Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for generalized peritonitis due to perforated diverticulitis

Long-Term Results After Laparoscopic Lavage for Perforated Diverticulitis Purulent Peritonitis in Sweden: A Population-Based Observational Study

Objective

To compare long-term outcomes after laparoscopic lavage with resection surgery for perforated diverticulitis, Hinchey grade III as practiced in Sweden for 3 years.

Background

Laparoscopic lavage has been studied in 3 randomized controlled trials. Long-term results indicate that additional surgery and a remaining stoma are less common after lavage compared with resection, but data from routine care and larger cohorts are needed to get a more complete picture.

Methods

LapLav is a national cohort study with nearly complete coverage of all patients operated in Sweden between 2016 and 2018. The cohort was retrieved from the national patient register by a definition based on the Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems-10 code plus the surgical procedural code. All medical records have been reviewed and data retrieved in addition to registry data. Propensity score with inverse probability weighting was used to balance the 2 groups, that is, laparoscopic lavage vs resection surgery.

Results

Before the propensity score was applied, the cohort consisted of 499 patients. Additional surgery was more common in the resection group [odds ratio, 0.714; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.529-0.962; P = 0.0271]. Mortality did not differ between the groups (hazard ratio, 1.20; 95% CI = 0.69-2.07; P = 0.516). In the lavage group, 27% of patients went on to have resection surgery.

Conclusions

In Swedish routine care, laparoscopic lavage was feasible and safe for the surgical treatment of perforated diverticulitis, Hinchey grade III. Our results indicate that laparoscopic lavage can be used as a first-choice treatment.

Evaluation of laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for perforated diverticulitis: a national registry-based study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic lavage (LPL) has been suggested for treatment of non-feculent perforated diverticulitis. In this observational study, the surgical treatment of diverticular disease in Sweden outside prospective trials was investigated.

METHODS

This population-based study used the National Patient Register to identify all patients in Sweden with emergency admissions for diverticular disease, as defined by ICD codes from July 2014 to December 2020. Demographics, surgical procedures and outcomes were assessed. In addition, register data since 1997 were retrieved to assess co-morbidities, previous abdominal surgeries, and previous admissions for diverticular disease.

RESULTS

Among 47 294 patients with emergency hospital admission, 2035 underwent LPL (427 patients) or sigmoid resection (SR, 1608 patients) for diverticular disease. The mean follow-up was 30.8 months. Patients selected for LPL were younger, healthier and with less previous abdominal surgery for diverticular disease than those in the SR group (P < 0.01). LPL was associated with shorter postoperative hospital stay (mean 9.4 versus 14.9 days, P < 0.001) and lower 30-day mortality (3.5% versus 8.7%, P < 0.001). Diverticular disease-associated subsequent surgery was more common in the SR group than the LPL group except during the first year (P < 0.001). LPL had a lower mortality rate during the study period (stratified HR 0.70, 95% c.i. 0.53-0.92, P = 0.023).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic lavage constitutes a safe alternative to sigmoid resection for selected patients judged clinically to require surgery.

Inadvertent laparoscopic lavage of perforated colon cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic lavage for perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis has been grabbing the headlines, it is known that the clinical presentation of peritonitis can also be caused by an underlying perforated carcinoma. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of patients undergoing inadvertent laparoscopic lavage of perforated colon cancer as well as the delay in cancer diagnosis.

METHODS

The PubMed database was systematically searched to include all studies meeting inclusion criteria. Studies were screened through titles and abstracts with potentially eligible studies undergoing full-text screening. The primary endpoints of this meta-analysis were the rates of perforated colon cancer patients having undergone inadvertent laparoscopic lavage as well as the delay in cancer diagnosis. This was expressed in pooled rate % and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Eleven studies (three randomized, two prospective, six retrospective) totaling 642 patients met inclusion criteria. Eight studies reported how patients were screened for cancer and the number of patients who completed follow-up. The pooled cancer rate was 3.4% (0.9%, 5.8%) with low heterogeneity (Isquare2 = 34.02%) in eight studies. Cancer rates were 8.2% (0%, 3%) (Isquare2 = 58.2%) and 1.7% (0%, 4.5%) (Isquare2 = 0%) in prospective and retrospective studies, respectively. Randomized trials reported a cancer rate of 7.2% (3.1%, 11.2%) with low among-study heterogeneity (Isquare2 = 0%) and a median delay to diagnosis of 2 (1.5-5) months.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review found that 7% of patients undergoing laparoscopic lavage for peritonitis had perforated colon cancer with a delay to diagnosis of up to 5 months.

Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials on Long-term Outcomes of Surgical Treatment of Perforated Diverticulitis

OBJECTIVE

To assess long-term outcomes of patients with perforated diverticulitis treated with resection or laparoscopic lavage (LL).

BACKGROUND

Surgical treatment of perforated diverticulitis has changed in the last few decades. LL and increasing evidence that primary anastomosis (PRA) is feasible in certain patients have broadened surgical options. However, debate about the optimal surgical strategy lingers.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCT) on surgical treatment of perforated diverticulitis from inception to October 2022. Long-term reports of RCT comparing surgical interventions for the treatment of perforated diverticulitis were selected. The main outcome measures were long-term ostomy, long-term complications, recurrence, and reintervention rates.

RESULTS

After screening 2431 studies, 5 long-term follow-up studies of RCT comprising 499 patients were included. Three studies, excluding patients with fecal peritonitis, compared LL and colonic resection, and 2 compared PRA and Hartmann procedures. LL had lower odds of long-term ostomy [odds ratio (OR) = 0.133, 95% CI: 0.278-0.579; P < 0.001] and reoperation (OR = 0.585, 95% CI: 0.365-0.937; P = 0.02) compared with colonic resection but higher odds of diverticular disease recurrence (OR = 5.8, 95% CI: 2.33-14.42; P < 0.001). Colonic resection with PRA had lower odds of long-term ostomy (OR = 0.02, 95% CI: 0.003-0.195; P < 0.001), long-term complications (OR = 0.195, 95% CI: 0.113-0.335; P < 0.001), reoperation (OR = 0.2, 95% CI: 0.108-0.384; P < 0.001), and incisional hernia (OR = 0.184, 95% CI: 0.102-0.333; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in odds of mortality among the procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term follow-up of patients who underwent emergency surgery for perforated diverticulitis showed that LL had lower odds of long-term ostomy and reoperation, but more risk for disease recurrence when compared with resection in purulent peritonitis. Colonic resection with PRA had better long-term outcomes than the Hartmann procedure for fecal peritonitis.

Effectiveness of intraoperative peritoneal lavage with saline in patient with intra-abdominal infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Intraoperative peritoneal lavage (IOPL) with saline has been widely used in surgical practice. However, the effectiveness of IOPL with saline in patients with intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) remains controversial. This study aims to systematically review randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of IOPL in patients with IAIs.

