Two-step versus three-step proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis: a comparative study on nutritional status, immunosuppressive therapy, and long-term outcome.

BACKGROUND: Despite novel medical therapies, rates of surgery in ulcerative colitis remain relevant. While various surgical approaches for multistep proctocolectomy are available, overall evidence is low and robust recommendations are lacking for individual procedures especially in case of refractory inflammation and signs of malnutrition. METHODS: All patients who received multistep proctocolectomy between 2010 and 2021 for ulcerative colitis were evaluated and divided into two groups (two-step/2-IPAA [ileal pouch-anal anastomosis] versus three-step/3-IPAA proctocolectomy). Patient characteristics as well as short- and long-outcomes were individually analyzed. RESULTS: Surgical techniques were explained in detail. Fifty patients were included in the study with 27 patients receiving 2-IPAA and 23 patients 3-IPAA. Rates of postoperative complications were comparable for both groups. While patients receiving 2-IPAA were more often suffering from malignancy, 3-IPAA resulted in a significant increase of hemoglobin and albumin levels as well as a reduction of immunosuppressive medication. Rates of stoma reversal trended to be reduced for 3-IPAA compared to 2-IPAA (52.2% vs. 77.8%, p = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Three-step proctocolectomy with creation of sigmoidostomy is a safe procedure and reasonable surgical approach in patients with preoperatively high dosages of immunosuppressive medication or risk factors such as persistent active inflammation and anemia.

Managing prostate cancer after proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: feasibility and outcomes of single-port transvesical robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (PC-IPAA) face unique challenges in managing prostate cancer due to their hostile abdomens and heightened small bowel mucosa radiosensitivity. In such cases, external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is contraindicated, and while brachytherapy provides a safer option, its oncologic effectiveness is limited. The Single-Port Transvesical Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (SP TV-RARP) offers promise by avoiding the peritoneal cavity. Our study aims to evaluate its feasibility and outcomes in patients with PC-IPAA. METHODS: A retrospective evaluation was done on patients with PC-IPAA who had undergone SP TV-RARP from June 2020 to June 2023 at a high-volume center. Outcomes and clinicopathologic variables were analyzed. RESULTS: Eighteen patients underwent SP TV-RARP without experiencing any complications. The median hospital stay was 5.7 h, with 89% of cases discharged without opioids. Foley catheters were removed in an average of 5.5 days. Immediate urinary continence was seen in 39% of the patients, rising to 76 and 86% at 6- and 12-month follow-ups. Half of the cohort had non-organ confined disease on final pathology. Two patients with ISUP GG3 and GG4 exhibited detectable PSA post-surgery and required systemic therapy; both had SVI, multifocal ECE, and large cribriform pattern. Positive surgical margins were found in 44% of cases, mostly Gleason pattern 3, unifocal, and limited. After 11.1 months of follow-up, no pouch failure or additional BCR cases were found. CONCLUSION: Patients with PC-IPAA often exhibit aggressive prostate cancer features and may derive the greatest benefit from surgical interventions, particularly given that radiation therapy is contraindicated. SP TV-RARP is a safe option for this group, reducing the risk of bowel complications and promoting faster recovery.

Transanal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of technical approaches and clinical outcomes.

