Chronic pouchitis is an important long-term complication following ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis. Antibiotic administration reduces symptoms of pouchitis, indicating that bacteria have a role in pathogenesis. The aim of the research was to investigate the bacterial content of pouches using nucleic acid-based methods.

METHODS

Stool microbiota of 17 patients with normal pouches (NP), 17 patients with pouchitis (CP) utilizing samples collected from each patient when antibiotic-treated (CP-on, asymptomatic) and when untreated (CP-off, symptomatic), and 14 familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) patients were analyzed by high-throughput sequencing, fluorescence in situ hybridization technologies, and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR).

RESULTS

Fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis revealed an expanded phylogenetic gap in NP and CP-off patients relative to FAP. Antibiotic treatment reduced the gap in CP stool. The phylogenetic gap of CP-off patients was due to members of the bacterial families Caulobacteriaceae, Sphingomonadaceae, Comamonadaceae, Peptostreptococcaceae, and Clostridiaceae. There was a greater diversity of phylotypes of Clostridiaceae in CP-off subjects. The phylogenetic gap of NP stool was enriched by Ruminococcaceae and Bifidobacteriaceae. CP stool microbiota had reduced diversity relative to NP and FAP stool due largely to a reduction in Lachnospiraceae/Insertae Sedis XIV/clostridial cluster IV groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Bacterial groups within the expanded phylogenetic gap of pouch patients may have roles in the pathogenesis of pouchitis. Further research concerning the physiology of cultured members of these groups will be necessary to explain their specific roles. Members of the Lachnospiraceae, Incertae Sedis XIV, and clostridial cluster IV could be useful biomarkers of pouch health.

Cell transplantation in surgical treatment of familial adenomatous polyposis coli

We developed a method of surgical treatment of familial adenomatous polyposis coli giving an opportunity to prevent the growth of new polyps in the preserved part of the rectum and consisting in transplantation of fetal cells of the epithelial origin into the rectum wall after mucosectomy. Since the rectum is partially preserved, ileorectal anastomosis can be formed after colectomy, which preserves natural bowel passage. Complex examination 4 weeks after surgery revealed the formation of normal rectal mucosa. No new polyps were detected in the rectum 1-3 years after surgery.

The role of cell proliferation and crypt fission in adenoma aggressiveness: a comparison of ileoanal pouch and rectal adenomas in familial adenomatous polyposis

AIM

In patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), ileoanal pouch cancer is rare whereas rectal cancer is common, despite polyp initiation at the two sites being similar at the molecular level. This study investigated whether the disparity in adenoma aggressiveness reflects underlying differences in histogenesis.

METHOD

Normal mucosal biopsies and 2-3 mm adenomas from patients with FAP were dissected into individual crypts. Crypt area, morphology, fission and mitoses were analysed for crypts from pouch, rectum and supra-anastomotic ileum. Immunohistochemistry of similar archival samples was performed for lysozyme, β-catenin and TP53 expression.

RESULTS

The morphology of normal crypts was similar at each site, although crypt area differed. The area of normal pouch crypts was intermediate between rectum and ileum. The area of adenomatous crypts of rectum and pouch was similar, but the latter had increased asymmetrical fission. Crypt mitoses were proportional to area in all tissues, but crypt fission was reduced in adenomatous crypts from the rectum compared with the pouch. Pouch adenomas retained lysozyme expression as seen in normal ileum. Nuclear β-catenin accumulation was similar, but TP53 expression was increased in rectal adenomas.

CONCLUSION

Diminutive polyps from rectum and pouch differ in morphology and proliferation. Aggressiveness in rectal polyps is not conferred by increased crypt proliferation, fission, or activation of the Wnt signalling pathway. Increased TP53 expression suggests other molecular mechanisms may be responsible. While crypt mitoses are proportional to crypt area, the threshold for fission may be site specific, indicating that tissue origin may influence histogenesis and thus malignant potential.

