Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Diagnosing Pouchitis

Comparative Validation of Two Scoring Systems in Routine Follow-Up

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

Abstract

PURPOSE: Pouchitis represents a serious threat to patients with ulcerative colitis after restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. The frequency of pouchitis is high, and it implies the risk of pouch failure and the risk of malignant mucosal transformation in the pouch. Early detection and precise classification of the inflammatory process are required for adequate therapy, which might be facilitated using a scoring system. The aim of the present study was to validate two existing scoring systems in routine outpatient practice. METHOD: The Heidelberg Pouchitis Activity Score and the Pouchitis Disease Activity Index developed at the Mayo Clinic were simultaneously prospectively applied in a consecutive series of 103 outpatient consultations of 41 patients at our hospital and comparatively validated against the diagnosis of “ pouchitis” or “no pouchitis” concurrently made by a physician and a surgeon. RESULTS: The median score of examinations in which the clinicians’ diagnosis was consistent with pouchitis were significantly higher than those of examinations inconsistent with pouchitis in both scoring systems (Heidelberg Pouchitis Activity Score, 17 (interquartile range, 14–21) and 8 (interquartile range, 5–10), respectively, P < 0.001; Pouchitis Disease Activity Index, 7 (interquartile range, 5–8) and 2.5 (interquartile range, 1–4), respectively, P < 0.001). The sensitivity and specificity in the two total scores were 84 and 79.5 percent, respectively (Heidelberg Pouchitis Activity Score), and 60 and 96.2 percent, respectively (Pouchitis Disease Activity Index); in the field clinical manifestations 44 and 73.1 percent, respectively (Heidelberg Pouchitis Activity Score), and 20 and 87.2 percent, respectively (Pouchitis Disease Activity Index); in the field endoscopic manifestations 88 and 83.3 percent, respectively (Heidelberg Pouchitis Activity Score), and 60 and 89.7 percent, respectively (Pouchitis Disease Activity Index); and in the field histologic manifestations 72 and 76.9 percent, respectively (Heidelberg Pouchitis Activity Score), and 44 and 96.2 percent, respectively (Pouchitis Disease Activity Index). Lowering the cutoff point for diagnosis of pouchitis in the Pouchitis Disease Activity Index by 2 points (pouchitis: score ≥ 5) would result in an 88 percent sensitivity and a 67 percent specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Specificity and sensitivity of the Heidelberg Pouchitis Activity Score were satisfactory. The cutoff point for diagnosing pouchitis in the Pouchitis Disease Activity Index would have to be lowered to reach an acceptable sensitivity and specificity. The very poor validity of the field clinical manifestations in diagnosing pouchitis emphasizes the need for endoscopic and histologic examination for detection of pouchitis. The issue of whether the diagnosis of pouchitis should be based on endoscopic and histologic features alone, instead of additionally taking clinical features into account, should be addressed in future studies.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. WJ Sandborn (1994) ArticleTitlePouchitis following ileal pouch-anal anastomosis Gastroenterology 107 1856–1860

    Google Scholar 

  2. WJ Sandborn WJ Tremaine KP Batts JH Pemberton SF Phillips (1994) ArticleTitlePouchitis after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis Mayo Clin Proc 69 409–415

    Google Scholar 

  3. T Kühbacher S Schreiber N Runkel (1998) ArticleTitlePouchitis Int J Colorectal Dis 13 196–207

    Google Scholar 

  4. J Romanos DN Samarasekera JF Stebbing DP Jewell MG Kettlewell NJ Mortensen (1997) ArticleTitleOutcome of 200 restorative proctocolectomy operations Br J Surg 84 814–818

    Google Scholar 

  5. HJ Järvinen P Luukkonen (1993) ArticleTitleExperience with restorative proctocolectomy in 201 patients Ann Chir Gynaecol 82 159–164

    Google Scholar 

  6. JM Salesmans FM Nagengast EJ Lubbers JH Kuijpers (1992) ArticleTitlePostoperative long-term results of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis and familial polyposis coli Dig Dis Sci 37 1882–1889

    Google Scholar 

  7. RR Dozois KA Kelly DR Welling (1989) ArticleTitleIleal pouch-anal anastomosis Ann Surg 210 268–273

    Google Scholar 

  8. P Luukkonen H Järvinen M Tanskanen M Kahri (1994) ArticleTitlePouchitis—recurrence of the inflammatory bowel disease? Gut 35 243–246

    Google Scholar 

  9. U Keränen P Luukkonen H Järvinen (1997) ArticleTitleFunctional results after restorative proctocolectomy complicated by pouchitis Dis Colon Rectum 40 764–769

