4.5 Review

Pouchitis after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in ulcerative colitis: Diagnosis, management, risk factors, and incidence

Journal

DIGESTIVE ENDOSCOPY
Volume 29, Issue 1, Pages 26-34

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/den.12744

Keywords

Crohn's disease of the pouch; cytapheresis; extraintestinal manifestation; pouchitis; ulcerative colitis

Funding

  1. Research Group for Intractable Inflammatory Bowel Disease (RGIBD) of the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis has been the surgical treatment of choice for patients with ulcerative colitis who require surgery. Quality of life after this procedure is satisfactory in most cases; however, pouchitis is a troublesome condition involving inflammation of the ileal pouch. When a patient presents with symptoms of pouchitis, such as increased bowel movements, mucous and/or bloody exudates, abdominal cramps, and fever, endoscopy is essential for a precise diagnosis. The proximal ileum and rectal cuff, as well as the ileal pouch, should be endoscopically observed. The reported incidence of pouchitis ranges from 14% to 59%, and antibiotic therapy is the primary treatment for acute pouchitis. Chronic pouchitis includes antibiotic-dependent and refractory pouchitis. Intensive therapy including antitumor necrosis factor antibodies and steroids may be necessary for antibioticrefractory pouchitis, and pouch failure may occur despite such intensive treatment. Reported risk factors for the development of pouchitis include presence of extraintestinal manifestations, primary sclerosing cholangitis, non-smoking, and postoperative non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug usage. In the present review, we focus on the diagnosis, endoscopic features, management, incidence, and risk factors of pouchitis in patients with ulcerative colitis who underwent ileal pouch-anal anastomosis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available