Functional results after anterior rectal resections are commonly considered satisfactory but variable percentages of postoperative incontinence are often reported. Continence was evaluated after 20 low anterior resections (LAR) and 13 high anterior resections (HAR) by means of clinical assessment, anorectal manometry, and evacuation proctography. Whereas all HAR patients had perfect continence, 10 patients (50 percent of the LAR group had occasional episodes of soiling from liquid feces, 5 patients (25 percent had frequent soiling or occasional incontinence for solid feces, and 1 patient (5 percent had frequent solid stool loss requiring surgical treatment. Anal canal resting pressure at 3 and 4 cm from the anal verge was significantly lower in the LAR group (P less than 0.02 and P less than 0.05, respectively) than in the HAR group. However, the maximum voluntary contraction did not differ between the two groups. Rectoanal inhibitory reflex was found to be present in 17 of the 20 patients with LAR and in all patients with HAR. The volume at which the anal sphincter is continuously inhibited was significantly reduced in the LAR group (P less than 0.001). Also, the conscious rectal sensibility volumes were found to be significantly reduced for threshold, constant, and maximum tolerated volume. Threshold volume for internal sphincter relaxation was lower than the threshold volume for rectal sensation in some patients with LAR. This could allow postoperative fecal soiling. Rectal compliance was decreased (P less than 0.001) in the LAR group. Evacuation proctography, performed in six LAR patients affected by major soiling or solid stool loss, revealed an abnormal obtuse anorectal angle and pathologic lowering of the perineum at rest and during defecation. The concomitance of internal and sphincter impairment, reduction in rectal compliance, and previous pelvis floor muscle damage are postulated as cause affecting continence in patients who underwent LAR.

Surgical treatment of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is still controversial. From 1984 we carried out a prospective evaluation of total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) and restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) to determine differences in postoperative complications, functional results, occurrence of desmoids, and recurrence of polyps in the rectal stump. IRA was performed below the peritoneal reflection and was indicated in the absence of rectal cancer and in the presence of fewer than 10 polyps or minute polyposis in the last 10 cm of the rectal mucosa. IRA patients underwent a regular endoscopic follow-up and prolonged sulindac administration (100 mg twice daily). When criteria for IRA were absent, IPAA was performed adopting a manual anastomosis at the pectinate line. Fourteen patients were operated with IRA and 24 with IPAA. There was no difference in sex and age between the two groups of patients. The number of rectal polyps was significantly different in the two groups. Immediate postoperative complications were observed in only five IPAA patients, three of whom (12%) required reoperation. Late postoperative complications occurred more frequently in IRA patients (14%) than in IPAA patients (4%). Desmoids developed in both groups (five in the IRA group and four in IPAA group). The number of bowel movements was similar in both groups, but 25% of IPAA patients complained of nocturnal fecal soiling. Fulguration or polypectomy for recurrent polyps was necessary in all but two IRA patients at follow-up. The rectal stump was easily eradicated by polyps in all but four patients with minute polyps at surgery. In the latter patients a diffuse or carpeting rectal polyposis occurred. IPAA can give optimum control of colorectal polyposis in FAP patients with an acceptable incidence of postoperative complications and satisfactory functional results. This type of surgical procedure is indicated in most FAP patients, and IRA should be reserved for patients without polyps or with fewer than 10 polyps in the rectal stump; otherwise growth of polyps cannot be adequately controlled.

SCFA do not control inflammation and clinical functions but reduce cell proliferation in UC patients. On the contrary, FAP patients are refractory to SCFA.

1) SIAM can be an alternative to pelvic pouch in patients who have undergone restorative proctocolectomy when the construction of the pouch is not feasible. 2) The functional result observed after SIAM has been shown to be similar to that observed after pouch construction.

No abstract