Methods

The databases of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library, CNKI, WanFang, and CBM databases were searched from inception to December 31, 2022. Random-effects models were used to calculate the risk ratio (RR), mean difference, and standardized mean difference. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to rate the quality of the evidence.

Results

Ten RCTs with 1318 participants were included, of which eight studies on appendicitis and two studies on peritonitis. Moderate-quality evidence showed that the use of IOPL with saline was not associated with a reduced risk of mortality (0% vs. 1.1%; RR, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.02–6.39]), intra-abdominal abscess (12.3% vs. 11.8%; RR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.70–1.48]; I2 = 24%), incisional surgical site infections (3.3% vs. 3.8%; RR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.18–2.86]; I2 = 50%), postoperative complication (11.0% vs. 13.2%; RR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.39–1.41]; I2 = 64%), reoperation (2.9% vs. 1.7%; RR,1.71 [95% CI, 0.74–3.93]; I2 = 0%) and readmission (5.2% vs. 6.6%; RR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.48–1.87]; I2 = 7%) in patients with appendicitis when compared to non-IOPL. Low-quality evidence showed that the use of IOPL with saline was not associated with a reduced risk of mortality (22.7% vs. 23.3%; RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.45–2.09], I2 = 0%) and intra-abdominal abscess (5.1% vs. 5.0%; RR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.16–6.98], I2 = 0%) in patients with peritonitis when compared to non-IOPL.

Conclusion

IOPL with saline use in patients with appendicitis was not associated with significantly decreased risk of mortality, intra-abdominal abscess, incisional surgical site infection, postoperative complication, reoperation, and readmission compared with non-IOPL. These findings do not support the routine use of IOPL with saline in patients with appendicitis. The benefits of IOPL for IAI caused by other types of abdominal infections need to be investigated.

A Meta-Analysis of Short-Term Outcomes After Laparoscopic Lavage Versus Colonic Resection in the Treatment of Perforated Diverticulitis

The management of perforated non-faeculent diverticulitis has traditionally involved performing a colonic resection (CR). Laparoscopic lavage (LL) has emerged as a less invasive alternative in recent years. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the role of LL in the surgical treatment of perforated non-faeculent diverticulitis. To that end, we conducted a search on Embase, Medline, and Cochrane databases for comparative studies in the English language published till June 2021 [PROSPERO (CRD42021269410)]. The risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2) and the methodological index for non-randomised studies (MINORS). Data were analysed using Cochrane RevMan. Pooled odds ratio (POR) and cumulative weighted ratios (CWR) were calculated. A total of 13 studies involving 1061 patients were found eligible, including seven studies based on three randomised control trials (RCTs). LL was associated with a reduced risk of wound infection, stoma formation, and need for further surgery by 77% [POR: 0.23, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.07-0.74], 83% (POR: 0.17, 95% CI: 0.05-0.56), and 53% (POR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.23-0.97) respectively. Duration of surgery and hospitalisation was reduced by 54% and 43% respectively. However, LL was associated with higher rates of unplanned reoperations (POR: 2.05, 95% CI: 1.22-3.42), recurrence (POR: 9.47, 95% CI: 3.24-27.67), and peritonitis (POR: 8.92, 95% CI: 2.71-29.33). No differences in mortality or readmission rates were observed. LL in Hinchey III diverticulitis lowers the incidence of stoma formation and overall reoperations without an increase in mortality but at the cost of higher recurrence rates and peritonitis. A limitation of this study was the inclusion of non-RCTs. An elective resection should be considered after LL. Guidelines for surgical techniques in LL need to be standardised.

Long-term outcomes and risk factors for diverticulitis recurrence after a successful laparoscopic peritoneal lavage in Hinchey III peritonitis

PURPOSE

Recently, treatment of Hinchey III diverticulitis by laparoscopic peritoneal lavage has been questioned. Moreover, long-term outcomes have been scarcely reported. Primary outcome was to determine the recurrence rate of diverticulitis after a successful laparoscopic peritoneal lavage in Hinchey III diverticulitis. Secondary outcomes were identification of associated risk factors for recurrence and elective sigmoidectomy rate.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study in a tertiary referral center was performed. Patients with Hinchey III diverticulitis who underwent a successful laparoscopic peritoneal lavage between June 2006 and December 2019 were eligible. Diverticulitis recurrence was analyzed according to the Kaplan-Meier and log-rank test, censoring for death, loss of follow-up, or elective sigmoid resection in the absence of recurrence. Risk factors for recurrence were identified using Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine patients had a successful laparoscopic peritoneal lavage (mean age: 63 years; 53.6% women). Four patients had an elective sigmoid resection without recurrences. Recurrence rate was 42% (n = 29) after a median follow-up of 63 months. The cumulative global recurrence at 1, 3, and 5 years was 30% (95% CI, 20-43%), 37.5% (95% CI, 27-51%), and 48.9% (95% CI, 36-64%), respectively. Smoking (HR, 2.87; 95% CI, 1.22-6.5; p = 0.016) and episodes of diverticulitis prior to laparoscopic peritoneal lavage (HR, 5.2; 95% CI, 2.11-12.81; p < 0.001) were independently associated with an increased risk of recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Diverticulitis recurrence after a successful laparoscopic peritoneal lavage is high, decreasing after the first year of follow-up. Smoking and previous episodes of acute diverticulitis independently increase the risk of new episodes of diverticulitis.

Laparoscopic lavage for perforated diverticulitis in the LapLav study: population-based registry study

BACKGROUND

The standard treatment for Hinchey III perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis was resection with or without a stoma, but recent trials have shown that laparoscopic lavage is a reasonable alternative. This registry-based Swedish study investigated results at a national level to assess safety in real-world scenarios.

METHODS

Patients in Sweden who underwent emergency surgery for perforated diverticulitis between 2016 and 2018 were studied. Inverse probability weighting by propensity score was used to adjust for confounding factors.

RESULTS

A total of 499 patients were included in this study. Laparoscopic lavage was associated with a significantly lower 90-day Comprehensive Complication Index (20.9 versus 32.0; odds ratio 0.77, 95 per cent compatibility interval (c.i.) 0.61 to 0.97) and overall duration of hospital stay (9 versus 15 days; ratio of means 0.84, 95 per cent c.i. 0.74 to 0.96) compared with resection. Patients had 82 (95 per cent c.i. 39 to 140) per cent more readmissions following lavage than resection (27.2 versus 21.0 per cent), but similar reoperation rates. More co-morbidity was noted among patients who underwent resection than those who had laparoscopic lavage.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic lavage is safe in routine care beyond trial evaluations.

