Long-term outcomes after close rectal dissection and total mesorectal excision in ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis

Transanal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of technical approaches and clinical outcomes

PURPOSE

Transanal minimally invasive surgery has theoretical advantages for ileal pouch-anal anastomosis surgery. We performed a systematic review assessing technical approaches to transanal IPAA (Ta-IPAA) and meta-analysis comparing outcomes to transabdominal (abd-IPAA) approaches.

METHODS

Three databases were searched for articles investigating Ta-IPAA outcomes. Primary outcome was anastomotic leak rate. Secondary outcomes included conversion rate, post operative morbidity, and length of stay (LoS). Staging, plane of dissection, anastomosis, extraction site, operative time, and functional outcomes were also assessed.

RESULTS

Searches identified 13 studies with 404 unique Ta-IPAA and 563 abd-IPAA patients. Anastomotic leak rates were 6.3% and 8.4% (RD 0, 95% CI -0.066 to 0.065, p = 0.989) and conversion rates 2.5% and 12.5% (RD -0.106, 95% CI -0.155 to -0.057, p = 0.104) for Ta-IPAA and abd-IPAA. Average LoS was one day shorter (MD -1, 95% CI -1.876 to 0.302, p = 0.007). A three-stage approach was most common (47.6%), operative time was 261(± 60) mins, and total mesorectal excision and close rectal dissection were equally used (49.5% vs 50.5%). Functional outcomes were similar. Lack of randomised control trials, case-matched series, and significant study heterogeneity limited analysis, resulting in low to very low certainty of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis demonstrated the feasibility and safety of Ta-IPAA with reduced LoS, trend towards less conversions, and comparable anastomotic leak rates and post operative morbidity. Though results are encouraging, they need to be interpreted with heterogeneity and selection bias in mind. Robust randomised clinical trials are warranted to adequately compare ta-IPAA to transabdominal approaches.

Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Ileoanal Pouch Surgery: a Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To summarise frequency, type, and heterogeneity of patient-reported outcomes measures [PROMs] in papers reporting on outcomes after ileal pouch anal anastomosis [IPAA].

BACKGROUND

Prevalence of ulcerative colitis [UC] has risen in Western countries, and one in three patients requires surgery. IPAA is a frequently performed procedure for UC, and a lack of standardisation is manifest in reporting outcomes for inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] despite the clear need for inclusion of PROMs as primary outcomes in IBD trials.

METHODS

Scopus, Pubmed, and Web of Science databases were searched from January 2010 to January 2023 for studies investigating outcomes in IPAA surgery. The primary outcome was the proportion of studies reporting outcomes for IPAA surgery for UC, which included PROMs.

RESULTS

The search identified a total of 8028 studies which, after de-duplication and exclusion, were reduced to 79 articles assessing outcomes after IPAA surgery. In all 44 [55.7%] reported PROMs, with 23 including validated questionnaires and 21 papers using authors' questions, 22 different PROMs were identified, with bowel function as the most investigated item. The majority of studies [67/79, 85%] were retrospective, only 14/79 [18%] were prospective papers and only two were [2.5%] randomised, controlled trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Only half of the papers reviewed used PROMs. The main reported item is bowel function and urogenital, social, and psychological functions are the most neglected. There is lack of standardisation for use of PROMs in IPAA. Complexity of UC and of outcomes after IPAA demands a change in clinical practice and follow-up, given how crucial PROMs are, compared with their non-routine use.