Can a meta-analysis answer the question: is mucosectomy and handsewn or double-stapled anastomosis better in ileal pouch-anal anastomosis?

Although ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the procedure of choice for polyposis and ulcerative colitis with medically refractory disease or dysplasia, controversy exists concerning whether mucosal preservation with double-stapled (DS) IPAA is superior to mucosectomy and handsewn (HS) IPAA anastomosis for postoperative function. Prospective studies have shown no statistically significant differences. The use of meta-analysis can strengthen statistical power by combining the data from related studies. A meta-analysis was performed to determine whether there was a significant difference in functional and manometric outcome between HS-IPAA and DS-IPAA. Prospective, randomized studies were identified using a literature search. Functional outcome variables included number of normal continence, minor incontinence, nocturnal evacuation, the ability to discriminate flatus from stool, and antidiarrheal medication. Manometric outcomes included postoperative resting and squeeze anal pressures. Four prospective, randomized trials were identified. Of the 184 total patients, the HS-IPAA group included 86 patients (48 men and 38 women) and the DS-IPAA group included 98 patients (49 men and 49 women). There were no significant differences in functional outcome between HS-IPAA and DS-IPAA. In addition, there was no significant difference in sphincter resting and squeeze pressures between the two patient groups. This meta-analysis demonstrates that DS-IPAA offers no advantage in functional or manometric outcome when compared with HS-IPAA.