» Articles » PMID: 29577558

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Comparing Adverse Events and Functional Outcomes of Different Pouch Designs After Restorative Proctocolectomy

Overview
Journal Colorectal Dis
Specialty Gastroenterology
Date 2018 Mar 27
PMID 29577558
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Aim: There is no consensus as to which ileoanal pouch design provides better outcomes after restorative proctocolectomy. This study compares different pouch designs.

Method: A systematic review of the literature was performed. A random effects meta-analytical model was used to compare adverse events and functional outcome.

Results: Thirty comparative studies comparing J, W, S and K pouch designs were included. No significant differences were identified between the different pouch designs with regard to anastomotic dehiscence, anastomotic stricture, pelvic sepsis, wound infection, pouch fistula, pouch ischaemia, perioperative haemorrhage, small bowel obstruction, pouchitis and sexual dysfunction. The W and K designs resulted in fewer cases of pouch failure compared with the J and S designs. J pouch construction resulted in a smaller maximum pouch volume compared with W and K pouches. Stool frequency per 24 h and during daytime was higher following a J pouch than W, S or K constructions. The J design resulted in increased faecal urgency and seepage during daytime compared with the K design. The use of protective pads during daytime and night-time was greater with a J pouch compared to S or K. The use of antidiarrhoeal medication was greater after a J reservoir than a W reservoir. Difficulty in pouch evacuation requiring intubation was higher with an S pouch than with W or J pouches.

Conclusion: Despite its ease of construction and comparable complication rates, the J pouch is associated with higher pouch failure rates and worse function. Patient characteristics, technical factors and surgical expertise should be considered when choosing pouch design.

Citing Articles

Preoperative anorectal manometry as a predictor of function after ileal pouch anal anastomosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Stephens I, Byrnes K, McCawley N, Burke J Tech Coloproctol. 2024; 29(1):1.

PMID: 39576416 DOI: 10.1007/s10151-024-03035-w.


Surgical Options for Appropriate Length of J-Pouch Construction for Better Outcomes and Long-term Quality of Life in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis after Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis.

Xu W, Tang W, Ding W, Hua Z, Wang Y, Ge X Gut Liver. 2023; 18(1):85-96.

PMID: 36987383 PMC: 10791498. DOI: 10.5009/gnl220471.


Incidence and causes of failure in various anatomical pouch designs 20 years after surgical primary ileal-pouch anal anastomosis construction.

Reijntjes M, Bocharewicz E, Hompes R, Buskens C, Bemelman W Int J Colorectal Dis. 2022; 37(12):2491-2499.

PMID: 36357735 PMC: 9741566. DOI: 10.1007/s00384-022-04280-x.


Continent ileostomies: what the radiologist needs to know.

T Flicek K, Shawki S Abdom Radiol (NY). 2022; 48(9):2969-2977.

PMID: 36352235 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-022-03705-z.


Continent Ileostomy as an Alternative to End Ileostomy.

Wu X, Ke H, Kiran R, Shen B, Lan P Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2020; 2020:9740980.

PMID: 32382274 PMC: 7199532. DOI: 10.1155/2020/9740980.