Antonino Spinelli, Nicolas Avellaneda, Alessandro Armuzzi
{"title":"Beyond ‘early surgery’: Reframing Ileocaecal resection as strategic care in Crohn's disease","authors":"Antonino Spinelli, Nicolas Avellaneda, Alessandro Armuzzi","doi":"10.1111/codi.70652","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>The concept of ‘early surgery’ for ileocaecal Crohn's disease (CD) has gained traction since the LIR!C trial demonstrated that laparoscopic ileocaecal resection is a cost-effective alternative to infliximab for uncomplicated terminal ileitis. However, the term ‘early’ is imprecisely defined, temporally misleading and difficult to operationalise in clinical practice. This article aims to propose a more useful clinical framework for the timing of ileocaecal resection in CD.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>We critically appraised the 10-year follow-up of the LIR!C trial, together with population-based and pooled observational data comparing ileocaecal resection with continued medical therapy.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Current evidence suggests that resection may be superior to continued medical therapy in selected patients. It is associated with higher rates of therapy-free remission and less need for subsequent surgery. Operating before complications develop is also associated with better perioperative outcomes. We propose distinguishing between reactive surgery, meaning operating in response to complications that have already developed, and strategic surgery. Strategic surgery is a proactive, multidisciplinary decision to offer ileocaecal resection at the optimal point in the disease course. It is based on phenotype, patient condition and shared decision-making, rather than on elapsed time or biological exposure alone.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The evidence underpinning this position is largely retrospective and subject to selection bias. Substantial clinician, patient and health-system barriers stand in the way of implementation. Prospective data are needed before guideline revision is warranted.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10512,"journal":{"name":"Colorectal Disease","volume":"28 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Colorectal Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/codi.70652","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aim
The concept of ‘early surgery’ for ileocaecal Crohn's disease (CD) has gained traction since the LIR!C trial demonstrated that laparoscopic ileocaecal resection is a cost-effective alternative to infliximab for uncomplicated terminal ileitis. However, the term ‘early’ is imprecisely defined, temporally misleading and difficult to operationalise in clinical practice. This article aims to propose a more useful clinical framework for the timing of ileocaecal resection in CD.
Method
We critically appraised the 10-year follow-up of the LIR!C trial, together with population-based and pooled observational data comparing ileocaecal resection with continued medical therapy.
Results
Current evidence suggests that resection may be superior to continued medical therapy in selected patients. It is associated with higher rates of therapy-free remission and less need for subsequent surgery. Operating before complications develop is also associated with better perioperative outcomes. We propose distinguishing between reactive surgery, meaning operating in response to complications that have already developed, and strategic surgery. Strategic surgery is a proactive, multidisciplinary decision to offer ileocaecal resection at the optimal point in the disease course. It is based on phenotype, patient condition and shared decision-making, rather than on elapsed time or biological exposure alone.
Conclusion
The evidence underpinning this position is largely retrospective and subject to selection bias. Substantial clinician, patient and health-system barriers stand in the way of implementation. Prospective data are needed before guideline revision is warranted.
期刊介绍:
Diseases of the colon and rectum are common and offer a number of exciting challenges. Clinical, diagnostic and basic science research is expanding rapidly. There is increasing demand from purchasers of health care and patients for clinicians to keep abreast of the latest research and developments, and to translate these into routine practice. Technological advances in diagnosis, surgical technique, new pharmaceuticals, molecular genetics and other basic sciences have transformed many aspects of how these diseases are managed. Such progress will accelerate.
Colorectal Disease offers a real benefit to subscribers and authors. It is first and foremost a vehicle for publishing original research relating to the demanding, rapidly expanding field of colorectal diseases.
Essential for surgeons, pathologists, oncologists, gastroenterologists and health professionals caring for patients with a disease of the lower GI tract, Colorectal Disease furthers education and inter-professional development by including regular review articles and discussions of current controversies.
Note that the journal does not usually accept paediatric surgical papers.