These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Survival of ileal pouch anal anastomosis constructed after colectomy or secondary to a previous ileorectal anastomosis in ulcerative colitis patients: a population-based cohort study.
    Author: Landerholm K, Abdalla M, Myrelid P, Andersson RE.
    Journal: Scand J Gastroenterol; 2017 May; 52(5):531-535. PubMed ID: 28102092.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: Ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) affects bowel function, sexual function and reproduction less negatively than ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA), the standard reconstruction after colectomy for ulcerative colitis (UC). In younger UC patients, IRA may have a role postponing pelvic surgery and IPAA. The aim of the present study was to investigate the survival of IPAA secondary to IRA compared to IPAA as primary reconstruction, as this has not previously been studied in UC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients with UC diagnosis between 1960 and 2010 in Sweden were identified from the National Patient Registry. From this cohort, colectomized patients reconstructed with primary IPAA and patients reconstructed with IPAA secondary to IRA were identified. The survival of the IPAA was followed up until pouch failure, defined as pouchectomy and ileostomy or a diverting ileostomy alone. RESULTS: Out of 63,796 patients, 1796 were reconstructed with IPAA, either primarily (n = 1720) or secondary to a previous IRA (n = 76). There were no demographic differences between the groups, including length of follow-up (median 12.6 (IQR 6.7-16.6) years and 10.0 (IQR 3.5-15.9) years, respectively). Failure of the IPAA occurred in 103 (6.0%) patients with primary and in 6 (8%) patients after secondary IPAA (P = 0.38 log-rank). The 10-year pouch survival was 94% (95% CI 93-96) for primary IPAA and 92% (81-97) for secondary. CONCLUSIONS: Patients choosing IRA as primary reconstruction do not have an increased risk of failure of a later secondary IPAA in comparison with patients with primary IPAA.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]