Modified Two-stage Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis Results in Lower Rate of Anastomotic Leak Compared with Traditional Two-stage Surgery for Ulcerative Colitis

Abstract

Background and aims: There is a paucity of evidence in ulcerative colitis [UC] comparing the traditional two-stage [total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis [IPAA] and diverting ileostomy, followed by ileostomy closure] vs the modified two-stage restorative proctocolectomy [subtotal colectomy with end ileostomy, followed by completion proctectomy and IPAA, without diverting ileostomy]. This study examines the risk of anastomotic leak following IPAA in traditional vs modified two-stage IPAA for UC patients.

Methods: This was a single-institution, retrospective study of all UC patients who underwent a traditional or modified two-stage IPAA between 2002 and 2013. The primary outcome was anastomotic leak following IPAA.

Results: In all, 460 patients had a two-stage IPAA procedure; 223 [48.5%] patients underwent traditional two-stage IPAA and 237 [51.5%] patients received the modified two-stage procedure. There was more preoperative enteral corticosteroid use [44.7% vs 33.2%, p = 0.04] before the first surgery in the modified two-stage group compared with the traditional two-stage group. The modified two-stage group had higher UC disease severity at presentation [86.9% patients with moderate/severe UC vs 73.1%, p < 0.01]. However, the modified two-stage group had a lower rate of anastomotic leak following IPAA [4.6% vs 15.7%, p < 0.01] and was associated with a lower risk of anastomotic leak on univariate (odds ratio [OR] 0.26, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13, 0.52] and multivariate analysis [OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.12, 0.57].

Conclusions: Patients with ulcerative colitis who received the modified two-stage IPAA had a significantly lower rate of anastomotic leak following pouch creation, compared with the traditional two-stage procedure.

Keywords: Inflammatory bowel disease; surgery; ulcerative colitis.