Literature DB >> 11786768

Small colonic J-pouch improves colonic retention of liquids--randomized, controlled trial with scintigraphy.

Yik-Hong Ho1, Sidney Yu, Ee-Sin Ang, F Seow-Choen, Felix Sundram.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: A small 6-cm colonic J-pouch improves stool frequency and continence, without stool evacuation problems. However, the reservoir function is not improved on physiologic studies. Hence, a scintigraphy technique was devised to study the transit of solid and liquid colonic contents in these patients.
METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to straight or colonic J-pouch anal anastomoses after ultralow anterior resection. At 1 year after surgery, they were studied by bowel questionnaire, anorectal manometry, and technetium TC 99m tin-colloid liquid test meal/I-131 microcapsule scintigraphy. In the latter, technetium TC 99m tin-colloid was ingested orally to image the colonic liquids. I-131 microcapsules taken simultaneously imaged the solid stools. After ingestion of the radioisotopes, imaging was performed at intervals of 7 to 8, 24, and 56 hours later. Two independent observers noted the presence of technetium TC 99m tin-colloid liquid and I-131 microcapsules in various areas of interest drawn over the colon.
RESULTS: There were six patients (5 males, mean age, 61.5 (SE mean, 1.9) years) in the straight, and six patients (5 males, mean age, 63.2 (4.5) years) in the colonic J-pouch group. Stool frequency was more in the straight group (4.8 (0.4) vs. 3 (0.2) stools/day; P <.001). Continence, evacuation problems, and anorectal physiologic findings were not different. Technetium TC 99m tin-colloid (imaging liquids) transited significantly faster than I-131 microcapsules (imaging solids), at various areas of interest in the colon. In the colonic J-pouch patients, technetium TC 99m tin-colloid liquid was retained significantly longer in the descending colon at 24 hours (P <.05). Stool frequency was higher when technetium TC 99m tin-colloid was not retained in the descending colon at 56 hours (3.3 (0.5) vs. 4.3 (0.4) stools/day) but this did not reach statistical significance. There were no significant differences in the distribution of the ingested I-131 microcapsules between colonic J-pouch and straight groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Reduced stool frequency after colonic J-pouch may be related to factors causing better retention of liquid stools in the distal colon. No difference in solid stool transit could possibly account for minimal evacuation problems in small pouches.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11786768     DOI: 10.1007/s10350-004-6117-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum        ISSN: 0012-3706            Impact factor:   4.585


  12 in total

1.  Comparison of J-pouch and coloplasty pouch for low rectal cancers: a randomized, controlled trial investigating functional results and comparative anastomotic leak rates.

Authors:  Yik-Hong Ho; Steven Brown; Siu-Meng Heah; Charles Tsang; Francis Seow-Choen; Kong-Weng Eu; Choong Leong Tang
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 12.969

2.  [Reconstructive surgery after anterior resection of the rectum].

Authors:  S Willis; V Schumpelick
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 0.955

Review 3.  A systematic review of the function and complications of colonic pouches.

Authors:  Poh-Koon Koh; Choong-Leong Tang; Kong-Weng Eu; Miny Samuel; Edwin Chan
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2006-09-13       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 4.  Techniques for restoring bowel continuity and function after rectal cancer surgery.

Authors:  Yik-Hong Ho
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-10-21       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 5.  Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS): cause and effect and reconstructive considerations.

Authors:  Y Ziv; A Zbar; Y Bar-Shavit; I Igov
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2012-10-18       Impact factor: 3.781

6.  Colonic J-pouch anal anastomosis after ultralow anterior resection with upper sphincter excision for low-lying rectal cancer.

Authors:  Jae-Gahb Park; Min-Ro Lee; Seok-Byung Lim; Chang-Won Hong; Sang-Nam Yoon; Sung-Bum Kang; Seung-Chul Heo; Seung-Yong Jeong; Kyu-Joo Park
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2005-05-07       Impact factor: 5.742

7.  Safety and morbidity after ultra-low coloanal anastomoses: J-pouch vs end-to-end reconstruction.

Authors:  Thomas Steffen; Ignazio Tarantino; Franc Heinrich Hetzer; René Warschkow; Jochen Lange; Michael Zünd
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2007-12-11       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  Similar outcome after colonic pouch and side-to-end anastomosis in low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a prospective randomized trial.

Authors:  Mikael Machado; Jonas Nygren; Sven Goldman; Olle Ljungqvist
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 9.  Pouch reconstruction in the pelvis.

Authors:  H-P Bruch; O Schwandner; S Farke; J Nolde
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2003-03-25       Impact factor: 3.445

Review 10.  Reconstructive techniques after rectal resection for rectal cancer.

Authors:  C J Brown; D S Fenech; R S McLeod
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2008-04-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.