PURPOSE: Transanal minimally invasive surgery has theoretical advantages for ileal pouch-anal anastomosis surgery. We performed a systematic review assessing technical approaches to transanal IPAA (Ta-IPAA) and meta-analysis comparing outcomes to transabdominal (abd-IPAA) approaches. METHODS: Three databases were searched for articles investigating Ta-IPAA outcomes. Primary outcome was anastomotic leak rate. Secondary outcomes included conversion rate, post operative morbidity, and length of stay (LoS). Staging, plane of dissection, anastomosis, extraction site, operative time, and functional outcomes were also assessed. RESULTS: Searches identified 13 studies with 404 unique Ta-IPAA and 563 abd-IPAA patients. Anastomotic leak rates were 6.3% and 8.4% (RD 0, 95% CI -0.066 to 0.065, p = 0.989) and conversion rates 2.5% and 12.5% (RD -0.106, 95% CI -0.155 to -0.057, p = 0.104) for Ta-IPAA and abd-IPAA. Average LoS was one day shorter (MD -1, 95% CI -1.876 to 0.302, p = 0.007). A three-stage approach was most common (47.6%), operative time was 261(± 60) mins, and total mesorectal excision and close rectal dissection were equally used (49.5% vs 50.5%). Functional outcomes were similar. Lack of randomised control trials, case-matched series, and significant study heterogeneity limited analysis, resulting in low to very low certainty of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis demonstrated the feasibility and safety of Ta-IPAA with reduced LoS, trend towards less conversions, and comparable anastomotic leak rates and post operative morbidity. Though results are encouraging, they need to be interpreted with heterogeneity and selection bias in mind. Robust randomised clinical trials are warranted to adequately compare ta-IPAA to transabdominal approaches.

Controversies in IPAA for Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review of Different Anastomotic Techniques.

BACKGROUND: Available techniques for IPAA in ulcerative colitis include handsewn, double-stapled, and single-stapled anastomoses. There are controversies, indications, and different outcomes regarding these techniques. OBJECTIVE: To describe technical details, indications, and outcomes of 3 specific types of anastomoses in restorative proctocolectomy. DATA SOURCE: Systematic literature review for articles in the PubMed database according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria. STUDY SELECTION: Studies describing outcomes of the 3 different types of anastomoses, during pouch surgery, in patients undergoing restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis. INTERVENTION: IPAA technique. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postoperative outcomes (anastomotic leaks, overall complication rates, and pouch function). RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were initially included: 6 studies exclusively on single-stapled IPAA, 2 exclusively on double-stapled IPAA, 6 studies comparing single-stapled to double-stapled techniques, 6 comparing double-stapled to handsewn IPAA, and 1 comprising single-stapled to handsewn IPAA. Thirty-seven studies were added according to authors' discretion as complementary evidence. Between 1990 and 2015, most studies were related to double-stapled IPAA, either only analyzing the results of this technique or comparing it with the handsewn technique. Studies published after 2015 were mostly related to transanal approaches to proctectomy for IPAA, in which a single-stapled anastomosis was introduced instead of the double-stapled anastomosis, with some studies comparing both techniques. LIMITATIONS: A low number of studies with handsewn IPAA technique and a large number of studies added at authors' discretion were the limitations of this strudy. CONCLUSIONS: Handsewn IPAA should be considered if a mucosectomy is performed for dysplasia or cancer in the low rectum or, possibly, for re-do surgery. Double-stapled IPAA has been more widely adopted for its simplicity and for the advantage of preserving the anal transition zone, having lower complications, and having adequate pouch function. The single-stapled IPAA offers a more natural design, is feasible, and is associated with reasonable outcomes compared to double-stapled anastomosis. See video from symposium.

Robotic-assisted reoperative ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: robotic pouch excision and pouch revision.

BACKGROUND: Up to 20% of patients with ileal pouch will develop pouch failure, ultimately requiring surgical reintervention. As a result of the complexity of reoperative pouch surgery, minimally invasive approaches were rarely utilized. In this series, we present the outcomes of the patients who underwent robotic-assisted pouch revision or excision to assess its feasibility and short-term results. METHODS: All the patients affected by inflammatory bowel diseases and familial adenomatous polyposis who underwent robotic reoperative surgery of an existing ileal pouch were included. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were included; 54.6% were female. The average age at reoperation was 51 ± 16 years, with a mean body mass index of 26.1 ± 5.6 kg/m2. Fourteen (63.7%) had a diagnosis of ulcerative colitis at reoperation, and seven (31.8%) had Crohn's disease. The mean time to pouch reoperation was 12.8 ± 11.8 years. Seventeen (77.3%) patients underwent pouch excision, and five (22.7%) had pouch revision surgery. The mean operative time was 372 ± 131 min, and the estimated blood loss was 199 ± 196.7 ml. The conversion rate was 9.1%, the 30-day morbidity rate was 27.3% (with only one complication reaching Clavien-Dindo grade IIIB), and the mean length of stay was 5.8 ± 3.9 days. The readmission rate was 18.2%, the reoperation rate was 4.6%, and mortality was nihil. All patients in the pouch revisional group are stoma-free. CONCLUSION: Robotic reoperative pouch surgery in highly selected patients is technically feasible with acceptable outcomes.

