4.5 Article

Faecal diversion in the management of perianal Crohn's disease

Journal

COLORECTAL DISEASE
Volume 13, Issue 2, Pages 171-176

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2009.02092.x

Keywords

Colostomy; Crohn's disease; ileostomy; infliximab; rectal fistula; rectovaginal fistula

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim Severe perianal Crohn's disease remains an uncommon but important indication for faecal diversion (FD). The advent of biological therapy such as infliximab for Crohn's disease is considered to have improved the outcome for these patients. The aim of this study was to assess the outcome of patients undergoing FD for perianal Crohn's disease and the impact of biological therapy (infliximab). Method Retrospective chart review was undertaken of patients who underwent FD for management of perianal Crohn's disease at two tertiary centres between 1990 and 2007. Patient demographics, disease extent and use of biological therapy were recorded. Subsequent surgery was assessed. The impact of infliximab on rates of proctocolectomy and restoration of intestinal continuity was assessed. Results Twenty-one patients (one male, 20 female), median age 34 years (range 21-67 years), underwent FD for perianal Crohn's disease. At a median follow-up time of 22 months (range 4-121 months), four patients had undergone stoma closure, 11 had had proctocolectomy and six had a stoma in situ. The effects of the procedure on severity of perianal disease were no effect in four (19%), temporary improvement in six (29%), initial improvement with later plateau in seven (33%) and healing in four patients (19%). Eleven patients (52%) received infliximab. In this group, four underwent proctocolectomy and two had intestinal continuity restored. This was not significantly different from the noninfliximab group. Conclusion Patients undergoing FD for perianal Crohn's disease have < 20% likelihood of restoration of intestinal continuity. This is not improved with biological therapy.

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