Encompassing an Emerging Laparoscopic Surgical Procedure for Hinchey III Diverticulitis Into Acute Surgical Care Practice: Our Experience With a Case Report and Review of Literature

In the past decade, there has been emerging data from the West supporting the use of laparoscopic lavage (LL) as a minimally invasive surgical (MIS) technique to treat Hinchey III perforated diverticulitis, rather than previous standard open surgical resection procedures. However, this can only be used in a select group of patients and also requires adequate knowledge and experience of colorectal and MIS techniques. This approach remains novel and rarely practiced in Asia. In this report, we review the current literature and discuss the considerations, outcomes, and limitations of this technique with an illustration of our case report. We report on a case of Hinchey III diverticulitis in a 51-year-old Asian woman who was successfully treated with LL after initial diagnostic laparoscopy in our institution and was discharged on the fifth postoperative day. LL is a colorectal MIS technique that has been evaluated and appears to be effective and has less morbidity compared with Hartmann procedure or primary resection with anastomosis. This technique should be incorporated into our practice for patients with Hinchey III diverticulitis who are suitable for laparoscopy at presentation. With the management of our case, we hence propose a clinical algorithm for adoption of this MIS technique by advocating routine diagnostic laparoscopy in hemodynamically stable patients presenting with gross peritonitis from perforated diverticulitis. This will promote the adoption of LL as a management option for perforated diverticulitis.

Laparoscopic Lavage in the Management of Hinchey III/IV Diverticulitis

Diverticulitis manifestations may cover a spectrum of mild local inflammation to diffuse feculent peritonitis. Up to 35% of patients presenting with diverticulitis will have purulent (Hinchey grade III) or feculent (Hinchey grade IV) contamination of the abdomen, with a high-associated morbidity and mortality. Surgical management may involve segmental resection with or without restoration of bowel continuity. However, emergency resection for diverticulitis can be associated with high mortality rates, as well as low stoma reversal rates at 1 year. Therefore, laparoscopic peritoneal lavage has been proposed for use in selected patients with purulent peritonitis. The topic of laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for the treatment of perforated diverticulitis in the literature has been controversial. Our review of the recent data show that laparoscopic lavage may be safe and feasible in select patients with similar rates of mortality and major morbidity. There is, however, a concern regarding an associated higher rate of postoperative abscess and early reintervention risk.

Laparoscopic Lavage vs Primary Resection for Acute Perforated Diverticulitis: Long-term Outcomes From the Scandinavian Diverticulitis (SCANDIV) Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Perforated colonic diverticulitis usually requires surgical resection, with significant morbidity. Short-term results from randomized clinical trials have indicated that laparoscopic lavage is a feasible alternative to resection. However, it appears that no long-term results are available.

Objective

To compare long-term (5-year) outcomes of laparoscopic peritoneal lavage and primary resection as treatments of perforated purulent diverticulitis.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This international multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted in 21 hospitals in Sweden and Norway, which enrolled patients between February 2010 and June 2014. Long-term follow-up was conducted between March 2018 and November 2019. Patients with symptoms of left-sided acute perforated diverticulitis, indicating urgent surgical need and computed tomography-verified free air, were eligible. Those available for trial intervention (Hinchey stages <IV) were included in the long-term follow-up.

Interventions

Patients were assigned to undergo laparoscopic peritoneal lavage or colon resection based on computer-generated, center-stratified block randomization.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was severe complications within 5 years. Secondary outcomes included mortality, secondary operations, recurrences, stomas, functional outcomes, and quality of life.

Results

Of 199 randomized patients, 101 were assigned to undergo laparoscopic peritoneal lavage and 98 were assigned to colon resection. At the time of surgery, perforated purulent diverticulitis was confirmed in 145 patients randomized to lavage (n = 74) and resection (n = 71). The median follow-up was 59 (interquartile range, 51-78; full range, 0-110) months, and 3 patients were lost to follow-up, leaving a final analysis of 73 patients who had had laparoscopic lavage (mean [SD] age, 66.4 [13] years; 39 men [53%]) and 69 who had received a resection (mean [SD] age, 63.5 [14] years; 36 men [52%]). Severe complications occurred in 36% (n = 26) in the laparoscopic lavage group and 35% (n = 24) in the resection group (P = .92). Overall mortality was 32% (n = 23) in the laparoscopic lavage group and 25% (n = 17) in the resection group (P = .36). The stoma prevalence was 8% (n = 4) in the laparoscopic lavage group vs 33% (n = 17; P = .002) in the resection group among patients who remained alive, and secondary operations, including stoma reversal, were performed in 36% (n = 26) vs 35% (n = 24; P = .92), respectively. Recurrence of diverticulitis was higher following laparoscopic lavage (21% [n = 15] vs 4% [n = 3]; P = .004). In the laparoscopic lavage group, 30% (n = 21) underwent a sigmoid resection. There were no significant differences in the EuroQoL-5D questionnaire or Cleveland Global Quality of Life scores between the groups.

Conclusions and Relevance

Long-term follow-up showed no differences in severe complications. Recurrence of diverticulitis after laparoscopic lavage was more common, often leading to sigmoid resection. This must be weighed against the lower stoma prevalence in this group. Shared decision-making considering both short-term and long-term consequences is encouraged.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01047462.

Management of perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis. A multidisciplinary review and position paper

Perforated diverticulitis is an emergent clinical condition and its management is challenging and still debated. The aim of this position paper was to critically review the available evidence on the management of perforated diverticulitis and generalized peritonitis in order to provide evidence-based suggestions for a management strategy. Four Italian scientific societies (SICCR, SICUT, SIRM, AIGO), selected experts who identified 5 clinically relevant topics in the management of perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis that would benefit from a multidisciplinary review. The following 5 issues were tackled: 1) Criteria to decide between conservative and surgical treatment in case of perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis; 2) Criteria or scoring system to choose the most appropriate surgical option when diffuse peritonitis is confirmed 3); The appropriate surgical procedure in hemodynamically stable or stabilized patients with diffuse peritonitis; 4) The appropriate surgical procedure for patients with generalized peritonitis and septic shock and 5) Optimal medical therapy in patients with generalized peritonitis from diverticular perforation before and after surgery. In perforated diverticulitis surgery is indicated in case of diffuse peritonitis or failure of conservative management and the decision to operate is not based on the presence of extraluminal air. If diffuse peritonitis is confirmed the choice of surgical technique is based on intraoperative findings and the presence or risk of severe septic shock. Further prognostic factors to consider are physiological derangement, age, comorbidities, and immune status. In hemodynamically stable patients, emergency laparoscopy has benefits over open surgery. Options include resection and anastomosis, Hartmann’s procedure or laparoscopic lavage. In generalized peritonitis with septic shock, an open surgical approach is preferred. Non-restorative resection and/or damage control surgery appear to be the only viable options, depending on the severity of hemodynamic instability. Multidisciplinary medical management should be applied with the main aims of controlling infection, relieving postoperative pain and preventing and/or treating postoperative ileus. In conclusion, the complexity and diversity of patients with diverticular perforation and diffuse peritonitis requires a personalized strategy, involving a thorough classification of physiological derangement, staging of intra-abdominal infection and choice of the most appropriate surgical procedure.