    Google Scholar 

  10. F Michelassi M Stella GE Block (1993) ArticleTitleProspective assessment of functional results after ileal J pouch-anal restorative proctocolectomy Arch Surg 128 889–895

    Google Scholar 

  11. UA Heuschen F Autschbach EH Allemeyer (2001) ArticleTitleLong-term follow-up after ileoanal pouch procedure Dis Colon Rectum 44 487–499

    Google Scholar 

  12. MV Madden MJ Farthing RJ Nicholls (1990) ArticleTitleInflammation in ileal reservoirs Gut 31 247–249

    Google Scholar 

  13. RL Moskowitz NA Shepherd RJ Nicholls (1986) ArticleTitleAn assessment of inflammation in the reservoir after restorative proctocolectomy with ileoanal reservoir Int J Colorectal Dis 1 167–174

    Google Scholar 

  14. G Di Febo M Miglioli A Lauri (1990) ArticleTitleEndoscopic assessment of acute inflammation of the ileal reservoir after restorative ileo-anal anastomosis Gastrointest Endosc 36 6–9

    Google Scholar 

  15. . O‘Connel . Rankin LH Weiland KA Kelly (1986) ArticleTitleEnteric bacteriology absorption, morphology and emptying after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis Br J Surg 73 909–914

    Google Scholar 

  16. P Luukkonen V Valtonen A Sivonen P Sipponen H Järvinen (1988) ArticleTitleFecal bacteriology and reservoir ileitis in patients operated on for ulcerative colitis Dis Colon Rectum 31 864–867

    Google Scholar 

  17. VW Fazio Y Ziv JM Church (1995) ArticleTitleIleal pouch-anal anastomosis complications and function in 1005 patients Ann Surg 222 120–127

    Google Scholar 

  18. S Körsgen MR Keighley (1997) ArticleTitleCauses of failure and life expectancy of the ileoanal pouch Int J Colorectal Dis 12 4–8

    Google Scholar 

  19. HM MacRae RS McLeod Z Cohen BI O’Connor EN Ton (1997) ArticleTitleRisk factors for pelvic pouch failure Dis Colon Rectum 40 257–262

    Google Scholar 

  20. OA Ogunbiyi S Korsgen MR Keighley (1997) ArticleTitlePouch salvage Dis Colon Rectum 40 548–552

    Google Scholar 

  21. S Korsgen N Nikiteas OA Ogunbiyi MR Keighley (1996) ArticleTitleResults from pouch salvage Br J Surg 83 372–374

    Google Scholar 

  22. PM Sagar RR Dozois BG Wolff KA Kelly (1996) ArticleTitleDisconnection, pouch revision and reconnection of the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis Br J Surg 83 1401–1405

    Google Scholar 

  23. Z Cohen D Smith R McLeod (1998) ArticleTitleReconstructive surgery for pelvic pouch World J Surg 22 342–346

    Google Scholar 

  24. R Löfberg O Broström P Karlén B Tribukait A Öst (1990) ArticleTitleColonoscopic surveillance in long-standing total ulcerative colitis—a 15-year follow-up study Gastroenterology 99 1021–1031

    Google Scholar 

  25. NS Williams (1989) ArticleTitleRestorative proctocolectomy is the first choice elective surgical treatment for ulcerative colitis Br J Surg 76 1109–1110

    Google Scholar 

  26. R Lofberg L Liljeqvist K Lindquist B Veress FP Reinholt B Tribukait (1991) ArticleTitleDysplasia and DNA aneuploidy in a pelvic pouch. Report of a case Dis Colon Rectum 34 280–284

    Google Scholar 

  27. B Veress FP Reinholt K Lindquist R Lofberg L Liljeqvist (1995) ArticleTitleLong-term histomorphological surveillance of the pelvic ileal pouch. Dysplasia develops in a subgroup of patients Gastroenterology 109 1090–1097

    Google Scholar 

  28. NA Shepherd (1995) ArticleTitlePouchitis and neoplasia in the pelvic ileal reservoir Gastroenterology 109 1381–1396

    Google Scholar 

  29. UA Heuschen G Heuschen F Autschbach EH Allemeyer C Herfarth (2001) ArticleTitleAdenocarcinoma in the ileal pouch Int J Colorectal Dis 16 126–130

    Google Scholar 

  30. De HJ PR Millard M Kettlewell NJ Mortensen C Prince DP Jewell (1991) ArticleTitleMucosal characteristics of pelvic ileal pouches Gut 32 61–65

