M L Sunde1,2, A Negård3, T Øresland4,5, N Bakka3, J T Geitung3,6, A E Færden4. 1. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Akershus University Hospital, 1478, Lørenskog, Norway. marie.louise.sunde@gmail.com. 2. Division of Surgical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. marie.louise.sunde@gmail.com. 3. Department of Radiology, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway. 4. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Akershus University Hospital, 1478, Lørenskog, Norway. 5. Division of Surgical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. 6. Division of Medicine and Laboratory Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Variability in functional outcome after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is to a large extent unexplained. The aim of this study was to use MRI to evaluate the morphology, emptying pattern and other pathology that may explain differences in functional outcome between well-functioning and poorly functioning pouch patients. A secondary aim was to establish a reference of normal MRI findings in pelvic pouch patients. METHODS: From a previous study, the best and worst functioning patients undergoing IPAA surgery between 2000 and 2013 had been identified and examined with manovolumetric tests (N = 47). The patients were invited to do a pelvic MRI investigating pouch morphology and emptying patterns, followed by a pouch endoscopy. RESULTS: Forty-three patients underwent MRI examination. We found no significant morphological or dynamic differences between the well-functioning and poorly functioning pouch patients. There was no correlation between urge volume and the volume of the bony pelvis, and no correlation between emptying difficulties or leakage and dynamic MRI findings. Morphological MRI signs of inflammation were present in the majority of patients and were not correlated to histological signs of inflammation. Of the radiological signs of inflammation, only pouch wall thickness correlated to endoscopic pouchitis disease activity index scores. CONCLUSION: It seems MRI does not increase the understanding of factors contributing to functional outcome after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Unless there is a clinical suspicion of perianal/peripouch disease or pelvic sepsis, MRI does not add value as a diagnostic tool for pelvic pouch patients. Endoscopy remains the golden standard for diagnosing pouch inflammation.
PURPOSE: Variability in functional outcome after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is to a large extent unexplained. The aim of this study was to use MRI to evaluate the morphology, emptying pattern and other pathology that may explain differences in functional outcome between well-functioning and poorly functioning pouch patients. A secondary aim was to establish a reference of normal MRI findings in pelvic pouch patients. METHODS: From a previous study, the best and worst functioning patients undergoing IPAA surgery between 2000 and 2013 had been identified and examined with manovolumetric tests (N = 47). The patients were invited to do a pelvic MRI investigating pouch morphology and emptying patterns, followed by a pouch endoscopy. RESULTS: Forty-three patients underwent MRI examination. We found no significant morphological or dynamic differences between the well-functioning and poorly functioning pouch patients. There was no correlation between urge volume and the volume of the bony pelvis, and no correlation between emptying difficulties or leakage and dynamic MRI findings. Morphological MRI signs of inflammation were present in the majority of patients and were not correlated to histological signs of inflammation. Of the radiological signs of inflammation, only pouch wall thickness correlated to endoscopic pouchitis disease activity index scores. CONCLUSION: It seems MRI does not increase the understanding of factors contributing to functional outcome after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Unless there is a clinical suspicion of perianal/peripouch disease or pelvic sepsis, MRI does not add value as a diagnostic tool for pelvic pouch patients. Endoscopy remains the golden standard for diagnosing pouch inflammation.
Authors: Richard E Lovegrove; Vasilis A Constantinides; Alexander G Heriot; Thanos Athanasiou; Ara Darzi; Feza H Remzi; R John Nicholls; Victor W Fazio; Paris P Tekkis Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Willem E Hueting; Erik Buskens; Ingeborg van der Tweel; Hein G Gooszen; Cees J H M van Laarhoven Journal: Dig Surg Date: 2005-04-14 Impact factor: 2.588
Authors: Victor Warren Fazio; Ravi P Kiran; Feza H Remzi; John Calvin Coffey; Helen Mary Heneghan; Hasan Tarik Kirat; Elena Manilich; Bo Shen; Sean T Martin Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Fabrizio Michelassi; John Lee; Michele Rubin; Alessandro Fichera; Kristen Kasza; Theodore Karrison; Roger D Hurst Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 12.969