Bowel Function After J-Pouch May Be More Complex Than Previously Appreciated: A Comprehensive Analysis to Highlight Existing Knowledge Gaps

BACKGROUND: Functional outcomes following J-pouch for ulcerative colitis have been studied, but lack standardization in which symptoms are reported. Furthermore, the selection of symptoms studied has not been patient centered. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to utilize a validated bowel function survey to determine which symptoms are present after J-pouch creation, and whether patients display a functional profile similar to low anterior resection syndrome. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained single-center database. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at the colorectal surgery center of a tertiary care academic hospital PATIENTS: Included were 159 patients with J-pouch, ≥6 months after ileostomy reversal. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were individual answers to the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Bowel Function Instrument. The original Bowel Function Instrument validation cohort was used as an historical comparison (n = 127). RESULTS: The mean total Bowel Function Instrument score for the J-pouch cohort was 59.9 ± 9.7 compared with a reported average score of 63.7 ± 11.6 for patients with low anterior resection in the validation cohort (p < 0.001), indicating worse bowel function in patients with J-pouch. When evaluating the Bowel Function Instrument subscales, patients with J-pouch reported frequency subscale scores of 18.2 ± 3.8, diet scores of 12.2 ± 3.8, and urgency scores of 15.9 ± 3.7, compared with 21.7 ± 4.5 (p < 0.001), 14.1 ± 3.7 (p < 0.001), and 15.0 ± 3.9 (p = 0.04) for patients undergoing rectal resection. Furthermore, 90.4% of patients with J-pouch state that they are sometimes, rarely, or never able to wait 15 minutes to get to the toilet. In addition, 56.4% of patients report having another bowel movement within 15 minutes of the last bowel movement, sometimes, always, or most of the time, and 50.6% of patients say that they sometimes, rarely, or never feel like their bowels have been totally emptied after a bowel movement. LIMITATIONS: This study is limited because it took place at a single center and the Bowel Function Instrument was only validated for patients undergoing rectal resection. CONCLUSIONS: Patients that undergo J-pouch surgery exhibit a constellation of bowel function symptoms that is more complex than fecal incontinence and frequency alone, despite the focus on these functional outcomes in the literature. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B73. LA FUNCIÓN INTESTINAL DESPUÉS DE LA BOLSA EN J PUEDE SER MÁS COMPLEJA DE LO QUE SE APRECIABA ANTERIORMENTE: UN ANÁLISIS EXHAUSTIVO PARA RESALTAR LAS BRECHAS DE CONOCIMIENTO EXISTENTES ANTECEDENTES: Se han estudiado los resultados funcionales después de la bolsa en J para la colitis ulcerosa, pero carecen de estandarización en la que se informen los síntomas. Además, la selección de los síntomas estudiados no se ha centrado en el paciente. OBJETIVO: Utilizar una encuesta validada de la función intestinal para determinar qué síntomas están presentes después de la bolsa en J y si los pacientes muestran un perfil funcional similar al síndrome de resección anterior baja. DISEÑO: Análisis retrospectivo de una base de datos de un solo centro mantenida prospectivamente. AJUSTES: Centro de cirugía colorrectal de un hospital académico de atención terciaria. PACIENTES: 159 pacientes con bolsa en J, ≥6 meses después de la reversión de ileostomía. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: Instrumento para la función intestinal del “Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center”; cohorte de validación original de instrumentos de función intestinal utilizada como comparación histórica (n = 127). RESULTADOS: La puntuación media total del instrumento de función intestinal para la cohorte de bolsa J fue 59.9 ± 9.7 en comparación con un puntaje promedio reportado de 63.7 ± 11.6 para pacientes con resección anterior baja en la cohorte de validación (p < 0.001), lo que indica peor función intestinal en pacientes con bolsa en J. Al evaluar las subescalas del instrumento de función intestinal, los pacientes con bolsa en J informaron puntuaciones de subescala de frecuencia de 18.2 ± 3.8, puntuaciones de dieta de 12.2 ± 3.8 y puntuaciones de urgencia de 15.9 ± 3.7, en comparación con 21.7 ± 4.5 (p < 0.001), 14.1 ± 3.7 (p < 0.001) y 15.0 ± 3.9 (p = 0.04) respectivamente para pacientes con resección rectal. Además, el 90.4% de los pacientes con bolsa en J afirman que a veces, rara vez o nunca pueden esperar 15 minutos para llegar al baño. Además, el 56.4% de los pacientes reportan haber tenido otra evacuación intestinal dentro de los 15 minutos posteriores a la última evacuación intestinal, a veces, siempre o la mayor parte del tiempo, y el 50.6% de los pacientes dicen que a veces, rara vez o nunca sienten que sus intestinos han sido vaciados totalmente después de una evacuación intestinal. LIMITACIONES: Estudio en un solo centro, instrumento de función intestinal validado solo para pacientes con resección rectal CONCLUSIONES: Los pacientes que se someten a una bolsa en J exhiben una constelación de síntomas de la función intestinal que es más compleja que la incontinencia fecal y la frecuencia sola, a pesar del enfoque en estos resultados funcionales en la literatura.Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B73. (Traducción—Dr. Gonzalo Federico Hagerman)