Complicated Diverticular Disease

The modern management of colonic diverticular disease involves grouping patients into uncomplicated or complicated diverticulitis, after which the correct treatment paradigm is instituted. Recent controversies suggest overlap in management strategies between these two groups. While most reports still support surgical intervention for the treatment of complicated diverticular disease, more data are forthcoming suggesting complicated diverticulitis does not merit surgical resection in all scenarios. Given the significant risk for complication in surgery for diverticulitis, careful attention should be paid to patient and procedure selection. Here, we define complicated diverticulitis, discuss options for surgical intervention, and explain strategies for avoiding operative pitfalls that result in early and late postoperative complications.

The role of emergency laparoscopic surgery for complicated diverticular disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery develops rapidly in both elective and emergency settings. The study aimed to determine the role of different laparoscopic methods for the emergency treatment of complicated diverticulitis.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and the Cochrane database were searched up to November 2019 to identify all published articles related to the topic. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata 15.

RESULTS

Fourteen publications were included in the analysis. Laparoscopic surgery was applied in 425 patients, and 493 patients underwent open colon resection (OCR). Postoperative mortality, morbidity, severe complications, and reoperation rates were not significantly different between the laparoscopic and open surgery groups. Subgroup analysis was performed based on the different laparoscopic methods (laparoscopic colon resection [LCR] and laparoscopic lavage and drainage [LLD]). Subgroup analysis indicated that LCR was superior to OCR in terms of morbidity, while OCR was superior to LLD in terms of severe complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The safety of laparoscopic surgery for the emergency treatment of complicated diverticulitis is related to different surgical methods. LCR is suggested to be a better choice according to the postoperative outcomes. More definite conclusions can be drawn in future randomized controlled trials.

Optimal Operative Strategy for Hinchey III Sigmoid Diverticulitis: A Decision Analysis

BACKGROUND

Operative approaches for Hinchey III diverticulitis include the Hartmann procedure, primary resection and anastomosis, and laparoscopic lavage. Several randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses have compared these approaches; however, results are conflicting and previous studies have not captured the complexity of balancing surgical risks and quality of life.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the optimal operative strategy for patients with Hinchey III sigmoid diverticulitis.

DESIGN

We developed a Markov cohort model, incorporating perioperative morbidity/mortality, emergency and elective reoperations, and quality-of-life weights. We derived model parameters from systematic reviews and meta-analyses, where possible. We performed a second-order Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analysis to account for joint uncertainty in model parameters.

SETTING

This study measured outcomes over patients' lifetime horizon.

PATIENTS

The base case was a simulated cohort of 65-year-old patients with Hinchey III diverticulitis. A scenario simulating a cohort of highly comorbid 80-year-old patients was also planned.

INTERVENTIONS

Hartmann procedure, primary resection and anastomosis (with or without diverting ileostomy), and laparoscopic lavage were performed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Quality-adjusted life years were the primary outcome measured.

RESULTS

Following surgery for Hinchey III diverticulitis, 39.5% of patients who underwent the Hartmann procedure, 14.3% of patients who underwent laparoscopic lavage, and 16.7% of patients who underwent primary resection and anastomosis had a stoma at 12 months. After applying quality-of-life weights, primary resection and anastomosis was the optimal operative strategy, yielding 18.0 quality-adjusted life years; laparoscopic lavage and the Hartmann procedure yielded 9.6 and 13.7 fewer quality-adjusted life months. A scenario analysis for elderly, highly comorbid patients could not be performed because of a lack of high-quality evidence to inform model parameters.

LIMITATIONS

This model required assumptions about the long-term postoperative course of patients who underwent laparoscopic lavage because few long-term data for this group have been published.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the Hartmann procedure is widely used for Hinchey III diverticulitis, when considering both surgical risks and quality of life, both laparoscopic lavage and primary resection and anastomosis provide greater quality-adjusted life years for patients with Hinchey III diverticulitis, and primary resection and anastomosis appears to be the optimal approach. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B223. ESTRATEGIA OPERATIVA ÓPTIMA EN DIVERTICULITIS HINCHEY III DE SIGMOIDES: UN ANÁLISIS DE DECISION: Los enfoques quirúrgicos para la diverticulitis Hinchey III incluyen el procedimiento de Hartmann, la resección primaria y anastomosis, y el lavado laparoscópico. Varios ensayos controlados aleatorios y metanálisis han comparado estos enfoques; sin embargo, los resultados son contradictorios y los estudios previos no han captado la complejidad de equilibrar los riesgos quirúrgicos y la calidad de vida.Determinar la estrategia operativa óptima para pacientes con diverticulitis Hinchey III de sigmoides.Desarrollamos un modelo de cohorte de Markov, incorporando morbilidad / mortalidad perioperatoria, reoperaciones electivas y de emergencia, y pesos de calidad de vida. Derivamos los parámetros del modelo de revisiones sistemáticas y metaanálisis, cuando fue posible. Realizamos un análisis de sensibilidad probabilístico Monte Carlo de segundo orden para tener en cuenta la incertidumbre conjunta en los parámetros del modelo.Seguimiento de por vida.El caso base fue una cohorte simulada de pacientes de 65 años con diverticulitis de Hinchey III. También se planeó un escenario que simulaba una cohorte de pacientes de 80 años altamente comórbidos.Procedimiento de Hartmann, resección primaria y anastomosis (con o sin desviación de ileostomía) y lavado laparoscópico.Años de vida ajustados por calidad.Después de la cirugía para la diverticulitis de Hinchey III, el 39.5% de los pacientes que se sometieron al procedimiento de Hartmann, el 14.3% de los pacientes que se sometieron a un lavado laparoscópico, y el 16.7% de los pacientes que se sometieron a resección primaria y anastomosis tuvieron un estoma a los 12 meses. Después de aplicar el peso de la calidad de vida, la resección primaria y la anastomosis fueron la estrategia operativa óptima, que dio como resultado 18.0 años de vida ajustados en función de la calidad; el lavado laparoscópico y el procedimiento de Hartmann arrojaron 9.6 y 13.7 meses de vida ajustados en función de la calidad, respectivamente. No se pudo realizar un análisis de escenarios para pacientes de edad avanzada altamente comórbidos debido a la falta de evidencia de alta calidad para informar los parámetros del modelo.Este modelo requirió suposiciones sobre el curso postoperatorio a largo plazo de pacientes que se sometieron a lavado laparoscópico, ya que se han publicado pocos datos a largo plazo para este grupo.Aunque el procedimiento de Hartmann se usa ampliamente para la diverticulitis de Hinchey III, cuando se consideran tanto los riesgos quirúrgicos como la calidad de vida, tanto el lavado laparoscópico como la resección primaria y la anastomosis proporcionan una mayor calidad de años de vida ajustada para los pacientes con diverticulitis de Hinchey III y la resección primaria y anastomosis parece ser el enfoque óptimo. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B223.