Effects of intervention with sulindac and inulin/VSL#3 on mucosal and luminal factors in the pouch of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis

BACKGROUND/AIM

In order to define future chemoprevention strategies for adenomas or carcinomas in the pouch of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), a 4-weeks intervention with (1) sulindac, (2) inulin/VSL#3, and (3) sulindac/inulin/VSL#3 was performed on 17 patients with FAP in a single center intervention study. Primary endpoints were the risk parameters cell proliferation and glutathione S-transferase (GST) detoxification capacity in the pouch mucosa; secondary endpoints were the short chain fatty acid (SCFA) contents, pH, and cytotoxicity of fecal water.

METHODS

Before the start and at the end of each 4-week intervention period, six biopsies of the pouch were taken and feces was collected during 24 h. Cell proliferation and GST enzyme activity was assessed in the biopsies and pH, SCFA contents, and cytotoxicity were assessed in the fecal water fraction. The three interventions (sulindac, inulin/VSL#3, sulindac/inulin/VSL#3) were compared with the Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

Cell proliferation was lower after sulindac or VSL#3/inulin, the combination treatment with sulindac/inulin/VSL#3 showed the opposite. GST enzyme activity was increased after sulindac or VSL#3/inulin, the combination treatment showed the opposite effect. However, no significance was reached in all these measures. Cytotoxicity, pH, and SCFA content of fecal water showed no differences at all among the three treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

Our study revealed non-significant decreased cell proliferation and increased detoxification capacity after treatment with sulindac or VSL#3/inulin; however, combining both regimens did not show an additional effect.

[Two cases of multiple adenomas in the ileal pouch after total proctocolectomy in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis]

Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is an inherited disease characterized by the development of hundreds of colorectal adenomas, leading to a 100% lifetime risk of colorectal cancer. A prophylactic colectomy is recommended for patients with FAP to prevent colorectal cancer. Four surgical strategies are available for patients with FAP: proctocolectomy with permanent ileostomy, colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis, proctocolectomy with Kochs pouch continent ileostomy (Koch), and restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA). Koch and IPAA, which make ileal pouch, have theoretical advantage of the elimination of the risk of colorectal cancer and adenomas and good functional outcome of reduced defecation frequency. However, recent reports have shown frequent development of adenomas and carcinomas in the ileal pouch after Koch or IPAA. We experienced 2 cases of multiple pouch adenomas after pouch surgery in FAP patients. Both patients were treated with endoscopic mucosal resection without complications. We report these 2 cases with a review of literatures.

Surgical treatment of familial adenomatous polyposis: ileorectal anastomosis or restorative proctolectomy?

CONTEXT

Controversy regarding the best operative choice for familial adenomatous polyposis lays between the morbidity of restorative proctocolectomy and the supposed mortality due to rectal cancer after ileorectal anastomosis.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate operative complications and oncological outcome after ileorectal anastomosis and restorative proctocolectomy.

METHODS

Charts from patients treated between 1977 and 2006 were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical and endoscopic data, results of treatment, pathological reports and information regarding early and late outcome were recorded.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight patients - 41 men (46.6%) and 47 women (53.4%) - were assisted. At diagnosis, 53 patients (60.2%) already had associated colorectal cancer. Operative complications occurred in 25 patients (29.0 %), being 17 (19.7%) early and 8 (9.3%) late complications. There were more complications after restorative proctocolectomy (48.1%) compared to proctocolectomy with ileostomy (26.6%) and ileorectal anastomosis (19.0%) (P = 0,03). There was no operative mortality. During the follow-up of 36 ileorectal anastomosis, cancer developed in the rectal cuff in six patients (16,6%). Cumulative cancer risk after ileorectal anastomosis was 17.2% at 5 years, 24.1% at 10 years and 43.1% at 15 years of follow-up. Age-dependent cumulative risk started at 30 years (4.3%), went to 9.6% at 40 years, 20.9% at 40 years and 52% at 60 years. Among the 26 patients followed after restorative proctocolectomy, it was found cancer in the ileal pouch in 1 (3.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

1. Operative complications occurred in about one third of the patients, being more frequently after the confection of ileal reservoir; 2. greater age and previous colonic carcinoma were associated with the development of rectal cancer after ileorectal anastomosis; 3. patients treated by restorative proctocolectomy are not free from the risk of pouch degeneration; 4. the disease complexity and the various risk factors (clinical, endoscopic, genetic) indicate that the best choice for operative treatment should be based on individual features discussed by a specialist; 5. all patients require continuous and long-term surveillance during postoperative follow-up.

