Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of our study was to evaluate the safety and functional outcome of restorative proctocolectomy (RP) without diversion. METHODS: Fifty patients underwent RP without diversion for ulcerative colitis (82 percent), familial adenomatous polyposis (12 percent), and indeterminate colitis (6 percent). The perioperative course and functional outcome of these patients were compared with another group of 50 patients undergoing RP with diverting ileostomy during the same time period (1989–1991) and closely matched for age, gender, surgeon, diagnosis, extent and duration (median, 10 years) of colitis, prior colectomy (∼22 percent), steroid use (40 percent), type of pouch, distance of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis from the dentate line (median, 1.5 cm), and the duration of follow-up (median, 12 months). All patients had a stapled ileal pouch-anal anastomosis without mucosectomy and a smooth conduct of the operation. RESULTS: There was no operative mortality. Anastomotic leaks and pelvic abscess were more common in patients without ileostomy (7/50 or 14 percentvs.2/50 or 4 percent); 8 of these 9 patients were taking ≥20 mg of prednisone/day. Septic complications requiring relaparotomy (6 percentvs.0 percent), prolonged ileus, and fever of unknown origin (10 percentvs.4 percent) were also more common in patients without ileostomy. Despite similar functional results at 6 weeks and at 12 months after initial pouch function, patients without ileostomy had a poorer quality of life index (5vs.8; 10 being best) in the early period (0–6 weeks) of pouch function. CONCLUSION: In equally favorable cases, RP without diversion is not as safe as RP with diversion, especially in patients taking ≥20 mg of prednisone/day.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Fazio VW, Tjandra JJ, Lavery IC. Techniques of pouch construction. In: Bartolo D, Mortensen N, Nicholls J, eds. Techniques to restorative proctocolectomy. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications (in press).
Fazio VW, Tjandra JJ. Prevention and management of ileostomy complications. J ET Nurs 1992;19:48–53.
Galandiuk S, Wolff B, Dozois R, Beart R Jr. Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis without ileostomy. Dis Colon Rectum 1991;34:870–3.
Wong WD, Rothenberger DA, Goldberg SM. Ileoanal pouch procedures. Curr Probl Surg 1985;22:9–78.
Thow GB. Single-stage colectomy and mucosal proctectomy with stapled antiperistaltic ileoanal reservoir. In: Dozois RR, ed. Alternatives to conventional ileostomy. Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, 1985:420–32.
Metcalf AM, Dozois RR, Kelly KA, Wolff BG. Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis without temporary, diverting ileostomy. Dis Colon Rectum 1986;29:33–5.
Emblem R, Larsen S, Torvet SH, Bergan A. Operative treatment of ulcerative colitis: conventional proctectomy with Brooke ileostomy versus mucosal proctectomy with ileoanal anastomosis. Scand J Gastroenterol 1988;23:493–500.
Peck DA. Stapled ileal reservoir to anal anastomosis. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1988;166:562–4.
Kmiot WA, Keighley MRB. Totally stapled abdominal restorative proctocolectomy. Br J Surg 1989;76:961–4.
Hosie KB, Grobler SP, Keighley MRB. Temporary loop ileostomy following restorative proctocolectomy. Br J Surg 1992;79:33–4.
Everett WG, Pollard SG. Restorative proctocolectomy without temporary ileostomy. Br J Surg 1990;77:621–2.
Matikainen M, Santavirta J, Hiltunen K-M. Ileoanal anastomosis without covering ileostomy. Dis Colon Rectum 1990;33:384–8.
Sugerman HJ, Newsome HH, Decosta G, Zfass AM. Stapled ileoanal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis and familial polyposis without a temporary diverting ileostomy. Ann Surg 1991;213:606–19.
Jarvinen HJ, Luukkonen P. Comparison of restorative proctocolectomy with and without covering ileostomy in ulcerative colitis. Br J Surg 1991;78:199–201.
Sagar PM, Lewis W, Holdsworth PJ, Johnston D. One-stage restorative proctocolectomy without temporary defunctioning ileostomy. Dis Colon Rectum 1992;35:582–8.
Tjandra JJ, Fazio VW, Church JM, Lavery IC, Milsom JW. Functional results after restorative proctocolectomy are similar in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis and mucosal ulcerative colitis. Am J Surg (in press).
Scott NA, Dozois RR, Beart RW Jr. Postoperative intra-abdominal and pelvic sepsis complicating ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Int J Colorectal Dis 1988;3:149–52.
Launer DP, Sackier JM. Pouch-anal anastomosis without diverting ileostomy. Dis Colon Rectum 1991;34:993–8.
Tjandra JJ, Fazio VW. Indications for and results of ileal pouch. Curr Pract Surgery (in press).
Tuckson WB, Lavery IC, Fazio VW, Oakley JR, Church JM, Milsom JW. Manometric and functional comparison of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis with and withoutanal manipulation. Am J Surg 1991;161:90–6.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Read at the meeting of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Chicago, Illinois, May 2 to 7, 1993.
About this article
Cite this article
Tjandra, J.J., Fazio, V.W., Milsom, J.W. et al. Omission of temporary diversion in restorative proctocolectomy — Is it safe?. Dis Colon Rectum 36, 1007–1014 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02047291
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02047291