PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the surgical complications and long-term outcome and assess the functional results and quality of life after ileorectal anastomosis and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. METHODS: From 1980 to 1997, 131 patients with familial adenomatous polyposis were operated on or were followed up or both at the Familial Gastrointestinal Cancer Registry at Mount Sinai Hospital. Demographic and operative data were prospectively collected in the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis group, and retrospectively in the ileorectal anastomosis group. A questionnaire or telephone interview or both were undertaken to evaluate functional outcome and quality of life. RESULTS: The ileorectal anastomosis group consisted of 60 patients (mean age, 31 years; mean follow-up, 7.7 years). In the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis group there were 50 patients (mean age, 35 years; mean follow-up, 6 years). There were no statistically significant differences with respect to anastomotic leak rate in ileal pouch-anal anastomosis vs. ileorectal anastomosis (12 vs. 3 percent; P = 0.21), risk of small-bowel obstruction (24 vs. 15 percent; P = 0.58), and risk of intra-abdominal sepsis (3 vs. 2 percent; P = 0.86). Reoperation rate was similar in the two groups (14 vs. 16 percent; P = 0.94). Twenty-one patients (37 percent) with ileorectal anastomosis were converted to ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (12 patients) or proctocolectomy (9 patients), because of rectal cancer (5 patients), dysplasia (1 patient), or uncontrollable rectal polyps (15 patients). Two pelvic pouches were excised, and another one was defunctioned. Information regarding functional results and quality of life was obtained in 40 patients (66.6 percent) in the ileorectal anastomosis group and in 43 patients (86 percent) in the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis group. Patients with ileorectal anastomosis had a significantly better functional outcome with regard to nighttime continence and perineal skin irritation. But otherwise, functional results and quality of life were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Although ileorectal anastomosis has a better functional outcome, ileal pouch-anal anastomosis may be preferable because of the lower long-term failure rate. Ileorectal anastomosis is still an option in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis with rectal polyp sparing and good compliance for follow-up.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the surgical complications and long-term outcome and assess the functional results and quality of life after ileorectal anastomosis and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. METHODS: From 1980 to 1997, 131 patients with familial adenomatous polyposis were operated on or were followed up or both at the Familial Gastrointestinal Cancer Registry at Mount Sinai Hospital. Demographic and operative data were prospectively collected in the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis group, and retrospectively in the ileorectal anastomosis group. A questionnaire or telephone interview or both were undertaken to evaluate functional outcome and quality of life. RESULTS: The ileorectal anastomosis group consisted of 60 patients (mean age, 31 years; mean follow-up, 7.7 years). In the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis group there were 50 patients (mean age, 35 years; mean follow-up, 6 years). There were no statistically significant differences with respect to anastomotic leak rate in ileal pouch-anal anastomosis vs. ileorectal anastomosis (12 vs. 3 percent; P = 0.21), risk of small-bowel obstruction (24 vs. 15 percent; P = 0.58), and risk of intra-abdominal sepsis (3 vs. 2 percent; P = 0.86). Reoperation rate was similar in the two groups (14 vs. 16 percent; P = 0.94). Twenty-one patients (37 percent) with ileorectal anastomosis were converted to ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (12 patients) or proctocolectomy (9 patients), because of rectal cancer (5 patients), dysplasia (1 patient), or uncontrollable rectal polyps (15 patients). Two pelvic pouches were excised, and another one was defunctioned. Information regarding functional results and quality of life was obtained in 40 patients (66.6 percent) in the ileorectal anastomosis group and in 43 patients (86 percent) in the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis group. Patients with ileorectal anastomosis had a significantly better functional outcome with regard to nighttime continence and perineal skin irritation. But otherwise, functional results and quality of life were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Although ileorectal anastomosis has a better functional outcome, ileal pouch-anal anastomosis may be preferable because of the lower long-term failure rate. Ileorectal anastomosis is still an option in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis with rectal polyp sparing and good compliance for follow-up.
Authors: Joan C Smith; Michael W Schäffer; Billy R Ballard; Duane T Smoot; Alan J Herline; Samuel E Adunyah; Amosy E M'Koma Journal: J Cancer Ther Date: 2013