תוצאת חיפוש

Is Ileostomy Necessary In Surgical Treatment of Ulcerative Colitis and Familial Polyposis?

Michael M. Krausz, Simon Daniel Duek

Dept. of Surgery A, Rambam Medical Center, Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, The Technion, Haifa

Proctolectomy with ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) has become the procedure of choice for the surgical treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC) and familial polyposis (FP). Ithas traditionally been performed in 2 stages, but recently the necessity for an ileostomy hbeen challenged by several authors who recommend a 1-stage procedure.

5 years ago we started to test this policy for treatment of UC and FP. In 48 patients (Group A), 45 with UC, the 2-step procedure, and in 17 of the 27 in Group B with FP, the 1-stage procedure were performed. The indications for surgery were intractable UC in 37 patients in group A and in 5 patients in Group B (p<0.01).

Postoperative infection due to bowel leakage developed in 2 in Group A and in 6 in Group B (p<0.01). Reoperation was necessary in 4 patients (15%) in Group B and only 1 (0.9%) in Group A (p<0.01). Bowel leakage in Group B occurred in 5 (19%) with UC and in only 1 with FP (p<0.05), which responded to medical treatment. All those with UC who developed this complication were relatively malnourished, with serum albumin levels lower than 3.0 g% and were regulated with corticosteroids.

We therefore conclude that the 2-stage IPAA is feasible and safe for the treatment of UC and FP. The 1-stage IPAA should be limited only to FP or good risk UC patients.

Cyclosporin for Severe Ulcerative Colitis

Z. Symon, R. Stalnikowich, R. Eliakim, Z. Ackerman, D. Rachmilewitz

Dept. of Medicine, Hadassah University Hospital, Mount Scopus and Hebrew University-Hadassah Medical School, Jerusalem

In recent years there have been numerous reports of successful treatment of resistant ulcerative colitis with cyclosporin. A series of 9 patients with moderate to severe active ulcerative colitis was treated with cyclosporin between September 1993 and October 1994. All 9 had failed to respond to conventional therapy, including salazopyrine and intravenous corticosteroids. They underwent colonoscopy and after contraindications to therapy were ruled out, received intravenous cyclosporin, 4 mg/kg/day for 7-10 days. They were discharged on oral cyclosporin with average serum levels maintained at 200 ng/ml. Response was assessed using the clinical score system of Schroeder et al. 2 out of 9 patients (22%) responded with full clinical remissions lasting more than 6 months. 6 patients had partial responses to the intravenous therapy, but symptoms resumed shortly after its cessation. Factors predicting favorable response to cyclosporin therapy were a shorter duration of disease with a fulminant clinical course. The success rate was less than that reported in the literature, possibly because of comparatively low serum cyclosporin levels. Potential complications of therapy and high cost preclude the routine use of cyclosporin in ulcerative colitis. Larger controlled studies are required to assess its efficacy and safety. Until such studies are available, cyclosporin may be tried in poor surgical risks or those not yet ready psychologically for total colectomy.