Skip to main content
Log in

Prospective, randomized study comparing clinical results between small and large colonic J-pouch following coloanal anastomosis

  • Original Contributions
  • Published:
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum

Abstract

PURPOSE: Improved functional results can be obtained by construction of a colonic J-pouch after coloanal anastomosis. Variability in pouch size following coloanal anastomosis is prevalent in current literature. In this study, the authors compare clinical bowel function after complete rectal excision with coloanal anastomosis for patients with rectal carcinoma using either a small 6-cm or a large 10-cm colonic J-pouch anastomosis. The clinical outcome is assessed both at short-term and long-term follow-up. METHODS: Fifty-nine consecutive patients with rectal cancers 4 to 8 cm from the anal verge were recruited into the study. Patients were randomized intraoperatively to either a 6-cm J-pouch group or a 10-cm J-pouch group. Clinical assessments were performed prospectively at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively, following colostomy closure. Clinical parameters such as frequency, urgency, continence, and laxative and enema use were assessed and compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There was no statistical differences in the mean defecation frequency, urgency, and fecal continence between the two groups at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. In the first year, laxative and enema use between the two groups was negligible; however at two years, 30 percent of patients with a large reservoir compared with 10 percent of patients in the small-pouch group required laxative and/or enema for constipation and evacuation of bowels. CONCLUSION: Similar clinical results can be expected from patients with either small or large reservoirs at one year. However, with long-term follow-up, patients with a large reservoir are more likely to require medication for constipation and evacuation. To avoid these inconveniences a small reservoir is advocated for patients undergoing coloanal anastomosis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Keighley MR, Matheson D. Functional results of rectal excision and endoanal anastomosis. Br J Surg 1980;67:757–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Lazorthes F, Fages P, Chiotasso P, Lemozy J, Bloom E. Resection of the rectum with construction of a colonic reservoir and coloanal anastomosis for carcinoma of the rectum. Br J Surg 1986;73:136–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Seow-Choen F, Goh HS. Prospective randomized trial comparing J colonic-pouch anal anastomosis and straight coloanal reconstruction. Br J Surg 1995;82:608–10.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ortiz H, De Miguel M, Armendariz P, Rodriguez J, Chocarro C. Coloanal anastomosis: are functional results better with a pouch? Dis Colon Rectum 1995;38:375–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hallböök O, Pahlman L, Krog M, Wexner SD, Sjödal R. Randomized comparison of straight and colonic J pouch anastomosis after low anterior resection. Ann Surg 1996;224:58–65.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Parc R, Tiret E, Frileux P, Mozkowski E, Loygue J. Resection and coloanal anastomosis with colonic reservoir for rectal carcinoma. Br J Surg 1986;73:139–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hida J, Yasutomi M, Fujimoto K,et al. Functional outcome after low anterior resection with low anastomosis for rectal cancer using the colonic J-pouch: prospective randomized study for determination of optimum pouch size. Dis Colon Rectum 1996;39:986–99.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lazorthes F, Fages P, Chiotasso P, Bugat R. Synchronous abdomino trans-sphincteric resection of low rectal cancer: new technique for direct coloanal anastomosis. Br J Surg 1986;73:573–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kirwan WO, Ruper B, Turnball B Jr, Fazio VW, Weakley FL. Pull through operation with delay anastomosis for rectal cancer. Br J Surg 1978;65:695–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Goligher JC, Hughes ES. Sensibility of the rectum and colon: its role in the mechanism of anal continence. Lancet 1951;1:543–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Nicholls RJ, Luwoski DZ, Donaldson DR. Comparison of colonic reservoir and straight coloanal reconstruction after rectal excision. Br J Surg 1988;75:318–20.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Pelissier EP, Blum D, Bachour A, Bosset JF. Functional results of coloanal anastomosis with reservoir. Dis Colon Rectum 1992;35:843–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mortensen NJ, Ramirez JM, Takeuchi N, Smilgin Humphreys MM. Colonic J-pouch-anal anastomosis after rectal excision for carcinoma: functional outcome. Br J Surg 1995;82:611–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

About this article

Cite this article

Lazorthes, F., Gamagami, R., Chiotasso, P. et al. Prospective, randomized study comparing clinical results between small and large colonic J-pouch following coloanal anastomosis. Dis Colon Rectum 40, 1409–1413 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02070703

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02070703

Key words

Navigation