Preliminary Experience with Laparoscopic Peritoneal Lavage for Complicated Diverticulitis: A New Algorithm for Treatment?

Patients with findings suggestive of a perforated diverticulitis may be subject to colostomy with the attendant morbidity and quality-of-life concerns. Recent literature demonstrates decreased use of laparotomy and colostomy when diagnostic laparoscopy reveals absence of fecal peritonitis. Ten patients presenting with diverticulitis between May 2009 and February 2012 underwent diagnostic laparoscopy. The indication for surgery in nine patients was failure of medical management with or without percutaneous drainage and one had significant pneumoperitoneum at presentation. A comprehensive algorithm was subsequently developed governing medical and surgical management of diverticulitis including the use of diagnostic laparoscopy and laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for patients with Hinchey Stage 3 diverticulitis or abscess formation not amenable to percutaneous drainage. Eight patients underwent diagnostic laparoscopy and laparoscopic peritoneal lavage, whereas two patients underwent diagnostic laparoscopy with conversion to open procedures (low-anterior resection with diverting ileostomy and Hartmann's procedure). Mortality was 0 per cent. Four patients were subsequently readmitted for relapse or recurrence. Two required laparotomy at the time of readmission, ultimately receiving a diagnosis of adenocarcinoma. Two were managed medically and later underwent elective laparoscopic sigmoid colon resection. Diagnostic laparoscopy and laparoscopy peritoneal lavage appear feasible and safe and may be an alternative to more invasive surgery, avoiding laparotomy and colostomy and staging patients for elective laparoscopic resection. Based on our institutional experience, we propose a novel algorithm for the treatment of hospitalized patients with diverticulitis, which incorporates diagnostic laparoscopy and laparoscopic peritoneal lavage while emphasizing patient selection based on clinical examination and imaging.

Acute diverticulitis: old challenge, current trends, open questions

Acute diverticulitis (AD) is an increasing issue for health systems worldwide. As accuracy of clinical symptoms and laboratory examinations is poor, a pivotal role in preoperative diagnosis and severity assessment is played by CT scan. Several new classifications trying to adapt the intraoperative Hinchey's classification to preoperative CT findings have been proposed, but none really entered clinical practice. Treatment of early AD is mostly conservative (antibiotics) and may be administered in outpatients in selected cases. Larger abscesses (exceeding 3 to 5 cm) need percutaneous drainage, while management of stages 3 (purulent peritonitis) and 4 (fecal peritonitis) is difficult to standardize, as various approaches are nowadays suggested. Three situations are identified: situation A, stage 3 in stable/healthy patients, where various options are available, including conservative management, lavage/drainage and primary resection/anastomosis w/without protective stoma; situation B, stage 3 in unstable and/or unhealthy patients, and stage 4 in stable/healthy patients, where stoma-protected primary resection/anastomosis or Hartmann procedure should be performed; situation C, stage 4 in unstable and/or unhealthy patients, where Hartmann procedure or damage control surgery (resection without any anastomosis/stoma) are suggested. Late, elective sigmoid resection is less and less performed, as a new trend towards a patient-tailored management is spreading.

The Bucharest ESTES consensus statement on peritonitis

INTRODUCTION

Peritonitis is still an important health problem associated with high morbidity and mortality. A multidisciplinary approach to the management of patients with peritonitis may be an important factor to reduce the risks for patients and improve efficiency, outcome, and the cost of care.

METHODS

Expert panel discussion on Peritonitis was held in Bucharest on May 2017, during the 17th ECTES Congress, involving surgeons, infectious disease specialists, radiologists and intensivists with the goal of defining recommendations for the optimal management of peritonitis.

CONCLUSION

This document is an updated presentation of management of peritonitis and represents the summary of the final recommendations approved by a panel of experts.

Emergency Surgery in Acute Diverticulitis: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Acute diverticulitis is a common disease with public health significance. Many studies with a high level of evidence have been published recently on the surgical management of acute diverticulitis.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to define the accurate surgical management of acute diverticulitis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were sources used.

STUDY SELECTION

One reviewer conducted a systematic study with combinations of key words for the disease and the surgical procedure. Additional studies were searched in the reference lists of all included articles. The results of the systematic review were submitted to a working group composed of 13 practitioners. All of the conclusions were obtained by full consensus and validated by an external committee.

INTERVENTIONS

The interventions assessed were laparoscopic peritoneal lavage, primary resection with anastomosis with or without ileostomy, and the Hartmann procedure, with either a laparoscopic or an open approach.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Morbidity, mortality, long-term stoma rates, and quality of life were measured.

RESULTS

Seventy-one articles were included. Five guidelines were retrieved, along with 4 meta-analyses, 14 systematic reviews, and 5 randomized controlled trials that generated 8 publications, all with a low risk of bias, except for blinding. Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage showed concerning results of deep abscesses and unplanned reoperations. Studies on Hinchey III/IV diverticulitis showed similar morbidity and mortality. A reduced length of stay with Hartmann procedure compared with primary resection with anastomosis was reported in the short term, and in the long term, more definite stoma along with poorer quality of life was reported with Hartmann procedure. No high-quality data were found to support the laparoscopic approach.

LIMITATIONS

Trials specifically assessing Hinchey IV diverticulitis have not yet been completed.

CONCLUSIONS

High-quality studies showed that laparoscopic peritoneal lavage was associated with an increased morbidity and that Hartmann procedure was associated with poorer long-term outcomes than primary resection with anastomosis with ileostomy, but Hartmann procedure is still acceptable, especially in high-risk patients.

Novel approach to intraoperative peritoneal lavage with an extracorporeal stirring method in laparoscopic surgery for generalized peritonitis: Preliminary results

INTRODUCTION

The primary concern with laparoscopic intraoperative peritoneal lavage (IOPL) for generalized peritonitis relates to the difficulty and uncertainty in ensuring adequate washout of contaminated fluid. Here, we describe a new method of laparoscopy-assisted IOPL.

METHODS

We performed emergency surgery in 10 patients with generalized peritonitis necessitating IOPL. A small wound retractor was inserted into the abdominal cavity through an incision and elevated to raise the abdominal wall. More than 3-L saline was injected via the retractor at one time. The abdomen was manually shaken by pressure from outside the body. Contaminated fluid was removed with a long suction device through the retractor. This procedure was repeated until the fluid was confirmed to be transparent by laparoscopy, and then drains were placed.

