Possible overuse of 3-stage procedures for active ulcerative colitis

JAMA Surg. 2013 Jul;148(7):658-64. doi: 10.1001/2013.jamasurg.325.

Abstract

Importance: There is an assumption that patients treated with 3-stage procedures for active ulcerative colitis are undergoing a safer surgical approach and thus spared the complications associated with a 2-stage procedure. However, there is a paucity of data addressing the validity of this assumption, and the optimal staging approach for patients traditionally considered at high risk for anastomotic leak remains unclear.

Objectives: To identify factors associated with 3- vs 2-stage procedures and to determine their impact on surgical outcomes.

Design: Retrospective analysis of patients who underwent 2-stage or 3-stage ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) surgery for active ulcerative colitis due to failure of medical management over a 10.5-year period (September 1, 2000, to March 30, 2011). The mean (SEM) follow-up was 5.15 (0.24) years (range, 0.26-11.09 years).

Setting: Single large academic medical center.

Patients: One hundred forty-four patients treated with 3- or 2-stage IPAA surgery for active ulcerative colitis. Among these patients, 77 were male and 67 were female. The mean (SEM) age was 34.6 (1.0) years (range, 11-67 years). Of the 144 patients, 116 (80.6%) had a 2-stage procedure and 28 (19.4%) had a 3-stage procedure.

Interventions: Two-stage vs 3-stage IPAA procedures for active ulcerative colitis.

Main outcomes and measures: Factors leading to decision for 3-stage procedure, postoperative outcomes with 3-stage vs 2-stage procedures, and risks for complications in patients undergoing 3-stage vs 2-stage procedures. RESULTS Of 144 patients, only 19.4% had a 3-stage procedure. Decision to perform a 3-stage vs 2-stage procedure was affected by emergent status (P < .001) and hemodynamic instability (P = .04) but not by age, sex, body mass index, use of steroids, or use of anti-tumor necrosis factor agents. For patients with 2-stage procedures, multivariate regression revealed that the number of perioperative complications was affected by surgeon experience (P = .02) but not by emergent status, use of steroids, or use of anti-tumor necrosis factor agents. Two-stage procedures were associated with more perioperative complications on univariate analysis (P = .05), but multivariate regression suggested that this difference was due to surgeon experience (P = .02) rather than to creation of an IPAA at the first operation (P = .55). Importantly, 2-stage procedures did not change the risk of anastomotic leak when all operations were taken into account (odds ratio = 1.09; P = .94). In the long term (mean [SEM], 5.2 [0.2] years), patients who underwent 2-stage surgery had a lower risk of anal stricture (odds ratio = 8.21; P = .01) and no differences in fistula or abscess formation or in pouch failure.

Conclusions and relevance: In patients with active ulcerative colitis, use of steroids and anti-tumor necrosis factor agents alone do not appear to justify the decision to avoid IPAA creation at the first operation provided that it is performed by a high-volume inflammatory bowel disease surgeon.

MeSH terms

  • Adolescent
  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Anastomosis, Surgical
  • Child
  • Colitis, Ulcerative / surgery*
  • Colonic Pouches*
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Multivariate Analysis
  • Proctocolectomy, Restorative / methods*
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Young Adult