FACTORS AFFECTING ANAL CONTINENCE AFTER RESTORATIVE PROCTOCOLECTOMY

被引：16

作者：

PESCATORI, M

MATTANA, C

机构：

[1] Institute of Clinical Surgery, Universita Cattolica, Roma

[2] Clinica Chirurgica, UCSC Policlinico Gemelli, Roma, I-00168

来源：

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COLORECTAL DISEASE | 1990年 / 5卷 / 04期

关键词：

D O I：

10.1007/BF00303279

中图分类号：

R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];

学科分类号：

摘要：

The aim of this multicentre study was to define the incidence of disordered continence after restorative proctocolectomy and ileoanal reservoir with respect to some factors which may influence the postoperative soiling rate. Two hundred and seven patients underwent the operation, 156 had their ileostomy closed and were all available for a functional assessment. Minor leakage was observed in 26.9% of cases, whereas 1.9% complained of troublesome faecal soiling. None had gross faecal incontinence. Patients over 45 years had significantly more soiling than those younger (45% vs 24%, p < 0.05). Soiling was more prevalent in those with ulcerative colitis than with other diseases (35% vs 18% p < 0.05). The soiling rate decreased after the first postoperative year from 34% to 21% (p < 0.05). A bowel frequency higher than 5 evacuations/24 hours increased soiling from 20% to 48% (p < 0.01). Pouchitis doubled the soiling rate from 26% to 50% (p < 0.05) without there being any difference in sphincter function. Soiling was not significantly related to staged procedure, J-pouch, perineal complications or a long rectal cuff. Careful preoperative evaluation of the anal sphincter should be performed in older patients operated on for colitis as they are likely to leak during the first year following restorative proctocolectomy, especially in cases with diarrhoea or pouchitis.

引用

页码：213 / 218

页数：6

共 26 条

[1]

Keighley B., Yoshioka K., Kmiot W., Heyen F., Physiological parameters influencing function in restorative proctocolectomy, Br J Surg, 75, pp. 997-1002, (1988)

[2]

Pezim M.E., Pemberton J.M., Beart R.W., Wolff B.G., Dozois R.R., Nivatvongs S., Devine R., Ilstrup D., Outcome of “indeterminant” colitis following ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: a technique to avoid mucosal proctectomy in the ileal pouch operation, Br J Surg, 73, pp. 653-658, (1986)

[3]

Keighley B., Abdominal mucosectomy reduces the incidence of soiling and sphincter damage after restorative proctocolectomy and J pouch, Dis Colon Rectum, 30, pp. 386-390, (1987)

[4]

Heald R.J., Allen D.R., Stapled ileoanal anastomosis: a technique to avoid mucosal proctectomy in the ileal pouch operation, Br J Surg, 73, pp. 571-572, (1986)

[5]

Nicholls R.J., Lubowski D.J., Restorative proctocolectomy: the four loop reservoir, Br J Surg, 74, pp. 564-566, (1987)

[6]

Pescatori M., A modified three-loop ileoanal reservoir, Dis Colon Rectum, 31, pp. 823-824, (1988)

[7]

Keighley B., Yoshioka K., Kmiot W., Prospective randomized trial to compare the stapled double lumen pouch and the sutured quadruple pouch for restorative proctocolectomy, Br J Surg, 75, pp. 1008-1011, (1988)

[8]

Utsunomiya J., Iwama T., Imago M., Matsuo S., Sawai S., Yaegashi K., Hirayama R., Total colectomy, mucosal proctectomy and ileoanal anastomosis, Dis Colon Rectum, 23, pp. 459-466, (1980)

[9]

Parks A.G., Nicholls R.J., Proctocolectomy without ileostomy for ulcerative colitis, Br Med J, 2, pp. 85-88, (1978)

[10]

Fonkalsrud E.W., Total colectomy and endorectal ileal pull-through with internal ileal reservoir for ulcerative colitis, Surg Gynecol Obstet, 150, pp. 1-8, (1980)

← 1 2 3 →