RESULTS

Median lavage time was 23.5 minutes (range, 15-34 minutes), and volume of lavage fluid was 19 L (range, 10-20 L). Median time to resumption of fluid intake was 3 days (range, 1-12 days), time to food intake was 6 days (range, 3-14 days), and time to first bowel movement was 5 days (range, 3-10 days). Median duration of antibiotic use was 8.5 days (range, 5-15 days). Complications were one case of antibiotic-induced rash, two cases of paralytic ileus, and one case of pelvic abscess. All patients recovered well without additional surgical intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

This new approach to laparoscopy-assisted IOPL was feasible for these patients with generalized peritonitis. This procedure enabled corpus lavage to be performed in a similarly short time to open surgery but with less invasiveness. Further research is needed to confirm indications and long-term outcomes.

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage versus laparoscopic sigmoidectomy in complicated acute diverticulitis: a multicenter prospective observational study

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage (LPL) is feasible in selected patients with pelvic abscess and generalized purulent peritonitis caused by acute diverticulitis. We aimed to compare LPL and laparoscopic sigmoidectomy (LS) in complicated acute diverticulitis.

METHODS

This prospective, observational, multicenter study included patients with a pelvic abscess not amenable to conservative management and patients with Hinchey III acute diverticulitis, from 2015 to 2018. Sixty-six patients were enrolled: 28 (42%) underwent LPL and 38 (58%) underwent LS. In LS, patients had a primary anastomosis, with or without ileostomy, or an end colostomy (HA). Major outcomes were mortality, morbidity, failure of source control, reoperation, length of stay, and diverticulitis recurrence.

RESULTS

Patient demographics were similar in the two groups. In LPL, ASA score > 2 and Mannheim Peritonitis Index were significantly higher (p = 0.05 and 0.004). In LS, 24 patients (63%) had a PA and 14 (37%) an HA. No death was recorded. Overall, morbidity was 33% in LPL and 18% in LS (p = 0.169). However, failure to achieve source control of the peritoneal infection and the need to return to the operating room were more frequent in LPL (p = 0.002 and p = 0.006). Mean postoperative length of stay was comparable (p = 0.08). Diverticular recurrence was significantly higher in LPL (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

LPL is related to a higher reoperation rate, more frequent postoperative ongoing sepsis, and higher recurrence rates. Therefore, laparoscopic lavage for perforated diverticulitis carries a high risk of failure in daily practice.

Timing of laparoscopic elective surgery for acute left colonic diverticulitis. Retrospective analysis of 332 patients

PURPOSE

The optimal time to perform elective surgery remains to be determined. We analyzed the impact of time interval to surgery on short-terme outcome parameters in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic left colonic resection for diverticulitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of two series of case-matched patients according to the timing of operation after the last episode of diverticulitis: group A (within 90 days) and group B (beyond 90 days).

RESULTS

332 patients had left colonic resection for diverticulitis. 117 patients were included in group A vs 114 patients in group B. Overall abdominal morbidity in Group A was 21% vs 5% in group B (p = 0.02). Mean hospital stay was 7.7 days in group A vs 5 days in group B (p = 0.08). Residual inflammation was significantly increased in group A (31%) as compared to group B (11%) (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic left colonic resection for acute diverticulitis is best performed beyond the third month after the last acute episode.

The diminishing role of surgery for acute diverticulitis

Tailored treatment

Randomized Controlled Trial on Adjunctive Lavage for Severe Peritonitis

Background:In severe peritoneal dialysis (PD)-related peritonitis, patients' response to antibiotic can be poor. We postulated that adjunctive lavage may improve the outcome in severe cases by enhancing the removal of bacteria and inflammatory cells from the peritoneum.Methods:Severe PD peritonitis was defined as poor clinical response to empirical cefazolin/ceftazidime and a PD effluent (PDE) leukocyte count > 1,090/mm³ on day 3. Enrolled patients were randomized into either the lavage group (n = 20) or control group (n = 20). In the lavage group, continuous lavage by an automated PD machine from day 3 to 5 or 6 was performed, whereas the usual PD schedule was maintained in the control group. The primary outcome was treatment success. Post hoc analysis was also performed to compare the outcome between subgroups with different severity.Results:Baseline parameters were similar in the lavage and control groups, including PDE leukocyte count on day 3 (4,871/mm³ vs 4,143/mm³, p = 0.46). Treatment success rates were high in both groups (75% vs 70%, p = 0.72). C-reactive protein (CRP) on day 3 was found to be the only predictor of treatment failure and was used to stratify all patients into tertiles of severity. Whilst a significant decline in treatment success was evident across the tertiles of increasing CRP in the control group (100% vs 85.7% vs 28.6%, p = 0.005), treatment success was relatively maintained in the lavage group (85.7% vs 71.4% vs 66.7%, p = 0.43).Conclusions:Adjunctive lavage did not improve the overall outcome, although it may be beneficial for the more severe peritonitis patients who have high CRP.

Long-term follow-up of a multicentre cohort study on laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for perforated diverticulitis

AIM

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage has increasingly been investigated as a promising alternative to sigmoidectomy for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis. Most studies only reported outcomes up to 12 months. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate long-term outcomes of patients treated with laparoscopic lavage.

METHODS

Between 2008 and 2010, 38 patients treated with laparoscopic lavage for perforated diverticulitis in 10 Dutch teaching hospitals were included. Long-term follow-up data on patient outcomes, e.g. diverticulitis recurrence, reoperations and readmissions, were collected retrospectively. The characteristics of patients with recurrent diverticulitis or complications requiring surgery or leading to death, categorized as 'overall complicated outcome', were compared with patients who developed no complications or complications not requiring surgery.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 46 months (interquartile range 7-77), during which 17 episodes of recurrent diverticulitis (seven complicated) in 12 patients (32%) occurred. Twelve patients (32%) required additional surgery with a total of 29 procedures. Fifteen patients (39%) had a total of 50 readmissions. Of initially successfully treated patients (n = 31), 12 (31%) had recurrent diverticulitis or other complications. At 90 days, 32 (84%) patients were alive without undergoing a sigmoidectomy. However, seven (22%) of these patients eventually had a sigmoidectomy after 90 days. Diverticulitis-related events occurred up to 6 years after the index procedure.

CONCLUSION

Long-term diverticulitis recurrence, re-intervention and readmission rates after laparoscopic lavage were high. A complicated outcome was also seen in patients who had initially been treated successfully with laparoscopic lavage with relevant events occurring up to 6 years after initial surgery.

