Impact on Fertility After Failure of Restorative Proctocolectomy in Men and Women With Ulcerative Colitis: A 17-Year Cohort Study.
Adolescent
Birth Rate
/ trends
Case-Control Studies
Cohort Studies
Colitis, Ulcerative
/ complications
Data Management
Denmark
/ epidemiology
Female
Fertility
/ physiology
Fertilization in Vitro
/ statistics & numerical data
Humans
Incidence
Male
Proctocolectomy, Restorative
/ adverse effects
Retrospective Studies
Treatment Failure
Young Adult
Journal
Diseases of the colon and rectum
ISSN: 1530-0358
Titre abrégé: Dis Colon Rectum
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0372764
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2020
06 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
10
3
2020
medline:
31
10
2020
entrez:
10
3
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Impact of restorative proctocolectomy failure on fertility has not been studied and is greatly relevant. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of restorative proctocolectomy failure on birth rate in women and men, along with in vitro fertilization incidence and success. This was a retrospective registry-based cohort study over 17 years. Records for parenting a child were cross-linked with patient records. In women, in vitro fertilization records were cross-linked. All data were prospectively registered. Patients of fertile age with ulcerative colitis between 1994 and 2010 were identified in Danish national databases. Patients with restorative proctocolectomy and restorative proctocolectomy failure were identified as subgroups. Birth rate ratios and in vitro fertilization incidence and success were measured. We included 11,939 women and 13,569 men with ulcerative colitis. A total of 711 women and 730 men had restorative proctocolectomy; 114 women and 90 men had failure. Birth rate in women with failure was significantly reduced compared with women without (birth rate ratio = 0.50 (95% CI, 0.29-0.82)). In men with failure, birth rate tended to be lower compared with men without (birth rate ratio = 0.74 (95% CI, 0.51-1.05)). In vitro fertilization incidence was similar with and without failure (HRs adjusted for age at start of follow-up = 0.98 (95% CI, 0.58-1.67]). In vitro fertilization success was significantly lower with failure compared with ulcerative colitis (OR adjusted for age at start of follow-up = 0.36 (95% CI, 0.4-0.92)). Information on patients leading up to restorative proctocolectomy failure is lacking. Failure patients may have had children during a period with pouch function. Therefore, the impact of failure may be underestimated. Restorative proctocolectomy failure impairs birth rate, primarily in women. Although in vitro fertilization incidence is similar in women with and without failure, the likelihood of giving birth after in vitro fertilization is reduced. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B202. IMPACTO SOBRE LA FERTILIDAD DESPUéS DEL FRACASO DE LA PROCTOCOLECTOMíA RESTAURADORA EN HOMBRES Y MUJERES CON COLITIS ULCEROSA: UN ESTUDIO DE COHORTE DE 17 AñOS: No se ha estudiado el impacto de la falla de la proctocolectomía restauradora en la fertilidad y es muy relevante.Evaluar el impacto del fracaso de la proctocolectomía restauradora en la tasa de natalidad en mujeres y hombres, junto con la incidencia y el éxito de la fertilización in vitro.Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo basado en el registro de más de 17 años.Los registros de crianza de un niño se cruzaron con los registros de pacientes. En las mujeres, los registros de fertilización in vitro se cruzarón. Todos los datos se regitraron de forma prospectiva.Los pacientes de edad fértil con colitis ulcerosa entre 1994-2010 fueron identificados en las bases de datos nacionales danesas. Los pacientes con proctocolectomía restauradora y fracaso de la proctocolectomía restauradora se identificaron como subgrupos.Tasas de natalidad e incidencia y éxito de la fertilización in vitro.Se incluyeron 11939 mujeres y 13569 hombres con colitis ulcerosa. 711 mujeres y 730 hombres tuvieron proctocolectomía restauradora; 114 mujeres y 90 hombres tuvieron fracaso. La tasa de natalidad en las mujeres con fracaso se redujo significativamente en comparación con las mujeres sin fracaso (tasa de natalidad: 0,50; IC del 95% [0,29; 0,82]). En los hombres con fracaso, la tasa de natalidad tendió a ser más baja en comparación con los hombres sin fracaso (tasa de natalidad: 0,74; IC del 95% [0,51; 1,05]). La incidencia de fertilización in vitro fue similar con y sin falla (aHR: 0.98, IC 95% [0.58; 1.67]). El éxito de la fertilización in vitro fue significativamente menor con el fracaso en comparación con la colitis ulcerosa (aOR: 0.36 IC 95% [0.4; 0.92]).Falta información sobre los pacientes que conducen al fracaso de la proctocolectomía restauradora. Los pacientes con fracaso pueden haber tenido hijos durante un período con función de bolsa. Por lo tanto, el impacto del fracaso puede ser subestimado.El fracaso de la proctocolectomía restauradora afecta la tasa de natalidad, principalmente en mujeres. Aunque la incidencia de la fertilización in vitro es similar en las mujeres con y sin fracaso, la probabilidad de dar a luz después de la fertilización in vitro se reduce. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B202. (Traducción-Dr Gonzalo Hagerman).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Impact of restorative proctocolectomy failure on fertility has not been studied and is greatly relevant.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of restorative proctocolectomy failure on birth rate in women and men, along with in vitro fertilization incidence and success.
