Published online Sep 7, 2015. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i33.9736
Peer-review started: December 16, 2014
First decision: January 22, 2015
Revised: February 27, 2015
Accepted: June 10, 2015
Article in press: June 10, 2015
Published online: September 7, 2015
Processing time: 267 Days and 19.3 Hours
AIM: To compare the follow-up outcomes of ileosigmoidal anastomosis (ISA) and caecorectal anastomosis (CRA) in patients with slow transit constipation (STC) with or without melanosis coli (MC).
METHODS: We collected the clinical data of 48 STC patients with or without MC from May 2002 to May 2007. Twenty-six patients underwent CRA (14 with MC) and 22 cases received ISA (14 with MC). A 3-year postoperative follow-up was conducted.
RESULTS: CRA improved the quality of life [evaluated by the gastrointestinal quality of life index (GIQLI)] in patients without MC, but was inferior to ISA in stool frequency and Wexner and GIQLI scores for MC patients. In the CRA group, patients with MC suffered worse outcomes than those without MC.
CONCLUSION: CRA is more suitable for STC patients without MC; however, for STC patients with MC, ISA is a better choice.
Core tip: The optimal surgical treatment for slow transit constipation (STC) is controversial. Based on our study, caecorectal anastomosis is more suitable for STC without melanosis coli (MC). However, for STC with MC, ileosigmoidal anastomosis, with a lower postoperative recurrence rate, is a better choice.