David B. Chessin

Severity of inflammation as a predictor of colectomy in patients with chronic ulcerative colitis.

PURPOSE: We evaluated a large cohort of patients with longstanding ulcerative colitis in a colonoscopic surveillance program to determine predictors of colectomy. METHODS: We queried a retrospective database of patients who had symptoms of ulcerative colitis for seven years or more. Histologic inflammation in biopsies was graded on a validated four-point scale: absent, mild, moderate, severe. We performed a multivariate analysis of the inflammation scores and other variables to determine predictive factors for colectomy. Patients who underwent colectomy for neoplasia were censored at the time of surgery; those who did not undergo colectomy were censored at the time of last contact. RESULTS: A total of 561 patients were evaluated, with a median follow-up of 21.4 years since disease onset. A total of 97 patients (17.3 percent) underwent surgery; 25 (4.5 percent) for reasons other than dysplasia. These 25 constitute events for this analysis. For univariate analysis, mean inflammation (P < 0.001) and steroid use (P = 0.01) were predictors of colectomy. For multivariable proportional hazards analysis, mean inflammation (P < 0.001) and steroid use (P = 0.03) were predictors of colectomy, whereas salicylate use (P = 0.007) was protective. CONCLUSIONS: Higher median inflammation scores and corticosteroid use were predictors of colectomy in this patient population. The overall rate of colectomy during a long period of follow-up was low (<1 percent per year).

Prospective Analysis of Clinician Accuracy in the Diagnosis of Benign Anal Pathology: Comparison Across Specialties and Years of Experience

PURPOSE: The majority of patients referred to a colorectal surgeon with anal complaints are told they have “hemorrhoids”; however, many of these patients have other anal pathology causing their symptoms. Therefore, we prospectively evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of physicians for common anal pathology, stratified by specialty and experience. METHODS: Seven common benign anal pathologic conditions were selected (prolapsed internal hemorrhoid, thrombosed external hemorrhoid, abscess, fissure, fistula, condyloma acuminata, and full-thickness rectal prolapse). Prospectively accrued subjects included attending physicians, fellows, residents, and medical students. Subjects were shown images and asked to provide a written diagnosis. We prospectively evaluated the overall diagnostic accuracy and stratified accuracy across specialties and years of clinical experience. Medical students were the control group. RESULTS: There were 198 physicians and 216 medical students. Overall diagnostic accuracy for physicians was 53.5% and for controls was 21.9% (P < .001). Surgeons had the highest overall accuracy at 70.4%, whereas all of the other groups had an accuracy of <50%. Physicians correctly identified condylomata and rectal prolapse most frequently and hemorrhoidal conditions least frequently. All 7 conditions were correctly identified by 4.1% of subjects and all of the conditions were incorrectly diagnosed by 20.2%. There was no correlation between years of experience and diagnostic accuracy (P = NS). CONCLUSION: Diagnostic accuracy for common benign anal pathologic conditions was suboptimal across all clinical specialties. Although many specialties had a diagnostic accuracy that was significantly better than the control group, there was no association between years of experience and accuracy. Improved programs for physician education for these common conditions should be developed.

Septic Complications after Restorative Proctocolectomy do not Impair Functional Outcome: Long-Term Follow-Up from a Specialty Center

PurposeAfter restorative proctocolectomy, 7 to 8 percent of patients may have a pouch leak. Concern exists that pouch leak may be associated with impaired functional outcome. We evaluated patients who underwent restorative proctocolectomy to determine whether pouch leak adversely affected long-term functional outcome and quality of life.MethodsWe queried our prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent restorative proctocolectomy for demographic and clinical data. We sent a long-term outcome questionnaire to patients, including the validated Fecal Incontinence Severity Index and Cleveland Global Quality of Life scores. Pouch leak was identified by clinical or radiographic evidence of leak. Patients with leak were compared with those without to determine the impact on long-term functional outcome or quality of life.ResultsA total of 817 patients were available for follow-up and 374 patients (46 percent) completed questionnaires. The group with (n = 60; 16 percent) and without (n = 314; 84 percent) leak had similar demographics. The median Fecal Incontinence Severity Index score (15.3 vs. 14.7, P = 0.77), Cleveland Global Quality of Life score (0.79 vs. 0.81, P = 0.48), and bowel movements per 24 hours (7.92 vs. 7.88, P = 0.92) were similar. The pouch loss/permanent ileostomy rate was higher in those who leaked (13.3 vs. 0.9 percent, P < 0.001).ConclusionsAnastomotic leak after restorative proctocolectomy does not adversely affect long-term quality of life or functional outcome. However, pouch loss/permanent ileostomy is significantly more likely in patients who have had an anastomotic leak.

Outcome and long‐term function of restorative proctocolectomy for Crohn’s disease: comparison to patients with ulcerative colitis

Aim  Restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) is the most common operation for chronic ulcerative colitis (CUC), as it provides excellent functional outcome. However, among patients with Crohn’s disease (CD), RPC is generally not recommended, as outcome and long‐term function may be poor. Our purpose was to compare matched cohorts of CD and CUC patients to determine whether there are differences in outcome or function.

Evaluation of one-stage laparoscopic-assisted restorative proctocolectomy at a specialty center: comparison with the open approach.

PURPOSE: This study compared outcomes after laparoscopically assisted and open restorative proctocolectomy performed as a one-stage procedure, including anorectal mucosectomy and omission of ileal diversion. METHODS: We reviewed our prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent restorative proctocolectomy between 1998 and 2006. Demographic data, surgical indications, and intraoperative and postoperative complications were evaluated. Anastomotic leaks were identified by radiologic, endoscopic, or intraoperative evidence. The primary outcome variables were complications, duration of operation, blood loss, intraoperative spillage of enteric contents, and the ability to complete the procedure in one stage. RESULTS: One-stage laparoscopically assisted restorative proctocolectomy was performed in 50 patients and open restorative proctocolectomy was performed in 155 patients. The mean operative time was longer for the laparoscopically assisted group (198.7 vs. 159.1 minutes; P = 0.006). The mean estimated blood loss was less among the patients in the laparoscopically assisted group (287.5 vs. 386.4 ml; P = 0.006). There were no significant differences in intraoperative or postoperative complications between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopically assisted one stage restorative proctocolectomy is a safe and technically feasible procedure. There seems to be no increase in the rate of postoperative complications compared with the open approach. Laparoscopically assisted restorative proctocolectomy should be considered in the surgical management of patients who require this procedure.