DESIGN
This was a retrospective registry-based cohort study over 17 years.
SETTINGS
Records for parenting a child were cross-linked with patient records. In women, in vitro fertilization records were cross-linked. All data were prospectively registered.
PATIENTS
Patients of fertile age with ulcerative colitis between 1994 and 2010 were identified in Danish national databases. Patients with restorative proctocolectomy and restorative proctocolectomy failure were identified as subgroups.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Birth rate ratios and in vitro fertilization incidence and success were measured.
RESULTS
We included 11,939 women and 13,569 men with ulcerative colitis. A total of 711 women and 730 men had restorative proctocolectomy; 114 women and 90 men had failure. Birth rate in women with failure was significantly reduced compared with women without (birth rate ratio = 0.50 (95% CI, 0.29-0.82)). In men with failure, birth rate tended to be lower compared with men without (birth rate ratio = 0.74 (95% CI, 0.51-1.05)). In vitro fertilization incidence was similar with and without failure (HRs adjusted for age at start of follow-up = 0.98 (95% CI, 0.58-1.67]). In vitro fertilization success was significantly lower with failure compared with ulcerative colitis (OR adjusted for age at start of follow-up = 0.36 (95% CI, 0.4-0.92)).
LIMITATIONS
Information on patients leading up to restorative proctocolectomy failure is lacking. Failure patients may have had children during a period with pouch function. Therefore, the impact of failure may be underestimated.
CONCLUSIONS
Restorative proctocolectomy failure impairs birth rate, primarily in women. Although in vitro fertilization incidence is similar in women with and without failure, the likelihood of giving birth after in vitro fertilization is reduced. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B202. IMPACTO SOBRE LA FERTILIDAD DESPUéS DEL FRACASO DE LA PROCTOCOLECTOMíA RESTAURADORA EN HOMBRES Y MUJERES CON COLITIS ULCEROSA: UN ESTUDIO DE COHORTE DE 17 AñOS: No se ha estudiado el impacto de la falla de la proctocolectomía restauradora en la fertilidad y es muy relevante.Evaluar el impacto del fracaso de la proctocolectomía restauradora en la tasa de natalidad en mujeres y hombres, junto con la incidencia y el éxito de la fertilización in vitro.Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo basado en el registro de más de 17 años.Los registros de crianza de un niño se cruzaron con los registros de pacientes. En las mujeres, los registros de fertilización in vitro se cruzarón. Todos los datos se regitraron de forma prospectiva.Los pacientes de edad fértil con colitis ulcerosa entre 1994-2010 fueron identificados en las bases de datos nacionales danesas. Los pacientes con proctocolectomía restauradora y fracaso de la proctocolectomía restauradora se identificaron como subgrupos.Tasas de natalidad e incidencia y éxito de la fertilización in vitro.Se incluyeron 11939 mujeres y 13569 hombres con colitis ulcerosa. 711 mujeres y 730 hombres tuvieron proctocolectomía restauradora; 114 mujeres y 90 hombres tuvieron fracaso. La tasa de natalidad en las mujeres con fracaso se redujo significativamente en comparación con las mujeres sin fracaso (tasa de natalidad: 0,50; IC del 95% [0,29; 0,82]). En los hombres con fracaso, la tasa de natalidad tendió a ser más baja en comparación con los hombres sin fracaso (tasa de natalidad: 0,74; IC del 95% [0,51; 1,05]). La incidencia de fertilización in vitro fue similar con y sin falla (aHR: 0.98, IC 95% [0.58; 1.67]). El éxito de la fertilización in vitro fue significativamente menor con el fracaso en comparación con la colitis ulcerosa (aOR: 0.36 IC 95% [0.4; 0.92]).Falta información sobre los pacientes que conducen al fracaso de la proctocolectomía restauradora. Los pacientes con fracaso pueden haber tenido hijos durante un período con función de bolsa. Por lo tanto, el impacto del fracaso puede ser subestimado.El fracaso de la proctocolectomía restauradora afecta la tasa de natalidad, principalmente en mujeres. Aunque la incidencia de la fertilización in vitro es similar en las mujeres con y sin fracaso, la probabilidad de dar a luz después de la fertilización in vitro se reduce. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B202. (Traducción-Dr Gonzalo Hagerman).
Identifiants
pubmed: 32149783
doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001640
pii: 00003453-202006000-00014
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Video-Audio Media
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
816-822Références
Heppell J. Surgical management of ulcerative colitis. UpToDate. 2014:1–22.
Fischera A. Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: laparoscopic approach. UpToDate. 2014:1–59.
Parc YR, Radice E, Dozois RR. Surgery for ulcerative colitis: historical perspective–a century of surgical innovations and refinements. Dis Colon Rectum. 1999;42:299–306.
Ordás I, Eckmann L, Talamini M, Baumgart DC, Sandborn WJ. Ulcerative colitis. Lancet. 2012;380:1606–1619.
Vind I, Riis L, Jess T, et al.; DCCD study group. Increasing incidences of inflammatory bowel disease and decreasing surgery rates in Copenhagen City and County, 2003-2005: a population-based study from the Danish Crohn colitis database. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101:1274–1282.
Körsgen S, Keighley MR. Causes of failure and life expectancy of the ileoanal pouch. Int J Colorectal Dis. 1997;12:4–8.
MacRae HM, McLeod RS, Cohen Z, O’Connor BI, Ton EN. Risk factors for pelvic pouch failure. Dis Colon Rectum. 1997;40:257–262.
Gemlo BT, Wong WD, Rothenberger DA, Goldberg SM. Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Patterns of failure. Arch Surg. 1992;127:784–787.
Setti-Carraro P, Ritchie JK, Wilkinson KH, Nicholls RJ, Hawley PR. The first 10 years’ experience of restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis. Gut. 1994;35:1070–1075.
Fazio VW, Tekkis PP, Remzi F, et al. Quantification of risk for pouch failure after ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery. Ann Surg. 2003;238:605–614.
Mark-Christensen A, Erichsen R, Brandsborg S, et al. Pouch failures following ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis. Colorectal Dis. 2018;20:44–52.
Mahadevan U. Pregnancy and inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2009;38:629–649.
Oresland T, Palmblad S, Ellström M, Berndtsson I, Crona N, Hultén L. Gynaecological and sexual function related to anatomical changes in the female pelvis after restorative proctocolectomy. Int J Colorectal Dis. 1994;9:77–81.
Gorgun E, Remzi FH, Goldberg JM, et al. Fertility is reduced after restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch anal anastomosis: a study of 300 patients. Surgery. 2004;136:795–803.
Rajaratnam SG, Eglinton TW, Hider P, Fearnhead NS. Impact of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis on female fertility: meta-analysis and systematic review. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2011;26:1365–1374.
Ørding Olsen K, Juul S, Berndtsson I, Oresland T, Laurberg S. Ulcerative colitis: female fecundity before diagnosis, during disease, and after surgery compared with a population sample. Gastroenterology. 2002;122:15–19.
Olsen KO, Joelsson M, Laurberg S, Oresland T. Fertility after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in women with ulcerative colitis. Br J Surg. 1999;86:493–495.
