2001Diseases of the Colon & RectumRequires access

Coloplasty in low colorectal anastomosis

Christopher R. Mantyh, Tracy L. Hull, Victor W. Fazio

Open publisher page 126 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE: After resection of the distal rectum with a straight reanastomosis, poor bowel function can occur. This is felt to be because of the loss of the rectal reservoir. To overcome this, a neoreservoir using a colonic J-pouch has been advocated in low colorectal and coloanal anastomosis. However, difficulties in reach, inability to fit the pouch into a narrow pelvis, and postoperative evacuation problems can make the colonic J-pouch problematic. Coloplasty is a new technique that may overcome the poor bowel function seen in the straight anastomosis and the problems of the colonic J-pouch. The purpose of this study was to compare the functional results after a low colorectal anastomosis among patients receiving a coloplasty, colonic J-pouch, or straight anastomosis. METHODS: Twenty patients underwent construction of a coloplasty with a low colorectal anastomosis. Postoperative manometry and functional outcome of these patients was compared with a matched group of 16 patients who had a colonic J-pouch and low colorectal anastomosis and 17 patients who had a straight low colorectal anastomosis. RESULTS: Maximum tolerated volume was significantly favorable in the coloplasty (mean, 116.9 ml) and colonic J-pouch group (mean, 150 ml) vs. the straight anastomosis group (mean, 83.3; P < 0.05) The compliance was also significantly favorable for the coloplasty (mean, 4.9 ml/mmHg) and the colonic J-pouch group (mean, 6.1 ml/mmHg) vs. the straight anastomosis group (mean, 3.2 ml/mmHg; P < 0.05) The coloplasty (mean, 2.6; range, 1-5) and colonic J-pouch (mean, 3.1; range, 2-6) had significantly fewer bowel movements per day than the straight anastomosis group (mean, 4.5; range, 1-8; P < 0.05). Similar complication rates were noted in the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a coloplasty and low colorectal anastomosis seem to have similar functional outcome along with similar pouch compliance compared with patients with colonic J-pouch and low colorectal anastomosis. However, the coloplasty may provide an alternative method to the colonic J-pouch for a neorectal reservoir construction when reach or a narrow pelvis prohibits its formation. Technically it also may be easier to construct.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

PURPOSE: After resection of the distal rectum with a straight reanastomosis, poor bowel function can occur. This is felt to be because of the loss of the rectal reservoir. To overcome this, a neoreservoir using a colonic J-pouch has been advocated in low colorectal and coloanal anastomosis. However, difficulties in reach, inability to fit the pouch into a narrow pelvis, and postoperative evacuation problems can make the colonic J-pouch problematic. Coloplasty is a new technique that may overcome the poor bowel function seen in the straight anastomosis and the problems of the colonic J-pouch. The purpose of this study was to compare the functional results after a low colorectal anastomosis among patients receiving a coloplasty, colonic J-pouch, or straight anastomosis. METHODS: Twenty patients underwent construction of a coloplasty with a low colorectal anastomosis. Postoperative manometry and functional outcome of these patients was compared with a matched group of 16 patients who had a colonic J-pouch and low colorectal anastomosis and 17 patients who had a straight low colorectal anastomosis. RESULTS: Maximum tolerated volume was significantly favorable in the coloplasty (mean, 116.9 ml) and colonic J-pouch group (mean, 150 ml) vs. the straight anastomosis group (mean, 83.3; P < 0.05) The compliance was also significantly favorable for the coloplasty (mean, 4.9 ml/mmHg) and the colonic J-pouch group (mean, 6.1 ml/mmHg) vs. the straight anastomosis group (mean, 3.2 ml/mmHg; P < 0.05) The coloplasty (mean, 2.6; range, 1-5) and colonic J-pouch (mean, 3.1; range, 2-6) had significantly fewer bowel movements per day than the straight anastomosis group (mean, 4.5; range, 1-8; P < 0.05). Similar complication rates were noted in the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a coloplasty and low colorectal anastomosis seem to have similar functional outcome along with similar pouch compliance compared with patients with colonic J-pouch and low colorectal anastomosis. However, the coloplasty may provide an alternative method to the colonic J-pouch for a neorectal reservoir construction when reach or a narrow pelvis prohibits its formation. Technically it also may be easier to construct.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 126 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

PURPOSE: After resection of the distal rectum with a straight reanastomosis, poor bowel function can occur. This is felt to be because of the loss of the rectal reservoir. To overcome this, a neoreservoir using a colonic J-pouch has been advocated in low colorectal and coloanal anastomosis. However, difficulties in reach, inability to fit the pouch into a narrow pelvis, and postoperative evacuation problems can make the colonic J-pouch problematic. Coloplasty is a new technique that may overcome the poor bowel function seen in the straight anastomosis and the problems of the colonic J-pouch. The purpose of this study was to compare the functional results after a low colorectal anastomosis among patients receiving a coloplasty, colonic J-pouch, or straight anastomosis. METHODS: Twenty patients underwent construction of a coloplasty with a low colorectal anastomosis. Postoperative manometry and functional outcome of these patients was compared with a matched group of 16 patients who had a colonic J-pouch and low colorectal anastomosis and 17 patients who had a straight low colorectal anastomosis. RESULTS: Maximum tolerated volume was significantly favorable in the coloplasty (mean, 116.9 ml) and colonic J-pouch group (mean, 150 ml) vs. the straight anastomosis group (mean, 83.3; P < 0.05) The compliance was also significantly favorable for the coloplasty (mean, 4.9 ml/mmHg) and the colonic J-pouch group (mean, 6.1 ml/mmHg) vs. the straight anastomosis group (mean, 3.2 ml/mmHg; P < 0.05) The coloplasty (mean, 2.6; range, 1-5) and colonic J-pouch (mean, 3.1; range, 2-6) had significantly fewer bowel movements per day than the straight anastomosis group (mean, 4.5; range, 1-8; P < 0.05). Similar complication rates were noted in the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a coloplasty and low colorectal anastomosis seem to have similar functional outcome along with similar pouch compliance compared with patients with colonic J-pouch and low colorectal anastomosis. However, the coloplasty may provide an alternative method to the colonic J-pouch for a neorectal reservoir construction when reach or a narrow pelvis prohibits its formation. Technically it also may be easier to construct.

Key concepts: Anastomosis, Medicine, Pouch, Coloanal anastomosis, Colorectal surgery, Rectum, Surgery, Surgical anastomosis

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Coloplasty in low colorectal anastomosis — Research Paper | ScholarLens