Evolution of laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: impact of enhanced recovery program, medication changes, and staged approaches on outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Although laparoscopic Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) has become the gold standard in restorative proctocolectomy, surgical techniques have experienced minimal changes. In contrast, substantial shifts in perioperative care, marked by the enhanced recovery program (ERP), modifications in steroid use, and a shift to a 3-staged approach, have taken center stage. METHODS: Data extracted from our prospective IPAA database focused on the first 100 laparoscopic IPAA cases (historic group) and the latest 100 cases (modern group), aiming to measure the effect of these evolutions on postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: The historic IPAA group had more 2-staged procedures (92% proctocolectomy), whereas the modern group had a higher number of 3-staged procedures (86% proctectomy) (P < .001). Compared with patients in the modern group, patients in the historic group were more likely to be on steroids (5% vs 67%, respectively; P < .001) or immunomodulators (0% vs 31%, respectively; P < .001) at surgery. Compared with the historic group, the modern group had a shorter operative time (335.5 ± 78.4 vs 233.8 ± 81.6, respectively; P < .001) and length of stay (LOS; 5.4 ± 3.1 vs 4.2 ± 1.6 days, respectively; P < .001). Compared with the modern group, the historic group exhibited a higher 30-day morbidity rate (20% vs 33%, respectively; P = .04) and an elevated 30-day readmission rate (9% vs 21%, respectively; P = .02). Preoperative steroids use increased complications (odds ratio [OR], 3.4; P = .01), whereas 3-staged IPAA reduced complications (OR, 0.3; P = .03). ERP was identified as a factor that predicted shorter stays. CONCLUSION: Although ERP effectively reduced the LOS in IPAA surgery, it failed to reduce complications. Conversely, adopting a 3-staged IPAA approach proved beneficial in reducing morbidity, whereas preoperative steroid use increased complications.

Complications following ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in pediatric ulcerative colitis.

Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the procedure of choice for reconstruction after total proctocolectomy in pediatric patients with ulcerative colitis. 30-60 % of patients undergoing IPAA will experience a postoperative complication. The primary objective of this article is to address the most common complications specific to IPAA in the pediatric population and provide an up-to-date review of their presentation, risk factors, workup, and management. We also share our preferred approaches to management and prevention of complications, where relevant. We intend to provide a concise review on the topic aimed at pediatric surgeons and healthcare providers involved in the care of this population with the goal of contributing to improved outcomes and patient quality of life.

Surgery for ulcerative colitis.

Ulcerative colitis (UC) has a more severe presentation and rapid progression in pediatric patients, resulting in a greater need for surgical intervention compared to adults. Though medical management of UC has advanced with new biologic therapies, surgery continues to play an important role when disease progresses in the form of worsened or persistent symptoms, hemodynamic instability, or sepsis. The goals of surgical management are to restore intestinal continuity with a functional pouch when possible. While the literature has been growing regarding studies of pediatric patients with UC, high level of evidence studies are limited and most recommendations are based on adult studies. Similar to adults, pediatric patients who have ileal pouches created require surveillance for recurrent disease and cancer surveillance. Unique issues for pediatric patients include monitoring of growth and appropriate transition to adult care after adolescence. This review includes indications for surgical management, overview of staged surgical approaches, and the technical details of the three-stage approach.

Ouch, my pouch! a clinician's guide to pouchitis.

Pouchitis is defined as inflammation of the ileal pouch created during a restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Although the incidence of this inflammatory condition is high, the exact etiology often remains unclear and the management challenging. In this review, we summarize the clinical presentation, pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management of this common complication.

