• R Parc, M Legrand, P Frileux, E Tiret, and R Ratelle.
• Department of Surgery, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Paris, France.
• Hepato Gastroenterol. 1989 Aug 1; 36 (4): 235-9.

AbstractThe aim of the study was to compare the results of ileal-pouch anal anastomosis (IAA) and total abdominal colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) in the treatment of ulcerative colitis. The number of patients included in the comparative trial was 104 (IAA) and 197 (IRA), respectively. No clear advantage of IRA over IAA was seen: postoperative mortality and morbidity were about the same; functional results as shown by the frequency of stools and daytime continence were virtually equal. A factor favoring IAA was, among others, recurrence of proctitis after IRA which is more difficult to treat than the pouchitis occurring after IAA and is associated with a higher rate of secondary permanent end ileostomy; besides, IRA entails the risk of cancer developing in the rectal stump, while at the same time it is difficult to follow up these patients closely enough. IRA is indicated only if the diagnosis of ulcerative colitis is in doubt; if the patient is more than 60 years of age; and if IAA proves technically too difficult, IAA is usually preferable, however, if there is any doubt as to whether the patient is suffering from ulcerative colitis or Crohn's disease, ileorectostomy is preferred which does not preclude IAA at a later date in case of need.

10 keywords...

hide…