Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Colectomy risk score predicts pouchitis in patients with ulcerative colitis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Updates in Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Risk stratification is required to improve the management of pouchitis with ulcerative colitis (UC) patients who undergo ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA). Recently, the colectomy risk score (CRS) has been used to assess UC severity and predict the need for surgery. We explored whether the CRS predicted pouchitis in patients with UC who underwent IPAA. This retrospective study included 168 UC patients who underwent IPAA. Pouchitis was diagnosed according to the pouchitis disease activity index. The primary endpoint was the cumulative incidence of pouchitis. The risk factors for pouchitis using preoperatively obtained data, including the CRS, were investigated. Based on their CRS, patients were assigned to low- (scores 0–3), intermediate- (scores 4–6), and high-risk (scores 7–9) groups. The incidence of pouchitis was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier curve. CRS validity was assessed using the Cox proportional hazards model. During the median 7.2 (interquartile range [IQR] 2.8–11.1) years’ follow-up, 37 (28.5%) patients were diagnosed with pouchitis. Patients with pouchitis had significantly higher CRS than patients without pouchitis (median 7.0; IQR, 4.0–7.0 vs median 5.0; IQR, 3.0–7.0). The cumulative incidences of pouchitis in the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups were 10.3%, 18.3%, and 36.1% at 5 years, respectively. Thus, the incidence trended to increase significantly as CRS increased. Multivariate analysis revealed high-risk CRS status was an independent predictor of pouchitis (hazard ratio: 18.03; 95% confidence interval 1.55–210.05). CRS is useful in risk stratification for the development of subsequent pouchitis in patients with UC undergoing IPAA.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

Due to the sensitive nature of the questions asked in this study, survey respondents were assured raw data would remain confidential and would not be shared.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Parks AG, Nicholls RJ (1978) Proctocolectomy without ileostomy for ulcerative colitis. Br Med J 2:85–88

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Hueting WE, Buskens E, van der Tweel I et al (2005) Results and complications after ileal pouch anal anastomosis: a meta-analysis of 43 observational studies comprising 9,317 patients. Dig Surg 22:69–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Muir AJ, Edwards LJ, Sanders LL et al (2001) A prospective evaluation of health-related quality of life after ileal pouch anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis. Am J Gastroenterol 96:1480–1485

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Meagher AP, Farouk R, Dozois RR et al (1998) J ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for chronic ulcerative colitis: complications and long-term outcome in 1310 patients. Br J Surg 85:800–803

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Fazio VW, Ziv Y, Church JM et al (1995) Ileal pouch-anal anastomoses complications and function in 1005 patients. Ann Surg 222:120–127

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Pardi DS, D’Haens G, Shen B et al (2009) Clinical guidelines for the management of pouchitis. Inflamm Bowel Dis 15:1424–1431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lohmuller JL, Pemberton JH, Dozois RR et al (1990) Pouchitis and extraintestinal manifestations of inflammatory bowel disease after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Ann Surg 211:622–627

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Shen B (2012) Acute and chronic pouchitis–pathogenesis, diagnosis and treatment. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 9:323–333

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Ananthakrishnan AN, McGinley EL, Binion DG, Saeian K (2010) Simple score to identify colectomy risk in ulcerative colitis hospitalizations. Inflamm Bowel Dis 16:1532–1540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lichtiger S, Present DH, Kornbluth A et al (1994) Cyclosporine in severe ulcerative colitis refractory to steroid therapy. N Engl J Med 330:1841–1845

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Herrlinger KR, Barthel DN, Schmidt KJ et al (2010) Infliximab as rescue medication for patients with severe ulcerative/indeterminate colitis refractory to tacrolimus. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 31:1036–1041

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sandborn WJ, Tremaine WJ, Batts KP et al (1994) Pouchitis after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: a Pouchitis Disease Activity Index. Mayo Clin Proc 69:409–415

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Fukushima T, Sugita A, Koganei K et al (2002) Staple-line ulcer in the ileal reservoir following restorative proctocolectomy. Surg Today 32:118–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lavery IC, Sirimarco MT, Ziv Y, Fazio VW (1995) Anal canal inflammation after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. The need for treatment. Dis Colon Rectum 38:803–806

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Barton JG, Paden MA, Lane M, Postier RG (2001) Comparison of postoperative outcomes in ulcerative colitis and familial polyposis patients after ileoanal pouch operations. Am J Surg 182:616–620

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Hata K, Yamamoto Y, Kiyomatsu T et al (2016) Hereditary gastrointestinal cancer. Surg Today 46:1115–1122

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Shen B, Lashner BA (2008) Diagnosis and treatment of pouchitis. Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y) 4:355–361

    Google Scholar 

  18. Barreiro-de Acosta M, Garcia-Bosch O, Souto R et al (2012) Efficacy of infliximab rescue therapy in patients with chronic refractory pouchitis: a multicenter study. Inflamm Bowel Dis 18:812–817

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Viazis N, Giakoumis M, Koukouratos T et al (2013) Long term benefit of one year infliximab administration for the treatment of chronic refractory pouchitis. J Crohns Colitis 7:e457-460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ritchie ML, Romanuk TN (2012) A meta-analysis of probiotic efficacy for gastrointestinal diseases. PLoS ONE 7:e34938

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Gionchetti P, Rizzello F, Helwig U et al (2003) Prophylaxis of pouchitis onset with probiotic therapy: a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Gastroenterology 124:1202–1209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Mimura T, Rizzello F, Helwig U et al (2004) Once daily high dose probiotic therapy (VSL#3) for maintaining remission in recurrent or refractory pouchitis. Gut 53:108–114

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Gosselink MP, Schouten WR, van Lieshout LM et al (2004) Delay of the first onset of pouchitis by oral intake of the probiotic strain Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG. Dis Colon Rectum 47:876–884

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Komanduri S, Gillevet PM, Sikaroodi M et al (2007) Dysbiosis in pouchitis: evidence of unique microfloral patterns in pouch inflammation. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 5:352–360

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Machiels K, Sabino J, Vandermosten L et al (2017) Specific members of the predominant gut microbiota predict pouchitis following colectomy and IPAA in UC. Gut 66:79–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Yamamoto T, Shimoyama T, Bamba T, Matsumoto K (2015) Consecutive monitoring of fecal calprotectin and lactoferrin for the early diagnosis and prediction of pouchitis after restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis. Am J Gastroenterol 110:881–887

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are indebted to Maruzen Co, Ltd (Tokyo, Japan) for their review of the present manuscript as native English speakers.

Funding

The authors state no grant support or financial relationships.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinano-machi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 1608582, Japan

    Akiyoshi Ikebata, Koji Okabayashi, Masashi Tsuruta, Kohei Shigeta, Ryo Seishima & Yuko Kitagawa

  2. Department of Pathology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan

    Masayuki Shimoda

  3. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan

    Makoto Naganuma

Authors
  1. Akiyoshi Ikebata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Koji Okabayashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Masashi Tsuruta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kohei Shigeta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ryo Seishima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Masayuki Shimoda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Makoto Naganuma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Yuko Kitagawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AI: conceptualization, methodology, software, writing-original draft. KO: conceptualization, methodology, data curation, supervision, writing—review & editing. MT: supervision. KS: data curation, supervision. RS: data curation, supervision. MS: formal analysis, data curation, visualization. MN: investigation, formal analysis, data curation. YK: project administration. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Koji Okabayashi.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethics approval

The study was approved by Keio university’s ethics committee (20150051).

Informed consent

All patients signed the institution informed consent for colorectal surgery. No specific consent for this type of study is required.

Consent for publication

Consent to submit the present paper has been received explicitly from all co-authors, as well as from Keio university’s ethics committee.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (PDF 181 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ikebata, A., Okabayashi, K., Tsuruta, M. et al. Colectomy risk score predicts pouchitis in patients with ulcerative colitis. Updates Surg 74, 649–655 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-021-01166-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-021-01166-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation