ArticleBJS open2024
Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis: 30-year analysis on surgical evolution and patient outcome.
Article in BJS open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Short- and long-term outcomes of IPAA for ulcerative colitis in Latin America: A retrospective, multicentre assessment.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2026Article
- Article
- Transformational journey in ileo-pouch anal anastomosis surgery for ulcerative colitis.BJS open · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is the treatment of choice for patients with ulcerative colitis with medical refractory disease or dysplasia. The aim of this research was to describe the evolution of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis surgery and surgical outcomes over a three-decade interval in a high-volume referral centre.
methodsAll consecutive patients undergoing ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis between 1990 and 2022 at the University Hospitals of Leuven were retrospectively included. Patients were divided into three interval arms (interval A 1990-2000, interval B 2001-2010 and interval C 2011-2022). The primary outcomes of interest were anastomotic leakage at 30 days and pouch failure.
resultsOverall, 492 patients were included. The use of preoperative advanced therapies increased over time (P < 0.001). An increase in laparoscopic procedures (23.2% in interval A, 66.4% in interval B, 86.0% in interval C; P < 0.001) and a shift towards delayed ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (colectomy-first approach with delayed ileal pouch-anal anastomosis construction: 23.0% in interval A, 40.9% in interval B, 85.8% in interval C; P < 0.001) were observed. Anastomotic leakage rate decreased from 16.7% (interval A) to 8.4% (interval C) (P = 0.04). Delayed ileal pouch-anal anastomosis was the most relevant factor in limiting leakage (OR 0.49 (95% c.i. 0.27 to 0.87); P = 0.016). Median follow-up was 7.5 years (interquartile range 2.5-16). Cumulative pouch failure incidence was 8.2%, not significantly different between the three intervals (P = 0.580). Anastomotic leakage was the only significant risk factor for pouch failure (HR 2.82 (95% c.i. 1.29 to 6.20); P = 0.010).
conclusionSignificant changes in the management of ulcerative colitis patients occurred. Despite the widespread use of advanced therapies and the expanded surgical indications, anastomotic leakage rate decreased over time. In the context of a delayed ileal pouch-anal anastomosis, diverting ileostomy could be avoided in selected cases. Anastomotic leakage remains the most relevant risk factor for pouch failure. Pouch failure incidence remained stable over the years.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.