Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch anal anastomosis in obese patients

Background: Obesity is a relative contraindication to performing restorativ e proctocolectomy. The aim of this study was to assess the morbidity and fu nctional results after restorative proctocolectomy in obese patients as com pared to a matched cohort of non-obese patients, Methods: 334 patients who had restorative proctocolectomy were reviewed; ob esity was defined as a body mass index (BMI) greater then or equal to 30 kg /m(2). 31 obese patients were matched to 31 nonobese patients for age, gend er, steroid use, and diagnosis. Operative time, length of hospitalization, and both perioperative (<6 weeks) and long-term morbidity (>6 weeks), espec ially sepsis, were evaluated. Results: The BMI was significantly higher in the obese group (33.7 vs 23.2) (p<0.0001), and no difference was found between the obese and non-obese gr oups relative to the matched parameters of age, gender, steroid use and dia gnosis. There was no difference in the rate of mucosectomy performed betwee n the obese end non-obese patients (9.6% vs 3.2%, p=NS), 16% of the obese p atients underwent one stage restorative proctocolectomies as compared to 10 % in the non-obese group, Operative time was longer In the obese group (229 min vs 196 min; p=0.02), but overall hospital length of stay was similar ( 9.7 days vs 7.7 days; p=0.13), Perioperative morbidity was higher in obese patients (32% vs 9.6%, 0=0.053), However, there was no statistical signific ance in long-term morbidity (23% vs 32%, p=0.57) at a mean follow-up of 51 months in the obese group and 53 months in the non-obese group. Obese patie nts had more stomal complications (10 vs 0%) and incisional hernias (13 vs 3%)(p=NS). Overall the pelvic sepsis-rate was significantly higher in the o bese group (16 vs 0%; p<0.05). 60% of the obese patients who developed pelv ic sepsis had pouch-anal anastomosis performed without proximal fecal diver sion. Mean bowel movements/24 hours, pad use, nocturnal evacuation, acciden ts/24 hours and incontinence scores were not statistically significant betw een the groups. Conclusion: Obese patients have a higher rate of pelvic sepsis and peri-ope rative morbidity when compared to a matched non-obese cohort of patients; h owever, the functional outcome of restorative proctocolectomy in obese pati ents is not significantly different than in non-obese patients.