Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Is diversion free ileal pouch-anal anastomosis a safe procedure? A meta-analysis of 4973 cases

  • Review
  • Published:
International Journal of Colorectal Disease Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) has been established as the procedure of choice for patients who require excision of the colon and rectum for familial adenomatous polyposis and ulcerative colitis. The requirement for proximal stomal diversion in IPAA is controversial.

Objectives

To compare post-operative outcomes following IPAA with and without proximal diversion.

Methods

Computerised literature search, of Ovid MEDLINE and EMBASE. Full-text comparative studies published between 1992 and 2019, in English language and on adult patients. Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis with or without proximal stomal diversion following proctocolectomy. Outcome measures were anastomotic leak, anastomosis strictures, re-operations, pouch failure, intra-abdominal sepsis, small bowel obstruction/ileus and mortality.

Results

Five hundred and forty-six studies were screened. Fourteen relevant studies included 4973 cases (1832 patients with no stomas vs 3141 with stomas). Anastomotic strictures (p ≤ 0.0001 OR 0.40; 95% CI (0.26–0.62)) and pouch failures (p = 0.003 OR 0.54; 95% CI (0.36–0.82)) were higher in diverted than non-diverted patients. Re-operation was more frequently required in non-diverted patients (p = 0.02 OR 2.51; 95% CI (1.12–5.59)). Heterogeneity was low in 5 out of 7 variables.

Conclusion

In selected patients, diversion-free IPAA is a safe procedure associated with lower anastomotic stricture and pouch failure rates than diverted IPAA. This appears to occur at the expense of a higher re-operation rate. An RCT is required to help define the selection criteria.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Richards DM, Hughes SA, Irving MH, Scott NA (2001) Patient quality of life after successful restorative proctocolectomy is normal. Color Dis 3:223–226

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Parks AG, Nicholls RJ (1978) Proctocolectomy without ileostomy for ulcerative colitis. Br Med J 2:85–88

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Thow GB (1985) Single-stage colectomy and mucosal proctectomy with stapled antiperistaltic ileoanal reservoir. In: Dozois RR (ed) Alternatives to conventional ileostomy. Year Book Medical Publishers, Chicago, pp 420–432

    Google Scholar 

  4. Sofo L, Caprino P, Sacchetti F, Bossola M (2016) Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis: a narrative review. WJGS 8:556–563

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Stey AM, Brook RH, Keeler E, Harris MT, Heimann T, Steinhagen RM (2014) Outcomes and cost of diverted versus undiverted restorative proctocolectomy. J Gastrointest Surg 18:995–1002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gray BW, Drongowski RA, Hirschl RB, Geiger JD (2012) Restorative proctocolectomy without diverting ileostomy in children with ulcerative colitis. J Pediatr Surg 47:204–208

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Manworren RC (1996) Developmental effects on the adolescent of a temporary ileostomy. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs 23:210–217

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Mennigen R, Senninger N, Bruwer M, Rijcken E (2011) Impact of defunctioning loop ileostomy on outcome after restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis. Int J Color Dis 26:627–633

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chen YJ, Grant R, Lindholm E, Lipskar A, Dolgin S, Khaitov S, Greenstein A (2019) Is fecal diversion necessary during ileal pouch creation after initial subtotal colectomy in pediatric ulcerative colitis? Pediatr Surg Int 35:443–448

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kiely JM, Fazio VW, Remzi FH, Shen B, Kiran RP (2012) Pelvic sepsis after IPAA adversely affects function of the pouch and quality of life. Dis Colon Rectum 55:387–392

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Beyer Berjot L, Maggiori L, Birnbaum D, et al. A total laparoscopic approach reduces the infertility rate after ileal pouch-anal anastamosis: a 2 centre study. Annals of surgery 258: 275–282