Laparoscopic lavage and drainage for Hinchey III diverticulitis: review of technical aspects

The surgical treatment for patients with generalized peritonitis complicating sigmoid diverticulitis is currently debated; particularly in case of diffuse purulent contamination (Hinchey 3). Laparoscopic lavage and drainage (LLD) has been proposed by some authors as a safe and effective alternative to single- or multi-stage resective surgery. However, among all the different studies on LLD, there is no uniformity in terms of surgical technique adopted and data show significant differences in postoperative outcomes. Aim of this review was to analyze the differences and similarities among the authors in terms of application, surgical technique and outcomes of LLD in Hinchey 3 patients. A bibliographical research was performed by referring to PubMed and Cochrane. "Purulent peritonitis", "Hinchey 3 diverticulitis", "acute diverticulitis", "colonic perforation" and "complicated diverticulitis" were used as key words. Twenty-eight papers were selected, excluding meta-analysis, reviews and case reports with a very small number of patients. The aim of this review was to establish how LLD should be done, suggesting important technical tricks. We found agreement in terms of indications, preoperative management, ports' positioning, antibiotics, enteral feeding and drain management. On the contrast, different statements regarding indications, adhesiolysis and management of colonic hole and failure of laparoscopic lavage are reported. A widespread diffusion of LLD and standardization of its technique are impossible because of data heterogeneity and selection bias in the limited RCTs. It is necessary to wait for long terms results from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in progress to establish the efficacy and safety of this technique. More importantly, an increased number of highly skilled and dedicated colorectal laparoscopic surgeons are required to standardized the procedure.

Non-operative management of perforated diverticulitis with extraluminal or free air - a retrospective single center cohort study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to describe patient characteristics and results of non-operative management for patients presenting with computed tomography (CT) verified perforated diverticulitis with extraluminal or free air.

METHODS

All patients treated for diverticulitis (ICD-10: K-57) during 2010-2014 were identified and medical records were reviewed. Re-evaluations of CT examinations for all patients with complicated disease according to medical records were performed. All patients diagnosed with perforated diverticulitis and extraluminal or free air on re-evaluation were included and characteristics of patients having immediate surgery and those whom non-operative management was attempted are described.

RESULTS

Of 141 patients with perforated diverticulitis according to medical records, 136 were confirmed on CT re-evaluation. Emergency surgical intervention within 24 h of admission was performed in 29 (21%) patients. Non-operative management with iv antibiotics was attempted for 107 patients and was successful in 101 (94%). The 30-day mortality rate was 2%. The presence of a simultaneous abscess was higher for patients with failure of non-operative management compared with those that were successfully managed non-operatively (67% compared to 17%, p = .013). Eleven out of thirty-two patients (34%) with free air were successfully managed conservatively. Patients that were operated within 24 h from admission were more commonly on immunosuppressive therapy, had more commonly free intraperitoneal air and free fluid in the peritoneal cavity.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-operative management is successful in the majority of patients with CT-verified perforated diverticulitis with extraluminal air, and also in one-third of those with free air in the peritoneal cavity.

Laparoscopic Lavage Versus Primary Resection for Acute Perforated Diverticulitis: Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare clinical outcomes after laparoscopic lavage (LL) or colonic resection (CR) for purulent diverticulitis.

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic lavage has been suggested as an alternative treatment for traditional CR. Comparative studies to date have shown conflicting results.

METHODS

Electronic searches of Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were performed. Weighted mean differences (WMD) were calculated for effect size of continuous variables and pooled odds ratios (POR) calculated for discrete variables.

RESULTS

A total of 589 patients recruited from 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 4 comparative studies were included; 85% as Hinchey III. LL group had younger patients with higher body mass index and lower ASA grades, but comparable Hinchey classification and previous diverticulitis rates. No significant differences were noted for mortality, 30-day reoperations and unplanned readmissions. LL had higher rates of intraabdominal abscesses (POR = 2.85; 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.52-5.34; P = 0.001), peritonitis (POR = 7.80; 95% CI 2.12-28.69; P = 0.002), and increased long-term emergency reoperations (POR = 3.32; 95% CI 1.73-6.38; P < 0.001). Benefits of LL included shorter operative time, fewer cardiac complications, fewer wound infections, and shorter hospital stay. Overall, 90% had stomas after CR, of whom 74% underwent stoma reversal within 12-months. Approximately, 14% of LL patients required a stoma; 48% obtaining gut continuity within 12-months, whereas 36% underwent elective sigmoidectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

The preservation of diseased bowel by LL is associated with approximately 3 times greater risk of persistent peritonitis, intraabdominal abscesses and the need for emergency surgery compared with CR. Future studies should focus on developing composite predictive scores encompassing the wide variation in presentations of diverticulitis and treatment tailored on case-by-case basis.

Multicentre international trial of laparoscopic lavage for Hinchey III acute diverticulitis (LLO Study)

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic lavage was proposed in the 1990s to treat purulent peritonitis in patients with perforated acute diverticulitis. Prospective randomized trials had mixed results. The aim of this study was to determine the success rate of laparoscopic lavage in sepsis control and to identify a group of patients that could potentially benefit from this treatment.

METHODS

This retrospective multicentre international study included consecutive patients from 24 centres who underwent laparoscopic lavage from 2005 to 2015.

RESULTS

A total of 404 patients were included, 231 of whom had Hinchey III acute diverticulitis. Sepsis control was achieved in 172 patients (74·5 per cent), and was associated with lower Mannheim Peritonitis Index score and ASA grade, no evidence of free perforation, absence of extensive adhesiolysis and previous episodes of diverticulitis. The operation was immediately converted to open surgery in 19 patients. Among 212 patients who underwent laparoscopic lavage, the morbidity rate was 33·0 per cent; the reoperation rate was 13·7 per cent and the 30-day mortality rate 1·9 per cent. Twenty-one patients required readmission for early complications, of whom 11 underwent further surgery and one died. Of the 172 patients discharged uneventfully after laparoscopic lavage, a recurrent episode of acute diverticulitis was registered in 46 (26·7 per cent), at a mean of 11 (range 2-108) months. Relapse was associated with younger age, female sex and previous episodes of acute diverticulitis.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic lavage showed a high rate of successful sepsis control in selected patients with perforated Hinchey III acute diverticulitis affected by peritonitis, with low rates of operative mortality, reoperation and stoma formation.