Pachler FR, Brandsborg SB, Laurberg S. Paradoxical impact of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis on male and female fertility in patients with ulcerative colitis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2017;60:603–607.
Pabby V, Oza SS, Dodge LE, et al. In vitro fertilization is successful in women with ulcerative colitis and ileal pouch anal anastomosis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015;110:792–797.
Oza SS, Pabby V, Dodge LE, et al. In vitro fertilization in women with inflammatory bowel disease is as successful as in women from the general infertility population. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;13:1641–6.e3.
Pachler FR, Toft G, Bisgaard T, Laurberg S. Use and success of in vitro fertilisation following restorative proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. a nationwide 17-year cohort study. J Crohns Colitis. 2019;13:1283–1286.
Nørgård BM, Larsen PV, Fedder J, de Silva PS, Larsen MD, Friedman S. Live birth and adverse birth outcomes in women with ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease receiving assisted reproduction: a 20-year nationwide cohort study. Gut. 2016;65:767–776.
Hueting WE, Gooszen HG, van Laarhoven CJ. Sexual function and continence after ileo pouch anal anastomosis: a comparison between a meta-analysis and a questionnaire survey. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2004;19:215–218.
Dafnis G. Functional outcome and quality of life after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis within a defined population in Sweden. Dig Dis. 2019;37:1–10.
Fazio VW, O’Riordain MG, Lavery IC, et al. Long-term functional outcome and quality of life after stapled restorative proctocolectomy. Ann Surg. 1999;230:575–584.
Fonager K, Sørensen HT, Rasmussen SN, Møller-Petersen J, Vyberg M. Assessment of the diagnoses of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis in a Danish hospital information system. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1996;31:154–159.
Andersen TF, Madsen M, Jørgensen J, Mellemkjoer L, Olsen JH. The Danish National Hospital Register: a valuable source of data for modern health sciences. Dan Med Bull. 1999;46:263–268.
Brandsborg S, Tøttrup A, Nicholls J, Laurberg S. Restorative proctocolectomy in patients with ulcerative colitis: a cross-sectional Danish population study on function and quality of life. Colorectal Dis. 2013;15:e453–e461.
von Elm E, Altman D, Egger M, Pocock S, Gotzsche P, Vandenbroucke J. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Prev Med. 2007;45:247–251.
Prudhomme M, Dehni N, Dozois RR, Tiret E, Parc R. Causes and outcomes of pouch excision after restorative proctocolectomy. Br J Surg. 2006;93:82–86.
Hull TL, Joyce MR, Geisler DP, Coffey JC. Adhesions after laparoscopic and open ileal pouch-anal anastomosis surgery for ulcerative colitis. Br J Surg. 2012;99:270–275.
Smith RP. Hydrosalpinx (chronic pelvic inflammatory disease). In: Netter’s Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2018:3rd ed. Elsevier, Inc; 307–308.
Zeyneloglu HB, Arici A, Olive DL. Adverse effects of hydrosalpinx on pregnancy rates after in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 1998;70:492–499.
Strandell A, Lindhard A. Why does hydrosalpinx reduce fertility? The importance of hydrosalpinx fluid. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:1141–1145.
Strandell A. The influence of hydrosalpinx on IVF and embryo transfer: a review. Hum Reprod Update. 2000;6:387–395.
Johnson N, van Voorst S, Sowter MC, Strandell A, Mol BW. Surgical treatment for tubal disease in women due to undergo in vitro fertilisation. [Review]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;(1):CD002125.
Parihar M, Mirge A, Hasabe R. Hydrosalpinx functional surgery or salpingectomy? The importance of hydrosalpinx fluid in assisted reproductive technologies. J Gynecol Endosc Surg. 2009;1:12–16.
Strandell A, Lindhard A, Waldenström U, Thorburn J, Janson PO, Hamberger L. Hydrosalpinx and IVF outcome: a prospective, randomized multicentre trial in Scandinavia on salpingectomy prior to IVF. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:2762–2769.
Feagins LA, Kane SV. Sexual and reproductive issues for men with inflammatory bowel disease. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104:768–773.