Case-Matched Comparison of Long-Term Functional and Quality of Life Outcomes Following Laparoscopic Versus Open Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis

State of the Art: Pouch Surgery in the 21st Century

BACKGROUND

An ileoanal pouch with IPAA is the preferred method to restore intestinal continuity in patients who require a total proctocolectomy. Pouch surgery has evolved during the past decades thanks to increased experience and research, changes in the medical management of patients who require an ileal pouch, and technological innovations.

OBJECTIVE

To review the main changes in pouch surgery over the past 2 decades, with a focus on staging, minimally invasive and transanal approaches, pouch design, and anastomotic configuration.

RESULTS

The decision on the staging approach depends on the patient's conditions, their indication for surgery, and the risk of anastomotic leak. A minimally invasive approach should be performed whenever feasible, but open surgery still has a role in this technically demanding operation. Transanal IPAA may be performed in experienced centers and may reduce conversion to open surgery in the hostile pelvis. The J-pouch is the easiest, fastest, and most commonly performed design, but other designs may be used when a J-pouch is not feasible. A stapled anastomosis without mucosectomy can be safely performed in the majority of cases, with a low incidence of rectal cuff neoplasia and better functional outcomes than handsewn. Finally, Crohn's disease is not an absolute contraindication to an ileoanal pouch, but pouch failure may be higher compared to other indications.

CONCLUSIONS

Many technical nuances contribute to the success of an ileoanal pouch. The current standard of care is a laparoscopic J-pouch with double-stapled anastomosis, but this should not be seen as a dogma, and the optimal approach and design should be tailored to each patient. See video from symposium.

Evolution of laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: impact of enhanced recovery program, medication changes, and staged approaches on outcomes

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) has become the gold standard in restorative proctocolectomy, surgical techniques have experienced minimal changes. In contrast, substantial shifts in perioperative care, marked by the enhanced recovery program (ERP), modifications in steroid use, and a shift to a 3-staged approach, have taken center stage.

METHODS

Data extracted from our prospective IPAA database focused on the first 100 laparoscopic IPAA cases (historic group) and the latest 100 cases (modern group), aiming to measure the effect of these evolutions on postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

The historic IPAA group had more 2-staged procedures (92% proctocolectomy), whereas the modern group had a higher number of 3-staged procedures (86% proctectomy) (P < .001). Compared with patients in the modern group, patients in the historic group were more likely to be on steroids (5% vs 67%, respectively; P < .001) or immunomodulators (0% vs 31%, respectively; P < .001) at surgery. Compared with the historic group, the modern group had a shorter operative time (335.5 ± 78.4 vs 233.8 ± 81.6, respectively; P < .001) and length of stay (LOS; 5.4 ± 3.1 vs 4.2 ± 1.6 days, respectively; P < .001). Compared with the modern group, the historic group exhibited a higher 30-day morbidity rate (20% vs 33%, respectively; P = .04) and an elevated 30-day readmission rate (9% vs 21%, respectively; P = .02). Preoperative steroids use increased complications (odds ratio [OR], 3.4; P = .01), whereas 3-staged IPAA reduced complications (OR, 0.3; P = .03). ERP was identified as a factor that predicted shorter stays.

CONCLUSION

Although ERP effectively reduced the LOS in IPAA surgery, it failed to reduce complications. Conversely, adopting a 3-staged IPAA approach proved beneficial in reducing morbidity, whereas preoperative steroid use increased complications.

DECIDE: Delphi Expert Consensus Statement on Inflammatory Bowel Disease Dysplasia Shared Management Decision-Making

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Inflammatory bowel disease colitis-associated dysplasia is managed with either enhanced surveillance and endoscopic resection or prophylactic surgery. The rate of progression to cancer after a dysplasia diagnosis remains uncertain in many cases and patients have high thresholds for accepting proctocolectomy. Individualised discussion of management options is encouraged to take place between patients and their multidisciplinary teams for best outcomes. We aimed to develop a toolkit to support a structured, multidisciplinary and shared decision-making approach to discussions about dysplasia management options between clinicians and their patients.

METHODS

Evidence from systematic literature reviews, mixed-methods studies conducted with key stakeholders, and decision-making expert recommendations were consolidated to draft consensus statements by the DECIDE steering group. These were then subjected to an international, multidisciplinary modified electronic Delphi process until an a priori threshold of 80% agreement was achieved to establish consensus for each statement.

RESULTS

In all, 31 members [15 gastroenterologists, 14 colorectal surgeons and two nurse specialists] from nine countries formed the Delphi panel. We present the 18 consensus statements generated after two iterative rounds of anonymous voting.

CONCLUSIONS

By consolidating evidence for best practice using literature review and key stakeholder and decision-making expert consultation, we have developed international consensus recommendations to support health care professionals counselling patients on the management of high cancer risk colitis-associated dysplasia. The final toolkit includes clinician and patient decision aids to facilitate shared decision-making.

[Complications and corrective surgery after ileal pouch-anal reconstruction?]

Proctocolectomy with ileal J‑pouch-anal and rectal reconstruction is the standard surgical treatment for ulcerative colitis, selected cases of Crohn's disease, FAP and multilocular colon carcinoma. Although this treatment has been continuously developed over the last 40 years, the long-term success rate is 80-90% of the treated patients. The reasons for this are manifold: chronic pouchitis, incontinence, secondary diagnosis of Crohn's disease, fistulas, severe surgical complications, rectal stump left for too long, chronic abscess and surgical technical errors. This article deals with the control of acute complications and with the management of long-term complications. Some of the triggering complications for pouch failure do not generally imply failure of the method. A correction, closure of the fistula and in individual cases also a completely new pouch creation can restore a good pouch function in about 75% of cases. Various indications, techniques and results are presented.

Vedolizumab for chronic antibiotic-refractory pouchitis

Background

Chronic antibiotic-refractory pouchitis (CARP) is a complication of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA), which poses a therapeutic challenge. Vedolizumab, a gut-selective monoclonal antibody to the α4β7 of integrin, has been used in such patients, but data on its efficacy are limited. Our aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of vedolizumab as induction therapy in CARP patients.

Methods

In this single-center, historic cohort, patients with CARP who received vedolizumab between January 2015 to June 2017 were identified and analysed. Patients were included if they had active pouchitis with a total of modified pouch disease activity index (mPDAI) score ≥5 or if unavailable clinician diagnosis of active pouchitis. Pre-treatment and at 3-month post-therapy pouchoscopy and clinical visits were used to calculate mPDAI.

Results

A total of 19 patients were included in the study. The mean age was 26.7 ± 12.8 years, with 10 (53%) males. Nine (47%) patients had been treated with anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents before colectomy and 10 (53%) had anti-TNFs after colectomy and IPAA. Six (32%) patients had improvement in the mPDAI symptom subscores (P = 0.031) and 14 (74%) had improvement in both endoscopic and total mPDAI scores with a median change of -2 units (both P = 0.031). Adverse events were noted only in two (11%) patients and four (21%) required surgery for CARP.

Conclusions

Our study suggests that vedolizumab has efficacy and can be safely used for CARP patients. Larger studies with a higher number of patients are required to confirm these findings.