Article Search
검색
검색 팝업 닫기

Metrics

Help

  • 1. Aims and Scope

    Gut and Liver is an international journal of gastroenterology, focusing on the gastrointestinal tract, liver, biliary tree, pancreas, motility, and neurogastroenterology. Gut atnd Liver delivers up-to-date, authoritative papers on both clinical and research-based topics in gastroenterology. The Journal publishes original articles, case reports, brief communications, letters to the editor and invited review articles in the field of gastroenterology. The Journal is operated by internationally renowned editorial boards and designed to provide a global opportunity to promote academic developments in the field of gastroenterology and hepatology. +MORE

  • 2. Editorial Board

    Editor-in-Chief + MORE

    Editor-in-Chief
    Yong Chan Lee Professor of Medicine
    Director, Gastrointestinal Research Laboratory
    Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Univ. California San Francisco
    San Francisco, USA

    Deputy Editor

    Deputy Editor
    Jong Pil Im Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
    Robert S. Bresalier University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
    Steven H. Itzkowitz Mount Sinai Medical Center, NY, USA
  • 3. Editorial Office
  • 4. Articles
  • 5. Instructions for Authors
  • 6. File Download (PDF version)
  • 7. Ethical Standards
  • 8. Peer Review

    All papers submitted to Gut and Liver are reviewed by the editorial team before being sent out for an external peer review to rule out papers that have low priority, insufficient originality, scientific flaws, or the absence of a message of importance to the readers of the Journal. A decision about these papers will usually be made within two or three weeks.
    The remaining articles are usually sent to two reviewers. It would be very helpful if you could suggest a selection of reviewers and include their contact details. We may not always use the reviewers you recommend, but suggesting reviewers will make our reviewer database much richer; in the end, everyone will benefit. We reserve the right to return manuscripts in which no reviewers are suggested.

    The final responsibility for the decision to accept or reject lies with the editors. In many cases, papers may be rejected despite favorable reviews because of editorial policy or a lack of space. The editor retains the right to determine publication priorities, the style of the paper, and to request, if necessary, that the material submitted be shortened for publication.

Search

Search

Year

to

Article Type

Original Article

Split Viewer

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

Weimin Xu1 , Wenbo Tang1 , Wenjun Ding1 , Zhebin Hua1 , Yaosheng Wang1 , Xiaolong Ge2 , Long Cui1 , Xiaojian Wu3 , Wei Zhou2 , Zhao Ding4 , Peng Du1 , China UC Pouch Center Union

1Department of Colorectal Surgery, Xinhua Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China; 2Department of General Surgery, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Medical School of Zhejiang University, Guangzhou, China; 3Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China; 4Department of Colorectal and Anal Surgery, Hubei Key Laboratory of Intestinal and Colorectal Diseases, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China

Correspondence to: Peng Du
ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9355-0789
E-mail dupeng@xinhuamed.com.cn

Zhao Ding
ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6052-3047
E-mail dingzhao@whu.edu.cn

Wei Zhou
ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3224-7046
E-mail zhouweisrrs@zju.edu.cn

Weimin Xu, Wenbo Tang, and Wenjun Ding contributed equally to this work as first authors.

Received: November 2, 2022; Revised: December 25, 2022; Accepted: January 12, 2023

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Gut Liver 2024;18(1):85-96. https://doi.org/10.5009/gnl220471

Published online March 29, 2023, Published date January 15, 2024

Copyright © Gut and Liver.

Background/Aims: Total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is widely accepted as a radical surgery for refractory ulcerative colitis (UC). Definite results on the appropriate pouch length for an evaluation of the risk-to-benefit ratio regarding technical complications and long-term quality of life (QOL) are still scarce.
Methods: Data on UC patients who underwent IPAA from 2008 to 2022 in four well-established pouch centers affiliated to China UC Pouch Center Union were collected.
Results: A total of 208 patients with a median follow-up time of 6.0 years (interquartile range, 2.3 to 9.0 years) were enrolled. The median lengths of the patients’ short and long pouches were 14.0 cm (interquartile range, 14.0 to 15.0 cm) and 22.0 cm (interquartile range, 20.0 to 24.0 cm), respectively. Patients with a short J pouch configuration were less likely to achieve significantly improved long-term QOL (p=0.015) and were prone to develop late postoperative complications (p=0.042), such as increased defecation frequency (p=0.003) and pouchitis (p=0.035). A short ileal pouch was an independent risk factor for the development of late postoperative complications (odds ratio, 3.100; 95% confidence interval, 1.519 to 6.329; p=0.002) and impaired longterm QOL improvement (odds ratio, 2.221; 95% confidence interval, 1.218 to 4.050, p=0.009).
Conclusions: The length of the J pouch was associated with the improvement in long-term QOL and the development of late post-IPAA complications. A long J pouch configuration could be a considerable surgical option for pouch construction.

Keywords: Ileal pouch anal anastomosis, Ulcerative colitis, Pouch length, Postoperative complications, Quality of life

Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) has been widely accepted as a radical surgery for ulcerative colitis (UC).1 Previous studies have demonstrated that IPAA significantly improved the quality of life (QOL) as it can restore intestinal continuity and avoid permanent ostomy by pouch construction.2-4 However, our previous study indicated that the technically demanding operation was associated with serious surgical complications, which may have a detrimental effect on the long-term QOL.5

IPAA can remove the affected colorectum and create an ileal reservoir. Among the “J”, “W”, “S” and recently reported “D” pouch, J pouch configuration is the most commonly used configuration of IPAA due to easy construction and satisfactory clinical outcomes.6,7 The length of distal ileum for pouch creation mainly determined the pouch volume, which is associated with bowel and pouch function.8 However, it is still unclear what length of pouch could make patients achieve the best long-term prognosis.9 Few studies with long follow-up period reported the relationship between pouch length and post-IPAA complications and long-term QOL.

In this study, we mainly aimed to determine whether pouch length was associated with the clinical outcomes by analyzing the postoperative long-term QOL and complications in patients with pouches of different lengths.

1. Study design and patients

A total of 221 patients with UC who underwent IPAA from January 2008 to September 2022 at our four inflammatory bowel disease surgery centers affiliated to China UC Pouch Center Union were evaluated in this study. As we previously reported, we collected the data by the prospectively maintained, institutional review board-approved pouch database.5 In our institute, we recommended a pouchoscopic examination once a year for those patients who had risks for pouch malignant transformation or complications. The Ethics Committee of Xinhua Hospital has reviewed and approved this study protocol (approval number: XHEC-D-2022-093). All patients signed informed consent forms.

2. Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Patients who were diagnosed with UC who underwent IPAA with J pouch construction and had complete data were included in this study. The exclusion criteria were patients with Crohn’s disease or familial adenomatous polyposis, without pouch creation and with incomplete data and loss of follow-up.

3. Preoperative and postoperative QOL assessment

To assess the preoperative and post-IPAA QOL, the Cleveland Global Quality of Life (CGQL) instrument was used for evaluation.10 The preoperative CGQL was collected after admission by questionnaires; post-IPAA CGQL was obtained from the most recent postoperative outpatient follow-up. CGQL was classified into three items as follows: current QOL (0 to 10 scores), current quality of health (0 to 10 scores) and current energy level (0 to 10 scores). Then the ultimate CGQL was obtained from the cumulative score divided by 30. As reported in our previous study,5 an increase of more than or less than 50% in postoperative CGQL compared to preoperative CGQL was considered as significantly improved long-term QOL or impaired long-term QOL in our study.

4. Pouch construction and the measurement of pouch length

The procedure of IPAA is homogenized, standardized, and normalized in our institute and performed by a specific and experienced colorectal surgeon in each center. Thus, the pouch length was mainly decided by the surgeons’ own experience as well as the intraoperative situation.

The length of cutting line of the anastomosis was assessed and measured intraoperatively to record as the pouch length. In our present retrospective multicenter study, we concluded the length of pouch was nearly 14±2 cm or 22±2 cm when we used 3 or 4-5 endoscopic linear cutter reloads, measured by using Endo GIA60, a laparoscopic stapler for construction J pouch. Pouch length was intraoperatively recorded and finally obtained by measuring the side-to-side anastomosis’s cutting line of the pouch body. Based on the medical records in the cohort database, we found the main two sizes of pouch, the length of 14±2 and 22±2 cm, were constructed in our inflammatory bowel disease surgery centers. According to the median lengths of the two sizes of pouch, 14.0 cm (interquartile range [IQR], 14.0 to 15.0 cm) and 22.0 cm (IQR, 20.0 to 24.0 cm), we categorized these pouches as short and long J pouch.

5. Data evaluation

Primary endpoints in this study were the occurrence of late postoperative complications or the impaired long-term QOL. Complications developed within 1 month after pouch surgery were defined as the early surgical complications. Pouchitis, pouch failure, defecation disorder, postoperative late intestinal obstruction, pouch-vagina leak, anastomotic stricture and sexual dysfunction were categorized as the late post-IPAA complications, which occurred more than 1 month after IPAA. Preoperative medical therapies and the value of laboratory results, such as hemoglobin and albumin were collected preoperatively.

6. Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis in this study was performed using the SPSS version 22.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) and GraphPad Prism 8.0 (San Diego, CA, USA). Statistical data were represented as mean and standard deviations, or the median and IQR appropriately. To compare the significance of continuous variables, the two-sample Student t-test was performed. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare the ranked variables. Additionally, categorical variables were analyzed by the chi-square or Fisher exact test. Variables with significant differences in the univariate analysis were then selected for the multivariate logistic regression analysis. In this study, we considered a p-value <0.05 significant with a two-sided test and confidence intervals (CIs) set at 95%.

1. Baseline characteristics

In the whole cohort of 221 UC patients, three patients underwent ileostomy without pouch construction, and 10 were lost to follow-up. In the present study, a total of 208 eligible patients who met the inclusion criteria were ultimately enrolled. The schematic flow diagram of this study is shown in Fig. 1. The overall baseline characteristics and the comparative analysis between the short and long J pouch groups were presented in Table 1. In the whole cohort, the median follow-up time was 6.0 years (IQR, 2.3 to 9.0 years). Of these patients, 94 patients had relatively short pouches (45.2%) with a median length of 14.0 cm (IQR, 14.0 to 15.0 cm) and 114 had long ileal pouches (54.8%) with a median length of 22.0 cm (IQR, 20.0 to 24.0 cm). There were more patients with intraoperative blood loss more than 200 mL in long J pouch group than in short J pouch group (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in other baseline characteristics between the short and long pouch groups (Table 1).

Figure 1.Schematic flow diagram of the present study. UC, ulcerative colitis; IPAA, Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis; QOL, quality of life.

Table 1. Main Baseline Patient Characteristics

VariableAll cases (n=208)Short J pouch group (n=94)Long J pouch group (n=114)p-value
Follow-up time, yr6.0 (2.3–9.0)6.0 (2.0–8.0)7.0 (3.0–9.0)
Sex, male/female109/9954/4055/590.186*
Age at diagnosis0.740*
<40 yr100 (48.1)44 (46.8)56 (49.1)
≥40 yr108 (51.9)50 (53.2)58 (50.9)
Height0.807*
<170 cm112 (58.7)56 (59.6)66 (57.9)
≥170 cm86 (41.3)38 (40.4)48 (42.1)
Body mass index0.164*
≥18.5 kg/m2143 (68.8)60 (63.8)83 (72.8)
<18.5 kg/m265 (31.2)34 (36.2)31 (27.2)
Disease duration0.726*
<5 yr139 (66.8)64 (68.1)75 (65.8)
≥5 yr69 (33.2)30 (31.9)39 (34.2)
First occurrence0.437
Yes31 (14.9)16 (17.0)15 (13.2)
No177 (85.1)78 (83.0)99 (86.8)
Extent of ulcerative colitis0.909
E1 (proctitis)37 (17.8)18 (19.1)19 (16.7)
E2 (left-sided colitis)18 (8.7)6 (6.4)12 (10.5)
E3 (pancolitis)153 (73.5)70 (74.5)83 (72.8)
Extraintestinal manifestation0.169*
No184 (88.5)80 (85.1)104 (91.2)
Yes24 (11.5)14 (14.9)10 (8.8)
Mesalamine0.539*
No62 (29.8)26 (27.7)36 (31.6)
Yes146 (70.2)68 (72.3)78 (68.4)
Immunomodulators0.661*
No147 (70.7)65 (69.1)82 (71.9)
Yes61 (29.3)29 (30.9)32 (28.1)
Steroids0.709*
No79 (38.0)37 (39.4)42 (36.8)
Yes129 (62.0)57 (60.6)72 (63.2)
Biologics0.333*
No178 (85.6)78 (83.0)100 (87.7)
Yes30 (14.4)16 (17.0)14 (12.3)
Stage of surgery0.633
II-stage IPAA132 (63.5)58 (61.7)74 (64.9)
III-stage IPAA76 (36.5)36 (38.3)40 (35.1)
Surgical urgency0.062
Urgent surgery20 (9.6)13 (13.8)7 (6.1)
Elective surgery188 (90.4)81 (86.2)107 (93.9)
Surgical approach0.275*
Open61 (29.3)24 (25.5)37 (32.5)
Laparoscopic147 (70.7)70 (74.5)77 (67.5)
Hemoglobin0.697*
≥110 g/L76 (36.5)33 (35.1)43 (37.7)
<110 g/L132 (63.5)61 (64.9)71 (62.3)
Albumin0.140*
≥35 g/L98 (47.1)39 (41.5)59 (51.8)
<35 g/L110 (52.9)55 (58.5)55 (48.2)
White blood cell0.348*
<10×109/L159 (76.4)69 (73.4)90 (78.9)
≥10×109/L49 (23.6)25 (26.6)24 (21.1)
Hospitalization time0.686*
<15 day103 (49.5)48 (51.1)55 (48.2)
≥15 day105 (50.5)46 (48.9)59 (51.8)
Intraoperative blood loss<0.001*
<200 mL139 (66.8)78 (83.0)61 (53.5)
≥200 mL69 (33.2)16 (17.0)53 (46.5)

Data are presented as median (interquartile range) or number (%).

IPAA, ileal pouch-anal anastomosis.

*Chi-square test; Wilcoxon rank-sum test.



2. Post-IPAA complications

A total of 58 patients (27.9%) developed the early postoperative complications. Late postoperative complications occurred in 71 patients (34.1%). Of them, 58 (27.9%) developed pouchitis, 23 (11.1%) had increased defecation frequency, 10 (4.8%) developed late postoperative intestinal obstruction, seven (3.4%) had anastomotic stricture, four (1.9%) developed pouch-vagina leak, three (1.4%) experienced pouch failure, and only one (0.5%) developed sexual dysfunction (Table 2).

Table 2. Main Postoperative Complications of Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis

ComplicationNo. (%)
Early postoperative complications
Early postoperative intestinal obstruction31 (14.9)
Pouch and anastomotic bleeding11 (5.3)
Pouch-anal anastomotic leak4 (1.9)
Wound infection16 (7.7)
Incision hernia3 (1.4)
Late postoperative complications
Pouchitis58 (27.9)
Pouch failure3 (1.4)
Increased defecation frequency23 (11.1)
Late postoperative intestinal obstruction10 (4.8)
Pouch-vagina leak4 (1.9)
Anastomotic stricture7 (3.4)
Sexual dysfunction1 (0.5)


3. Clinical outcomes in patients with J pouch configuration of different lengths

We first evaluated the effect of IPAA on postoperative outcomes in patients with UC. As shown in Fig. 2, the mean current QOL (pre vs post, 4.274 vs 7.481, p<0.001), current quality of health (pre vs post, 4.760 vs 7.505, p<0.001), current energy level (pre vs post, 5.106 vs 7.683, p<0.001) and ultimate CGQL scores (pre vs post, 0.472 vs 0.757, p<0.001) were all significantly improved after IPAA in the whole cohort.

Figure 2.Evaluation of the long-term QOL via the pre-IPAA and post-IPAA CGQL instrument. Three items of the CGQL instrument—current QOL (A), current quality of health (B), and current energy level (C)—and the overall CGQL scores (n=208) (D) were compared between the pre- and post-IPAA periods in the whole cohort. QOL, quality of life; IPAA, Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis; CGQL, Cleveland Global Quality of Life. *p<0.001.

To determine whether pouch length could affect clinical outcomes, we compared the postoperative complications and long-term QOL in patients with pouches of different lengths. As shown in Table 3, we found that patients in short J pouch group were likely to develop the late postoperative complications (p=0.042), mainly presented in more defecation frequency (p=0.003) and pouchitis (p=0.035). The significantly improved CGQL was more common in long J pouch group than in short J pouch group (p=0.015) (Table 3).

Table 3. Analysis of the Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Short and Long Ileal J Pouches

VariableShort J pouch group (n=94)Long J pouch group (n=114)p-value
Early postoperative complications25 (26.6)33 (28.9)0.707*
Late postoperative complications39 (41.5)32 (28.1)0.042*
Increased defecation frequency0.003*
No77 (81.9)108 (94.7)
Yes17 (18.1)6 (5.3)
Pouchitis0.035*
No61 (64.9)89 (78.1)
Yes33 (35.1)25 (21.9)
Postoperative long-term intestinal obstruction0.735
No90 (95.7)108 (94.7)
Yes4 (4.3)6 (5.3)
Anastomotic stricture0.156
No89 (94.7)112 (98.2)
Yes5 (5.3)2 (1.8)
Postoperative CGQL score0.725±0.1350.783±0.1390.003
Current QOL7.128±1.6487.772±1.5740.004
Current quality of health7.128±1.4837.816±1.4850.001
Current energy level7.447±1.6377.877±1.5750.055
Significantly improved long-term QOL0.015*
No47 (50.0)38 (33.3)
Yes47 (50.0)76 (66.7)

Data are presented as number (%) or mean±SD.

CGQL, Cleveland Global Quality of Life; QOL, quality of life.

*Chi-square test; Fisher exact test; Two-sample Student t-test.



Although we found an obvious improvement of CGQL scores in short and long J pouch group (Fig. 3A and B), the post-IPAA current QOL (7.128 vs 7.772, p=0.004), current quality of health (7.128 vs 7.816, p=0.001) and ultimate CGQL scores (0.725 vs 0.783, p=0.003) were significantly impaired compared with those with long J pouch (Table 3, Fig. 3C-F). Collectively, these data demonstrated pouch length was associated with the clinical outcomes in patients underwent IPAA. Therefore, we speculated that short J pouch could be a risk factor for the development of late postoperative complications and impaired long-term QOL improvement.

Figure 3.Analysis of the effects of pouch length on the improvement in long-term post-IPAA QOL. Comparison of pre- and post-IPAA CGQL in patients with short J pouch (n=94) (A) and long J pouch (n=114) (B). Three items of the CGQL instrument—current QOL (C), current quality of health (D), and current energy level (E)—and the overall CGQL scores (F) were compared between the short and long J pouch groups. IPAA, Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis; QOL, quality of life; CGQL, Cleveland Global Quality of Life; NS, not significant. *p<0.01; p<0.001.

4. Short J pouch configuration increased the risk for the late post-IPAA complications

Furthermore, we explored whether the short J pouch configuration could contribute to develop the late post-IPAA complications. The results of the univariate analysis indicated that recurrence of disease (p=0.002), pouch length (p=0.042), the value of preoperative white blood cell (WBC) count (p=0.031), hospitalization time (p=0.003), and intraoperative blood loss (p=0.009) were significantly associated with the late post-IPAA complications (Table 4). These significant variables in the univariate analysis were further analyzed in the multivariate logistic regression and demonstrated that recurrent UC (odds ratio [OR], 8.102; 95% CI, 2.259 to 29.602; p=0.001), short J pouch (OR, 3.100; 95% CI, 1.519 to 6.329; p=0.002), the preoperative total WBCs more than 10×109/L (OR, 2.641; 95% CI, 1.243 to 5.609; p=0.012) and intraoperative blood loss ≥200 m: (OR, 3.484; 95% CI, 1.574 to 7.712; p=0.002) were independent risk factors for the development of late postoperative complications (Table 4). Taken together, these data indicated the short J pouch configuration could increase the risk to develop late post-IPAA complications and further affect the long-term QOL improvement.

Table 4. Univariate and Multivariate Logistic Regression Analysis of Risk Factors for Late Postoperative Complications in Ulcerative Colitis Patients with IPAA

VariableNon-late postoperative complications group (n=137)Late postoperative complications group (n=71)Univariate analysis
p-value
Multivariate logistic regression
OR (95% CI)p-value
Age at diagnosis
<40 yr69 (50.4)31 (43.7)0.359*
≥40 yr68 (49.6)40 (56.3)
Body mass index0.567*
≥18.5 kg/m296 (70.1)47 (66.2)
<18.5 kg/m241 (29.9)24 (33.8)
Disease duration0.653*
<5 yr93 (67.9)46 (64.8)
≥5 yr44 (32.1)25 (35.2)
First occurrence0.0028.102 (2.259–29.602)0.001
Yes28 (20.4)3 (4.2)
No109 (79.6)68 (95.8)
Extent of ulcerative colitis0.214
E1 (proctitis)27 (19.7)10 (14.1)
E2 (left-sided colitis)13 (9.5)5 (7.0)
E3 (pancolitis)97 (70.8)56 (78.9)
Extraintestinal manifestation0.712*
No122 (89.1)62 (87.3)
Yes15 (10.9)9 (12.7)
Mesalamine0.183*
No45 (32.8)17 (23.9)
Yes92 (67.2)54 (76.1)
Immunomodulators0.220*
No93 (67.9)54 (76.1)
Yes44 (32.1)17 (23.9)
Steroids0.554*
No54 (39.4)25 (35.2)
Yes83 (60.6)46 (64.8)
Biologics0.606*
No116 (84.7)62 (87.3)
Yes21 (15.3)9 (12.7)
Stage of surgery0.373
II-stage IPAA84 (61.3)48 (67.6)
III-stage IPAA53 (38.7)23 (32.3)
Surgical urgency0.682
Urgent surgery14 (10.2)6 (8.5)
Elective surgery123 (89.8)65 (91.5)
Surgical approach0.705*
Open surgery39 (28.5)22 (31.0)
Laparoscopic surgery98 (71.5)49 (69.0)
Pouch length0.042*3.100 (1.519–6.329)0.002
Short J pouch55 (40.1)39 (54.9)
Long J pouch82 (59.9)32 (45.1)
Hemoglobin0.532*
≥110 g/L48 (35.0)28 (39.4)
<110 g/L89 (65.0)43 (60.6)
Albumin0.104*
≥35 g/L59 (43.1)39 (54.9)
<35 g/L78 (56.9)32 (45.1)
White blood cell0.031*2.641 (1.243–5.609)0.012
<10×109/L111 (81.1)48 (67.6)
≥10×109/L26 (19.0)23 (32.4)
Hospitalization time0.003*1.626 (0.820–3.226)0.164
<15 day78 (56.9)25 (35.2)
≥15 day59 (43.1)46 (64,8)
Intraoperative blood loss0.009*3.484 (1.574–7.712)0.002
<200 mL100 (73.0)39 (54.9)
≥200 mL37 (27.0)32 (45.1)

Data are presented as number (%).

IPAA, ileal pouch-anal anastomosis; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

*Chi-square test; Wilcoxon rank-sum test.



5. Short J pouch configuration affected the postoperative long-term QOL

To further investigate whether short J pouch could impair postoperative long-term QOL, univariate analysis was performed. In this study, postoperative long-term QOL was significantly improved in 123 patients (59.1%), and relatively impaired in 85 patients (40.9%). We found that age at diagnosis (p=0.012), surgical approach (p=0.002), pouch length (p=0.015) and preoperative albumin value (p=0.046) were associated with the postoperative long-term QOL improvement (Table 5). These significant variables in univariate analysis were selected for the multivariate logistic regression analysis and determined that age at diagnosis more than 40 years old (OR, 2.214; 95% CI, 1.170 to 3.855; p=0.013), open surgery (OR, 3.268; 95% CI, 1.688 to 6.326; p<0.001) and short ileal pouch (OR, 2.221; 95% CI, 1.218 to 4.050; p=0.009) were independent contributing factors for the impaired long-term QOL (Table 5).

Table 5. Univariate and Multivariate Logistic Regression Analysis of Risk Factors for Impaired Long-term QOL after IPAA

VariableImpaired long-term QOL group (n=85)Significantly improved long-term QOL group (n=123)Univariate analysis
p-value
Multivariate logistic regression
OR (95% CI)p-value
Age at diagnosis0.012*2.214 (1.170–3.855)0.013
<40 yr32 (37.6)68 (55.3)
≥40 yr53 (62.4)55 (44.7)
Body mass index0.278*
≥18.5 kg/m262 (72.9)81 (65.9)
<18.5 kg/m223 (27.1)42 (34.1)
Disease duration0.400*
<5 yr54 (63.5)85 (69.1)
≥5 yr31 (36.5)38 (30.9)
First occurrence0.599
Yes14 (16.5)17 (13.8)
No71 (83.5)106 (86.2)
Extent of ulcerative colitis0.634
E1 (proctitis)14 (16.5)23 (18.7)
E2 (left-sided colitis)7 (8.2)11 (8.9)
E3 (pancolitis)64 (75.3)89 (72.4)
Extraintestinal manifestation0.599*
No74 (87.1)110 (89.4)
Yes11 (12.9)13 (10.6)
Mesalamine0.411*
No28 (32.9)34 (27.6)
Yes57 (67.1)89 (72.4)
Immunomodulators0.224*
No64 (75.3)83 (67.5)
Yes21 (24.7)40 (32.5)
Steroids0.618*
No34 (40.0)45 (36.6)
Yes51 (60.0)78 (63.4)
Biologics0.271*
No70 (82.4)108 (87.8)
Yes15 (17.6)15 (12.2)
Stage of surgery0.757
II-stage IPAA55 (64.7)77 (62.6)
III-stage IPAA30 (35.3)46 (37.4)
Surgical urgency0.934
Urgent surgery8 (9.4)12 (9.8)
Elective surgery77 (90.6)111 (90.2)
Surgical approach0.002*3.268 (1.688–6.326)<0.001
Open surgery35 (41.2)26 (21.1)
Laparoscopic surgery50 (58.8)97 (78.9)
Pouch length0.015*2.221 (1.218-4.050)0.009
Short J pouch47 (55.3)47 (38.2)
Long J pouch38 (44.7)76 (61.8)
Hemoglobin0.783*
≥110 g/L32 (37.6)44 (35.8)
<110 g/L53 (62.4)79 (64.2)
Albumin0.046*1.784 (0.972–3.274)0.062
≥35 g/L33 (38.8)65 (52.8)
<35 g/L52 (61.2)58 (47.2)
White blood cell0.381*
<10×109/L68 (80.0)92 (74.8)
≥10×109/L17 (20.0)31 (25.2)
Intraoperative blood loss0.589*
<200 mL55 (64.7)84 (68.3)
≥200 mL30 (35.3)39 (31.7)

Data are presented as number (%).

QoL, quality of life; IPAA, ileal pouch-anal anastomosis; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

*Chi-square test; Wilcoxon rank-sum test.


The present study with a long follow-up period comprehensively and systematically analyzed the relationship between pouch length and clinical outcomes in UC patients. In this study, our findings indicated that patients with short pouch were less likely to achieve significantly improved long-term QOL and prone to develop the late postoperative complications, such as more defecation frequency and pouchitis. We further demonstrated that recurrent UC, short J pouch, high preoperative total WBCs and intraoperative blood loss ≥200 mL were contributing factors for the development of late post-IPAA complications. Moreover, short J pouch configuration, age at diagnosis more than 40 years old and open surgery were independent risk factors for impaired long-term QOL. Therefore, long J pouch configuration could be a considerable surgical option for pouch construction.

Previous studies indicated excessive blood loss was associated with increased mortality after colorectal surgery and length of hospital stay.11,12 We also reported that patients with intraoperative blood loss ≥200 mL were prone to develop early surgical complications, which have a detrimental effect on the postoperative long-term outcomes.5 Patients with recurrent UC and high preoperative WBCs count were prone to suffer the chronic inflammation, which is associated with poor long-term outcomes and the development of postoperative complications after IPAA.13 We previously reported that older age at pouch surgery could contribute to poor long-term QOL after IPAA.5 Previous researches also indicated that older patients underwent pouch surgery were prone to develop complications, including increased stool frequency and fecal incontinence, which could impair their long-term QOL.14-16 We also demonstrated that minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery could make patients achieve better prognoses.17 Additionally, we first indicated that short J pouch configuration could increase the risk to develop late complications and impair the improvement of postoperative long-term QOL.

It is still unclear whether pouch length is associated with the long-term prognosis after IPAA. Shibata et al.18 showed that patients with a long J pouch were prone to have less frequent stools. In our study, we compared the postoperative complications in patients with relatively short (14±2 cm) and long (22±2 cm) J pouch and demonstrated short J pouch make patients more likely to had more defecation frequency, which was consistent with researches which reported that stool frequency was negatively correlated with the pouch volume.19-21 Miratashi Yazdi et al.22 reported that patients with short J pouch configuration (8±2 cm) were likely to have worse bowel function but obtained better QOL assessed by SF-36 questionnaire. However, our study indicated that patients with long J pouch were more likely to achieve significantly improved long-term QOL, which could be explained by the different scoring scale and the follow-up period in our study was much longer than this research. In addition to the increased frequency of stools, we also indicated pouchitis was more common in patients with short J pouch. Previous studies reported various risk factors for pouchitis.23-27 Pouchitis could be described as the continuation and reactivation of UC disease processes.28,29 It was known that microbiota dysbiosis exerts an important role in the development of pouchitis. A dysbiosis characterized by decreased gut microbiota diversity in patients underwent IPAA may contribute to an aberrant mucosal immune regulation to promote the development of pouchitis.30 Sinha et al.31 reported that a secondary bile acid-producing species, Ruminococcaceae, was significantly decreased in pouchitis. Thus, increased defecation frequency or incontinence could promote the disruption of intestine homeostasis and further promote the development of microbiota dysbiosis32 then lead to the occurrence of pouchitis.33,34 Taken together, we concluded that patients with short pouch were prone to achieve relatively poor pouch function and had more defecation frequency even incontinence, which could impair the improvement of QOL in the long run. Prospective research should be further performed to determine the results in the future.

Several limitations existed in this study. First, since it is a retrospective study, the loss of follow-up and clinical data is almost inevitable. A study with larger sample size is recommended to further demonstrate our results in the future. Second, some selective basis could exist since enrolled patients were managed by four inflammatory bowel disease surgery centers.

In this study, we found pouch length was associated with the clinical outcomes and long-term QOL improvement after IPAA. Patients with short J pouches were likely to achieve impaired long-term QOL and develop late postoperative complications, such as increased defecation frequency and pouchitis. We further demonstrated that short J pouch was an independent risk factor for the impaired long-term QOL and the development of late postoperative complications. Therefore, relatively long J pouch configuration could be a considerable surgical option for pouch construction. Multicenter prospective research with a large sample size should be performed to further demonstrate the results in this study.

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 82000481 and 82270549), the Shanghai Sailing Program (No. 20YF1429400) and the Qingfeng Scientific Research Fund of the China Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation (CCCF) (No. CCCF-QF-2022C14-21).

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Study concept and design: P.D., Z.D., W.Z. Data acquisition: W.X., W.T., W.D., Z.H., Y.W., X.G. Data analysis and interpretation: W.X. Drafting of the manuscript: W.X. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: W.X., W.T., W.D. Statistical analysis: W.X. Obtained funding: W.X., P.D. Administrative, technical, or material support; study supervision: L.C., X.W. Approval of final manuscript: all authors.

  1. Parks AG, Nicholls RJ. Proctocolectomy without ileostomy for ulcerative colitis. Br Med J 1978;2:85-88.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  2. Fazio VW, O'Riordain MG, Lavery IC, et al. Long-term functional outcome and quality of life after stapled restorative proctocolectomy. Ann Surg 1999;230:575-584.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  3. Muir AJ, Edwards LJ, Sanders LL, et al. A prospective evaluation of health-related quality of life after ileal pouch anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis. Am J Gastroenterol 2001;96:1480-1485.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  4. Fazio VW, Kiran RP, Remzi FH, et al. Ileal pouch anal anastomosis: analysis of outcome and quality of life in 3707 patients. Ann Surg 2013;257:679-685.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  5. Xu W, Ye H, Zhu Y, et al. Long-term quality of life associated with early surgical complications in patients with ulcerative colitis after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: a single-center retrospective study. Int J Surg 2017;48:174-179.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  6. Lovegrove RE, Heriot AG, Constantinides V, et al. Meta-analysis of short-term and long-term outcomes of J, W and S ileal reservoirs for restorative proctocolectomy. Colorectal Dis 2007;9:310-320.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  7. Zhang Y, Hu H, Jiang C, Qian Q, Ding Z. D-pouch: a modified ileal J-pouch for patients with ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis. Tech Coloproctol 2021;25:1209-1215.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  8. Simillis C, Afxentiou T, Pellino G, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing adverse events and functional outcomes of different pouch designs after restorative proctocolectomy. Colorectal Dis 2018;20:664-675.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  9. Shen B, Remzi FH, Lavery IC, Lashner BA, Fazio VW. A proposed classification of ileal pouch disorders and associated complications after restorative proctocolectomy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008;6:145-158.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  10. Coffey JC, Winter DC, Neary P, Murphy A, Redmond HP, Kirwan WO. Quality of life after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: an evaluation of diet and other factors using the Cleveland Global Quality of Life instrument. Dis Colon Rectum 2002;45:30-38.
  11. Skala K, Gervaz P, Buchs N, et al. Risk factors for mortality-morbidity after emergency-urgent colorectal surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis 2009;24:311-316.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  12. Aga Z, Machina M, McCluskey SA. Greater intravenous fluid volumes are associated with prolonged recovery after colorectal surgery: a retrospective cohort study. Br J Anaesth 2016;116:804-810.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  13. Frese JP, Gröne J, Lauscher JC, et al. Inflammation of the rectal remnant endangers the outcome of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: a case-control study. Int J Colorectal Dis 2022;37:1647-1655.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  14. Carmon E, Keidar A, Ravid A, Goldman G, Rabau M. The correlation between quality of life and functional outcome in ulcerative colitis patients after proctocolectomy ileal pouch anal anastomosis. Colorectal Dis 2003;5:228-232.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  15. Delaney CP, Fazio VW, Remzi FH, et al. Prospective, age-related analysis of surgical results, functional outcome, and quality of life after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Ann Surg 2003;238:221-228.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  16. Farouk R, Pemberton JH, Wolff BG, Dozois RR, Browning S, Larson D. Functional outcomes after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for chronic ulcerative colitis. Ann Surg 2000;231:919-926.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  17. Cai Z, He X, Gong J, et al. Laparoscopic surgery contributes to a decrease in short-term complications in surgical ulcerative colitis patients during 2008-2017: a multicenter retrospective study in China. Intest Res 2023;21:235-243.
    KoreaMed CrossRef
  18. Shibata C, Funayama Y, Fukushima K, et al. Factors affecting the bowel function after proctocolectomy and ileal J pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis. J Gastrointest Surg 2006;10:1065-1071.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  19. Selvaggi F, Giuliani A, Gallo C, Signoriello G, Riegler G, Canonico S. Randomized, controlled trial to compare the J-pouch and W-pouch configurations for ulcerative colitis in the maturation period. Dis Colon Rectum 2000;43:615-620.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  20. Hatakeyama K, Yamai K, Muto T. Evaluation of ileal W pouch-anal anastomosis for restorative proctocolectomy. Int J Colorectal Dis 1989;4:150-155.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  21. Sagar PM, Holdsworth PJ, Godwin PG, Quirke P, Smith AN, Johnston D. Comparison of triplicated (S) and quadruplicated (W) pelvic ileal reservoirs: studies on manovolumetry, fecal bacteriology, fecal volatile fatty acids, mucosal morphology, and functional results. Gastroenterology 1992;102:520-528.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  22. Miratashi Yazdi SA, Fazeli MS, Ahmadi Amoli H, Rahimpour E, Behboudi B. Functional and quality of life outcomes after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in short versus long ileal J-pouch configuration in ulcerative colitis patients: a cohort study. Updates Surg 2020;72:827-833.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  23. Vavricka SR, Schoepfer A, Scharl M, Lakatos PL, Navarini A, Rogler G. Extraintestinal manifestations of inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2015;21:1982-1992.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  24. Penna C, Dozois R, Tremaine W, et al. Pouchitis after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis occurs with increased frequency in patients with associated primary sclerosing cholangitis. Gut 1996;38:234-239.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  25. Shen B, Fazio VW, Remzi FH, et al. Risk factors for diseases of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis after restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006;4:81-89.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  26. Achkar JP, Al-Haddad M, Lashner B, et al. Differentiating risk factors for acute and chronic pouchitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2005;3:60-66.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  27. Xu W, Tang W, Ding W, et al. Preoperative endoscopic activity predicts the occurrence of pouchitis after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in ulcerative colitis: a multicenter retrospective study in China. Front Surg 2021;8:740349.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  28. McLaughlin SD, Clark SK, Tekkis PP, Nicholls RJ, Ciclitira PJ. The bacterial pathogenesis and treatment of pouchitis. Therap Adv Gastroenterol 2010;3:335-348.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  29. Shen B. Bacteriology in the etiopathogenesis of pouchitis. Dig Dis 2012;30:351-357.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  30. Angriman I, Scarpa M, Castagliuolo I. Relationship between pouch microbiota and pouchitis following restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis. World J Gastroenterol 2014;20:9665-9674.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  31. Sinha SR, Haileselassie Y, Nguyen LP, et al. Dysbiosis-induced secondary bile acid deficiency promotes intestinal inflammation. Cell Host Microbe 2020;27:659-670.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  32. Li Y, Xia S, Jiang X, et al. Gut microbiota and diarrhea: an updated review. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2021;11:625210.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  33. LeBlanc JF, Segal JP, de Campos Braz LM, Hart AL. The microbiome as a therapy in pouchitis and ulcerative colitis. Nutrients 2021;13:1780.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  34. Anbazhagan AN, Priyamvada S, Alrefai WA, Dudeja PK. Pathophysiology of IBD associated diarrhea. Tissue Barriers 2018;6:e1463897.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef

Article

Original Article

Gut and Liver 2024; 18(1): 85-96

Published online January 15, 2024 https://doi.org/10.5009/gnl220471

Copyright © Gut and Liver.

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

Weimin Xu1 , Wenbo Tang1 , Wenjun Ding1 , Zhebin Hua1 , Yaosheng Wang1 , Xiaolong Ge2 , Long Cui1 , Xiaojian Wu3 , Wei Zhou2 , Zhao Ding4 , Peng Du1 , China UC Pouch Center Union

1Department of Colorectal Surgery, Xinhua Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China; 2Department of General Surgery, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Medical School of Zhejiang University, Guangzhou, China; 3Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China; 4Department of Colorectal and Anal Surgery, Hubei Key Laboratory of Intestinal and Colorectal Diseases, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China

Correspondence to:Peng Du
ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9355-0789
E-mail dupeng@xinhuamed.com.cn

Zhao Ding
ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6052-3047
E-mail dingzhao@whu.edu.cn

Wei Zhou
ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3224-7046
E-mail zhouweisrrs@zju.edu.cn

Weimin Xu, Wenbo Tang, and Wenjun Ding contributed equally to this work as first authors.

Received: November 2, 2022; Revised: December 25, 2022; Accepted: January 12, 2023

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Background/Aims: Total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is widely accepted as a radical surgery for refractory ulcerative colitis (UC). Definite results on the appropriate pouch length for an evaluation of the risk-to-benefit ratio regarding technical complications and long-term quality of life (QOL) are still scarce.
Methods: Data on UC patients who underwent IPAA from 2008 to 2022 in four well-established pouch centers affiliated to China UC Pouch Center Union were collected.
Results: A total of 208 patients with a median follow-up time of 6.0 years (interquartile range, 2.3 to 9.0 years) were enrolled. The median lengths of the patients’ short and long pouches were 14.0 cm (interquartile range, 14.0 to 15.0 cm) and 22.0 cm (interquartile range, 20.0 to 24.0 cm), respectively. Patients with a short J pouch configuration were less likely to achieve significantly improved long-term QOL (p=0.015) and were prone to develop late postoperative complications (p=0.042), such as increased defecation frequency (p=0.003) and pouchitis (p=0.035). A short ileal pouch was an independent risk factor for the development of late postoperative complications (odds ratio, 3.100; 95% confidence interval, 1.519 to 6.329; p=0.002) and impaired longterm QOL improvement (odds ratio, 2.221; 95% confidence interval, 1.218 to 4.050, p=0.009).
Conclusions: The length of the J pouch was associated with the improvement in long-term QOL and the development of late post-IPAA complications. A long J pouch configuration could be a considerable surgical option for pouch construction.

Keywords: Ileal pouch anal anastomosis, Ulcerative colitis, Pouch length, Postoperative complications, Quality of life

INTRODUCTION

Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) has been widely accepted as a radical surgery for ulcerative colitis (UC).1 Previous studies have demonstrated that IPAA significantly improved the quality of life (QOL) as it can restore intestinal continuity and avoid permanent ostomy by pouch construction.2-4 However, our previous study indicated that the technically demanding operation was associated with serious surgical complications, which may have a detrimental effect on the long-term QOL.5

IPAA can remove the affected colorectum and create an ileal reservoir. Among the “J”, “W”, “S” and recently reported “D” pouch, J pouch configuration is the most commonly used configuration of IPAA due to easy construction and satisfactory clinical outcomes.6,7 The length of distal ileum for pouch creation mainly determined the pouch volume, which is associated with bowel and pouch function.8 However, it is still unclear what length of pouch could make patients achieve the best long-term prognosis.9 Few studies with long follow-up period reported the relationship between pouch length and post-IPAA complications and long-term QOL.

In this study, we mainly aimed to determine whether pouch length was associated with the clinical outcomes by analyzing the postoperative long-term QOL and complications in patients with pouches of different lengths.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

1. Study design and patients

A total of 221 patients with UC who underwent IPAA from January 2008 to September 2022 at our four inflammatory bowel disease surgery centers affiliated to China UC Pouch Center Union were evaluated in this study. As we previously reported, we collected the data by the prospectively maintained, institutional review board-approved pouch database.5 In our institute, we recommended a pouchoscopic examination once a year for those patients who had risks for pouch malignant transformation or complications. The Ethics Committee of Xinhua Hospital has reviewed and approved this study protocol (approval number: XHEC-D-2022-093). All patients signed informed consent forms.

2. Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Patients who were diagnosed with UC who underwent IPAA with J pouch construction and had complete data were included in this study. The exclusion criteria were patients with Crohn’s disease or familial adenomatous polyposis, without pouch creation and with incomplete data and loss of follow-up.

3. Preoperative and postoperative QOL assessment

To assess the preoperative and post-IPAA QOL, the Cleveland Global Quality of Life (CGQL) instrument was used for evaluation.10 The preoperative CGQL was collected after admission by questionnaires; post-IPAA CGQL was obtained from the most recent postoperative outpatient follow-up. CGQL was classified into three items as follows: current QOL (0 to 10 scores), current quality of health (0 to 10 scores) and current energy level (0 to 10 scores). Then the ultimate CGQL was obtained from the cumulative score divided by 30. As reported in our previous study,5 an increase of more than or less than 50% in postoperative CGQL compared to preoperative CGQL was considered as significantly improved long-term QOL or impaired long-term QOL in our study.

4. Pouch construction and the measurement of pouch length

The procedure of IPAA is homogenized, standardized, and normalized in our institute and performed by a specific and experienced colorectal surgeon in each center. Thus, the pouch length was mainly decided by the surgeons’ own experience as well as the intraoperative situation.

The length of cutting line of the anastomosis was assessed and measured intraoperatively to record as the pouch length. In our present retrospective multicenter study, we concluded the length of pouch was nearly 14±2 cm or 22±2 cm when we used 3 or 4-5 endoscopic linear cutter reloads, measured by using Endo GIA60, a laparoscopic stapler for construction J pouch. Pouch length was intraoperatively recorded and finally obtained by measuring the side-to-side anastomosis’s cutting line of the pouch body. Based on the medical records in the cohort database, we found the main two sizes of pouch, the length of 14±2 and 22±2 cm, were constructed in our inflammatory bowel disease surgery centers. According to the median lengths of the two sizes of pouch, 14.0 cm (interquartile range [IQR], 14.0 to 15.0 cm) and 22.0 cm (IQR, 20.0 to 24.0 cm), we categorized these pouches as short and long J pouch.

5. Data evaluation

Primary endpoints in this study were the occurrence of late postoperative complications or the impaired long-term QOL. Complications developed within 1 month after pouch surgery were defined as the early surgical complications. Pouchitis, pouch failure, defecation disorder, postoperative late intestinal obstruction, pouch-vagina leak, anastomotic stricture and sexual dysfunction were categorized as the late post-IPAA complications, which occurred more than 1 month after IPAA. Preoperative medical therapies and the value of laboratory results, such as hemoglobin and albumin were collected preoperatively.

6. Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis in this study was performed using the SPSS version 22.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) and GraphPad Prism 8.0 (San Diego, CA, USA). Statistical data were represented as mean and standard deviations, or the median and IQR appropriately. To compare the significance of continuous variables, the two-sample Student t-test was performed. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare the ranked variables. Additionally, categorical variables were analyzed by the chi-square or Fisher exact test. Variables with significant differences in the univariate analysis were then selected for the multivariate logistic regression analysis. In this study, we considered a p-value <0.05 significant with a two-sided test and confidence intervals (CIs) set at 95%.

RESULTS

1. Baseline characteristics

In the whole cohort of 221 UC patients, three patients underwent ileostomy without pouch construction, and 10 were lost to follow-up. In the present study, a total of 208 eligible patients who met the inclusion criteria were ultimately enrolled. The schematic flow diagram of this study is shown in Fig. 1. The overall baseline characteristics and the comparative analysis between the short and long J pouch groups were presented in Table 1. In the whole cohort, the median follow-up time was 6.0 years (IQR, 2.3 to 9.0 years). Of these patients, 94 patients had relatively short pouches (45.2%) with a median length of 14.0 cm (IQR, 14.0 to 15.0 cm) and 114 had long ileal pouches (54.8%) with a median length of 22.0 cm (IQR, 20.0 to 24.0 cm). There were more patients with intraoperative blood loss more than 200 mL in long J pouch group than in short J pouch group (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in other baseline characteristics between the short and long pouch groups (Table 1).

Figure 1. Schematic flow diagram of the present study. UC, ulcerative colitis; IPAA, Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis; QOL, quality of life.

Table 1 . Main Baseline Patient Characteristics.

VariableAll cases (n=208)Short J pouch group (n=94)Long J pouch group (n=114)p-value
Follow-up time, yr6.0 (2.3–9.0)6.0 (2.0–8.0)7.0 (3.0–9.0)
Sex, male/female109/9954/4055/590.186*
Age at diagnosis0.740*
<40 yr100 (48.1)44 (46.8)56 (49.1)
≥40 yr108 (51.9)50 (53.2)58 (50.9)
Height0.807*
<170 cm112 (58.7)56 (59.6)66 (57.9)
≥170 cm86 (41.3)38 (40.4)48 (42.1)
Body mass index0.164*
≥18.5 kg/m2143 (68.8)60 (63.8)83 (72.8)
<18.5 kg/m265 (31.2)34 (36.2)31 (27.2)
Disease duration0.726*
<5 yr139 (66.8)64 (68.1)75 (65.8)
≥5 yr69 (33.2)30 (31.9)39 (34.2)
First occurrence0.437
Yes31 (14.9)16 (17.0)15 (13.2)
No177 (85.1)78 (83.0)99 (86.8)
Extent of ulcerative colitis0.909
E1 (proctitis)37 (17.8)18 (19.1)19 (16.7)
E2 (left-sided colitis)18 (8.7)6 (6.4)12 (10.5)
E3 (pancolitis)153 (73.5)70 (74.5)83 (72.8)
Extraintestinal manifestation0.169*
No184 (88.5)80 (85.1)104 (91.2)
Yes24 (11.5)14 (14.9)10 (8.8)
Mesalamine0.539*
No62 (29.8)26 (27.7)36 (31.6)
Yes146 (70.2)68 (72.3)78 (68.4)
Immunomodulators0.661*
No147 (70.7)65 (69.1)82 (71.9)
Yes61 (29.3)29 (30.9)32 (28.1)
Steroids0.709*
No79 (38.0)37 (39.4)42 (36.8)
Yes129 (62.0)57 (60.6)72 (63.2)
Biologics0.333*
No178 (85.6)78 (83.0)100 (87.7)
Yes30 (14.4)16 (17.0)14 (12.3)
Stage of surgery0.633
II-stage IPAA132 (63.5)58 (61.7)74 (64.9)
III-stage IPAA76 (36.5)36 (38.3)40 (35.1)
Surgical urgency0.062
Urgent surgery20 (9.6)13 (13.8)7 (6.1)
Elective surgery188 (90.4)81 (86.2)107 (93.9)
Surgical approach0.275*
Open61 (29.3)24 (25.5)37 (32.5)
Laparoscopic147 (70.7)70 (74.5)77 (67.5)
Hemoglobin0.697*
≥110 g/L76 (36.5)33 (35.1)43 (37.7)
<110 g/L132 (63.5)61 (64.9)71 (62.3)
Albumin0.140*
≥35 g/L98 (47.1)39 (41.5)59 (51.8)
<35 g/L110 (52.9)55 (58.5)55 (48.2)
White blood cell0.348*
<10×109/L159 (76.4)69 (73.4)90 (78.9)
≥10×109/L49 (23.6)25 (26.6)24 (21.1)
Hospitalization time0.686*
<15 day103 (49.5)48 (51.1)55 (48.2)
≥15 day105 (50.5)46 (48.9)59 (51.8)
Intraoperative blood loss<0.001*
<200 mL139 (66.8)78 (83.0)61 (53.5)
≥200 mL69 (33.2)16 (17.0)53 (46.5)

Data are presented as median (interquartile range) or number (%)..

IPAA, ileal pouch-anal anastomosis..

*Chi-square test; Wilcoxon rank-sum test..



2. Post-IPAA complications

A total of 58 patients (27.9%) developed the early postoperative complications. Late postoperative complications occurred in 71 patients (34.1%). Of them, 58 (27.9%) developed pouchitis, 23 (11.1%) had increased defecation frequency, 10 (4.8%) developed late postoperative intestinal obstruction, seven (3.4%) had anastomotic stricture, four (1.9%) developed pouch-vagina leak, three (1.4%) experienced pouch failure, and only one (0.5%) developed sexual dysfunction (Table 2).

Table 2 . Main Postoperative Complications of Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis.

ComplicationNo. (%)
Early postoperative complications
Early postoperative intestinal obstruction31 (14.9)
Pouch and anastomotic bleeding11 (5.3)
Pouch-anal anastomotic leak4 (1.9)
Wound infection16 (7.7)
Incision hernia3 (1.4)
Late postoperative complications
Pouchitis58 (27.9)
Pouch failure3 (1.4)
Increased defecation frequency23 (11.1)
Late postoperative intestinal obstruction10 (4.8)
Pouch-vagina leak4 (1.9)
Anastomotic stricture7 (3.4)
Sexual dysfunction1 (0.5)


3. Clinical outcomes in patients with J pouch configuration of different lengths

We first evaluated the effect of IPAA on postoperative outcomes in patients with UC. As shown in Fig. 2, the mean current QOL (pre vs post, 4.274 vs 7.481, p<0.001), current quality of health (pre vs post, 4.760 vs 7.505, p<0.001), current energy level (pre vs post, 5.106 vs 7.683, p<0.001) and ultimate CGQL scores (pre vs post, 0.472 vs 0.757, p<0.001) were all significantly improved after IPAA in the whole cohort.

Figure 2. Evaluation of the long-term QOL via the pre-IPAA and post-IPAA CGQL instrument. Three items of the CGQL instrument—current QOL (A), current quality of health (B), and current energy level (C)—and the overall CGQL scores (n=208) (D) were compared between the pre- and post-IPAA periods in the whole cohort. QOL, quality of life; IPAA, Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis; CGQL, Cleveland Global Quality of Life. *p<0.001.

To determine whether pouch length could affect clinical outcomes, we compared the postoperative complications and long-term QOL in patients with pouches of different lengths. As shown in Table 3, we found that patients in short J pouch group were likely to develop the late postoperative complications (p=0.042), mainly presented in more defecation frequency (p=0.003) and pouchitis (p=0.035). The significantly improved CGQL was more common in long J pouch group than in short J pouch group (p=0.015) (Table 3).

Table 3 . Analysis of the Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Short and Long Ileal J Pouches.

VariableShort J pouch group (n=94)Long J pouch group (n=114)p-value
Early postoperative complications25 (26.6)33 (28.9)0.707*
Late postoperative complications39 (41.5)32 (28.1)0.042*
Increased defecation frequency0.003*
No77 (81.9)108 (94.7)
Yes17 (18.1)6 (5.3)
Pouchitis0.035*
No61 (64.9)89 (78.1)
Yes33 (35.1)25 (21.9)
Postoperative long-term intestinal obstruction0.735
No90 (95.7)108 (94.7)
Yes4 (4.3)6 (5.3)
Anastomotic stricture0.156
No89 (94.7)112 (98.2)
Yes5 (5.3)2 (1.8)
Postoperative CGQL score0.725±0.1350.783±0.1390.003
Current QOL7.128±1.6487.772±1.5740.004
Current quality of health7.128±1.4837.816±1.4850.001
Current energy level7.447±1.6377.877±1.5750.055
Significantly improved long-term QOL0.015*
No47 (50.0)38 (33.3)
Yes47 (50.0)76 (66.7)

Data are presented as number (%) or mean±SD..

CGQL, Cleveland Global Quality of Life; QOL, quality of life..

*Chi-square test; Fisher exact test; Two-sample Student t-test..



Although we found an obvious improvement of CGQL scores in short and long J pouch group (Fig. 3A and B), the post-IPAA current QOL (7.128 vs 7.772, p=0.004), current quality of health (7.128 vs 7.816, p=0.001) and ultimate CGQL scores (0.725 vs 0.783, p=0.003) were significantly impaired compared with those with long J pouch (Table 3, Fig. 3C-F). Collectively, these data demonstrated pouch length was associated with the clinical outcomes in patients underwent IPAA. Therefore, we speculated that short J pouch could be a risk factor for the development of late postoperative complications and impaired long-term QOL improvement.

Figure 3. Analysis of the effects of pouch length on the improvement in long-term post-IPAA QOL. Comparison of pre- and post-IPAA CGQL in patients with short J pouch (n=94) (A) and long J pouch (n=114) (B). Three items of the CGQL instrument—current QOL (C), current quality of health (D), and current energy level (E)—and the overall CGQL scores (F) were compared between the short and long J pouch groups. IPAA, Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis; QOL, quality of life; CGQL, Cleveland Global Quality of Life; NS, not significant. *p<0.01; p<0.001.

4. Short J pouch configuration increased the risk for the late post-IPAA complications

Furthermore, we explored whether the short J pouch configuration could contribute to develop the late post-IPAA complications. The results of the univariate analysis indicated that recurrence of disease (p=0.002), pouch length (p=0.042), the value of preoperative white blood cell (WBC) count (p=0.031), hospitalization time (p=0.003), and intraoperative blood loss (p=0.009) were significantly associated with the late post-IPAA complications (Table 4). These significant variables in the univariate analysis were further analyzed in the multivariate logistic regression and demonstrated that recurrent UC (odds ratio [OR], 8.102; 95% CI, 2.259 to 29.602; p=0.001), short J pouch (OR, 3.100; 95% CI, 1.519 to 6.329; p=0.002), the preoperative total WBCs more than 10×109/L (OR, 2.641; 95% CI, 1.243 to 5.609; p=0.012) and intraoperative blood loss ≥200 m: (OR, 3.484; 95% CI, 1.574 to 7.712; p=0.002) were independent risk factors for the development of late postoperative complications (Table 4). Taken together, these data indicated the short J pouch configuration could increase the risk to develop late post-IPAA complications and further affect the long-term QOL improvement.

Table 4 . Univariate and Multivariate Logistic Regression Analysis of Risk Factors for Late Postoperative Complications in Ulcerative Colitis Patients with IPAA.

VariableNon-late postoperative complications group (n=137)Late postoperative complications group (n=71)Univariate analysis
p-value
Multivariate logistic regression
OR (95% CI)p-value
Age at diagnosis
<40 yr69 (50.4)31 (43.7)0.359*
≥40 yr68 (49.6)40 (56.3)
Body mass index0.567*
≥18.5 kg/m296 (70.1)47 (66.2)
<18.5 kg/m241 (29.9)24 (33.8)
Disease duration0.653*
<5 yr93 (67.9)46 (64.8)
≥5 yr44 (32.1)25 (35.2)
First occurrence0.0028.102 (2.259–29.602)0.001
Yes28 (20.4)3 (4.2)
No109 (79.6)68 (95.8)
Extent of ulcerative colitis0.214
E1 (proctitis)27 (19.7)10 (14.1)
E2 (left-sided colitis)13 (9.5)5 (7.0)
E3 (pancolitis)97 (70.8)56 (78.9)
Extraintestinal manifestation0.712*
No122 (89.1)62 (87.3)
Yes15 (10.9)9 (12.7)
Mesalamine0.183*
No45 (32.8)17 (23.9)
Yes92 (67.2)54 (76.1)
Immunomodulators0.220*
No93 (67.9)54 (76.1)
Yes44 (32.1)17 (23.9)
Steroids0.554*
No54 (39.4)25 (35.2)
Yes83 (60.6)46 (64.8)
Biologics0.606*
No116 (84.7)62 (87.3)
Yes21 (15.3)9 (12.7)
Stage of surgery0.373
II-stage IPAA84 (61.3)48 (67.6)
III-stage IPAA53 (38.7)23 (32.3)
Surgical urgency0.682
Urgent surgery14 (10.2)6 (8.5)
Elective surgery123 (89.8)65 (91.5)
Surgical approach0.705*
Open surgery39 (28.5)22 (31.0)
Laparoscopic surgery98 (71.5)49 (69.0)
Pouch length0.042*3.100 (1.519–6.329)0.002
Short J pouch55 (40.1)39 (54.9)
Long J pouch82 (59.9)32 (45.1)
Hemoglobin0.532*
≥110 g/L48 (35.0)28 (39.4)
<110 g/L89 (65.0)43 (60.6)
Albumin0.104*
≥35 g/L59 (43.1)39 (54.9)
<35 g/L78 (56.9)32 (45.1)
White blood cell0.031*2.641 (1.243–5.609)0.012
<10×109/L111 (81.1)48 (67.6)
≥10×109/L26 (19.0)23 (32.4)
Hospitalization time0.003*1.626 (0.820–3.226)0.164
<15 day78 (56.9)25 (35.2)
≥15 day59 (43.1)46 (64,8)
Intraoperative blood loss0.009*3.484 (1.574–7.712)0.002
<200 mL100 (73.0)39 (54.9)
≥200 mL37 (27.0)32 (45.1)

Data are presented as number (%)..

IPAA, ileal pouch-anal anastomosis; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval..

*Chi-square test; Wilcoxon rank-sum test..



5. Short J pouch configuration affected the postoperative long-term QOL

To further investigate whether short J pouch could impair postoperative long-term QOL, univariate analysis was performed. In this study, postoperative long-term QOL was significantly improved in 123 patients (59.1%), and relatively impaired in 85 patients (40.9%). We found that age at diagnosis (p=0.012), surgical approach (p=0.002), pouch length (p=0.015) and preoperative albumin value (p=0.046) were associated with the postoperative long-term QOL improvement (Table 5). These significant variables in univariate analysis were selected for the multivariate logistic regression analysis and determined that age at diagnosis more than 40 years old (OR, 2.214; 95% CI, 1.170 to 3.855; p=0.013), open surgery (OR, 3.268; 95% CI, 1.688 to 6.326; p<0.001) and short ileal pouch (OR, 2.221; 95% CI, 1.218 to 4.050; p=0.009) were independent contributing factors for the impaired long-term QOL (Table 5).

Table 5 . Univariate and Multivariate Logistic Regression Analysis of Risk Factors for Impaired Long-term QOL after IPAA.

VariableImpaired long-term QOL group (n=85)Significantly improved long-term QOL group (n=123)Univariate analysis
p-value
Multivariate logistic regression
OR (95% CI)p-value
Age at diagnosis0.012*2.214 (1.170–3.855)0.013
<40 yr32 (37.6)68 (55.3)
≥40 yr53 (62.4)55 (44.7)
Body mass index0.278*
≥18.5 kg/m262 (72.9)81 (65.9)
<18.5 kg/m223 (27.1)42 (34.1)
Disease duration0.400*
<5 yr54 (63.5)85 (69.1)
≥5 yr31 (36.5)38 (30.9)
First occurrence0.599
Yes14 (16.5)17 (13.8)
No71 (83.5)106 (86.2)
Extent of ulcerative colitis0.634
E1 (proctitis)14 (16.5)23 (18.7)
E2 (left-sided colitis)7 (8.2)11 (8.9)
E3 (pancolitis)64 (75.3)89 (72.4)
Extraintestinal manifestation0.599*
No74 (87.1)110 (89.4)
Yes11 (12.9)13 (10.6)
Mesalamine0.411*
No28 (32.9)34 (27.6)
Yes57 (67.1)89 (72.4)
Immunomodulators0.224*
No64 (75.3)83 (67.5)
Yes21 (24.7)40 (32.5)
Steroids0.618*
No34 (40.0)45 (36.6)
Yes51 (60.0)78 (63.4)
Biologics0.271*
No70 (82.4)108 (87.8)
Yes15 (17.6)15 (12.2)
Stage of surgery0.757
II-stage IPAA55 (64.7)77 (62.6)
III-stage IPAA30 (35.3)46 (37.4)
Surgical urgency0.934
Urgent surgery8 (9.4)12 (9.8)
Elective surgery77 (90.6)111 (90.2)
Surgical approach0.002*3.268 (1.688–6.326)<0.001
Open surgery35 (41.2)26 (21.1)
Laparoscopic surgery50 (58.8)97 (78.9)
Pouch length0.015*2.221 (1.218-4.050)0.009
Short J pouch47 (55.3)47 (38.2)
Long J pouch38 (44.7)76 (61.8)
Hemoglobin0.783*
≥110 g/L32 (37.6)44 (35.8)
<110 g/L53 (62.4)79 (64.2)
Albumin0.046*1.784 (0.972–3.274)0.062
≥35 g/L33 (38.8)65 (52.8)
<35 g/L52 (61.2)58 (47.2)
White blood cell0.381*
<10×109/L68 (80.0)92 (74.8)
≥10×109/L17 (20.0)31 (25.2)
Intraoperative blood loss0.589*
<200 mL55 (64.7)84 (68.3)
≥200 mL30 (35.3)39 (31.7)

Data are presented as number (%)..

QoL, quality of life; IPAA, ileal pouch-anal anastomosis; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval..

*Chi-square test; Wilcoxon rank-sum test..


DISCUSSION

The present study with a long follow-up period comprehensively and systematically analyzed the relationship between pouch length and clinical outcomes in UC patients. In this study, our findings indicated that patients with short pouch were less likely to achieve significantly improved long-term QOL and prone to develop the late postoperative complications, such as more defecation frequency and pouchitis. We further demonstrated that recurrent UC, short J pouch, high preoperative total WBCs and intraoperative blood loss ≥200 mL were contributing factors for the development of late post-IPAA complications. Moreover, short J pouch configuration, age at diagnosis more than 40 years old and open surgery were independent risk factors for impaired long-term QOL. Therefore, long J pouch configuration could be a considerable surgical option for pouch construction.

Previous studies indicated excessive blood loss was associated with increased mortality after colorectal surgery and length of hospital stay.11,12 We also reported that patients with intraoperative blood loss ≥200 mL were prone to develop early surgical complications, which have a detrimental effect on the postoperative long-term outcomes.5 Patients with recurrent UC and high preoperative WBCs count were prone to suffer the chronic inflammation, which is associated with poor long-term outcomes and the development of postoperative complications after IPAA.13 We previously reported that older age at pouch surgery could contribute to poor long-term QOL after IPAA.5 Previous researches also indicated that older patients underwent pouch surgery were prone to develop complications, including increased stool frequency and fecal incontinence, which could impair their long-term QOL.14-16 We also demonstrated that minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery could make patients achieve better prognoses.17 Additionally, we first indicated that short J pouch configuration could increase the risk to develop late complications and impair the improvement of postoperative long-term QOL.

It is still unclear whether pouch length is associated with the long-term prognosis after IPAA. Shibata et al.18 showed that patients with a long J pouch were prone to have less frequent stools. In our study, we compared the postoperative complications in patients with relatively short (14±2 cm) and long (22±2 cm) J pouch and demonstrated short J pouch make patients more likely to had more defecation frequency, which was consistent with researches which reported that stool frequency was negatively correlated with the pouch volume.19-21 Miratashi Yazdi et al.22 reported that patients with short J pouch configuration (8±2 cm) were likely to have worse bowel function but obtained better QOL assessed by SF-36 questionnaire. However, our study indicated that patients with long J pouch were more likely to achieve significantly improved long-term QOL, which could be explained by the different scoring scale and the follow-up period in our study was much longer than this research. In addition to the increased frequency of stools, we also indicated pouchitis was more common in patients with short J pouch. Previous studies reported various risk factors for pouchitis.23-27 Pouchitis could be described as the continuation and reactivation of UC disease processes.28,29 It was known that microbiota dysbiosis exerts an important role in the development of pouchitis. A dysbiosis characterized by decreased gut microbiota diversity in patients underwent IPAA may contribute to an aberrant mucosal immune regulation to promote the development of pouchitis.30 Sinha et al.31 reported that a secondary bile acid-producing species, Ruminococcaceae, was significantly decreased in pouchitis. Thus, increased defecation frequency or incontinence could promote the disruption of intestine homeostasis and further promote the development of microbiota dysbiosis32 then lead to the occurrence of pouchitis.33,34 Taken together, we concluded that patients with short pouch were prone to achieve relatively poor pouch function and had more defecation frequency even incontinence, which could impair the improvement of QOL in the long run. Prospective research should be further performed to determine the results in the future.

Several limitations existed in this study. First, since it is a retrospective study, the loss of follow-up and clinical data is almost inevitable. A study with larger sample size is recommended to further demonstrate our results in the future. Second, some selective basis could exist since enrolled patients were managed by four inflammatory bowel disease surgery centers.

In this study, we found pouch length was associated with the clinical outcomes and long-term QOL improvement after IPAA. Patients with short J pouches were likely to achieve impaired long-term QOL and develop late postoperative complications, such as increased defecation frequency and pouchitis. We further demonstrated that short J pouch was an independent risk factor for the impaired long-term QOL and the development of late postoperative complications. Therefore, relatively long J pouch configuration could be a considerable surgical option for pouch construction. Multicenter prospective research with a large sample size should be performed to further demonstrate the results in this study.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 82000481 and 82270549), the Shanghai Sailing Program (No. 20YF1429400) and the Qingfeng Scientific Research Fund of the China Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation (CCCF) (No. CCCF-QF-2022C14-21).

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Study concept and design: P.D., Z.D., W.Z. Data acquisition: W.X., W.T., W.D., Z.H., Y.W., X.G. Data analysis and interpretation: W.X. Drafting of the manuscript: W.X. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: W.X., W.T., W.D. Statistical analysis: W.X. Obtained funding: W.X., P.D. Administrative, technical, or material support; study supervision: L.C., X.W. Approval of final manuscript: all authors.

Fig 1.

Figure 1.Schematic flow diagram of the present study. UC, ulcerative colitis; IPAA, Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis; QOL, quality of life.
Gut and Liver 2024; 18: 85-96https://doi.org/10.5009/gnl220471

Fig 2.

Figure 2.Evaluation of the long-term QOL via the pre-IPAA and post-IPAA CGQL instrument. Three items of the CGQL instrument—current QOL (A), current quality of health (B), and current energy level (C)—and the overall CGQL scores (n=208) (D) were compared between the pre- and post-IPAA periods in the whole cohort. QOL, quality of life; IPAA, Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis; CGQL, Cleveland Global Quality of Life. *p<0.001.
Gut and Liver 2024; 18: 85-96https://doi.org/10.5009/gnl220471

Fig 3.

Figure 3.Analysis of the effects of pouch length on the improvement in long-term post-IPAA QOL. Comparison of pre- and post-IPAA CGQL in patients with short J pouch (n=94) (A) and long J pouch (n=114) (B). Three items of the CGQL instrument—current QOL (C), current quality of health (D), and current energy level (E)—and the overall CGQL scores (F) were compared between the short and long J pouch groups. IPAA, Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis; QOL, quality of life; CGQL, Cleveland Global Quality of Life; NS, not significant. *p<0.01; p<0.001.
Gut and Liver 2024; 18: 85-96https://doi.org/10.5009/gnl220471

Table 1 Main Baseline Patient Characteristics

VariableAll cases (n=208)Short J pouch group (n=94)Long J pouch group (n=114)p-value
Follow-up time, yr6.0 (2.3–9.0)6.0 (2.0–8.0)7.0 (3.0–9.0)
Sex, male/female109/9954/4055/590.186*
Age at diagnosis0.740*
<40 yr100 (48.1)44 (46.8)56 (49.1)
≥40 yr108 (51.9)50 (53.2)58 (50.9)
Height0.807*
<170 cm112 (58.7)56 (59.6)66 (57.9)
≥170 cm86 (41.3)38 (40.4)48 (42.1)
Body mass index0.164*
≥18.5 kg/m2143 (68.8)60 (63.8)83 (72.8)
<18.5 kg/m265 (31.2)34 (36.2)31 (27.2)
Disease duration0.726*
<5 yr139 (66.8)64 (68.1)75 (65.8)
≥5 yr69 (33.2)30 (31.9)39 (34.2)
First occurrence0.437
Yes31 (14.9)16 (17.0)15 (13.2)
No177 (85.1)78 (83.0)99 (86.8)
Extent of ulcerative colitis0.909
E1 (proctitis)37 (17.8)18 (19.1)19 (16.7)
E2 (left-sided colitis)18 (8.7)6 (6.4)12 (10.5)
E3 (pancolitis)153 (73.5)70 (74.5)83 (72.8)
Extraintestinal manifestation0.169*
No184 (88.5)80 (85.1)104 (91.2)
Yes24 (11.5)14 (14.9)10 (8.8)
Mesalamine0.539*
No62 (29.8)26 (27.7)36 (31.6)
Yes146 (70.2)68 (72.3)78 (68.4)
Immunomodulators0.661*
No147 (70.7)65 (69.1)82 (71.9)
Yes61 (29.3)29 (30.9)32 (28.1)
Steroids0.709*
No79 (38.0)37 (39.4)42 (36.8)
Yes129 (62.0)57 (60.6)72 (63.2)
Biologics0.333*
No178 (85.6)78 (83.0)100 (87.7)
Yes30 (14.4)16 (17.0)14 (12.3)
Stage of surgery0.633
II-stage IPAA132 (63.5)58 (61.7)74 (64.9)
III-stage IPAA76 (36.5)36 (38.3)40 (35.1)
Surgical urgency0.062
Urgent surgery20 (9.6)13 (13.8)7 (6.1)
Elective surgery188 (90.4)81 (86.2)107 (93.9)
Surgical approach0.275*
Open61 (29.3)24 (25.5)37 (32.5)
Laparoscopic147 (70.7)70 (74.5)77 (67.5)
Hemoglobin0.697*
≥110 g/L76 (36.5)33 (35.1)43 (37.7)
<110 g/L132 (63.5)61 (64.9)71 (62.3)
Albumin0.140*
≥35 g/L98 (47.1)39 (41.5)59 (51.8)
<35 g/L110 (52.9)55 (58.5)55 (48.2)
White blood cell0.348*
<10×109/L159 (76.4)69 (73.4)90 (78.9)
≥10×109/L49 (23.6)25 (26.6)24 (21.1)
Hospitalization time0.686*
<15 day103 (49.5)48 (51.1)55 (48.2)
≥15 day105 (50.5)46 (48.9)59 (51.8)
Intraoperative blood loss<0.001*
<200 mL139 (66.8)78 (83.0)61 (53.5)
≥200 mL69 (33.2)16 (17.0)53 (46.5)

Data are presented as median (interquartile range) or number (%).

IPAA, ileal pouch-anal anastomosis.

*Chi-square test; Wilcoxon rank-sum test.


Table 2 Main Postoperative Complications of Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis

ComplicationNo. (%)
Early postoperative complications
Early postoperative intestinal obstruction31 (14.9)
Pouch and anastomotic bleeding11 (5.3)
Pouch-anal anastomotic leak4 (1.9)
Wound infection16 (7.7)
Incision hernia3 (1.4)
Late postoperative complications
Pouchitis58 (27.9)
Pouch failure3 (1.4)
Increased defecation frequency23 (11.1)
Late postoperative intestinal obstruction10 (4.8)
Pouch-vagina leak4 (1.9)
Anastomotic stricture7 (3.4)
Sexual dysfunction1 (0.5)

Table 3 Analysis of the Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Short and Long Ileal J Pouches

VariableShort J pouch group (n=94)Long J pouch group (n=114)p-value
Early postoperative complications25 (26.6)33 (28.9)0.707*
Late postoperative complications39 (41.5)32 (28.1)0.042*
Increased defecation frequency0.003*
No77 (81.9)108 (94.7)
Yes17 (18.1)6 (5.3)
Pouchitis0.035*
No61 (64.9)89 (78.1)
Yes33 (35.1)25 (21.9)
Postoperative long-term intestinal obstruction0.735
No90 (95.7)108 (94.7)
Yes4 (4.3)6 (5.3)
Anastomotic stricture0.156
No89 (94.7)112 (98.2)
Yes5 (5.3)2 (1.8)
Postoperative CGQL score0.725±0.1350.783±0.1390.003
Current QOL7.128±1.6487.772±1.5740.004
Current quality of health7.128±1.4837.816±1.4850.001
Current energy level7.447±1.6377.877±1.5750.055
Significantly improved long-term QOL0.015*
No47 (50.0)38 (33.3)
Yes47 (50.0)76 (66.7)

Data are presented as number (%) or mean±SD.

CGQL, Cleveland Global Quality of Life; QOL, quality of life.

*Chi-square test; Fisher exact test; Two-sample Student t-test.


Table 4 Univariate and Multivariate Logistic Regression Analysis of Risk Factors for Late Postoperative Complications in Ulcerative Colitis Patients with IPAA

VariableNon-late postoperative complications group (n=137)Late postoperative complications group (n=71)Univariate analysis
p-value
Multivariate logistic regression
OR (95% CI)p-value
Age at diagnosis
<40 yr69 (50.4)31 (43.7)0.359*
≥40 yr68 (49.6)40 (56.3)
Body mass index0.567*
≥18.5 kg/m296 (70.1)47 (66.2)
<18.5 kg/m241 (29.9)24 (33.8)
Disease duration0.653*
<5 yr93 (67.9)46 (64.8)
≥5 yr44 (32.1)25 (35.2)
First occurrence0.0028.102 (2.259–29.602)0.001
Yes28 (20.4)3 (4.2)
No109 (79.6)68 (95.8)
Extent of ulcerative colitis0.214
E1 (proctitis)27 (19.7)10 (14.1)
E2 (left-sided colitis)13 (9.5)5 (7.0)
E3 (pancolitis)97 (70.8)56 (78.9)
Extraintestinal manifestation0.712*
No122 (89.1)62 (87.3)
Yes15 (10.9)9 (12.7)
Mesalamine0.183*
No45 (32.8)17 (23.9)
Yes92 (67.2)54 (76.1)
Immunomodulators0.220*
No93 (67.9)54 (76.1)
Yes44 (32.1)17 (23.9)
Steroids0.554*
No54 (39.4)25 (35.2)
Yes83 (60.6)46 (64.8)
Biologics0.606*
No116 (84.7)62 (87.3)
Yes21 (15.3)9 (12.7)
Stage of surgery0.373
II-stage IPAA84 (61.3)48 (67.6)
III-stage IPAA53 (38.7)23 (32.3)
Surgical urgency0.682
Urgent surgery14 (10.2)6 (8.5)
Elective surgery123 (89.8)65 (91.5)
Surgical approach0.705*
Open surgery39 (28.5)22 (31.0)
Laparoscopic surgery98 (71.5)49 (69.0)
Pouch length0.042*3.100 (1.519–6.329)0.002
Short J pouch55 (40.1)39 (54.9)
Long J pouch82 (59.9)32 (45.1)
Hemoglobin0.532*
≥110 g/L48 (35.0)28 (39.4)
<110 g/L89 (65.0)43 (60.6)
Albumin0.104*
≥35 g/L59 (43.1)39 (54.9)
<35 g/L78 (56.9)32 (45.1)
White blood cell0.031*2.641 (1.243–5.609)0.012
<10×109/L111 (81.1)48 (67.6)
≥10×109/L26 (19.0)23 (32.4)
Hospitalization time0.003*1.626 (0.820–3.226)0.164
<15 day78 (56.9)25 (35.2)
≥15 day59 (43.1)46 (64,8)
Intraoperative blood loss0.009*3.484 (1.574–7.712)0.002
<200 mL100 (73.0)39 (54.9)
≥200 mL37 (27.0)32 (45.1)

Data are presented as number (%).

IPAA, ileal pouch-anal anastomosis; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

*Chi-square test; Wilcoxon rank-sum test.


Table 5 Univariate and Multivariate Logistic Regression Analysis of Risk Factors for Impaired Long-term QOL after IPAA

VariableImpaired long-term QOL group (n=85)Significantly improved long-term QOL group (n=123)Univariate analysis
p-value
Multivariate logistic regression
OR (95% CI)p-value
Age at diagnosis0.012*2.214 (1.170–3.855)0.013
<40 yr32 (37.6)68 (55.3)
≥40 yr53 (62.4)55 (44.7)
Body mass index0.278*
≥18.5 kg/m262 (72.9)81 (65.9)
<18.5 kg/m223 (27.1)42 (34.1)
Disease duration0.400*
<5 yr54 (63.5)85 (69.1)
≥5 yr31 (36.5)38 (30.9)
First occurrence0.599
Yes14 (16.5)17 (13.8)
No71 (83.5)106 (86.2)
Extent of ulcerative colitis0.634
E1 (proctitis)14 (16.5)23 (18.7)
E2 (left-sided colitis)7 (8.2)11 (8.9)
E3 (pancolitis)64 (75.3)89 (72.4)
Extraintestinal manifestation0.599*
No74 (87.1)110 (89.4)
Yes11 (12.9)13 (10.6)
Mesalamine0.411*
No28 (32.9)34 (27.6)
Yes57 (67.1)89 (72.4)
Immunomodulators0.224*
No64 (75.3)83 (67.5)
Yes21 (24.7)40 (32.5)
Steroids0.618*
No34 (40.0)45 (36.6)
Yes51 (60.0)78 (63.4)
Biologics0.271*
No70 (82.4)108 (87.8)
Yes15 (17.6)15 (12.2)
Stage of surgery0.757
II-stage IPAA55 (64.7)77 (62.6)
III-stage IPAA30 (35.3)46 (37.4)
Surgical urgency0.934
Urgent surgery8 (9.4)12 (9.8)
Elective surgery77 (90.6)111 (90.2)
Surgical approach0.002*3.268 (1.688–6.326)<0.001
Open surgery35 (41.2)26 (21.1)
Laparoscopic surgery50 (58.8)97 (78.9)
Pouch length0.015*2.221 (1.218-4.050)0.009
Short J pouch47 (55.3)47 (38.2)
Long J pouch38 (44.7)76 (61.8)
Hemoglobin0.783*
≥110 g/L32 (37.6)44 (35.8)
<110 g/L53 (62.4)79 (64.2)
Albumin0.046*1.784 (0.972–3.274)0.062
≥35 g/L33 (38.8)65 (52.8)
<35 g/L52 (61.2)58 (47.2)
White blood cell0.381*
<10×109/L68 (80.0)92 (74.8)
≥10×109/L17 (20.0)31 (25.2)
Intraoperative blood loss0.589*
<200 mL55 (64.7)84 (68.3)
≥200 mL30 (35.3)39 (31.7)

Data are presented as number (%).

QoL, quality of life; IPAA, ileal pouch-anal anastomosis; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

*Chi-square test; Wilcoxon rank-sum test.


References

  1. Parks AG, Nicholls RJ. Proctocolectomy without ileostomy for ulcerative colitis. Br Med J 1978;2:85-88.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  2. Fazio VW, O'Riordain MG, Lavery IC, et al. Long-term functional outcome and quality of life after stapled restorative proctocolectomy. Ann Surg 1999;230:575-584.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  3. Muir AJ, Edwards LJ, Sanders LL, et al. A prospective evaluation of health-related quality of life after ileal pouch anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis. Am J Gastroenterol 2001;96:1480-1485.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  4. Fazio VW, Kiran RP, Remzi FH, et al. Ileal pouch anal anastomosis: analysis of outcome and quality of life in 3707 patients. Ann Surg 2013;257:679-685.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  5. Xu W, Ye H, Zhu Y, et al. Long-term quality of life associated with early surgical complications in patients with ulcerative colitis after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: a single-center retrospective study. Int J Surg 2017;48:174-179.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  6. Lovegrove RE, Heriot AG, Constantinides V, et al. Meta-analysis of short-term and long-term outcomes of J, W and S ileal reservoirs for restorative proctocolectomy. Colorectal Dis 2007;9:310-320.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  7. Zhang Y, Hu H, Jiang C, Qian Q, Ding Z. D-pouch: a modified ileal J-pouch for patients with ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis. Tech Coloproctol 2021;25:1209-1215.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  8. Simillis C, Afxentiou T, Pellino G, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing adverse events and functional outcomes of different pouch designs after restorative proctocolectomy. Colorectal Dis 2018;20:664-675.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  9. Shen B, Remzi FH, Lavery IC, Lashner BA, Fazio VW. A proposed classification of ileal pouch disorders and associated complications after restorative proctocolectomy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008;6:145-158.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  10. Coffey JC, Winter DC, Neary P, Murphy A, Redmond HP, Kirwan WO. Quality of life after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: an evaluation of diet and other factors using the Cleveland Global Quality of Life instrument. Dis Colon Rectum 2002;45:30-38.
  11. Skala K, Gervaz P, Buchs N, et al. Risk factors for mortality-morbidity after emergency-urgent colorectal surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis 2009;24:311-316.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  12. Aga Z, Machina M, McCluskey SA. Greater intravenous fluid volumes are associated with prolonged recovery after colorectal surgery: a retrospective cohort study. Br J Anaesth 2016;116:804-810.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  13. Frese JP, Gröne J, Lauscher JC, et al. Inflammation of the rectal remnant endangers the outcome of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: a case-control study. Int J Colorectal Dis 2022;37:1647-1655.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  14. Carmon E, Keidar A, Ravid A, Goldman G, Rabau M. The correlation between quality of life and functional outcome in ulcerative colitis patients after proctocolectomy ileal pouch anal anastomosis. Colorectal Dis 2003;5:228-232.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  15. Delaney CP, Fazio VW, Remzi FH, et al. Prospective, age-related analysis of surgical results, functional outcome, and quality of life after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Ann Surg 2003;238:221-228.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  16. Farouk R, Pemberton JH, Wolff BG, Dozois RR, Browning S, Larson D. Functional outcomes after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for chronic ulcerative colitis. Ann Surg 2000;231:919-926.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  17. Cai Z, He X, Gong J, et al. Laparoscopic surgery contributes to a decrease in short-term complications in surgical ulcerative colitis patients during 2008-2017: a multicenter retrospective study in China. Intest Res 2023;21:235-243.
    KoreaMed CrossRef
  18. Shibata C, Funayama Y, Fukushima K, et al. Factors affecting the bowel function after proctocolectomy and ileal J pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis. J Gastrointest Surg 2006;10:1065-1071.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  19. Selvaggi F, Giuliani A, Gallo C, Signoriello G, Riegler G, Canonico S. Randomized, controlled trial to compare the J-pouch and W-pouch configurations for ulcerative colitis in the maturation period. Dis Colon Rectum 2000;43:615-620.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  20. Hatakeyama K, Yamai K, Muto T. Evaluation of ileal W pouch-anal anastomosis for restorative proctocolectomy. Int J Colorectal Dis 1989;4:150-155.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  21. Sagar PM, Holdsworth PJ, Godwin PG, Quirke P, Smith AN, Johnston D. Comparison of triplicated (S) and quadruplicated (W) pelvic ileal reservoirs: studies on manovolumetry, fecal bacteriology, fecal volatile fatty acids, mucosal morphology, and functional results. Gastroenterology 1992;102:520-528.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  22. Miratashi Yazdi SA, Fazeli MS, Ahmadi Amoli H, Rahimpour E, Behboudi B. Functional and quality of life outcomes after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in short versus long ileal J-pouch configuration in ulcerative colitis patients: a cohort study. Updates Surg 2020;72:827-833.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  23. Vavricka SR, Schoepfer A, Scharl M, Lakatos PL, Navarini A, Rogler G. Extraintestinal manifestations of inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2015;21:1982-1992.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  24. Penna C, Dozois R, Tremaine W, et al. Pouchitis after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis occurs with increased frequency in patients with associated primary sclerosing cholangitis. Gut 1996;38:234-239.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  25. Shen B, Fazio VW, Remzi FH, et al. Risk factors for diseases of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis after restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006;4:81-89.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  26. Achkar JP, Al-Haddad M, Lashner B, et al. Differentiating risk factors for acute and chronic pouchitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2005;3:60-66.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  27. Xu W, Tang W, Ding W, et al. Preoperative endoscopic activity predicts the occurrence of pouchitis after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in ulcerative colitis: a multicenter retrospective study in China. Front Surg 2021;8:740349.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  28. McLaughlin SD, Clark SK, Tekkis PP, Nicholls RJ, Ciclitira PJ. The bacterial pathogenesis and treatment of pouchitis. Therap Adv Gastroenterol 2010;3:335-348.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  29. Shen B. Bacteriology in the etiopathogenesis of pouchitis. Dig Dis 2012;30:351-357.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  30. Angriman I, Scarpa M, Castagliuolo I. Relationship between pouch microbiota and pouchitis following restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis. World J Gastroenterol 2014;20:9665-9674.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  31. Sinha SR, Haileselassie Y, Nguyen LP, et al. Dysbiosis-induced secondary bile acid deficiency promotes intestinal inflammation. Cell Host Microbe 2020;27:659-670.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  32. Li Y, Xia S, Jiang X, et al. Gut microbiota and diarrhea: an updated review. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2021;11:625210.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  33. LeBlanc JF, Segal JP, de Campos Braz LM, Hart AL. The microbiome as a therapy in pouchitis and ulcerative colitis. Nutrients 2021;13:1780.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  34. Anbazhagan AN, Priyamvada S, Alrefai WA, Dudeja PK. Pathophysiology of IBD associated diarrhea. Tissue Barriers 2018;6:e1463897.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
Gut and Liver

Vol.18 No.2
March, 2024

pISSN 1976-2283
eISSN 2005-1212

qrcode
qrcode

Share this article on :

  • line

Popular Keywords

Gut and LiverQR code Download
qr-code

Editorial Office