Polyps in the ileal pouch

Total proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is the operation of choice for patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. With this operation comes the risk of developing ileal pouch polyps. Although rare, ileal pouch carcinomas may also occur within the pouch. Periodic endoscopic surveillance of the retained rectum and ileal pouch is recommended. Endoscopic polypectomy of medium and large polyps should be performed. Sulindac is effective in the reduction and often in the elimination of numerous smaller pouch polyps. Future studies are necessary to determine the role of sulindac and other chemotherapeutic agents in preventing the development of these polyps.

Prevalence of adenomas and carcinomas in the ileal pouch after proctocolectomy in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis

PURPOSE

Restorative proctocolectomy has become the most common surgical option for patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). However, adenomas may develop in the ileal pouch mucosa over time, and even carcinoma in the pouch has been reported. Our aim was to evaluate the prevalence, nature, and etiology of ileal pouch and nonpouch adenomas and carcinoma in patients with FAP.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective study of 31 FAP patients with Kock's continent ileostomy (Kock; n = 8), ileorectal anastomosis (IRA; n = 7), and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) (n = 16). All patients were followed with a standardized protocol including chromoendoscopy and biopsies of visible polyps in the ileal pouch and nonpouch mucosa.

RESULTS

Sixteen of 24 pouch patients (Kock and IPAA) developed adenomas in the ileal pouch mucosa, and all patients with IRA developed adenomas in the rectal mucosa. The prevalence of ileal adenomas was significantly higher in pouch patients than in IRA patients (P = 0.002). Only one patient with Kock showed adenoma in the prepouch area. Two cases of adenocarcinomas and one case of advanced adenoma were found in the ileal pouch mucosa.

CONCLUSION

Our results show a high frequency of adenomas in the ileal pouch mucosa, with evolution into carcinoma in some patients. Regular endoscopic surveillance of the pouch is recommended at a frequency similar to that for the rectal mucosa after IRA in pouch patients with FAP.

Adenocarcinoma arising in the middle of ileoanal pouches: report of five cases

Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis with or without mucosectomy has become the procedure of choice in patients with long-standing ulcerative colitis complicated by malignancy or medically refractory disease and for familial polyposis syndrome. Some reports have demonstrated the development of malignancy at the ileoanal anastomosis. We present a recent series of five patients who developed adenocarcinoma in the middle of their ileal pouch including the first case of pouch carcinoma in a patient who underwent pouch formation for ulcerative colitis. We discuss their presentation and management. Development of ileal pouch cancers, while rare, has been seen with increasing frequency in our practice. Patients with long-standing ileal pouches may benefit from routine surveillance of the pouch as often as every six months, which can be performed quickly and easily in the office using flexible endoscopy.

[Hereditary colorectal cancer]

One of the main challenges in the clinical management of familial colorectal cancer (CRC) remains the overlap of syndromes with different underlying genetic causes and the differentiated risk management of colorectal and associated malignancies. The Lynch syndrome (hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer, HNPCC) is characterized by the development of colorectal, endometrial, gastric and other cancers and is caused by a mutation in one of the mismatch repair (MMR) genes. Microsatellite instability (MSI) and/or immunohistochemistry (IHC) are important prognostic factors and may predict the response to chemotherapy. Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) may be seen as a counterpart to Lynch syndrome, responsible for <1% of all CRC cases. Recently the MUTYH gene has been identified as a further polyposis gene. The associated disorder has been termed MYH-associated polyposis (MAP) and displays an autosomal recessive pattern of inheritance. For clinical management, distinguishing between Lynch syndrome, attenuated FAP and MAP is important for risk assessment, surveillance recommendations and indication for prophylactic surgery.

