Small Bowel Obstruction Following Restorative Proctocolectomy: Affected by a Laparoscopic Approach?

• Published in: The Journal of surgical research 2011-10, Vol.170 (2), p.202-208
• Main Authors: Dolejs, Scott, B.S.E, Kennedy, Greg, M.D., Ph.D, Heise, Charles P., M.D
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Biological and medical sciences; Chronic Disease; Colitis, Ulcerative - epidemiology; Colitis, Ulcerative - surgery; Databases, Factual - statistics & numerical data; Female; Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen; General aspects; Humans; ileal pouch; Incidence; Intestinal Obstruction - epidemiology; IPAA; Laparoscopy - adverse effects; Laparoscopy - statistics & numerical data; Male; Medical sciences; Middle Aged; Other diseases. Semiology; Postoperative Complications - epidemiology; proctocolectomy; Proctocolectomy, Restorative - adverse effects; Proctocolectomy, Restorative - methods; Proctocolectomy, Restorative - statistics & numerical data; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors; small bowel obstruction; Stomach, duodenum, intestine, rectum, anus; Stomach. Duodenum. Small intestine. Colon. Rectum. Anus; Surgery; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases; Surgery of the digestive system; Time Factors; Young Adult
• ISSN: 0022-4804; 1095-8673
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2011.03.004

Background Total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the gold standard surgical treatment for chronic ulcerative colitis. More recently, this procedure is being performed laparoscopically assisted. Postoperatively, small bowel obstruction (SBO) is one of the more common associated complications. However, it is unknown whether the addition of a laparoscopic approach has changed this risk. This study aims to assess and compare the incidence of SBOs after both open and laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy. Methods All subjects who underwent restorative proctocolectomy from 1998–2008 were identified from a prospective Colorectal Surgery Database. Medical records were reviewed for all cases of SBO, confirmed by a combination of clinical symptoms and radiologic evidence. Comparisons were made between laparoscopic and open approaches. The incidence of SBO was also subdivided into pre-ileostomy takedown, early post-ileostomy takedown (30 d post), and late post-ileostomy takedown (30 d to 1 y post). Several potential risk factors were also evaluated. Statistical analysis was performed utilizing Fisher’s exact (for incidence) or t-tests (for means). Significance was defined as P < 0.05 Results A total of 290 open cases and 100 laparoscopic cases were identified during this time period. The overall incidence of SBO at 1 y post-ileostomy takedown was 14% ( n = 42) in the open group and 16% ( n  = 16) laparoscopic ( P = NS). In the pre-ileostomy takedown period the incidence of SBO was 7% ( n  = 21) open and 13% ( n = 13) laparoscopic ( P = NS). While in the post-takedown period, the early incidence was 4% ( n = 12) open and 1% ( n = 1) laparoscopic and late incidence was 3% ( n = 9) open and 2% ( n = 2) laparoscopic ( P = NS). Factors associated with an increased risk of SBO include coronary artery disease, prior appendectomy and W and J pouch configurations. Conclusions The burden of postoperative small bowel obstruction after restorative proctocolectomy is not changed with a laparoscopic approach. Most cases occur in the early postoperative period, especially prior to ileostomy reversal.