==== Front Ann Saudi MedAnn Saudi MedAnnals of Saudi Medicine0256-49470975-4466King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre 2379343010.5144/0256-4947.2013.268asm-3-268Original ArticleOutcome after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis compared to mucosal ulcerative colitis in a Middle Eastern population Al-Sanea Nasser Alfaifi Jaber Al Homoud Samar Abduljabbar Alaa Hibbert Denise Ashari Luai From the Department of Surgery, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi ArabiaCorrespondence: Nasser Al-Sanea MD, Department of Surgery, MBC 40, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, PO Box 3354, Riyadh 11211, Saudi Arabia, T: 966-1-442 7754, F: 966-1-442-7772, nsanea@kfshrc.edu.saMay-Jun 2013 33 3 268 272 Copyright © 2013, Annals of Saudi Medicine2013This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES To compare the complications and outcome after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) for mucosal ulcerative colitis (MUC) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). DESIGN AND SETTINGS This is a retrospective study. The study was conducted at a single tertiary referral center. METHODS All patients who underwent restorative proctocolectomy with IPAA at a tertiary center in Saudi Arabia from 2001 till 2009 were retrieved. Data was obtained regarding preoperative status, postoperative complications, and functional outcome. RESULTS A total of 40 patients underwent IPAA, of which 21 cases were of FAP and 19 cases of MUC. Median age at operation for FAP and MUC was 31 (range: 16–45) and 43 (range: 15–65) years, respectively (P<.05). Median length of stay was 10 days (range: 6–42) for FAP and 12 days (range: 9–27) for MUC (P=.1). Postoperative morbidity was noted in 4 cases of FAP and 6 cases of MUC (P=.36). Specifically, wound infection was noted in 2 cases of FAP compared to 3 cases of MUC (P=.55); 1 MUC case had an anastomotic leak (P=.29). One mortality was recorded among the FAP cases (P=.35). The time between the creation of IPAA and the closure of ileostomy was 4.5 and 5 months for FAP and MUC, respectively (P=.87). Median follow-up was 36 months. Median bowel frequency per 24 hours was 6 (range: 3–24) for FAP and 7 (range 3–17) for MUC (P=.54). Intestinal obstruction was reported in 3 cases of FAP and 5 cases of MUC (P=.38). One pouch was excised in a FAP patient. One case of MUC developed pouchitis. CONCLUSIONS The outcome after IPAA was inferior for MUC compared to FAP, but it was not statistically significant due to the small sample size. The morbid status of the MUC cases and their older age contributed to the minor differences. ==== Body Restorative proctocolectomy with the formation of an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) was introduced by Parks AG and Nicholls RJ in 1978 for mucosal ulcerative colitis (MUC).1 Several years later, it became the first choice for both MUC and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP).2–4 Many researchers over the last 30 years had studied this procedure with regard to the short- and long-term outcome. Some of them concluded that the functional outcome was better and the complications were less in FAP patients than in MUC patients2,5 while others found them similar. In Saudi Arabia there was a single report about 30 patients who underwent IPAA; however, the differences between FAP and MUC cases have not been studied. We reported a single center experience over 9 years with the procedure in Saudi patients and compared the outcome among FAP and MUC patients. METHODS The colorectal database at King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, was reviewed from 2001 till 2009 for all patients who underwent IPAA. Patients who underwent IPAA for reasons other than FAP and MUC were excluded. IPAA was constructed using a J-ileal loop according to the stapled technique described by Kmiot WA, and Keighley MR. The ileoanal anastomosis was constructed using a double-stapled or hand-sewn technique. Mucosectomy was not performed in FAP patients unless the pouch was anastomosed to more than 1 cm above the dentate line. All pouches were covered with a loop ileostomy. From 2008, some cases were performed using a laparoscopic-assisted approach. All patients were operated electively. They received a prophylactic antibiotic and mechanical bowel preparation. Some patients received blood transfusion and some received preoperative total parenteral nutrition (TPN) when indicated. Early complications like septic episodes and mortality were documented. The first follow-up was 1 month after the operation, then every 6 months for 2 years, and yearly thereafter. Histopathology was reviewed for all cases. Late complications, frequency of bowel motions, incontinence symptoms, and use of constipating agents were recorded. SPSS, version 17.0.1 (IBM Corporation), was used for analysis; the comparison of variables was conducted using a chi-square test or Fisher exact test. A 2-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used to compare the medians. A P value less than .05 was considered significant. RESULTS A total of forty patients underwent IPAA: 19 females and 21 males. There were 21 cases of FAP and 19 cases of MUC. The median age at operation for FAP and MUC was 31 (range: 16–45) and 43 (range: 15–65) years, respectively, which was significantly different (P=.02). No cases of diabetes mellitus were recorded among both groups. Six cases of MUC were on steroids. Hypertension was reported in 1 case of FAP and 2 cases of MUC. A total of 9 cases of FAP and 10 cases of MUC were anemic. Only 4 cases underwent laparoscopic-assisted technique and 2 cases underwent hand-sewn anal anastomosis. The median length of hospital stay was 10 days (range: 6–42) for FAP and 12 days (range: 9–27) for MUC (P=.1). The time between creation of IPAA and closure of ileostomy was 4.5 and 5 months for FAP and MUC, respectively (P=.87). TPN was given to 5 cases of MUC and 1 case of FAP (P=.06). A total of 9 cases of FAP received blood transfusion, of which 6 were anemic preoperatively in comparison to 11 cases of MUC and 8 were anemic preoperatively (P=.34). In general, postoperative morbidity was reported in 4 cases of FAP and 6 cases of MUC (P=.36). The details of these complications are shown in Table 1. There was 1 mortality after IPAA creation for FAP due to unexplained disseminated intravascular coagulation. The median number of bowel movements for FAP cases was 4 in the daytime (range 3–20) and 2 in the nighttime (range 0–4). For MUC cases, it was 6 (range: 3–12) and 1 (range: 0–5), respectively. No significant difference in the functional outcome was recorded between FAP and MUC cases as shown in Table 2. The use of constipating agents was significantly higher among MUC cases compared to FAP cases at 11 to 5 cases, (MUC, 11 cases; FAP 5 cases) (P=.01). The median follow up was 36 months. No significant difference was observed between FAP and MUC cases in late complications, the details of which are shown in Table 3. DISCUSSION The time to refer to surgery was reflected by the age at operation. The median age at operation for FAP cases was 31 years; this coincided with international reports,2,6,9–11 where the median age ranged between 26 and 31 years. However, international reports of IPAA for MUC recorded a median age of 32 to 35 years at operation.2,6,11,12 In our series, the median age at operation for MUC was 43 years. This indicated late referral for surgery. Late referral led to more MUC cases being nutritionally depleted at the time of operation, and 53% of them were anemic. This most probably contributed to more complications among MUC cases, although it did not reach significance due to the small sample size of our study population. It is noteworthy to mention that TPN was received mainly by MUC cases. The median length of stay is a reflection of 2 factors: the morbid status of the patients and the type of the health care system. The health care delivery system in Saudi Arabia is a national health service that is free. There is more tendency for patients in such systems to stay longer in the hospital.13,14 Reports from the United Kingdom and the Netherlands gave a hospital stay of 15 days.15,16 The situation is even more apparent if we consider the Veterans Affairs hospitals in the United States where patients have reached an average stay of 36 days according to some reports.17 This is in contrast to health care systems where patients pay through insurance or medical saving funds. In such systems, the median length of stay was 8 to 10 days.5–6,18 In our series, the patients stayed for 10 days for FAP and 12 days for MUC. This fell in between the health care systems where patients pay for their care and free national health service systems. The length of stay for MUC cases was longer since they were more morbid. Our results of shorter than expected length of stay in a free national health service was a reflection of an efficient coordination team that was available to provide care and support after the discharge of the patients alleviating the patients’ anxiety toward early discharge. It included a patient education/counselor, a discharge planner, and 24/7 hotline answering service. Four patients underwent laparoscopic-assisted ileal pouch creation, but their stay was not less as they were part of an early learning curve experience. Wound infection was noted more frequently in our series at 12.5%. This is higher than an earlier report by Isbister7 from Saudi where he reported a rate of 6.7%. Reports from other centers ranged between 1.6% and 8.2% (Table 4). Wound infection in our series had been diagnosed following the CDC