Rectal and pouch recurrences after surgical treatment for familial adenomatous polyposis

BACKGROUND

Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is a genetic disease characterized by multiple adenomatous colorectal polyps and different extracolonic manifestations (ECM). The present work is aimed to analyze the outcome after surgical treatment regarding complications and cancer recurrence.

METHODS

Charts from patients treated between 1977 and 2006 were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical and endoscopic data, results of treatment, pathological reports and information about recurrence were collected.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight patients (41 men [46.6%] and 47 women [53.4%]) were assisted. At diagnosis, associated colorectal cancer (CRC) was detected in 53 patients (60.2%), whose average age was higher than those without CRC (40.0 vs. 29.5 years). At colonoscopy, polyposis was classified as attenuated in 12 patients (14.3%). Surgical treatment consisted in total proctocolectomy with ileostomy (PCI, 15 [17.4%]), restorative proctocolectomy (RPC, 27 [31.4%]), total colectomy with ileal-rectum anastomosis (IRA, 42 [48.8%]), palliative segmental resection (1 [1.2%]) and internal bypass (1 [1.2%]). Two patients were not operated on due to religious reasons and advanced disease. Complications occurred in 25 patients (29.0%), more commonly after RPC (48.1%). There was no operative mortality. Local or distant metastases were detected in six (11.3%) patients with CRC treated to cure. During the follow-up of 36 IRA, cancer developed in the rectal cuff in six patients (16.6%), whose average age was higher than in patients without rectal recurrence (45.8 vs. 36.6 years). Five of them have had colonic cancer in the resected specimen. Among the 26 patients followed after RPC, cancer in the ileal pouch developed in 1 (3.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

(1) Within the present series, FAP patients presented a high incidence of associated CRC and diagnosis was generally established after the third decade of life; (2) operative complications occurred in about one third of the patients, being more frequent after the confection of an ileal reservoir; (3) rectal cancer after IRA was detected in 16.6% of patients and it was associated with greater age and previous colonic carcinoma; (4) both continuous and long-term surveillance of the rectal stump and ileal pouch are necessary during follow-up.

Familial adenomatous polyposis and the small bowel: a loco-regional review and current management strategies

Small-bowel tumours are an important cause of morbidity and death in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. Intensive endoscopic surveillance is now standard in the long-term management of this condition. Thus, lesions occurring throughout the small bowel are increasingly noted by oesophagogastroduodenoscopy and flexible pouchoscopy. Some occur commonly de novo (in stomach, duodenum and ampulla), while others may occur following surgery (polyps of the ileostomy, ileoanal pouch, or small bowel above an anastomosis). These differ widely in incidence, natural history and management. This review provides a regional overview of these lesions, in terms of current research findings and management protocols.

Analysis of bacterial bowel communities of IBD patients: what has it revealed?

The bacterial community, in whole or in part, resident in the bowel of humans is considered to fuel the chronic immune inflammatory conditions characteristic of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. Chronic or recurrent pouchitis in ulcerative colitis patients is responsive to antibiotic therapy, indicating that bacteria are the etiological agents. Microbiological investigations of the bacterial communities in stool or of biopsy-associated bacteria have so far failed to reveal conclusively the existence of pathogens or bacterial communities of consistently altered composition in IBD patients relative to control subjects. Confounding factors need to be eliminated from future studies by using better-defined patient populations of newly diagnosed and untreated individuals and by improved sampling procedures.

APC mutation spectrum in ileoanal pouch polyps resembles that of colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND

Ileoanal pouch polyps commonly develop following restorative proctocolectomy in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). In FAP adenomas, the relationship between germline and somatic adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) mutations is determined by 'just right' beta-catenin signalling in tumour cells, with respect to the 20-amino acid beta-catenin-binding/degradation repeats (20AARs) in the APC protein. However, the relationship varies, with upper gastrointestinal polyps typically retaining three to four 20AARs and colonic polyps retaining one or two. The aim of this study was to establish the mutational spectrum in ileoanal pouch polyps, to ascertain whether polyp development resembled that typical of small or large bowel.

METHODS

Some 151 pouch adenomas were screened from 46 patients with known germline APC mutations for 'second hits' acquired through loss of heterozygosity and truncating mutations. The number of 20AARs remaining after the 'second hit' was calculated.