  12. Salehimarzijarani B, Jalaly NY, Dadvar Z, Hemmasi G, Ashrafi M, Zali M (2013) Long term quality of life after ileal pouch anal restorative proctoclectomy for ulcerative colitis. Indian journal of gastroeneterology 32:49–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Fazio VW, Kiran RP, Remzi FH, Coffey JC, Heneghan HM, Kirat HT, Manilich E, Shen B, Martin ST (2013) Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: analysis of outcome and quality of life in 3707 patients. Ann Surg 257:679–685

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group (2010) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Int J Surg 8:336–341

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ et al (2019) RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 366:l4898

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sterne JAC, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, Savović J, Berkman ND, Viswanathan M, Henry D, Altman DG, Ansari MT, Boutron I, Carpenter JR, Chan AW, Churchill R, Deeks JJ, Hróbjartsson A, Kirkham J, Jüni P, Loke YK, Pigott TD, Ramsay CR, Regidor D, Rothstein HR, Sandhu L, Santaguida PL, Schünemann HJ, Shea B, Shrier I, Tugwell P, Turner L, Valentine JC, Waddington H, Waters E, Wells GA, Whiting PF, Higgins JPT (2016) ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions. BMJ 355:i4919. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i4919

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Luke A McGuinness (2019). robvis: an R package and web application for visualising risk-of-bias assessments. https://github.com/mcguinlu/robvis

  18. Heuschen UA, Hinz U, Allemeyer EH, Lucas M, Heuschen G, Herfarth C (2001) One- or two-stage procedure for restorative proctocolectomy: rationale for a surgical strategy in ulcerative colitis. Ann Surg 234:788–794

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Kienle P, Weitz J, Benner A, Herfarth C, Schmidt J (2003) Laparoscopically assisted colectomy and ileoanal pouch procedure with and without protective ileostomy. Surg Endosc 17:716–720

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Gorfine SR, Fichera A, Harris MT et al (2003) Long-term results of salvage surgery for septic complications after restorative proctocolectomy: does faecal diversion improve outcome? Dis Colon Rectum 46:1339–1344

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lepisto¨ A, Luukkonen P, Jarvinen HJ. Cumulative failure rate of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and quality of life after failure. Dis Colon rectum. 2002;45:1289–1294

  22. Dolgin SE, Shlasko E, Gorfine S, Benkov K, Leleiko N (1999) Restorative proctocolectomy in children with ulcerative colitis utilizing rectal mucosectomy with or without diverting ileostomy. J Pediatr Surg 34:837–839

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Wasmuth HH, Tranø G, Endreseth B et al (2009) Long-term surgical load in patients with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Color Dis 11:711–718

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Grobler SP, Hosie KB, Keighley MR (1992) Randomized trial of loop ileostomy in restorative proctocolectomy. Br J Surg 79:903–906

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gullberg K, Lindquist K, Lijeqvist L (1995) Pelvic pouch-anal anastomoses: pros and cons about omission of mucosectomy and loop ileostomy. A study of 60 patients. Ann Chir 49:527–533

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hainsworth PJ, Bartolo DC (1998) Selective omission of loop ileostomy in restorative proctocolectomy. Int J Color Dis 13:119–123

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Hor T, Zalinski S, Lefevre JH, Shields C, Attal E, Tiret E, Parc Y (2012) Feasibility of laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy without diverting stoma. Dig Liver Dis 44:118–122

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ikeuchi H, Nakano H, Uchino M, Nakamura M, Noda M, Yanagi H, Yamamura T (2005) Safety of one-stage restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis. Dis Colon Rectum 48:1550–1555

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Remzi FH, Fazio VW, Gorgun E, Ooi BS, Hammel J, Preen M, Church JM, Madbouly K, Lavery IC (2006) The outcome after restorative proctocolectomy with or without defunctioning ileostomy. Dis Colon Rectum 49:470–477

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Samples J, Evans K, Chaumont N, Strassle P, Sadiq T, Koruda M (2017) Variant two-stage Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: an innovative and effective alternative to standard resection in ulcerative colitis. J Am Coll Surg 224:557–563