definition.23 Moreover, the diagnosis was made by a third party to avoid the bias of the operating surgeon; in this case, it was the enterostomal therapist. The data was also collected prospectively to avoid further bias. We believe our rate had been increased due to these reasons, which were not strictly followed up in other reports. Besides these, other factors like anemia, malnourishment, and use of steroids increased the risk of septic complications.24–26 The rate of bowel obstruction ranged between 6.4% and 26.7% in the published studies.6–7,9,19–21 Fazio et al6 reported a rate of 25.3%. In our series, the rate was 20%, and more was noted among MUC cases. Only 1 patient required reoperation due to an ileal pouch volvulus. Table 5 shows our late complication rate compared to international reports. Although bowel function was not significantly different between FAP and MUC cases, one could not overlook the fact that the similarity between the 2 was at the expense of more usage of constipating agents by MUC cases (Table 6). Although it did not reach significance, MUC cases had a higher number of bowel movements. This observation was noted by Fazio et al as he reported frequencies for both FAP and MUC cases at 5 and 6 per 24 hours, respectively; while it was 6 and 7 in our study population, respectively. He did not comment if this was a significant difference. The difference was more marked in the earlier report by Isbister; he reported a frequency for 24 hours of 5.1 and 8 for FAP and MUC cases, respectively. Therefore, it is a consistent finding that MUC patients have a slightly inferior functional outcome compared to FAP patients as exemplified by the higher frequency and fecal soiling (Table 6). However, this is improved through the use of constipating agents. The reason the bowel frequency is higher in the Saudi population compared to the Western population lies in the cultural differences. Saudis as Muslims must pray 5 times per day and for each prayer must perform ablution. Furthermore, they must avoid breaking wind or staining their underwear after the ablution until the prayer is finished. Therefore, most patients are encouraged by the religious scholars prior to an ablution to evacuate their bowels to avoid such an event. This increases their reported frequency.28 In conclusion, the outcome after IPAA for MUC was worse than for FAP; however, it did not reach statistical significance due to the small sample size. Probably, the minor differences noted between FAP and MUC cases were related more to the morbid status of the MUC cases and their older age rather than the surgery itself. Table 1 Early complications. Complications (≤30 d) FAP (n=21) MUC (n=19) Pelvic sepsis (collection) 2 2 Wound infection 2 3 Anastomotic leak 0 1 Total 4 6 FAP: Familial adenomatous polyposis, MUC: mucosal ulcerative colitis. Table 2 Functional results. Type of incontinence FAP (n=21) MUC (n=19) Incontinence to gas 2 1 Incontinence to liquid 1 0 Incontinence to solid 0 0 Nocturnal soiling 4 5 FAP: Familial adenomatous polyposis, MUC: mucosal ulcerative colitis. Table 3 Late complications. Complications (>30 d) FAP MUC Total Intestinal obstruction 3 5 8 Incisional hernia 0 3 3 Pouch fistula 0 1 1 Pouchitis 0 1 1 Pouch excision 1 0 1 FAP: Familial adenomatous polyposis, MUC: mucosal ulcerative colitis. Table 4 Early complications (≤30 d). Author Year No. Mortality (%) Wound infection (%) Pelvic sepsis (%) Anastomotic leak (%) Current study 2011 40 2.5 12.5 10 2.5 Nicholls et al19 1984 66 0 6.1 27.2 - Setti-Carraro et al20 1994 110 0.9 8.2 8.2 5.5 Fazio et al6 1995 1005 1 5.8 8.2 2.9 Nyam et al9 1997 187 0 1.6 1.6 - Isbister7 2000 30 0 6.7 - 3.3 Michelassi21 2003 391 0.5 - 1.3 6.4 Lovegrove et al22 2006 4183 2.4 - 7.2 6.9 Table 5 Late complications (>30 d). Author Year No. Intestinal obstruction (%) Pouch fistula (%) Pouchitis (%) Pouch excision (%) Overall late complication (%) Current study 2011 40 20 2.5 2.5 2.5 35 Nicholls et al19 1984 66 6.4 1.6 - 4.5 51 Setti-Carraro et al20 1994 110 8.2 5.5 27 15 - Fazio et al6 1995 1005 25.3 9.4 23.5 3.4 50.5 Nyam DC et al9 1997 187 13 - 3 3 - Isbister7 2000 30 26.7 3.3 7 6.7 - Michelassi et al21 2003 391 11.2 - - 3.4 - Lovegrove et al22 2006 4183 - 4.7 16.8 3.8 Walker and Bulow27 2008 178 - 3 12 2 29 Table 6 Functional outcome. Author Year No. Median number of bowel motions Use of constipating agents (%) Daytime Night-time FAP MUC FAP MUC FAP MUC Current study 2011 40 4 6 2 1 23 58 Dozois2 1989 582 5 5 1 1 37 57 Fazio6 1995 1005 5 6 - - 56 62 Isbister7 2000 30 4.7a 6a 0.4a 2a - - a Mean. FAP: Familial adenomatous polyposis, MUC: mucosal ulcerative colitis. ==== Refs REFERENCES 1 Parks AG Nicholls RJ Proctocolectomy without ileostomy for ulcerative colitis Br Med J 1978 2 85 8 667572 2 Dozois RR Kelly KA Welling DR Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: comparison of results in familial adenomatous polyposis and chronic ulcerative colitis Ann Surg 1989 210 268 73 2549890 3 Williams NS Marzouk DE Hallan RI Function after ileal pouch and stapled pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis Br J Surg 1989 76 1168 71 2597975 4 Kartheuser AH Parc R Penna CP Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis as the first choice operation in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis: a ten year experience Surgery 1996 119 615 23 8650601 5 Becker JM Raymond JL Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis Ann Surg 1986 204 375 83 3767475 6 Fazio VW Ziv Y Church JM Ileal pouchanal anastomosis, complications and function in 1005 patients Ann Surg 1995 222 120 7 7639579 7 Isbister WH Restorative proctocolectomy-a nine year experience at the King Faisal specialist hospital Saudi J Gastroenterol 2000 6 147 52 19864709 8 Kmiot WA Keighley MR Totally stapled abdominal restorative proctocolectomy Br J Surg 1989 76 961 4 2804600 9 Nyam DC Brillant PT Dozois RR Ileal pouch-anal canal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis: early and late results Ann Surg 1997 226 514 21 9351719 10 Wu JS McGannon EA Church JM Incidence of neoplastic polyps in the ileal pouch of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis after restorative proctocolectomy Dis Colon Rectum 1998 41 552 7 9593235 11 Heuschen UA Hinz U Allemeyer EH Risk factors for ileoanal J pouch-related septic complications in ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis Ann Surg 2002 235 207 16 11807360 12 Farouk R Pemberton JH Wolff BG Functional outcomes after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for chronic ulcerative colitis Ann Surg 2000 23 919 26 13 Black D Pearson M Average length of stay, delayed discharge, and hospital congestion BMJ 2002 325 610 1 12242160 14 Picone G Mark Wilson R Chou SY Analysis of hospital length of stay and discharge destination using hazard functions with unmeasured heterogeneity Health Econ 2003 12 1021 34 14673811 15 Davies M Hawley PR Ten years experience of one-stage restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis Int J Colorectal Dis 2007 22 1255 60 17216220 16 Van Duijvendijk P Slors JF Taat CW Proctocolectomy with an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis; results from 100 consecutive patients in the Academic Medical Center at Amsterdam, 1994–1999 Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2000 144 612 6 10761550 17 Longo WE Virgo KS Bahadursingh AN Patterns of disease and surgical treatment among United States veterans more than 50 years of age with ulcerative colitis Am J Surg 2003 186 514 8 14599617 18 Marcello PW Milsom JW Wong SK Laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy: case-matched comparative study with open restorative proctocolectomy Dis Colon Rectum 2000 43 604 8 10826418 19 Nicholls RJ Pescatori M Motson RW Pezim ME Restorative proctocolectomy with a three-loop ileal reservoir for ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis. Clinical results in 66 patients followed for up to 6 years Ann Surg 1984 199 383 8 6712311 20 Setti-Carraro Ritchie JK Wilkinson KH The first 10 years’ experience of restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis Gut 1994 35 1070 5 7926908 21 Michelassi F Lee J Rubin M Long-term functional results after ileal pouch anal restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis: a prospective observational study Ann Surg 2003 238 433 45 14501509 22 Lovegrove RE Constantinides VA Heriot AG A comparison of hand-sewn versus stapled ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) following proctocolectomy: a meta-analysis of 4183 patients Ann Surg 2006 244 18 26 16794385 23 Mangram AJ Horan TC Pearson ML Guideline for Prevention of Surgical Site Infection, 1999. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee Am J of Infect Control 1999 27 97 132 10196487 24 Madbouly KM Senagore AJ Remzi FH Perioperative blood transfusions increase complications after ileoanal pouch procedures (IPAA) Int J Colorectal Dis 2006 21 807 13 16583193 25 Lake JP Firoozmand E Kang JC Effect of high-dose steroids on anastomotic complications after proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis J Gastrointest Surg 2004 8 547 51 15239989 26 Heuschen UA Hinz U Allemeyer EH Risk factors for ileoanal J pouch-realted septic complications in ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis Ann Surg 2002 235 207 16 11807360 27 Walker LR Bulow S Restorative proctocolectomy with an ileoanal pouch. Postoperative course and long-term functional results Ugeskr Laeger 2008 170 1721 5 18489884 28 Bin Baz A Al-Sheikh A Alfozan S Fecal Incontinence (Fatwa No. 17122) Bin Baz A Alothaimeen M Fatwas of Permanent Committee for Scholarly Research & Ifta’ 1990 4 243 4