Coloplasty in low colorectal anastomosis: Manometric and functional comparison with straight and colonic J-pouch anastomosis

PURPOSE:After resection of the distal rectum with a straight reanastomosis, poor bowel function can occur. This is felt to be because of the loss of the rectal reservoir. To overcome this, a neoreservoir using a colonic J-pouch has been advocated in low colorectal and coloanal anastomosis. However,...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Diseases of the colon & rectum 2001-01, Vol.44 (1), p.37-42
Hauptverfasser: Mantyh, Christopher R, Hull, Tracy L, Fazio, Victor W
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:PURPOSE:After resection of the distal rectum with a straight reanastomosis, poor bowel function can occur. This is felt to be because of the loss of the rectal reservoir. To overcome this, a neoreservoir using a colonic J-pouch has been advocated in low colorectal and coloanal anastomosis. However, difficulties in reach, inability to fit the pouch into a narrow pelvis, and postoperative evacuation problems can make the colonic J-pouch problematic. Coloplasty is a new technique that may overcome the poor bowel function seen in the straight anastomosis and the problems of the colonic J-pouch. The purpose of this study was to compare the functional results after a low colorectal anastomosis among patients receiving a coloplasty, colonic J-pouch, or straight anastomosis. METHODS:Twenty patients underwent construction of a coloplasty with a low colorectal anastomosis. Postoperative manometry and functional outcome of these patients was compared with a matched group of 16 patients who had a colonic J-pouch and low colorectal anastomosis and 17 patients who had a straight low colorectal anastomosis. RESULTS:Maximum tolerated volume was significantly favorable in the coloplasty (mean, 116.9 ml) and colonic J-pouch group (mean, 150 ml) vs. the straight anastomosis group (mean, 83.3; P
ISSN:0012-3706
1530-0358
DOI:10.1007/BF02234818