Predictors of pouch failure and quality of life following ileal pouch‐anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis: a retrospective multicenter study

Résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the causes of failure after the ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) procedure for ulcerative colitis (UC) and to determine the independent risk factors affecting their quality of life. METHODS: This multi-center cohort study included all UC patients who underwent IPAA at nine referral centers in Türkiye from 2010 to 2018. Centers were categorized as high-volume (≥10 cases/year) or low-volume (<10 cases/year). Outcomes assessed included postoperative complications, pouch failure, and QoL using the Cleveland Global Quality of Life (CGQL) and modified Oresland Score. Logistic and linear regression analyses were used to identify risk factors for pouch failure and QoL determinants, respectively. RESULTS: Of 296 patients included, pouches were constructed in 172 (58.1%) as a two-staged and in the remaining patients as a three-staged procedure. The high-volume center had higher rates of biologic (45.1% versus 16%) and steroid use (63.9% versus 22.1%). The overall pouch failure rate was 4.7% at the end of follow-up of 66.1 months. Independent risk factors for pouch failure included pelvic sepsis (OR = 47.47, P = 0.002), biologic use (OR = 13.45, P = 0.033), chronic pouchitis (OR = 14.31, P = 0.013), postoperative blood transfusion (OR = 7.04, P = 0.048), and low annual case volume (OR = 30.86, P = 0.047). CGQL and Oresland scores averaged 0.77 ± 0.1 and 6.3 ± 1.1, respectively. Factors negatively impacting QoL included two-staged procedures, small bowel obstruction, venous thromboembolism, chronic pouchitis, increased frequency of bowel movements, and low annual case volume. CONCLUSIONS: IPAA surgery in UC patients in Türkiye demonstrates acceptable rates of complications and pouch failure, with high patient satisfaction in terms of QoL and functional outcomes. Optimizing long-term results requires enhanced surgical expertise and coordinated multidisciplinary management strategies.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.