Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Residual rectal mucosa after stapled vs. handsewn ileal J-pouch-anal anastomosis in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis coli (FAP)—a critical issue

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Restorative proctocolectomy has become the standard surgical procedure for familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) patients. The use of stapler devices has initiated a controversial discussion concerning the ileal pouch-anal reconstruction. Some authors advocate a handsewn anastomosis after transanal mucosectomy. A double-stapled anastomosis leads to better functional results but seems to bear a higher risk of residual rectal mucosa with dysplasia and adenomas. The present study systematically analyses the rate of residual rectal mucosa after restorative proctocolectomy and handsewn vs. stapled anastomosis.

Patients and methods

One hundred FAP patients after restorative proctocolectomy undergoing regular follow-up at our outpatient clinic were included in the study. Proctoscopy with standardised biopsy sampling was performed.

Results

Of the 100 patients, 50 had undergone a stapled and 50 a handsewn anastomosis. Median follow-up was 146.1 months (handsewn) vs. 44.8 months (stapled) (P < 0.0001). Eighty-seven patients received a proctoscopy with standardised biopsy sampling. Thirteen patients had been diagnosed with residual rectal mucosa before. Sixty-three patients (63 %) showed remaining rectal mucosa (42 (66.6 %) stapler, 21 (33.3 %) handsewn, P < 0.0001). Patients after stapled anastomosis had higher rates of circular rectal mucosa seams, while small mucosa islets predominated in the handsewn group. The rate of rectal adenomas was significantly higher in the stapler group (21 vs. 10, P = 0.02).

Conclusion

Rectal mucosa, especially wide mucosa seams, as well as rectal adenomas are found significantly more often after a stapled than after a handsewn anastomosis. As the follow-up interval in the stapler group was significantly shorter, the impact of these findings may still be underestimated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bodmer WF, Bailey CJ, Bodmer J, Bussey HJR, Ellis A, Gorman P, Lucibello C, Murda VA, Rider SH, Scambler P, Sheer D, Solomon R, Spurr K (1987) Localization of the gene for familial adenomatous polyposis on chromosome 5. Nature 328:614–616

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Groden J, Thliveris A, Samowitz W, Carlson M, Gelbert L, Albertsen H, Joslyn G, Stevens J, Spirio L, Robertson M, Sargeant L, Krapcho K, Wolff E, Burt R, Hughes JP, Warrington J, McPherson J, Wasmuth J, Le Paslier D, Abderrahim H, Cohen D, Leppert M, White R (1991) Identification and characterization of the familial adenomatous polyposis coli gene. Cell 66:589–600

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Joslyn G, Carlson M, Thliveris A, Albertsen H, Gelbert L, Samowitz W, Groden J, Stevens J, Spirio L, Robertson M, Sargeant L, Krapcho K, Wolff E, Burt R, Hughes JP, Warrington J, McPherson J, Wasmuth J, Le Paslier D, Abderrahim H, Cohen D, Leppert MM, White R (1991) Identification of deletion mutations and three new genes at the familial polyposis locus. Cell 66:601–613

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bülow S (2003) Results of national registration of familial adenomatous polyposis. Gut 52:742–746

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kadmon M (2005) Prophylactic surgery for patients with familial adenomatous polyposis coli. Chirurg 76:1125–1134

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kartheuser A, Stangherlin P, Brandt D, Remue C, Sempoux C (2006) Restorative proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis revisited. Fam Cancer 5:241–260

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Vasen HF, Möslein G, Alonso A, Aretz S, Bernstein I, Bertario L, Blanco I, Bülow S, Burn J, Capella G, Colas C, Engel C, Frayling I, Friedl W, Hes FJ, Hodgson S, Järvinen H, Mecklin JP, Møller P, Myrhøi T, Nagengast FM, Parc Y, Phillips R, Clark SK, de Leon MP, Renkonen-Sinisalo L, Sampson JR, Stormorken A, Tejpar S, Thomas HJ, Wijnen J (2008) Guidelines for the clinical management of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Gut 57:704–713

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Parks AG, Nicholls RJ (1978) Proctocolectomy without ileostomy for ulcerative colitis. Br Med J 2:85–88

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Heuschen UA, Heuschen G, Herfarth C (1999) Der ileoanale Pouch als Rectumersatz. Chirurg 70:530–542

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Utsunomiya J, Iwama T, Imajo J, MAtsuo S, Sawai S, Yaegashi K, Hirayama R (1980) Total colectomy, mucosal proctectomy, and ileoanal anastomosis. Dis Colon Rectum 23:459–466

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Heald RJ, Allen DR (1986) Stapled ileo-anal anastomosis: a technique to avoid mucosal proctectomy in the ileal pouch operation. Br J Surg 73:571–572

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Reilly WT, Pemberton JH, Wolff BG, Nivatvongs S, Devine RM, Litchy WJ, McIntyre PB (1997) Randomized prospective trial comparing ileal pouch-anal anastomosis performed by excising the anal mucosa to ileal pouch-anal anastomosis performed by preserving the anal mucosa. Ann Surg 225:666–677

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kirat HT, Remzi FH, Kiran RP, Fazio VW (2009) Comparison of outcomes after hand-sewn versus stapled ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in 3,109 patients. Surgery 146:723–730

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gozzetti G, Poggioli G, Marchetti F, Laureti S, Grazi GL, Mastrorilli M, Selleri S, Stocchi L, Di Simone M (1994) Functional outcome in handsewn versus stapled ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Am J Surg 168:325–329

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gecim IE, Wolff BG, Pemberton JH, Devine RM, Dozois RR (2000) Does technique of anastomosis play any role in developing late perianal abscess or fistula? Dis Colon Rectum 43:1241–1245

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lewis LG, Kuzu A, Sagar PM, Holdswirth PJ, Johnston D (1994) Stricture at the pouch-anal anastomosis after restorative proctocolectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 37:120–125

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Fazio VW, Ziv Y, Church JM, Oakley JR, Lavery IC, Schroeder TK (1995) Ileal pouch-anal anastomoses, complications and function in 1005 patients. Ann Surg 222:120–127

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gemlo BT, Belmonte C, Wiltz O, Madoff RD (1995) Functional assessment of ileal pouch-anal anastomotic techniques. Am J Surg 169:137142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lovegrove RE, Constantinides VA, Heriot AG, Athanasiou T, Darzi A, Remzi FH, Nicholls RH, Fazio VW, Tekkis PP (2006) A comparison of hand-sewn versus stapled ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) following proctocolectomy. A meta-analysis of 4183 patients. Ann Surg 1:18–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Smith JC, Schäffer MW, Ballard BR, Smoot DT, Herline AJ, Adunyah SE, M’Koma AE (2013) Adenocarcinomas after prophylactic surgery for familial adenomatous polyposis. J Cancer Ther 4(1):260–70

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Remzi FH, Church JM, Bast J, Lavery IC, Strong SA, Hull TL, Harris GJC, Delaney CP, O’Riordain MG, McGannon EA, Fazio VW (2001) Mucosectomy vs. stapled ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. Dis Colon Rectum 44:1590–1596

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Tsunoda A, Talbot IC, Nicholls RJ (1990) Incidence of dysplasia in the anorectal mucosa in patients having restorative proctocolectomy. Br J Surg 77:506–508

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Thompson-Fawcett MW, Mortensen NJ (1996) Anal transitional zone and columnar cuff in restorative proctocolectomy. Br J Surg 83:1047–1055

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Dozios RR, Kelly KA, Welling DR, Gordon H, Beart RW, Wolff BG, Pemberton JH, Ilstrup DM (1989) Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: comparison of results in familial adenomatous polyposis and chronic ulcerative colitis. Ann Surg 210:268–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Becker JM, Stucchi AF (2004) Proctocolectomy with ileoanal anastomosis. J Gastrointest Surg 8:376–386

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Duff SE, O’Dwyer ST, Hultén L, Willén R, Haboubi NY (2002) Dysplasia in the ileoanal pouch. Colroectal Dis 4:420–429

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. O’Connell PR, Pemberton JH, Weiland LH, Beart RW Jr, Dozios RR, Wolff BG, Telander RL (1987) Does rectal mucosa regenerate after ileoanal anastomosis? Dis Colon Rectum 30:1–5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. van Duijvendijk P, Vasen HFA, Bertario L, Bülow S, Kuijpers JHC, Schouten WR, Guillem JG, Taat CW, Slors JFM (1999) Cumulative risk of developing polyps or malignancy at the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. J Gastrointest Surg 3:325–330

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. von Roon AC, Will OCC, Man RF, Ripple F, Neale KF, Philips RKS, Nicholls RJ, Clark SK, Tekkis PP (2011) Mucosectomy with handsewn anastomosis reduces the risk of adenoma formation in the anorectal segment after restorative proctocolectomy for familial adenomatous polyposis. Ann Surg 253(2):314–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Möslein G, Buhr HJ, Kadmon M, Herfarth C (1992) Familial adenomatous polyposis. Initial experiences with the Heidelberg Polyposis Register. Chirurg 63:327–333

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Ahmed AU, Keus F, Heikens JT, Bemelman WA, Berdah SV, Gooszen HG, van Laarhoven CJHM. Open versus laparoscopic (assisted) ileo pouch anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis (review). The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 1

  32. Ng SSM, Lee JFY, Yiu RY, Li JC, Hon SS, Mak TW, Leung WW, Leung KL (2013) Oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer: a pooled analysis of 3 randomized controlled trials. Ann Surg 00:1–9

    Google Scholar 

  33. Lujan J, Valero G, Biondo S, Espin E, Pamilla P, Ortiz H (2013) Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer: results of a prospective multicentre analysis of 4,970 patients. Surg Endosc 27:295–302

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Breukink S, Pierie JP, Wiggers T. Laparoscopic versus open total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer (review). The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 4

  35. Heppel J, Weiland LH, Perault J, Pemberton JH, Telander RL, Beart RW Jr (1983) Fate of the rectal mucosa after rectal mucosectomy and ileoanal anastomosis. Dis Colon Rectum 26:768–771

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Deen KI, Hubscher S, Bain I, Patel R, Keighly MR (1994) Histological assessment of the distal “doughnut” in patients undergoing stapled restorative proctocolectomy with high or low anal transaction. Br J Surg 81:900–903

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Slors JF, Ponson AE, Taat CW, Bosma A (1995) Risk of residual rectal mucosa after proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal reconstruction with the double-stapling technique. Postoperative endoscopic follow-up study. Dis Colon Rectum 38:207–210

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Remzi FH, Fazio VW, Delaney CP, Preen M, Ormsby A, Bast J, O’Riordain MG, Strong SA, Church JM, Petra RE, Gramlich T, Lavery IC (2003) Dysplasia of the anal transitional zone after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Results of prospective evaluation after a minimum of ten years. Dis Colon Rectum 46:6–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. von Herbay A, Stern J, Herfarth C (1996) Pouch-anal cancer after restorative proctocolectomy for familial adenomatous polyposis. Am J Surg Pathol 20:995–999

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ooi BS, Remzi FH, Gramlich T, Church JM, Preen M, Fazio VW (2000) Anal transitional zone cancer after restorative proctocolectomy and ileoanal anastomosis in familial adenomatous polyposis. Dis Colon Rectum 43:1660–1665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Ozdemir Y, Kalady MF, Aytac E, Kiran RP, Erem HH, Church JM, Remzi FH (2013) Anal transitional zone neoplasia in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis after restorative proctocolectomy and IPAA: incidence, management, and oncologic and functional outcomes. Dis Colon Rectum 56:808–14

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martina Kadmon.

Additional information

Petra Ganschow and Irmgard Treiber contributed equally to this manuscript.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ganschow, P., Treiber, I., Hinz, U. et al. Residual rectal mucosa after stapled vs. handsewn ileal J-pouch-anal anastomosis in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis coli (FAP)—a critical issue. Langenbecks Arch Surg 400, 213–219 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-014-1263-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-014-1263-x

Keywords

Navigation