Transanal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcomes.

AIM: Restorative proctocolectomy with transabdominal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (abd-IPAA) has become the standard surgical treatment for medically refractory ulcerative colitis (UC). However, it requires a technically difficult distal anorectal dissection and anastomosis due to the bony confines of the deep pelvis. To address these challenges, the transanal IPAA approach (ta-IPAA) was developed. This novel approach may offer increased visibility and range of motion compared with abd-IPAA, although its postoperative benefits remain unclear. The aim of this work was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare and inform the frequency of postoperative outcomes between ta-IPAA and abd-IPAA for patients with UC. METHOD: Several databases were searched from inception until May 2022 for studies reporting postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing ta-IPAA. Reviewers, working independently and in duplicate, evaluated studies for inclusion and graded the risk of bias. Odds ratios (OR), mean differences (MD) and prevalence ratio (PR) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models. Sensitivity analysis was performed. RESULTS: Ten retrospective studies comprising 284 patients with ta-IPAA were included. Total mesorectal excision was performed in 61.8% of cases and close rectal dissection in 27.9%. There was no difference in the odds of Clavien-Dindo (CD) I-II complications, CD III-IV and anastomotic leak (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.27-3.40; OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.65-2.16; OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.58-3.23; respectively) between ta-IPAA and abd-IPAA. The ta-IPAA pooled CD I-II complication rate was 18% (95% CI 5%-35%) and for CD III-IV 10% (95% CI 5%-17%), and the anastomotic leak rate was 6% (95% CI 2%-10%). There were no deaths reported. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis compared the novel ta-IPAA procedure with abd-IPAA and found no difference in postoperative outcomes. While the need for randomized controlled trails and comparison of functional outcomes between both approaches remains, this evidence should assist colorectal surgeons to decide if ta-IPAA is a viable alternative.

State of the Art: Pouch Surgery in the 21st Century.

BACKGROUND: An ileoanal pouch with IPAA is the preferred method to restore intestinal continuity in patients who require a total proctocolectomy. Pouch surgery has evolved during the past decades thanks to increased experience and research, changes in the medical management of patients who require an ileal pouch, and technological innovations. OBJECTIVE: To review the main changes in pouch surgery over the past 2 decades, with a focus on staging, minimally invasive and transanal approaches, pouch design, and anastomotic configuration. RESULTS: The decision on the staging approach depends on the patient's conditions, their indication for surgery, and the risk of anastomotic leak. A minimally invasive approach should be performed whenever feasible, but open surgery still has a role in this technically demanding operation. Transanal IPAA may be performed in experienced centers and may reduce conversion to open surgery in the hostile pelvis. The J-pouch is the easiest, fastest, and most commonly performed design, but other designs may be used when a J-pouch is not feasible. A stapled anastomosis without mucosectomy can be safely performed in the majority of cases, with a low incidence of rectal cuff neoplasia and better functional outcomes than handsewn. Finally, Crohn's disease is not an absolute contraindication to an ileoanal pouch, but pouch failure may be higher compared to other indications. CONCLUSIONS: Many technical nuances contribute to the success of an ileoanal pouch. The current standard of care is a laparoscopic J-pouch with double-stapled anastomosis, but this should not be seen as a dogma, and the optimal approach and design should be tailored to each patient. See video from symposium.

Functional Disorders of the Ileal-Anal Pouch: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The IPAA is a boon to patients needing proctocolectomy but maintains per anal function through anatomic and physiologic compromises. The state of pouch function is hard to define because pouch anatomy is not normal and pouch physiology is a distortion of normal defecation. Patients with pouches develop multiple symptoms: some are expected, some are disease related, and some are the result of surgical complications. It is important to understand the cause of pouch-related symptoms so that appropriate management is offered. OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to review pouch symptoms and discuss their likely cause, review the literature on pouch function and dysfunction, and provide clarity to clear the confusion. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and Cochrane databases were searched using the terms "ileoanal pouch function" and "ileoanal pouch dysfunction." STUDY SELECTION: From 1983 to 2023, 553 articles related to "ileoanal pouch function" and 178 related to "ileoanal pouch dysfunction" were reviewed. Nine studies appeared under both headings. Case studies, duplicate publications, and articles concerning pouch diseases were excluded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Definitions of pouch function and dysfunction, methods of describing and scoring symptoms, and understanding of expected changes in pouch function given the nature of the surgery. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies were reviewed from the ileoanal pouch dysfunction search and 38 from ileoanal pouch function. Three studies tried to define normal pouch function, 10 attempted to measure pouch function, and 4 aimed to score pouch function. Only 3 studies addressed pouch physiology. LIMITATIONS: A full discussion of pouch dysfunction is limited by the lack of studies focussing on the anatomic and physiologic consequences of turning the terminal ileum into an organ of storage. CONCLUSIONS: Most studies of pouch function and dysfunction do not consider expected changes in the physiology of defecation that follow restorative proctocolectomy. Thus, most studies of pouch function produce conclusions that lack an important dimension. See video from symposium.

Radiographic Evaluation of Ileal Pouch Disorders: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Radiographic imaging of the abdomen and pelvis plays an important role in the diagnosis and management of ileal pouch disorders with modalities including CT, MRI, contrasted pouchography, and defecography. OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic review of the literature and describe applications of cross-sectional imaging, pouchography, defecography, and ultrasonography. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane database. STUDY SELECTION: Relevant articles on endoscopy in ileal pouches published between January 2003 and June 2023 in English were included on the basis of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. INTERVENTION: Main abdominal and pelvic imaging modalities and their applications in the diagnosis of ileal pouch disorders were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Accuracy in characterization of ileal pouch disorders. RESULTS: CT is the test of choice for the evaluation of acute anastomotic leaks, perforation, and abscess(es). MRI of the pelvis is suitable for the assessment of chronic anastomotic leaks and their associated fistulas and sinus tracts, as well as for the penetrating phenotype of Crohn's disease of the pouch. CT enterography and magnetic resonance enterography are useful in assessing intraluminal, intramural, and extraluminal disease processes of the pouch and prepouch ileum. Water-soluble contrast pouchography is particularly useful for evaluating acute or chronic anastomotic leaks and outlines the shape and configuration of the pouch. Defecography is the key modality to evaluate structural and functional pouch inlet and outlet obstructions. Ultrasonography can be performed to assess the pouch in experienced IBD centers. LIMITATIONS: This is a qualitative, not quantitative, review of mainly case series and case reports. CONCLUSIONS: Abdominopelvic imaging, along with clinical and endoscopic evaluation, is imperative for accurately assessing structural, inflammatory, functional, and neoplastic disorders. See video from symposium .

Diagnosis and treatment of primary ileal pouch leaks: a 27-year experience at a referral center.

BACKGROUND: Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is considered the preferred restorative surgical procedure for patients with ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis requiring proctocolectomy. Unfortunately, postoperative leaks remain a complication with potentially significant ramifications. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive description of the evaluation, management, and outcomes of leaks after primary IPAA procedures. METHODS: Between 1995 and 2022, a total of 4058 primary IPAA procedures were performed at Cleveland Clinic. From a prospectively maintained pouch registry, we retrospectively reviewed the data of 237 patients who presented to the pouch center for management. Of these, 114 (3%) had undergone the index IPAA procedure at our clinic (de novo cases), whereas 123 patients had their index IPAA performed elsewhere. Data were missing for 43 patients, resulting in a final cohort of 194 patients. RESULTS: Our cohort had an average age of 41 years (range, 16-76) at the time of leak diagnosis. Overall, 55.2% were males, average body mass index was 24.4 kg/m2, and pain was the most prevalent presenting symptom (61.8%), followed by fever (34%). Leaks were confirmed through diagnostic testing in 141 cases, whereas 27.3% were detected intraoperatively. The most common initial diagnoses were pelvic abscess (47.4%) and enteric fistulas (26.8%), including cutaneous (9.8%), vaginal (7.2%), and bladder fistulas (3.1%). By location, leaks occurred at the tip of the "J" (52.6%), at the pouch-anal anastomotic site (35%), and in the body of the pouch (12.4%). A nonoperative management approach was initially attempted in 49.5% of cases, including antibiotic therapy, drainage, endoclip, and endo-sponge, with a success rate of 18.5%. Surgery was eventually required in 81.4% of patients, including (1) sutured or stapled pouch repair (52.5%), with diversion performed in 87.9% of these cases either before or during the salvage surgery; (2) pouch excision with neo-IPAA (22.7%), including 9 patients from the first group; and (3) pouch disconnection, repair, and reanastomosis (9.3%). Pouch failure occurred in 8.4%, with either pouch excision (11.1%) or permanent diversion (4.5%). Ultimately, 12.4% of patients (24 of 194) required permanent diversion, with all necessitating pouch excision. In the 30-day follow-up after salvage surgery, short-term complications arose in 38.7% of patients. The most common complications observed were ileus, pelvic abscess/sepsis, and fever. CONCLUSION: Leaks after primary IPAA procedures represent an infrequent, yet challenging, complication. Despite attempts at nonoperative management, the success rate is limited. Salvage surgery is associated with a high pouch retention rate, underscoring its importance in the management of post-IPAA leaks.

National trends and outcomes of total proctocolectomy and completion proctectomy ileal pouch-anal anastomosis procedures for ulcerative colitis.

AIM: The purpose of this study is to assess US operative trends and outcomes of ulcerative colitis (UC) patients undergoing total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (TPC-IPAA) or completion proctectomy with IPAA (CP-IPAA). METHODS: Adult UC patients who underwent TPC-IPAA or CP-IPAA were analysed retrospectively using the 2016-2020 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Factors associated with 30-day overall and serious morbidity were identified using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 1696 patients were identified, with 958 patients (56.5%) undergoing TPC-IPAA and 738 (43.5%) undergoing CP-IPAA. A greater proportion of TPC-IPAAs were performed each year (except in 2019) compared to CP-IPAAs over the study period (P trend <0.001). Unadjusted analysis showed comparable rates of overall (20.8% vs. 24.4%, P = 0.076) and serious morbidity (14.3% vs. 12.7%, P = 0.352) between TPC-IPAA and CP-IPAA patients. Robotic TPC-IPAA had no differences in complications compared to laparoscopic and open approaches. Robotic CP-IPAA had higher anastomotic leak rates and longer hospital length of stay compared to laparoscopic and open approaches. Obesity was associated with increased odds of overall and serious morbidity for patients who underwent TPC-IPAA. Steroid/immunosuppressive therapy was associated with increased odds of overall and serious morbidity for patients who underwent CP-IPAA. CONCLUSIONS: Obese patients should be informed of their increased morbidity risk and offered counselling on weight loss prior to surgery when feasible. Patients on steroid/immunosuppressive therapy within 30 days preoperatively should not undergo CP-IPAA or should delay surgery until they can be safely off those medications.

Third Time's the Charm? Indications and Outcomes for Redo-Redo IPAA.

BACKGROUND: Up to 20% to 40% cases of redo IPAA procedures will result in pouch failure. Whether to offer a second redo procedure to maintain intestinal continuity remains a controversial decision. OBJECTIVE: To report our institutional experience of second redo IPAA procedures. DESIGN: This was a retrospective review. Patient-reported outcomes were compared between patients undergoing second redo procedures and those undergoing first redo procedures using propensity score matching to balance the 2 cohorts. SETTINGS: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent second redo IPAA procedures between 2004 and 2021 were included in this study. INTERVENTIONS: Second redo IPAA. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pouch survival and patient-reported outcomes were measured using the Cleveland Global Quality of Life survey. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were included (65% women), 20 (87%) with an index diagnosis of ulcerative colitis and 3 (13%) with indeterminate colitis. The final diagnosis was changed to Crohn's disease in 8 (35%) cases. The indication for pouch salvage was the same for the first and second redo procedures in 21 (91%) cases: 20 (87%) patients had both redo IPAAs for septic complications. After a median follow-up of 39 months (interquartile range, 18.5-95.5 months), pouch failure occurred in 8 (30%) cases (7 cases due to sepsis, of whom 3 never had their stoma closed, and 1 case due to poor function); all patients who experienced pouch failure underwent the second redo procedure due to septic complications. Overall pouch survival at 3 years was 76%: 62.5% in patients with a final diagnosis of Crohn's disease versus 82.5% in patients with ulcerative/indeterminate colitis ( p = 0.09). Overall quality-of-life score (0-1) was 0.6 (0.5-0.8). Quality of life and functional outcomes were comparable between first and second redo procedures, except incontinence, which was higher in second redo procedures. LIMITATIONS: Single-center retrospective review. CONCLUSIONS: A second pouch salvage procedure may be offered with acceptable outcomes to selected patients with high motivation to keep intestinal continuity. See Video Abstract . LA TERCERA ES LA VENCIDA INDICACIONES Y RESULTADOS DE LA RERECONFECCION DE LA ANASTOMOSIS ANAL CON BOLSA ILEAL: ANTECEDENTES:Hasta un 20-40% de los casos de rehacer anastomosis anal con bolsa ileal (IPAA) resultarán en falla de la bolsa. La posibilidad de ofrecer un segundo procedimiento para mantener la continuidad intestinal sigue siendo una decisión controvertida.OBJETIVO:Reportar nuestra experiencia institucional de una segunda re-confección de la anastomosis anal con bolsa ileal.DISEÑO:Revisión retrospectiva; los resultados informados por los pacientes se compararon entre los pacientes que se sometieron a una segunda re-confeccion con los de los pacientes que se sometieron a una la primera re-confeccion utilizando el puntaje de propensión para equilibrar las dos cohortes.AJUSTES ENTORNO CLINICO:Centro de referencia terciario.PACIENTES:Pacientes que se sometieron a una segunda re-confeccion de de la anastomosis anal con bolsa ileal entre 2004 y 2021.INTERVENCIONES:Segunda re-confeccion de la anastomosis anal con bolsa ileal.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Supervivencia de la bolsa, resultados informados por los pacientes medidos mediante la encuesta Cleveland Global Quality of Life.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron veintitrés pacientes (65% mujeres), 20 (87%) con diagnóstico inicial de colitis ulcerosa y 3 (13%) con colitis indeterminada. El diagnóstico final se cambió a enfermedad de Crohn en ocho (35%) casos. La indicación para el rescate de la bolsa fue la misma para la primera y segunda re-confeccion en 21 (91%) casos: 20 (87%) pacientes tuvieron ambas re-confecciones de la anastomosis anal con bolsa ileal por complicaciones sépticas. Después de una mediana de seguimiento de 39 meses (RIC 18,5 - 95,5), se produjo falla de la bolsa en 8 (30%) casos (7 casos debido a sepsis, de los cuales 3 nunca cerraron el estoma y 1 caso debido a una mala función); todos los pacientes que experimentaron falla de la bolsa se sometieron a una segunda re-confeccion debido a complicaciones sépticas. La supervivencia global de la bolsa a los 3 años fue del 76%: 62,5% en pacientes con diagnóstico final de enfermedad de Crohn, versus 82,5% en colitis ulcerativa/indeterminada ( p = 0,09). La puntuación general de calidad de vida (0 -1) fue 0,6 (0,5 - 0,8). La calidad de vida y los resultados funcionales fueron comparables entre la primera y la segunda re-confeccion, excepto la incontinencia, que fue mayor en la segunda re-confeccion.LIMITACIONES:Revisión retrospectiva de un solo centro.CONCLUSIONES:Se puede ofrecer un segundo procedimiento de rescate de la bolsa con resultados aceptables a pacientes seleccionados con alta motivación para mantener la continuidad intestinal. (Traducción- Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon ).