SCIRP Mobile Website
Paper Submission

Why Us? >>

  • - Open Access
  • - Peer-reviewed
  • - Rapid publication
  • - Lifetime hosting
  • - Free indexing service
  • - Free promotion service
  • - More citations
  • - Search engine friendly

Free SCIRP Newsletters>>

Add your e-mail address to receive free newsletters from SCIRP.


Contact Us >>

Article citations


P. Friederich, A. E. de Jong, L. M. Mathus-Vliegen, E. Dekker, H. H. Krieken, J. Dees, F. M. Nagengast and H. F. Vasen, “Risk of Developing Adenomas and Carcinomas in the Ileal Pouch in Patients with Familial Adenomatous Polyposis,” Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Vol. 6, No. 11, 2008, pp. 1237-1242.

has been cited by the following article:

  • TITLE: Adenocarcinomas after Prophylactic Surgery for Familial Adenomatous Polyposis

    AUTHORS: Joan C. Smith, Michael W. Schäffer, Billy R. Ballard, Duane T. Smoot, Alan J. Herline, Samuel E. Adunyah, Amosy E. M’Koma

    KEYWORDS: Familial Adenomatous Polyposis; Restorative Proctocolectomy; Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis; Ileorectal Anastomosis; Adenocarcinomas

    JOURNAL NAME: Journal of Cancer Therapy, Vol.4 No.1, February 20, 2013

    ABSTRACT: The incidence of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is one in 7,000 to 12,000 live births. Virtually, all surgically untreated patients with FAP inevitably develop colorectal-cancer in their lifetime because they carry the adenomatous polyposis coli gene. Thus prophylactic proctocolectomy is indicated. Surgical treatment of FAP is still controversial. There are however, four surgical options: ileorectal anastomosis, restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis, proctocolectomy with ileostomy, and proctocolectomy with continent-ileostomy. Conventional proctocolectomy options largely lie between colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis or ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Detractors of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis prefer ileorectal anastomosis because of better functional results and quality of life. The functional outcome of total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis is undoubtedly far superior to that of the ileoanal pouch; however, the risk for rectal cancer is increased by 30%. Even after mucosectomy, inadvertent small mucosal residual islands remain. These residual islands carry the potential for the development of subsequent malignancy. We reviewed the literature (1975-2012) on the incidence, nature, and possible etiology of subsequent ileal-pouch and anal transit zone adenocarcinoma after prophylactic surgery procedure for FAP. To date there are 24 studies reporting 92 pouch-related cancers; 15 case reports, 4 prospective and 5 retrospective studies. Twenty three of 92 cancers (25%) developed in the pouch mucosa and 69 (75%) in anal transit zone (ATZ). Current recommendation for pouch surveillance and treatment are presented. Data suggest lifetime surveillance of these patients.