Skip to main content
Log in

S-pouchesvs. J-pouches

A comparison of functional outcomes

  • Published:
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum

Abstract

Subjects undergoing proctocolectomy with ileoanal anastomosis of either a J-shaped or a S-shaped ileal reservoir were studied with respect to functional status. Both subjective and objective measures were used. The S-pouch subjects appeared to have better early functional results, but no differences were found between groups evaluated at least one year from ileostomy closure. While virtually all subjects preferred restorative proctocolectomy to their previous loop ileostomy, there was a relatively high frequency of bowel-related symptoms, worries about bowel activity, and associated behavioral changes. The actual significance of these symptoms is difficult to determine at present. Further assessment of the quality of life in individuals with restorative proctocolectomy in comparison with subjects undergoing alternative surgical treatments is recommended.

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. Parks AG, Nicholls RJ, Belliveau P. Proctocolectomy with ileal reservoir and anal anastomosis. Br J Surg 1980;67:533–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Utsunomiya J, Iwama T, Imajo M, et al. Total colectomy, mucosal proctectomy, and ileoanal anastomosis. Dis Colon Rectum 1980;23:459–66.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Heppell J, Taylor BM, Beart RW Jr, Dozois RR, Kelly KA. Predicting outcome after endorectal ileoanal anastomosis. Can J Surg 1983;26:132–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Nicholls RJ, Belliveau P, Neill M, Wilks M, Tabaqchali S. Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal reservoir: a pathophysiological assessment. Gut 1981;22:462–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Stryker SJ, Daube JR, Kelly KA, et al. Anal sphincter electromyography after colectomy, mucosal rectectomy, and ileoanal anastomosis. Arch Surg 1985;120:713–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Belliveau P, Rolstad BS, Rothenberger DA. Ileal-anal reservoir: an alternative to permanent ileostomy. J Enterostom Ther 1982;9:44–50.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Taylor BM, Cranley B, Kelly KA, Phillips SF, Beart RW, Jr, Dozois RR. A clinico-physiological comparison of ileal pouch-anal and straight ileoanal anastomoses. Ann Surg 1983;198:462–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Beart RW Jr, Dozois RR, Wolff BG, Pemberton JH. Mechanisms of rectal continence: lessons from the ileoanal procedure. Am J Surg 1985;149:31–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lindquist K, Liljeqvist L, Sellberg B. The topography of ileoanal reservoirs in relation to evacuation patterns and clinical function. Acta Chir Scand 1984;150:573–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Rabau MY, Percy JP, Parks AG. Ileal pelvic reservoir: a correlation between motor patterns and clinical behaviour. Br J Surg 1982;69:391–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Stryker SJ, Borody TJ, Phillips SF, Kelly KA, Dozois RR, Beart RW Jr. Motility of the small intestine after proctocolectomy and ileal bouch-anal anastomosis. Ann Surg 1985;201:351–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Stryker SJ, Phillips SF, Dozois RR, Kelly KA, Beart RW Jr. Anal and neorectal function after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Ann Surg 1986;203:55–61.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Pezim ME, Nicholls RJ. Quality of life after restorative proctocolectomy with pelvic ileal reservoir. Br J Surg 1985;72:31–3.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. McHugh S, Cohen Z, McLeod R, Grant D. Restorative proctocolectomy—are ‘S’ pouches better than ‘J’ pouches? (abstr). Clin Invest Med 1985;8:A117.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cohen Z, McLeod RS, Stern H, Grant D, Nordgren S. The pelvic ponch and ileoanal anastomosis procedure: surgical technique and initial results. Am J Surg 1985;150:601–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Fonkalsrud EW. Endorectal ileoanal anastomosis with isoperistaltic ileal reservoir after colectomy and mucosal proctectomy. Ann Surg 1984;199:151–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Martin LW, Fischer JE. Preservation of anorectal continence following total colectomy. Ann Surg 1982;196:700–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Failes DG. Proctocolectomy without ileostomy: ileo-anal anastomosis with an ileal reservoir. Aust NZ J Surg 1983;53:551–6.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Nicholls RJ, Moskowitz RL, Shepherd NA. Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal reservoir. Br J Surg 1985;72(suppl):S76–9.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Manning AP, Wyman JB, Heaton KW. How trustworthy are bowel histories? Comparison of recalled and recorded information. Br Med J [Clin Res] 1976;2:213–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Nicholls RJ. Sphincter sparing colo-anal surgery. In: Dozois RR, ed. Alternatives to conventional ileostomy. Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Heyen F, Belliveau P, Heppell J, Dube S, Ouimet A. Clinical comparison of ileoanal reservoirs: S-pouch vs J-pouch (abstr). Clin Invest Med 1985;8:A117.

    Google Scholar 

  23. McHugh S, Segal Z, Lico S, Diamant NE. Control over bowel activity (abstr). Gastroenterology 1987;92:1527.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Read at the meeting of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Houston, Texas, May 11 to 14, 1986

Supported through the Elsie Watt Foundation.

About this article

Cite this article

McHugh, S.M., Diamant, N.E., McLeod, R. et al. S-pouchesvs. J-pouches. Dis Colon Rectum 30, 671–677 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02561686

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02561686

Key words

Navigation