Leaks From the Tip of the J-pouch: Diagnosis, Management, and Long-term Pouch Survival.
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:
01 01 2023
01 01 2023
Historique:
pubmed:
12
11
2022
medline:
17
12
2022
entrez:
11
11
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The standard of care for surgical treatment of ulcerative colitis is restorative proctocolectomy with ileal J-pouch. Leaks from the tip of the J-pouch are a known complication, but there is a paucity of literature regarding this type of leak. We aimed to describe the diagnosis, management, and long-term clinical outcomes of leaks from the tip of the J-pouch at our institution. This was a retrospective study of a prospectively maintained pouch registry. This study was conducted at a quaternary IBD referral center. Patients included those with ileal J-pouches diagnosed with leaks from the tip of the J-pouch. The main measures of outcomes were pouch salvage rate, type of salvage procedures, and long-term Kaplan-Meier pouch survival. We identified 74 patients with leaks from the tip of the J-pouch. Pain (68.9%) and pelvic abscess (40.9%) were the most common presentations, whereas 10.8% of patients presented with an acute abdomen. The leak was diagnosed by imaging and/or endoscopy in 74.3% of patients but only discovered during surgical exploration in 25.6% of patients. Some 63.5% of patients were diagnosed only after loop ileostomy closure, whereas 32.4% of patients were diagnosed before ileostomy closure. The most common methods used for diagnosis were pouchoscopy (31.1%) and gastrograffin enema (28.4%). A definitive nonoperative approach was attempted in 48.6% of patients but was successful in only 10.8% of patients overall. Surgical repair was attempted in 89.2% of patients, whereas 4.5% of patients had pouch excision. Salvage operations (n = 63) included sutured or stapled repair of the tip of the J (65%), pouch excision with neo-pouch (25.4%), and pouch disconnection, repair, and reanastomosis (9.5%). Ultimately' 10 patients (13.5%) required pouch excision, yielding an overall 5-year pouch survival rate of 86.3%. This was a retrospective review; referral bias may limit the generalizability. Leaks from the tip of the J-pouch have variable clinical presentations and require a high index of suspicion. Pouch salvage surgery is required in the majority of patients and is associated with a high pouch salvage rate. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C50 . ANTECEDENTES:El estándar de atención para el tratamiento quirúrgico de la colitis ulcerosa es la proctocolectomía restauradora con bolsa ileal en J. Las fugas del extremo de la bolsa en J son una complicación conocida, pero hay escasez de literatura sobre este tipo de fuga.OBJETIVO:Describir el diagnóstico, manejo y resultados clínicos a largo plazo de las fugas del extremo de la bolsa en J en nuestra institución.DISEÑO:Estudio retrospectivo de registro de bolsa mantenido prospectivamente.ENTORNO CLINICO:Centro de referencia de enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal cuaternaria.PACIENTES:Pacientes con bolsas ileales en J diagnosticadas con fugas del extremo de la J.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACIÓN:Tasa de rescate de la bolsa, tipo de procedimientos de rescate y supervivencia a largo plazo de la bolsa Kaplan-Meier.RESULTADOS:Identificamos 74 pacientes con fugas del extremo de la bolsa en J. El dolor (68,9%) y el absceso pélvico (40,9%) fueron las presentaciones más comunes, mientras que el 10,8% de los pacientes presentaron abdomen agudo. La fuga se diagnosticó por imagen y/o endoscopia en el 74,3%, pero solo se descubrió durante la exploración quirúrgica en el 25,6%. El 63,5% fueron diagnosticados solo después del cierre de la ileostomía en asa, mientras que el 32,4% lo fueron antes del cierre de la ileostomía. Los métodos más comunes utilizados para el diagnóstico fueron la endoscopia (31,1%) y el enema de gastrografín (28,4%). Se intentó un abordaje no quirúrgico definitivo en el 48,6%, pero tuvo éxito en solo el 10,8% de los pacientes en general. Se intentó la reparación quirúrgica en el 89,2% de los pacientes, mientras que en el 4,5% se realizó la escisión del reservorio. Las operaciones de rescate (n = 63) incluyeron la reparación con sutura o grapas del extremo de la J (65%), la escisión del reservorio con neo-reservorio (25,4%) y la desconexión, reparación y reanastomosis del reservorio (9,5%). Finalmente, 10 (13,5%) pacientes requirieron la escisión de la bolsa, lo que se asocio con una alta tasa de supervivencia general de la bolsa a los 5 años del 86,3%.LIMITACIONES:Revisión retrospectiva; el sesgo de referencia puede limitar la generalización.CONCLUSIONES:Las fugas del extremo de la bolsa en J tienen presentaciones clínicas variables y requieren un alto índice de sospecha. La cirugía de rescate de la bolsa se requiere en la mayoría y se asocia con una alta tasa de rescate de la bolsa. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C50 . (Traducción- Dr. Ingrid Melo ).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The standard of care for surgical treatment of ulcerative colitis is restorative proctocolectomy with ileal J-pouch. Leaks from the tip of the J-pouch are a known complication, but there is a paucity of literature regarding this type of leak.
