Routine diversion following delayed IPAA construction does not reduce the incidence of pouch‐related sepsis or failure in patients with ulcerative colitis

Abstract

AbstractAimThe aim of this study was to compare modified 2‐stage and 3‐stage IPAA construction techniques to evaluate the effect of diverting loop ileostomy following completion proctectomy and IPAA for ulcerative colitis. In addition, our overall institutional experience was reviewed to describe long‐term outcomes and changes in staging trends over time.MethodsOur institutional database was searched to identify all cases of IPAA for ulcerative colitis between 1981 and 2018. Patient, pouch and outcome characteristics were abstracted. Primary study outcomes were the incidence of primary pouch failure and pouch‐related sepsis. Failure was evaluated by Kaplan–Meier estimates of survival over time. The adjusted effect of pouch stage was evaluated using multivariable Cox and logistic regression models. Exploratory analysis evaluated the effect of stage on failure in the pouch related sepsis subgroup.ResultsA total of 2105 patients underwent primary IPAA over the study period. The 5, 10 and 20‐year pouch survival probabilities were 95.2%, 92.7% and 86.6%. The incidence of pouch related sepsis was 12.3%. Adjusted analysis demonstrated no difference in pouch failure (HR = 0.64: 95% 0.39–1.07, p = 0.09) or post‐operative sepsis (aOR = 0.79: 95% CI 0.53–1.17, p = 0.24) by stage of construction. Among patients experiencing pouch sepsis, there was no difference in Kaplan–Meier estimates of pouch survival by stage (p = 0.90).ConclusionsPouch related sepsis and IPAA failure did not differ between modified 2‐stage and 3‐stage construction techniques. Among the sub‐group of patients experiencing pouch related sepsis, there was no difference in failure between groups. The results suggest diverting ileostomy may be safely avoided following delayed pouch reconstruction in appropriately selected patients.