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Widmar M, Munger JA, Mui A, Gorfine SR, Chessin DB, Popowich DA, Bauer JJ (2019) Diverted versus undiverted restorative proctocolectomy for chronic ulcerative colitis: an analysis of long-term outcomes after pouch leak. Int J Color Dis 34:691–697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Williamson ME, Lewis WG, Sagar PM et al (1997) One-stage restorative proctocolectomy without temporary ileostomy for ulcerative colitis: a note of caution. Dis Colon Rectum 40:1019–1022

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Zittan E, Wong-Chong N, Ma GW, McLeod RS, Silverberg MS, Cohen Z (2016) Modified two-stage Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis results in lower rate of anastomotic leak compared with traditional two-stage surgery for ulcerative colitis. J Crohns Colitis 10:766–772

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Metcalf AM, Dozois RR, Kelly KA, Wolff BG (1986) Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis without temporary, diverting ileostomy. Dis Colon Rectum 29:33–35

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Matikainen M, Santavirta J, Hiltunen K (1990) Ileoanal anastomosis without covering ileostomy. Dis Colon Rectum 33:384–388

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Gunnarsson U, Karlbom U, Docker M, Raab Y, Påhlman L (2004) Proctocolectomy and pelvic pouch--is a diverting stoma dangerous for the patient? Color Dis 6:23–27

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Okada S, Hata K, Emoto S, Murono K, Kaneko M, Sasaki K, Otani K, Nishikawa T, Tanaka T, Kawai K, Nozawa H (2018 Dec) Elevated risk of stoma outlet obstruction following colorectal surgery in patients undergoing ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: a retrospective cohort study. Surg Today 48(12):1060–1067

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Dafnis G (2016) Early and late surgical outcomes of ileal pouch–anal anastomosis within a defined population in Sweden. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 28:842–849

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Mizushima T, Kameyama H, Watanabe K (2017) Risk factors of small bowel obstruction following total proctocolectomy and ileal pouch–anal anastomosis with diverting loop-ileostomy for ulcerative colitis. Ann Gastroenterol Surg 1:122–128

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Sahami S, Buskens CJ, Fadok TY, Tanis PJ, de Buck van Overstraeten A, Wolthuis AM, Bemelman WA, D’Hoore A (2016) Defunctioning ileostomy is not associated with reduced leakage in Proctocolectomy and Ileal pouch anastomosis surgeries for IBD. J Crohn's Colitis 10:779–785

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Weston-Petrides GK, Lovegrove RE, Tilney HS, Heriot AG, Nicholls RJ, Mortensen NJ, Fazio VW, Tekkis PP (2008) Comparison of outcomes after restorative proctocolectomy with or without defunctioning ileostomy. Arch Surg 143:406–412

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. MacLean AR, Cohen Z, MacRae HM et al (2002) Risk of small bowel obstruction after the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Ann Surg 235:200–206

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Sugerman HJ, Sugerman EL, Meador JG, Newsome HH Jr, Kellum JM Jr, DeMaria EJ (2000) Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis without ileal diversion. Ann Surg 232:530–541

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Beyer-Berjot L, Baumstarck K, Loubière S et al (2019) Is diverting loop ileostomy necessary for completion proctectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis? A multicenter randomized trial of the GETAID Chirurgie group (IDEAL trial): rationale and design (NCT03872271). BMC Surg 19:192

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge support from Kirsty Morrison, Senior Information Specialist, Royal College of Surgeons of England for carrying out literature searches.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Castle Hill Hospital, Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, East Yorkshire, HU16 5JQ, UK

    Khalid Khan, Talha Manzoor, Sarah Khan & John E. Hartley

Authors
  1. Khalid Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Talha Manzoor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sarah Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. John E. Hartley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Khalid Khan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Khan, K., Manzoor, T., Khan, S. et al. Is diversion free ileal pouch-anal anastomosis a safe procedure? A meta-analysis of 4973 cases. Int J Colorectal Dis 36, 657–669 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-020-03814-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-020-03814-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation