The Effect on Morbidity of Mesentery Lengthening Techniques and the Use of a Covering Stoma After Ileoanal Pouch Surgery

PURPOSE: METHODS: RESULTS:In one patient a restorative proctocolectomy was not possible. The remaining 220 patients were divided into two groupsGroup A (inflammatory bowel disease; n = 123) and Group B (noninflammatory bowel disease; n = 97). Sixty-nine patients (31.4 percent) had major comorbiditie...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Diseases of the colon & rectum 2006-05, Vol.49 (5), p.621-628
Hauptverfasser: Araki, Toshimitsu, Parc, Yann, Lefevre, Jérémie, Dehni, Nidal, Tiret, Emmanuel, Parc, Rolland
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:PURPOSE: METHODS: RESULTS:In one patient a restorative proctocolectomy was not possible. The remaining 220 patients were divided into two groupsGroup A (inflammatory bowel disease; n = 123) and Group B (noninflammatory bowel disease; n = 97). Sixty-nine patients (31.4 percent) had major comorbidities. A lengthening technique was performed in 120 patients (54.5 percent) by dividing the ileocecal artery (n = 37) or the superior mesenteric artery (n = 88); 5 patients had only the marginal vascular arcade preserved. An ileostomy was not required in 116 patients (52.7 percent). In multivariate analysis, in Group B the only surgical variable influencing the need for an ileostomy was preservation of the marginal vascular arcade (50 vs. 14.7 percent; P < 0.0005). Complications occurred in 41 patients (18.6 percent), more frequently for those in GroupA and for patients receiving steroids (23.6 vs. 12.4 percent, P = 0.012; 10.4 vs. 6.8 percent, P = 0.0172). CONCLUSIONS:
ISSN:0012-3706
1530-0358
DOI:10.1007/s10350-005-0322-3