Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine the outcome of pouch salvage operations and the factors that may influence successful reconstructions. METHODS: This retrospective review includes data from 198 patients who had undergone restorative proctocolectomy at a single institution during an 11-year period. All patients who had undergone attempted pouch salvage and who still had a pouch in situ were reviewed by both postal questionnaire and at interview in the outpatients clinic. RESULTS: Of 198 patients who underwent restorative proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis, 27 (13.6 percent) presented with pouch-specific complications requiring pouch salvage. A further five patients requiring pouch salvage were referred from other centers. Of 32 patients who underwent attempted pouch salvage, 16 (50 percent) had a successful outcome, 12 (37.5 percent) had pouch excision, and 3 (9 percent) are still defunctioned. There was one death (3 percent) in this series. Pelvic sepsis was a major cause of pouch failure, being present in 50 percent (8/16) of failed salvage procedures, and accounting for 58 percent (7/12) of pouch excisions. CONCLUSIONS: Salvage surgery for major complications following ileoanal pouch construction is worthwhile in the absence of major pelvic sepsis. Overall success rate is 50 percent, and these results may be acceptable to highly motivated patients.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Pemberton JH, Kelly KA, Beart RW Jr, Dozois RR, Wolff BG, Ilstrup DM. Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for chronic ulcerative colitis: longterm results. Ann Surg 1987;206:504–11.
Setti-Carraro P, Richie JK, Wilkinson KH, Nicholls RJ, Hawley PR. The first 10 years' experience of restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis. Gut 1994;35:1070–5.
Keighley MR, Grobler S, Bain I. An audit of restorative proctocolectomy. Gut 1993;34:680–4.
Foley EF, Schoetz DJ Jr, Roberts PL,et al. Rediversion after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: causes of failures and predictors of subsequent pouch salvage. Dis Colon Rectum 1995;38:793–8.
Keighley MR, Winslet MC, Flinn R, Kmiot W. Multivariate analysis of factors influencing the results of restorative proctocolectomy. Br J Surg 1989;76:740–4.
Galanduik S, Scott NA, Dozois RR,et al. Ileal pouchanal anastomosis: reoperation for pouch related complications. Ann Surg 1990;212:446–54.
Korsgen S, Nikiteas N, Ogunbiyi OA, Keighley MR. Results from pouch salvage. Br J Surg 1996;83:372–4.
Dozois RR, Kelly KA, Welling DR,et al. Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: comparison of results of familial adenomatous polyposis and chronic ulcerative colitis. Ann Surg 1989;210:268–71.
Schoetz DJ Jr, Coller JA, Veidenheimer MC. Can the pouch be saved? Dis Colon Rectum 1988;31:671–5.
Wexner SD, Rothenberger DA, Jensen L,et al. Ileal pouch-vaginal fistulas: incidence, etiology, and management. Dis Colon Rectum 1989;32:460–5.
Cullen JJ, Kelly KA. Prospectively evaluating anal sphincter function after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Am J Surg 1994;167:558–61.
Farouk R, Duthie GS, Bartolo DC. Recovery of the internal anal sphincter and continence after restorative proctocolectomy. Br J Surg 1994;81:1065–8.
O'Kelly TJ, Merrett M, Mortensen NJ, Dehn TC, Kettlewell M. Pouch-vaginal fistula after restorative proctocolectomy: aetiology and management. Br J Surg 1994;81:1374–5.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
About this article
Cite this article
Ogunbiyi, O.A., Korsgen, S. & Keighley, M.R.B. Pouch salvage. Dis Colon Rectum 40, 548–552 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02055376
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02055376