OBJECTIVE
We aimed to describe the diagnosis, management, and long-term clinical outcomes of leaks from the tip of the J-pouch at our institution.
DESIGN
This was a retrospective study of a prospectively maintained pouch registry.
SETTING
This study was conducted at a quaternary IBD referral center.
PATIENTS
Patients included those with ileal J-pouches diagnosed with leaks from the tip of the J-pouch.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
The main measures of outcomes were pouch salvage rate, type of salvage procedures, and long-term Kaplan-Meier pouch survival.
RESULTS
We identified 74 patients with leaks from the tip of the J-pouch. Pain (68.9%) and pelvic abscess (40.9%) were the most common presentations, whereas 10.8% of patients presented with an acute abdomen. The leak was diagnosed by imaging and/or endoscopy in 74.3% of patients but only discovered during surgical exploration in 25.6% of patients. Some 63.5% of patients were diagnosed only after loop ileostomy closure, whereas 32.4% of patients were diagnosed before ileostomy closure. The most common methods used for diagnosis were pouchoscopy (31.1%) and gastrograffin enema (28.4%). A definitive nonoperative approach was attempted in 48.6% of patients but was successful in only 10.8% of patients overall. Surgical repair was attempted in 89.2% of patients, whereas 4.5% of patients had pouch excision. Salvage operations (n = 63) included sutured or stapled repair of the tip of the J (65%), pouch excision with neo-pouch (25.4%), and pouch disconnection, repair, and reanastomosis (9.5%). Ultimately' 10 patients (13.5%) required pouch excision, yielding an overall 5-year pouch survival rate of 86.3%.
LIMITATIONS
This was a retrospective review; referral bias may limit the generalizability.
CONCLUSIONS
Leaks from the tip of the J-pouch have variable clinical presentations and require a high index of suspicion. Pouch salvage surgery is required in the majority of patients and is associated with a high pouch salvage rate. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C50 .
FUGAS DEL EXTREMO DE LA BOLSA EN J DIAGNSTICO, MANEJO Y SUPERVIVENCIA A LARGO PLAZO DE LA BOLSA
ANTECEDENTES:El estándar de atención para el tratamiento quirúrgico de la colitis ulcerosa es la proctocolectomía restauradora con bolsa ileal en J. Las fugas del extremo de la bolsa en J son una complicación conocida, pero hay escasez de literatura sobre este tipo de fuga.OBJETIVO:Describir el diagnóstico, manejo y resultados clínicos a largo plazo de las fugas del extremo de la bolsa en J en nuestra institución.DISEÑO:Estudio retrospectivo de registro de bolsa mantenido prospectivamente.ENTORNO CLINICO:Centro de referencia de enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal cuaternaria.PACIENTES:Pacientes con bolsas ileales en J diagnosticadas con fugas del extremo de la J.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACIÓN:Tasa de rescate de la bolsa, tipo de procedimientos de rescate y supervivencia a largo plazo de la bolsa Kaplan-Meier.RESULTADOS:Identificamos 74 pacientes con fugas del extremo de la bolsa en J. El dolor (68,9%) y el absceso pélvico (40,9%) fueron las presentaciones más comunes, mientras que el 10,8% de los pacientes presentaron abdomen agudo. La fuga se diagnosticó por imagen y/o endoscopia en el 74,3%, pero solo se descubrió durante la exploración quirúrgica en el 25,6%. El 63,5% fueron diagnosticados solo después del cierre de la ileostomía en asa, mientras que el 32,4% lo fueron antes del cierre de la ileostomía. Los métodos más comunes utilizados para el diagnóstico fueron la endoscopia (31,1%) y el enema de gastrografín (28,4%). Se intentó un abordaje no quirúrgico definitivo en el 48,6%, pero tuvo éxito en solo el 10,8% de los pacientes en general. Se intentó la reparación quirúrgica en el 89,2% de los pacientes, mientras que en el 4,5% se realizó la escisión del reservorio. Las operaciones de rescate (n = 63) incluyeron la reparación con sutura o grapas del extremo de la J (65%), la escisión del reservorio con neo-reservorio (25,4%) y la desconexión, reparación y reanastomosis del reservorio (9,5%). Finalmente, 10 (13,5%) pacientes requirieron la escisión de la bolsa, lo que se asocio con una alta tasa de supervivencia general de la bolsa a los 5 años del 86,3%.LIMITACIONES:Revisión retrospectiva; el sesgo de referencia puede limitar la generalización.CONCLUSIONES:Las fugas del extremo de la bolsa en J tienen presentaciones clínicas variables y requieren un alto índice de sospecha. La cirugía de rescate de la bolsa se requiere en la mayoría y se asocia con una alta tasa de rescate de la bolsa. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C50 . (Traducción- Dr. Ingrid Melo ).
Identifiants
pubmed: 36367463
doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000002558
pii: 00003453-202301000-00013
doi:
Types de publication
Video-Audio Media
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
97-105Informations de copyright
Copyright © The ASCRS 2022.
Références
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.
Holubar S, Hyman N. Continence alterations after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis do not diminish quality of life. Dis Colon Rectum. 2003;46:1489–1491.
Fazio VW, Kiran RP, Remzi FH, et al. Ileal pouch anal anastomosis: analysis of outcome and quality of life in 3707 patients. Ann Surg. 2013;257:679–685.
Parks AG, Nicholls RJ. Proctocolectomy without ileostomy for ulcerative colitis. BMJ. 1978;2:85–88.
Utsunomiya J, Iwama T, Imajo M, et al. Total colectomy, mucosal proctectomy, and ileoanal anastomosis. Dis Colon Rectum. 1980;23:459–466.
Kiran RP. The ideal design of the ileoanal pouch: one for each patient? Dis Colon Rectum. 2012;55:1201–1202.
McCormick PH, Guest GD, Clark AJ, et al. The ideal ileal-pouch design: a long-term randomized control trial of J- vs W-pouch construction. Dis Colon Rectum. 2012;55:1251–1257.
Leinicke JA. Ileal pouch complications. Surg Clin North Am. 2019;99:1185–1196.
Lavryk OA, Stocchi L, Hull TL, et al. Factors associated with long-term quality of life after restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch anal anastomosis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2019;23:571–579.
Holubar SD. Prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of complications of the IPAA for ulcerative colitis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2018;61:532–536.
Kirat HT, Kiran RP, Oncel M, Shen B, Fazio VW, Remzi FH. Management of leak from the tip of the “J” in ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2011;54:454–459.
Nadkarni PM, Ohno-Machado L, Chapman WW. Natural language processing: an introduction. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2011;18:544–551.
Laique SN, Hayat U, Sarvepalli S, et al. Application of optical character recognition with natural language processing for large-scale quality metric data extraction in colonoscopy reports. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021;93:750–757.
Lian L, Kiran RP, Remzi FH, Lavery IC, Fazio VW. Outcomes for patients developing anastomotic leak after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: does a handsewn vs. stapled anastomosis matter? Dis Colon Rectum. 2009;52:387–393.
Remzi FH, Aytac E, Ashburn J, et al. Transabdominal redo ileal pouch surgery for failed restorative proctocolectomy: lessons learned over 500 patients. Ann Surg. 2015;262:675–682.
Holubar SD, Neary P, Aiello A, et al. Ileal pouch revision vs excision: short-term (30-day) outcomes from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Colorectal Dis. 2019;21:209–218.
Cai JX, Barrow J, Parian A, et al. Routine pouchoscopy prior to ileostomy takedown may not be necessary in patients with chronic ulcerative colitis. Dig Dis. 2018;36:72–77.
Sossenheimer PH, Glick LR, Dachman AH, et al. Abnormal pouchogram predicts pouch failure even in asymptomatic patients. Dis Colon Rectum. 2019;62:463–469.
Pokala A, Shen B. Endoscopic clipping of ascites from the tip of the “J” leak in ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. VideoGIE. 2019;4:574–576.
Ourô S, Thava B, Shaikh I, Clark SK. Management of pouch dysfunction in a tertiary centre. Colorectal Dis. 2016;18:1167–1171.
Kochhar GS, Shen B. Endoscopic treatment of leak at the tip of the “J” ileal pouch. Endosc Int Open. 2017;5:E64–E66.
Lightner AL, Pemberton JH. The role of temporary fecal diversion. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2017;30:178–183.
Galandiuk S, Scott NA, Dozois RR, et al. Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Reoperation for pouch-related complications. Ann Surg. 1990;212:446–52; discussion 452.
Tulchinsky H, Cohen CR, Nicholls RJ. Salvage surgery after restorative proctocolectomy. Br J Surg. 2003;90:909–921.
Lightner AL, Dattani S, Dozois EJ, Moncrief SB, Pemberton JH, Mathis KL. Pouch excision: indications and outcomes. Colorectal Dis. 2017;19:912–916.
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.
Helavirta I, Lehto K, Huhtala H, Hyöty M, Collin P, Aitola P. Pouch failures following restorative proctocolectomy in ulcerative colitis. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2020;35:2027–2033.
Meagher AP, Farouk R, Dozois RR, Kelly KA, Pemberton JH. J ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for chronic ulcerative colitis: complications and long-term outcome in 1310 patients. Br J Surg. 1998;85:800–803.
Feinberg AE, Lavryk O, Aiello A, et al. Conditional survival after IPAA for ulcerative and indeterminate colitis: does long-term pouch survival improve or worsen with time? Dis Colon Rectum. 2020;63:927–933.
Fazio VW, Tekkis PP, Remzi F, et al. Quantification of risk for pouch failure after ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery. Ann Surg. 2003;238:605–14; discussion 614.
MacRae HM, McLeod RS, Cohen Z, O’Connor BI, Ton EN. Risk factors for pelvic pouch failure. Dis Colon Rectum. 1997;40:257–262.
Al-Sukhni W, McLeod RS, MacRae H, O’Connor B, Huang H, Cohen Z. Oncologic outcome in patients with ulcerative colitis associated with dyplasia or cancer who underwent stapled or handsewn ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2010;53:1495–1500.