RESULTS

Loss of heterozygosity was rare in pouch polyps except when the germline mutation left one 20AAR. Overall, the combined alleles left two to three 20AARs in 40 of 51 polyps with an identified 'second hit'. This was significantly fewer than in upper gastrointestinal polyps, and more than in colorectal adenomas.

CONCLUSION

Tissue environment appears to influence the position of the 'second hit' in pouch polyps and the mutations resemble those of large bowel polyps.

Review article: restorative proctocolectomy, indications, management of complications and follow-up--a guide for gastroenterologists

BACKGROUND

Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is the procedure of choice for the majority of patients with ulcerative colitis who require surgery. Over 2500 patients in the UK have undergone restorative proctocolectomy. It is now increasingly being performed in district general hospitals as well as in specialist inflammatory bowel disease units. Gastroenterologists are increasingly involved in the management of patients following restorative proctocolectomy.

AIM

To provide gastroenterologists with a clear understanding of the investigation and evidence-based management of complications and the aftercare required in patients who have undergone restorative proctocolectomy.

RESULTS

Following restorative proctocolectomy, most patients have an excellent long-term functional outcome. Pouchitis, pelvic sepsis and poor function are the most common causes of failure. The development of cancer is rare; nevertheless, long-term follow-up is required.

CONCLUSIONS

The investigation and management of patients who develop complications require a multidisciplinary team approach to optimize the outcome. Protocols are suggested for investigation and management of patients with complications and for long-term cancer surveillance.

Occurrence of adenomas in the pouch and small intestine of FAP patients after proctocolectomy with ileoanal pouch construction

PURPOSE

Proctocolectomy with ileoanal pouch construction is the standard therapy for patients with familial adenomatous polyposis coli (FAP) to prevent the genesis of colorectal carcinomas. In our patient population, we observed the postoperative development of adenomas not only in the pouch but also in the remaining small intestine. The exact incidence of these ileal polyps is still unknown, since the diagnostic possibilities of examining the small intestine are limited.

METHODS

We performed wireless capsule endoscopy (CE) in patients who developed postoperative pouch adenomas (PA) to record the simultaneous occurrence of small bowel adenomas and PA. We operated on 46 patients with FAP (m:f 17:10, age 33 +/- 9 years). Thirty-five patients underwent proctocolectomy with ileoanal pouch creation. Pouch endoscopy was performed in regular intervals at 3 months and then annually after proctocolectomy. Capsule endoscopy was additionally carried out in all patients with PA.

RESULTS

Ileal PA occurred in 22.8% (n = 8) of the patients with proctocolectomy (n = 35) after a mean of 5 years after surgery. Eight PA patients (all with PA) also had adenomas in the small intestine diagnosed by CE.

CONCLUSIONS

Since jejunal and ileal adenomas occur in all patients with PA, we recommend regular follow-up examinations, which include pouch endoscopy at 3 months and annually after surgery in the presence of PA after proctocolectomy and pouch creation. On the basis of our observations, we recommend adding CE or double-balloon enteroscopy to the follow-up examination.

A proposed classification of ileal pouch disorders and associated complications after restorative proctocolectomy

Both medical and surgical therapies for ulcerative colitis have inherent advantages and disadvantages that must be balanced for patients with moderate to severe disease. Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis has become the surgical treatment of choice for the majority of patients with ulcerative colitis who require proctocolectomy. However, adverse sequelae of mechanical, inflammatory, functional, neoplastic, and metabolic conditions related to the pouch can occur postoperatively. Recognition and familiarization of the disease conditions related to the ileal pouch can be challenging for practicing gastroenterologists. Accurate diagnosis and classification of the disease conditions are imperative for proper management and prognosis.

Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis

BACKGROUND

Since 1977, restorative proctocolectomy with ileoanal anastomosis (IAA) has evolved into the surgical treatment of choice for most patients with intractable ulcerative colitis. Construction of an ileal pouch reservoir is now standard, usually in the form of J pouch (IPAA). The aim of this report is to review selection criteria for, and functional outcomes, follow-up and management of complications of IPAA after 30 years of widespread clinical application.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Literature published in English on the clinical indications, surgical technique, morbidity, complications and outcome following IAA and IPAA was sourced by electronic search, performed independently by two reviewers who selected potentially relevant papers based on title and abstract. Additional articles were identified by cross-referencing from papers retrieved in the initial search.

CONCLUSION

The functional results of IPAA are good. Pouchitis, irritable pouch syndrome and cuffitis are specific long-term complications but rarely result in failure. Pouch salvage is possible in selected patients with poor functional outcomes. One-stage operations are increasingly performed.

Increased epithelial cell proliferation in the ileal pouch mucosa of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis

To eliminate the risk of colorectal cancer in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), reconstructive proctocolectomy is performed. Although most colonic mucosa is resected during the ileal pouch anal anastomosis, adenomas and carcinomas may develop in the pouch. This may be caused by altered cell kinetics due to intraluminal changes in the pouch. In 32 patients with FAP, biopsy specimens from the mucosa of the pouch and also of the afferent ileal loop were taken. Tissue sections were immunohistochemically processed with the monoclonal antibodies M30 and MIB-1 to assess apoptotic and proliferative indices, respectively. Cell proliferation was also assessed by a modified sign test. There were no significant differences in apoptotic rates between the mucosa of the pouch and the mucosa of the afferent ileal loop. However, cell proliferation was significantly higher in the mucosa of the pouch vs afferent ileal loop, both by using the quantitative (68.3% vs 61.6%, p = 0.001) and semiquantitative methods (p < 0.05). Our newly developed semiquantitative approach outperformed previously described methods. The higher cell proliferation in the pouch as compared to the afferent ileal loop may contribute to the increased risk for adenomas and carcinomas in the pouch of patients with FAP and emphasizes the need for regular endoscopic surveillance.

Clinical features of ileal pouch polyps in patients with underlying ulcerative colitis

PURPOSE

Polypoid lesions rarely occur in the ileal pouch in ulcerative colitis patients after restorative proctocolectomy. Clinical features, malignant potential, and management of pouch polyps have not been characterized.

METHODS

We identified 23 ulcerative colitis patients with large polyps (size> or =1 cm) of the ileal pouch from our 2,512-case ulcerative colitis pouch database. Demographic, clinical, endoscopic, and histologic data were reviewed. The Pouchitis Disease Activity Index symptom score (range, 0-6) was used to quantify patients' symptoms before and after polypectomy.

RESULTS

Of the 23 patients, 95.7 percent (22 patients) had pouch endoscopy indicated for the evaluation of symptoms when polyps were detected, and 60.9 percent of patients had the polyps in the pouch, 26.1 percent in the anal transitional zone, and 21.7 percent in the afferent limb. The mean size of pouch polyps was 1.9 cm +/- 1 cm. Twenty-one patients (91.3 percent) had concomitant pouchitis, cuffitis, or Crohn's disease. On histology, 21 patients (91.3 percent) had inflammatory-type polyps, and 2 (8.7 percent) had dysplastic or malignant polyps. In 18 patients who had endoscopic polypectomy with concurrent medical therapy, the prepolypectomy and postpolypectomy mean symptom scores were 3.4 +/- 1.7 and 1.1 +/- 1.2 points, respectively (P = 0.015). Two patients (8.7 percent) had pouch excision for malignancy or for concomitant chronic refractory pouchitis.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of patients with large ileal pouch polyps were symptomatic. These polyps were typically detected on the background of pouchitis, cuffitis, or Crohn's disease. Although the majority of polyps were inflammatory type, polyps in two patients were dysplastic or malignant. Endoscopic polypectomy with concomitant medical therapy seemed to improve patients' symptom scores.

ASCO/SSO review of current role of risk-reducing surgery in common hereditary cancer syndromes

BACKGROUND

A significant portion of cancers are accounted for by a heritable component, which has increasingly been linked to mutations in specific genes. Clinical interventions have been formulated for mutation carriers within affected families. The primary interventions for mutation carriers of highly penetrant syndromes are surgical.

