Evidence Hub

Complications and failure after Kock continent ileostomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Emile SH, Garoufalia Z, Mavrantonis S, Rogers P, Barsom SH, Horesh N, Gefen R, Wexner SD

Techniques in coloproctology, 2024

2,042 participants · 6 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A significant number of patients experience complications of the Kock pouch (KP) warranting revision or excision. This systematic review aimed to assess the pooled prevalence and risk factors for complications and failure of the KP.

METHODS: This Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA)-compliant systematic review (CRD42023416961) searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for studies on adult patients with Kock continent ileostomy published after the year 2000. The main outcome measures were revision, complications, and failure of the KP. Risk factors for complications and failure were assessed using a meta-regression analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-1 tool. A proportional meta-analysis of the main outcomes was performed.

RESULTS: A total of 19 studies (2042 patients) were included. The weighted mean prevalence of complications was 60.4% [95% confidence interval (CI): 46.1-74.7%], of pouch revision was 46.6% (95% CI: 38.5-54.7%), and of pouch failure was 12.9% (95% CI: 9.3-16.4%). Studies conducted in the USA had a mean failure prevalence of 12.6% (95% CI: 6.2-18.9%) comparable to studies conducted in Europe (11.1%; 95% CI: 7.5-14.7%). Factors associated with higher complications were increased body mass index (BMI) and previous ileoanal pouch anastomosis (IPAA); however, these factors were not associated with increased pouch failure.

CONCLUSIONS: The KP is a highly complex operation as shown by a pooled…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 2,042 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free