Singh S, Ding N S, Mathis K L, Dulai P S, Farrell A M, Pemberton J H, Hart A L, Sandborn W J, Loftus E V
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Division of Gastroenterology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2015 Oct;42(7):783-92. doi: 10.1111/apt.13356. Epub 2015 Aug 11.
Temporary faecal diversion is sometimes used for management of refractory perianal Crohn's disease (CD) with variable success.
To perform a systematic review with meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness, long-term outcomes and factors associated with success of temporary faecal diversion for perianal CD.
Through a systematic literature review through 15 July 2015, we identified 16 cohort studies (556 patients) reporting outcomes after temporary faecal diversion. We estimated pooled rates [with 95% confidence interval (CI)] of early clinical response, attempted and successful restoration of bowel continuity after temporary faecal diversion (without symptomatic relapse), and rates of re-diversion (in patients with attempted restoration) and proctectomy (with or without colectomy and end-ileostomy). We identified factors associated with successful restoration of bowel continuity.
On meta-analysis, 63.8% (95% CI: 54.1-72.5) of patients had early clinical response after faecal diversion for refractory perianal CD. Restoration of bowel continuity was attempted in 34.5% (95% CI: 27.0-42.8) of patients, and was successful in only 16.6% (95% CI: 11.8-22.9). Of those in whom restoration was attempted, 26.5% (95% CI: 14.1-44.2) required re-diversion because of severe relapse. Overall, 41.6% (95% CI: 32.6-51.2) of patients required proctectomy after failure of temporary faecal diversion. There was no difference in the successful restoration of bowel continuity after temporary faecal diversion in the pre-biological or biological era (13.7% vs. 17.6%, P = 0.60), in part due to selection bias. Absence of rectal involvement was the most consistent factor associated with restoration of bowel continuity.
Temporary faecal diversion may improve symptoms in approximately two-thirds of patients with refractory perianal Crohn's disease, but bowel restoration is successful in only 17% of patients.
临时粪便转流有时用于治疗难治性肛周克罗恩病(CD),疗效不一。
进行一项系统评价并荟萃分析,以评估临时粪便转流治疗肛周CD的有效性、长期结局及与成功相关的因素。
通过截至2015年7月15日的系统文献回顾,我们确定了16项队列研究(556例患者),报告了临时粪便转流后的结局。我们估计了早期临床反应、临时粪便转流后尝试恢复和成功恢复肠道连续性(无症状复发)的合并率[及95%置信区间(CI)],以及重新转流率(在尝试恢复的患者中)和直肠切除术率(有或无结肠切除术及回肠造口术)。我们确定了与成功恢复肠道连续性相关的因素。
荟萃分析显示,63.8%(95%CI:54.1 - 72.5)的难治性肛周CD患者在粪便转流后有早期临床反应。34.5%(95%CI:27.0 - 42.8)的患者尝试恢复肠道连续性,仅16.6%(95%CI:11.8 - 22.9)成功。在尝试恢复的患者中,26.5%(95%CI:14.1 - 44.2)因严重复发需要重新转流。总体而言,41.6%(95%CI:32.6 - 51.2)的患者在临时粪便转流失败后需要直肠切除术。在生物制剂时代前或生物制剂时代,临时粪便转流后肠道连续性成功恢复情况无差异(13.7%对17.6%,P = 0.60),部分原因是选择偏倚。无直肠受累是与肠道连续性恢复最一致相关的因素。
临时粪便转流可能使约三分之二的难治性肛周克罗恩病患者症状改善,但仅17%的患者肠道恢复成功。