Continent ileostomy: short- and long-term outcomes of a forgotten procedure

Abstract

Background Continent ileostomy (CI) aims to provide control of gas and faecal evacuation; however, it is rarely performed. This paper reports on outcomes of CI in a large single-surgeon series. Methods All consecutive patients who underwent CI between 1986 and 2015 were reviewed. Patients were classified according to the CI procedure (single stage versus two stage) and according to the underlying disease conditions (inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) versus no IBD). Primary outcome measures were early mortality and complications requiring surgical revision within 30 days (group Ia), those requiring surgical revision within 1–12 months (group Ib), and long-term complications after more than 12 months (group II). Secondary outcome measures were pouch survival and quality of life (QoL) assessed using questionnaires for occupational, sports, sexual, and travel activities; patients undergoing CI after conversion from ileostomy. Analyses were performed using descriptive statistics and Kaplan–Meier curves for the long-term outcomes. Results Sixty-two consecutive patients (28 men, 34 women) who underwent CI were reviewed, including 48 with IBD, and 14 without inflammatory conditions. Mean(s.d.) follow-up was 14.4 (9.5) (range 1–30) years. Twenty-seven patients (44 per cent) developed group I complications, of which 25 were corrected successfully. Two patients dropped out of the analysis: one who died from sepsis and the other owing to pouch loss attributed to unsolvable nipple complications. Of the remaining 60 patients, 23 (38 per cent) developed between one and five group II complications. The cumulative probability of reoperation was 54. per cent at 25 years. Overall, pouch survival was achieved in 90 per cent. The two-stage approach led to significantly fewer complications in group Ia (single stage versus two stage: 8 of 25 versus 2 of 37; P = 0.005), whereas complication rates in group Ib (5 of 23 versus 14 of 37) and group II (9 of 23 versus 14 of 37) were similar. Four CIs failed because of IBD complications. CI pouch and function were preserved in all patients without IBD, whereas in the group with IBD 2 of 31 with ulcerative colitis and 2 of 17 with Crohn’s colitis lost the CI owing to severe intractable inflammatory complications. In 16 patients who had conversion from ileostomy to CI, QoL improved significantly above precolectomy levels in all domains Conclusions CI remains an alternative to conventional ileostomy. Although affected by high reoperation rates, it has the benefit of a high rate of pouch survival.

Conversion of ileo‐pouch anal anastomosis to continent ileostomy: strategic surgical considerations and outcome

“…This requirement is especially true for the not inconsiderable number of patients who have previously received a redo IPAA. While the details of the different surgical techniques according to the three‐part classification will be presented in detail elsewhere [9], a clinical benefit–risk consideration will be discussed here.…”

“…However, the interpretation of the present study in comparison to these results is difficult. First, the definition period for postoperative complications has here been extended to 12 months for reasons outlined in our previous report concerning primary CI constructions [9]. On the other hand, septic complications in the sacral cavity after excision of an IPAA are generally very common and are not necessarily related to subsequent reconstruction [24].…”

“…In selected cases, continent ileostomy (CI) deserves consideration and offers the advantage of complete control over faecal evacuation with a much improved quality of life compared to IS [9]. Let us recall that CI was initially described by Nils Kock [10] as an attractive alternative to IS as early as 1969.…”

Salvage surgery for continent ileostomies (CI) after a first successful revision: more long-term blame on the reservoir than the nipple valve

“…CI or KP has been abandoned as primary reconstructive procedure ever since the implementation of IPAA as the preferred reconstructive procedure for proctocolectomy [5,7,8]. An important argument for the change in strategy was that IPAA preserves the natural defecation route, thereby preventing the requirement of a permanent stoma.…”

“…In the authors' experience, resection of the afferent loop is much more successful and feasible with an underlying S design of the pouch and as such a strong argument for the technical preference adopted, since corrections in this setting do not require the trauma of mobilizing the entire pouch. This is a clear advantage over the original K-pouch (in addition to other benefits), which has lead the authors to implement the S-pouch as the standard pouch [5].…”