This is the Scientific Surgery Archive, which contains all randomized clinical trials in surgery that have been identified by searching the top 50 English language medical journal issues since January 1998. Compiled by Jonothan J. Earnshaw, former Editor-in-Chief, BJS
Comparison of outcomes of ileal pouch–anal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis with and without previous ileorectal anastomosis. BJS 2008; 95: 494-498.
Published: 28th December 2007
Authors: A. C. von Roon, P. P. Tekkis, R. E. Lovegrove, K. F. Neale, R. K. S. Phillips, S. K. Clark et al.
Background
It is reported that previous colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) has no effect on postoperative complications and functional outcomes of secondary proctectomy and ileal pouch–anal anastomosis (IPAA) in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). This retrospective study re‐examined the question in a single centre.
Method
Some 185 patients were grouped by either IPAA as the initial prophylactic surgical procedure (primary IPAA) or IPAA preceded by IRA (secondary IPAA). Data on functional outcomes were available for 104, 83 and 56 patients at years 1, 5 and 10 respectively.
Results
The 78 patients who had secondary IPAA were older at the time of operation than the 107 who underwent primary IPAA (35·7 versus 29·2 years; P < 0·001). Six (8 per cent) of the secondary IPAA procedures could not be completed. Otherwise, apart from more wound infections in the secondary IPAA group (9 versus 0·9 per cent in the primary IPAA group; P = 0·012), there were no significant differences in rates of complications, functional outcomes, desmoid disease or pouch failure.
Conclusion
Conversion from IRA to IPAA may not be possible in patients with FAP. Where conversion is successful, pouch outcomes are similar but wound infections are more frequent. Copyright © 2007 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Full text