[1]  A. Ananthakrishnan,et al.  Comparable perioperative outcomes, long-term outcomes, and quality of life in a retrospective analysis of ulcerative colitis patients following 2-stage versus 3-stage proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis , 2019, International Journal of Colorectal Disease.

[2]  G. Dafnis Functional Outcome and Quality of Life after Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis within a Defined Population in Sweden , 2018, Digestive Diseases.

[3]  H. Huhtala,et al.  Health-Related Quality of Life after Restorative Proctocolectomy: A Cross-Sectional Study , 2018, Scandinavian journal of surgery : SJS : official organ for the Finnish Surgical Society and the Scandinavian Surgical Society.

[4]  S. Laurberg,et al.  Patient and healthcare professional perceptions of colostomy‐related problems and their impact on quality of life following rectal cancer surgery , 2018, BJS open.

[5]  D. Schwartz,et al.  Management of Pouchitis and Other Common Complications of the Pouch. , 2018, Inflammatory bowel diseases.

[6]  E. Dozois,et al.  Impact of sex on 30-day complications and long-term functional outcomes following ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for chronic ulcerative colitis , 2018, International Journal of Colorectal Disease.

[7]  M. Unno,et al.  The functional outcome and factors influencing the quality of life after ileal pouch anal anastomosis in patients with ulcerative colitis , 2018, Surgery Today.

[8]  D. Larson,et al.  Functional Outcomes Following Laparoscopic Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis in Patients with Chronic Ulcerative Colitis: Long-Term Follow-up of a Case-Matched Study , 2017, Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery.

[9]  C. Buskens,et al.  Comparison of health-related quality of life and disability in ulcerative colitis patients following restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis versus anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy , 2017, European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology.

[10]  R. Forsythe,et al.  Core Outcomes for Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Consensus Study , 2016, PLoS medicine.

[11]  F. Remzi,et al.  Long-Term Outcomes in Indeterminate Colitis Patients Undergoing Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis: Function, Quality of Life, and Complications , 2016, Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery.

[12]  P. Tekkis,et al.  Functional outcomes following ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) in older patients: a systematic review , 2016, International Journal of Colorectal Disease.

[13]  S. Laurberg,et al.  Difference between patients’ and clinicians’ perception of pouch dysfunction and its impact on quality of life following restorative proctocolectomy , 2015, Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.

[14]  L. Feldman,et al.  Using the age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index to predict outcomes in emergency general surgery , 2015, The journal of trauma and acute care surgery.

[15]  R. Hodin,et al.  Does intramesorectal excision for ulcerative colitis impact bowel and sexual function when compared with total mesorectal excision? , 2014, American journal of surgery.

[16]  P. Rutgeerts,et al.  Long-term functional outcome after ileal pouch anal anastomosis in 191 patients with ulcerative colitis. , 2014, Journal of Crohn's & colitis.

[17]  S. Laurberg,et al.  International Validation of the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Score , 2014, Annals of surgery.

[18]  F. Remzi,et al.  Functional outcomes and complications after restorative proctocolectomy and ileal pouch anal anastomosis in the pediatric population. , 2014, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[19]  S. Laurberg,et al.  Restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis: development and validation of a new scoring system for pouch dysfunction and quality of life , 2013, Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.

[20]  S. Laurberg,et al.  Restorative proctocolectomy in patients with ulcerative colitis: a cross‐sectional Danish population study on function and quality of life , 2013, Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.

[21]  Elena A. Manilich,et al.  Ileal Pouch Anal Anastomosis: Analysis of Outcome and Quality of Life in 3707 Patients , 2013, Annals of surgery.

[22]  L. Påhlman,et al.  Long‐term functional outcome after restorative proctocolectomy in patients with ulcerative colitis , 2012, Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.

[23]  S. Laurberg,et al.  Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Score: Development and Validation of a Symptom-Based Scoring System for Bowel Dysfunction After Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer , 2012, Annals of surgery.

[24]  V. Valentini,et al.  Validity and reliability of the MSKCC Bowel Function instrument in a sample of Italian rectal cancer patients. , 2011, European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology.

[25]  V. Fazio,et al.  Perioperative Factors During Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis Predict Pouchitis , 2011, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[26]  A. Wibe,et al.  Long‐term function after ileal pouch‐anal anastomosis –Function does not deteriorate with time , 2010, Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.

[27]  Z. Halpern,et al.  A Longitudinal Study of Quality of Life and Functional Outcome of Patients With Ulcerative Colitis After Proctocolectomy With Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis , 2010, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[28]  V. Fazio,et al.  Development of a pouch functional score following restorative proctocolectomy , 2010, The British journal of surgery.

[29]  T. Øresland,et al.  Pouch design and long‐term functional outcome after ileal pouch–anal anastomosis , 2009, The British journal of surgery.

[30]  A. Fichera,et al.  Laparoscopic Restorative Proctocolectomy with Ileal Pouch Anal Anastomosis: A Comparative Observational Study on Long-term Functional Results , 2009, Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery.

[31]  J. Church,et al.  Complications and Functional Results after Ileoanal Pouch Formation in Obese Patients , 2008, Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery.

[32]  J. Bacik,et al.  The Development of a Validated Instrument to Evaluate Bowel Function After Sphincter-Preserving Surgery for Rectal Cancer , 2005, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[33]  L. Hultén,et al.  The clinical and functional outcome after restorative proctocolectomy , 1989, International Journal of Colorectal Disease.

[34]  E. Livingston,et al.  Postoperative ileus , 2005, Digestive Diseases and Sciences.

[35]  D. Larson,et al.  The Effect of Ageing on Function and Quality of Life in Ileal Pouch Patients: A Single Cohort Experience of 409 Patients With Chronic Ulcerative Colitis , 2004, Annals of surgery.

[36]  J. Church,et al.  Prospective, Age-Related Analysis of Surgical Results, Functional Outcome, and Quality of Life After Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis , 2003, Annals of surgery.

[37]  R. Farouk,et al.  Functional outcomes after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for chronic ulcerative colitis. , 2000, Annals of surgery.

[38]  J. Church,et al.  Long-term functional outcome and quality of life after stapled restorative proctocolectomy. , 1999, Annals of surgery.

[39]  J. Church,et al.  IIeal Pouch‐Anal Anastomoses Complications and Function in 1005 Patients , 1995, Annals of surgery.

[40]  R. Nicholls,et al.  Proctocolectomy without ileostomy for ulcerative colitis. , 1978, British medical journal.