source: Langenbeck's archives of surgery/Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Chirurgie
authors: Petra Ganschow, Irmgard Treiber, Ulf Hinz, Christine Leowardi, Martina Kadmon, Markus W. Büchler summary/abstract:
INTRODUCTION : Restorative proctocolectomy has become the standard surgical procedure for familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) patients. The use of stapler devices has initiated a controversial discussion concerning the ileal pouch-anal reconstruction. Some authors advocate a handsewn anastomosis after transanal mucosectomy. A double-stapled anastomosis leads to better functional results but seems to bear a higher risk of residual rectal mucosa with dysplasia and adenomas. The present study systematically analyses the rate of residual rectal mucosa after restorative proctocolectomy and handsewn vs. stapled anastomosis.
PATIENTS AND METHODS : One hundred FAP patients after restorative proctocolectomy undergoing regular follow-up at our outpatient clinic were included in the study. Proctoscopy with standardised biopsy sampling was performed.
RESULTS : Of the 100 patients, 50 had undergone a stapled and 50 a handsewn anastomosis. Median follow-up was 146.1 months (handsewn) vs. 44.8 months (stapled) (P < 0.0001). Eighty-seven patients received a proctoscopy with standardised biopsy sampling. Thirteen patients had been diagnosed with residual rectal mucosa before. Sixty-three patients (63 %) showed remaining rectal mucosa (42 (66.6 %) stapler, 21 (33.3 %) handsewn, P < 0.0001). Patients after stapled anastomosis had higher rates of circular rectal mucosa seams, while small mucosa islets predominated in the handsewn group. The rate of rectal adenomas was significantly higher in the stapler group (21 vs. 10, P = 0.02).
CONCLUSION : Rectal mucosa, especially wide mucosa seams, as well as rectal adenomas are found significantly more often after a stapled than after a handsewn anastomosis. As the follow-up interval in the stapler group was significantly shorter, the impact of these findings may still be underestimated.organization:
University of Heidelberg DOI:
10.1007/s00423-014-1263-x read more full text source