METHODS

The American Society of Clinical Oncology and the Society of Surgical Oncology formed a task force charged with presenting an educational symposium on surgical management of hereditary cancer syndromes at annual society meetings, and this resulted in a position paper on this topic. The content of both the symposium and the position paper was developed as a consensus statement.

RESULTS

This article addresses hereditary breast, colorectal, ovarian/endometrial, and multiple endocrine neoplasias. A brief introduction on the genetics and natural history of each disease is provided, followed by detailed descriptions of modern surgical approaches, clinical and genetic indications, timing of prophylactic surgery, and the efficacy of surgery (when known). Although several recent reviews have addressed the role of genetic testing for cancer susceptibility, this article focuses on the issues surrounding surgical technique, timing, and indications for surgical prophylaxis.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk-reducing surgical treatment of hereditary cancer is a complex undertaking. It requires a clear understanding of the natural history of the disease, realistic appreciation of the potential benefits and risks of these procedures in potentially otherwise healthy individuals, and the long-term sequelae of such interventions, as well as the individual patient's and family's perceptions of surgical risk and anticipated benefit.

Restorative proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis revisited

Since restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) with ileal-pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) removes the entire diseased mucosa, it has become firmly established as the standard operative procedure of choice for familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Many technical controversies still persist, such as mesenteric lengthening techniques, close rectal wall proctectomy, endoanal mucosectomy vs. double stapled anastomosis, loop ileostomy omission and a laparoscopic approach. Despite the complexity of the operation, IPAA is safe (mortality: 0.5-1%), it carries an acceptable risk of non-life-threatening complications (10-25%), and it achieves good long-term functional outcome with excellent patient satisfaction (over 95%). In contrast to the high incidence in patients operated for ulcerative colitis (UC) (15-20%), the occurrence of pouchitis after IPAA seems to be rare in FAP patients (0-11%). Even after IPAA, FAP patients are still at risk of developing adenomas (and occasional adenocarcinomas), either in the anal canal (10-31%) or in the ileal pouch itself (8-62%), thus requiring lifelong endoscopic monitoring. IPAA operation does not jeopardise pregnancy and childbirth, but it does impair female fecundity and has a low risk of impairment of erection and ejaculation in young males. The latter can almost completely be avoided by a careful "close rectal wall" proctectomy technique. Some argue that low risk patients (e.g. <5 rectal polyps) can be identified where ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) might be reasonable. We feel that the risk of rectal cancer after IRA means that IPAA should be recommended for the vast majority of FAP patients. We accept that in some very selected cases, based on clinical and genetics data (and perhaps influenced by patient choice regarding female fecundity), a stepwise surgical strategy with a primary IPA followed at a later age by a secondary proctectomy with IPAA could be proposed.

ASCO/SSO review of current role of risk-reducing surgery in common hereditary cancer syndromes

Although the etiology of solid cancers is multifactorial, with environmental and genetic factors playing a variable role, a significant portion of the burden of cancer is accounted for by a heritable component. Increasingly, the heritable component of cancer predispositions has been linked to mutations in specific genes, and clinical interventions have been formulated for mutation carriers within affected families. The primary interventions for mutations carriers for highly penetrant syndromes such as multiple endocrine neoplasias, familial adenomatous polyposis, hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer, and hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndromes are primarily surgical. For that reason, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) have undertaken an educational effort within the oncology community. A joint ASCO/SSO Task Force was charged with presenting an educational symposium on the surgical management of hereditary cancer syndromes at the annual ASCO and SSO meetings, resulting in an educational position article on this topic. Both the content of the symposium and the article were developed as a consensus statement by the Task Force, with the intent of summarizing the current standard of care. This article is divided into four sections addressing breast, colorectal, ovarian and endometrial cancers, and multiple endocrine neoplasia. For each, a brief introduction on the genetics and natural history of the disease is provided, followed by a detailed description of modern surgical approaches, including a description of the clinical and genetic indications and timing of prophylactic surgery, and the efficacy of prophylactic surgery when known. Although a number of recent reviews have addressed the role of genetic testing for cancer susceptibility, including the richly illustrated Cancer Genetics and Cancer Predisposition Testing curriculum by the ASCO Cancer Genetics Working Group (available through http://www.asco.org), this article focuses on the issues surrounding the why, how, and when of surgical prophylaxis for inherited forms of cancer. This is a complex process, which requires a clear understanding of the natural history of the disease and variance of penetrance, a realistic appreciation of the potential benefit and risk of a risk-reducing procedure in a potentially otherwise healthy individual, the long-term sequelae of such surgical intervention, as well as the individual patient and family's perception of surgical risk and anticipated benefit.

Decreased levels of mucosal detoxification enzymes in the pouch of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis

BACKGROUND

Adenomas can develop in the pouch after colectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Glutathione S-transferases (GSTs) have a protective role in carcinogenesis. GST activity is much higher in the ileum than in the colon. The present study examined the hypothesis that the protective capacity of GSTs may be lowered as a result of colonic metaplasia of the ileal pouch.

METHODS

Levels of GSTs, glutathione and cysteine, and the degree of inflammation and colonic metaplasia were quantified in biopsies from the pouch and afferent loop of 26 patients with FAP.

RESULTS

GST enzyme activity, and levels of GST alpha, glutathione and cysteine in the pouch were significantly lower than those in the afferent loop (308 versus 398 nmol per min per mg protein (P<0.001), 4604 versus 5286 ng per mg protein (P=0.010), 27.1 versus 34.8 nmol per mg protein (P=0.023) and 0 versus 4.8 nmol per mg protein (P=0.009) respectively). No correlation was found between inflammation or colonic metaplasia of the pouch and GST enzyme activity in the pouch.

CONCLUSION

After IPAA, GST detoxification activity in the pouch is significantly lower than that in the afferent ileal loop, which may promote tumorigenesis.

Ileoanal pouch neoplasia in familial adenomatous polyposis: an underestimated threat

PURPOSE

Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is one of the two main options available for the surgical treatment of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. Its main advantage is the minimal risk of rectal cancer but a possible Achilles heel is the recurrence of epithelial neoplasia at the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and within the ileal pouch. The significance of ileoanal anastomotic and ileal pouch adenomas is not yet fully appreciated, and there is a false sense of security about this operation. The consequences of worsening pouch polyposis are serious in that endoscopic treatment is unlikely to be an effective way of controlling it. This study has been done to alert those caring for patients with familial adenomatous polyposis to the looming danger of pouch polyposis and to suggest ways to deal with it.

METHODS

Studies reporting ileoanal pouch adenomas, ileal pouch-anal anastomotic cancers, and ileal pouch cancers in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis were reviewed. Reports of adenomas in Kock pouches and in Brooke ileostomies in the setting of familial adenomatous polyposis were included. The primary end points of the study were the time between pouch construction and the diagnosis of neoplasia, the age of the patients at the diagnosis of neoplasia, and the severity of the neoplasia.

RESULTS

There were 18 studies reporting pouch neoplasia, 15 with adenomas, and 3 with cancer. Ten were case reports, five were retrospective studies, and three were prospective studies. All three prospective studies showed that the incidence of pouch adenomas increases with time of follow-up and that the severity of the polyposis varies. The median time from pouch construction to diagnosis of pouch adenomas was 4.7 years and the range was 0.5 to 12 years. There were six studies reporting eight patients with cancer at the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis, diagnosed a median of 8 years after pouch construction (range, 3-20 years). One-half of the cancers were locally advanced (T4) and one-half were not (T1 or T2). One-half followed stapled anastomosis and one-half were after mucosectomy. There were eight case reports of cancer described in an ileostomy in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. The median time from ileostomy construction to the ileostomy cancers was 25 (range, 9-40) years.

DISCUSSION

The combination of fecal stasis, adenomatous epithelium, and a germline APC mutation is a potent recipe for epithelial neoplasia. There is increasing evidence that this happens in an ileostomy but that the process is much faster in an ileal pouch. Endoscopic treatment of ileal adenomas is likely to be difficult, reducing the options for their control to excising the entire pouch or chemoprevention.