    Google Scholar 

  31. NA Shepherd JR Jass RJ Nicholls (1986) ArticleTitleAn assessment of inflammation in the reservoir after restorative proctocolectomy with ileoanal ileal reservoir Int J Colorectal Dis 1 167–174

    Google Scholar 

  32. UA Heuschen U Hinz EH Allemeyer M Lucas G Heuschen Ch Herfarth (2001) ArticleTitleOne- or two-stage procedure for restorative proctocolectomy Ann Surg 234 788–794

    Google Scholar 

  33. GN Tytgat SJ van Deventer (1988) ArticleTitlePouchitis Int J Colorect Dis 3 226–228

    Google Scholar 

  34. P Setti Carraro IC Talbot RJ Nicholls (1998) ArticleTitlePatterns of distribution of endoscopic and histological changes in the ileal reservoir after restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis. A long-term follow-up study Int J Colorectal Dis 13 103–107

    Google Scholar 

  35. P Setti Carraro IC Talbot RJ Nicholls (1994) ArticleTitleLong-term appraisal of the histological appearances of the ileal reservoir mucosa after restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis Gut 35 1721–1727

    Google Scholar 

  36. A Stallmach C Moser R Hero-Gross (1999) ArticleTitlePattern of mucosal adaptation in acute and chronic pouchitis Dis Colon Rectum 42 1311–1317

    Google Scholar 

  37. AP Meagher R Farouk RR Dozois DA Kelly JH Pemberton (1998) ArticleTitleJ ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for chronic ulcerative colitis Br J Surg 85 800–803

    Google Scholar 

  38. RG Newcombe (1998) ArticleTitleTwo-sided confidence intervals for the single proportion Stat Med 17 857–872

    Google Scholar 

  39. JR Beck EK Shultz (1986) ArticleTitleThe use of relative operating characteristic (ROC) curves in test performance evaluation Arch Pathol Lab Med 110 13–20

    Google Scholar 

  40. KY Liang SL Zeger (1986) ArticleTitleLongitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models Biometrika 73 13–22

    Google Scholar 

  41. SL Zeger KY Liang (1986) ArticleTitleLongitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes Biometrics 42 121–130

    Google Scholar 

  42. RJ Nicholls AK Banerjee (1998) ArticleTitlePouchitis World J Surg 22 347–351

    Google Scholar 

  43. MC Schmidt AJ Lazenby RJ Hendrickson JV Sitzmann (1998) ArticleTitlePreoperative terminal ileal and colonic resection histology predicts risk of pouchitis in patients after ileoanal pull-through procedure Ann Surg 227 654–662

    Google Scholar 

  44. EW Fonkalsrud JD Phillips (1990) ArticleTitleReconstruction of malfunctioning ileoanal pouch procedures as an alternative to permanent ileostomy Am J Surg 160 245–251

    Google Scholar 

  45. BJ Fozard JH Pemberton (1992) ArticleTitleResults of pouch surgery after ileo-anal anastomosis World J Surg 16 880–884

    Google Scholar 

  46. S Chaussade Y Denizot P Valleur (1991) ArticleTitlePresence of PAF-acether in stool of patients with pouch ileoanal anastomosis and pouchitis Gastroenterology 100 1509–1514

    Google Scholar 

  47. KE Levin JH Pemberton SF Phillips AR Zinsmeister ME Pezim (1992) ArticleTitleRole of oxygen free radicals in the etiology of pouchitis Dis Colon Rectum 35 452–456

    Google Scholar 

  48. SM Rauh DJ Schoetz PL Roberts JJ Murray JA Coller MC Veidenheimer (1991) ArticleTitlePouchitis—is it a wastebasket diagnosis? Dis Colon Rectum 34 685–689

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Unit for Documentation and Statistics of the Department of Surgery, and Department of Pathology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

    Udo A. Heuschen M.D., Erik H. Allemeyer M.D., Ulf Hinz M.Sc., Frank Autschbach M.D., Tanja Uehlein, Christian Herfarth M.D. & Gundi Heuschen M.D.

Authors
  1. Udo A. Heuschen M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Erik H. Allemeyer M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ulf Hinz M.Sc.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Frank Autschbach M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Tanja Uehlein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Christian Herfarth M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Gundi Heuschen M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

About this article

Cite this article

Heuschen, U.A., Allemeyer, E.H., Hinz, U. et al. Diagnosing Pouchitis. Dis Colon Rectum 45, 776–786 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-004-6297-7

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-004-6297-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation