English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Background Long-term outcomes data after modified 2-stage ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA), defined as completion proctectomy (CP) and IPAA without loop ileostomy, is lacking. We aimed to describe long-term functional results, patient satisfaction, and pouch survival in a cohort of patients from a high-volume center. We hypothesized selective m2-stage can result in comparable long-term pouch survival relative to a 3-stage approach. Methods Our institutional ileal pouch database was retrospectively reviewed to identify patients who underwent index IPAA surgery from 1983–2019. Adults &amp;gt;18 years of age who underwent CP with IPAA were included. At our specialized institution, m2-stage is performed selectively based on surgeon judgement. Patients were stratified into 2 groups (3-stage vs m2-stage) and matched on a 1:1 basis based on age ±5, year of operation ±3, gender, preoperative diagnosis, double-stapled vs handsewn, and laparoscopy. Primary outcome was pouch survival, with pouch failure defined as permanent diversion, pouch excision, or conversion to a Kock pouch. Results In total, 2,433 patients were included, of whom 2,198 (90.3%) underwent 3-stage IPAA and 235 (9.7%) m2-stage IPAA. Matching resulted in 223 matched pairs, and long-term pouch survival (95.5% vs 93.2%, p=0.32) did not significantly differ (Figure 1). Short-term outcomes in the matched pairs revealed a shorter postoperative length of stay in the 3-stage patients (5 vs 8 days, p&amp;lt;0.001), but no significant difference in postoperative complications (12.1% vs 17%, p=0.09) was seen between the matched 3-stage and m2-stage patients, respectively. Functionally, there was no difference in the number of stools/24 hours (7 vs 7, p=0.33) or in proportion of patients requiring seepage protection at night (29.7% vs 24.6%, p=0.31). However, 3-stage patients required significantly more seepage protection during the day (25.1% vs 15.0%, p=0.02). Regarding pouchitis, there was no difference in the proportion of patients reporting recent symptoms (33.4% vs 33.3%, p=1.0), episodes in the last year (0 vs 0, p=0.51), or pouchitis requiring continuous medication (16.7% vs 10.1%, p=0.10). Patient satisfaction was similar as no difference in the proportion of those who would have surgery again (90.4% vs 93.7%, p=0.34), those who would recommend surgery (94% vs 95.5%, p=0.68), or overall patient satisfaction with surgery on a scale of 1 – 10 (highest) (3 vs 7, p=0.07) was reported. Figure 1: Kaplan-Meier curve for pouch survival (matched pairs) Conclusion Long-term outcomes were similar in patients who underwent modified 2-stage and 3-stage IPAA. Modified 2-stage IPAA is an alternative for selected patients with limited options if performed at high-volume centers in experienced hands.

journal of crohn's and colitis

OP13 Modified 2-stage vs. 3-stage ileal pouch-anal anastomosis result in equivalent long-term functional outcomes and pouch survival: A matched-pair analysis