Perforated Diverticulitis with Generalized Peritonitis: Low Stoma Rate Using a "Damage Control Strategy"

PURPOSE

Optimal surgical management of perforated diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon has yet to be clearly defined. The purpose of this study was to evaluate efficacy of a "Damage Control Strategy" (DCS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with perforated diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon complicated by generalized peritonitis (Hinchey III and IV) surgically treated according to a damage control strategy between May 2011 and February 2017 were enrolled in the present multicenter retrospective cohort study. Data were collected at three surgical centers. DCS comprises a two-stage concept: [1] limited resection of the perforated colon segment with oral and aboral blind closure during the emergency procedure and [2] definitive reconstruction at scheduled second laparotomy (anastomosis ∓ loop ileostomy or a Hartmann's procedure) after 24-48 h.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight patients were included into the analysis [W:M 28:30, median age 70.1 years (30-92)]. Eleven patients (19%) initially presented with fecal peritonitis (Hinchey IV) and 47 patients with purulent peritonitis (Hinchey III). An anastomosis could be created during the second procedure in 48 patients (83%), 14 of those received an additional loop ileostomy. In the remaining ten patients (n = 17%), an end colostomy was created at second laparotomy. A fecal diversion was performed in five patients to treat anastomotic complications. Thus, altogether, 29 patients (50%) had stoma at the end of the hospital stay. The postoperative mortality was 9% (n = 5), and median postoperative hospital stay was 18.5 days (3-66). At the end of the follow-up, 44 of 53 surviving patients were stoma free (83%).

CONCLUSION

The use of the Damage Control strategy leads to a comparatively low stoma rate in patients suffering from perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis.

Safety of primary anastomosis following emergency left sided colorectal resection: an international, multi-centre prospective audit

INTRODUCTION

Some evidence suggests that primary anastomosis following left sided colorectal resection in the emergency setting may be safe in selected patients, and confer favourable outcomes to permanent enterostomy. The aim of this study was to compare the major postoperative complication rate in patients undergoing end stoma vs primary anastomosis following emergency left sided colorectal resection.

METHODS

A pre-planned analysis of the European Society of Coloproctology 2017 audit. Adult patients (> 16 years) who underwent emergency (unplanned, within 24 h of hospital admission) left sided colonic or rectal resection were included. The primary endpoint was the 30-day major complication rate (Clavien-Dindo grade 3 to 5).

RESULTS

From 591 patients, 455 (77%) received an end stoma, 103 a primary anastomosis (17%) and 33 primary anastomosis with defunctioning stoma (6%). In multivariable models, anastomosis was associated with a similar major complication rate to end stoma (adjusted odds ratio for end stoma 1.52, 95%CI 0.83-2.79, P = 0.173). Although a defunctioning stoma was not associated with reduced anastomotic leak (12% defunctioned [4/33] vs 13% not defunctioned [13/97], adjusted odds ratio 2.19, 95%CI 0.43-11.02, P = 0.343), it was associated with less severe complications (75% [3/4] with defunctioning stoma, 86.7% anastomosis only [13/15]), a lower mortality rate (0% [0/4] vs 20% [3/15]), and fewer reoperations (50% [2/4] vs 73% [11/15]) when a leak did occur.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary anastomosis in selected patients appears safe after left sided emergency colorectal resection. A defunctioning stoma might mitigate against risk of subsequent complications.

Emergency Presentations of Diverticulitis

Acute diverticulitis is a common condition that has been increasing in incidence in the United States. It is associated with increasing age, but the pathophysiology of acute diverticulitis is still being elucidated. It is now believed to have a significant contribution from inflammatory processes rather than being a strictly infectious process. There are still many questions to be answered regarding the optimal management of acute diverticulitis because recent studies have challenged traditional practices, such as the routine use of antibiotics, surgical technique, and dietary restrictions for prevention of recurrence.

Surgical treatment of diverticulitis and its complications: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials

PURPOSE

The surgical interventions of diverticulitis vary according to its grade and severity. There is a controversy about the best of these different surgical procedures. We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing outcomes and complications between different surgical approaches for acute diverticulitis and its complications.

METHODS

Nine electronic databases including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for RCTs comparing different surgical procedures for different grades of diverticulitis. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42015032290).

RESULTS

Outcome data were analyzed from five RCTs comparing laparoscopic sigmoid resection (LSR) (n = 247) versus open sigmoid resection (OSR) (n = 237) for treatment of acute complicated diverticulitis with minimal heterogeneity. There was no significant difference in short-term postoperative overall morbidity (risk ratio (RR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-1.31; P = 0.56) and long-term postoperative major morbidity (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.46-1.31, P = 0.34). In other six RCTs compared laparoscopic lavage with resection for treatment of perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis, the postoperative mortality rate was non-significant in both short-term (RR 1.55, 95% CI 0.79-3.04; P = 0.21) and long-term (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.29-1.58; P = 0.36) follow up.

CONCLUSIONS

LSR is not superior over OSR regarding postoperative morbidity and mortality for acute symptomatic diverticulitis. Furthermore, laparoscopic lavage was proved to be as safe as resection for perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis. Further RCTs are still needed to make an accurate decision regarding these and other procedures.

Perforated sigmoid diverticulitis: Hartmann's procedure or resection with primary anastomosis-a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised control trials

INTRODUCTION

The surgical management of perforated sigmoid diverticulitis and generalised peritonitis is challenging. Surgical resection is the established standard of care. However, there is debate as to whether a primary anastomosis (PA) or a Hartmann's procedure (HP) should be performed. The aim of the present study was to perform a review of the literature comparing HP to PA for the treatment of perforated sigmoid diverticulitis with generalised peritonitis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed for articles published up to March 2018. We considered only randomised control trials (RCTs) comparing the outcomes of sigmoidectomy with PA versus HP in adults with perforated sigmoid diverticulitis and generalised peritonitis (Hinchey III or IV). Primary outcomes were mortality and permanent stoma rate. Outcomes were pooled using a random-effects model to estimate the risk ratio and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Of the 1,204 potentially relevant articles, 3 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis with 254 patients in total (116 and 138 in the PA and HP groups, respectively). All three RCTs had significant limitations including small size, lack of blinding and possible selection bias. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality or overall morbidity. Although 2 out of the 3 trials reported a lower permanent stoma rate in the PA arm, the difference in permanent stoma rates was not statistically significant (RR = 0.40, 95% CI 0.14-1.16). The incidence of anastomotic leaks, including leaks after stoma reversal, was not statistically different between PA and HP (RR = 1.42, 95% CI 0.41-4.87, p = 0.58) while risk of a postoperative intra-abdominal abscess was lower after PA than after HP (RR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.12-0.96, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

PA and HP appear to be equivalent in terms of most outcomes of interest, except for a lower intra-abdominal abscess risk after PA. The latter finding needs further investigation as it was not reported in any of the individual trials. However, given the limitations of the included RCTs, no firm conclusion can be drawn on which is the best surgical option in patients with generalised peritonitis due to diverticular perforation.

Current Options for the Emergency Management of Diverticular Disease and Options to Reduce the Need for Colostomy

This article reviews the current options and recommendations for the emergency management of acute diverticulitis, including the spectrum of antibiotics, percutaneous drainage, laparoscopic lavage, and surgical options for resection with the restoration of bowel continuity.

Meta-analysis of surgical strategies in perforated left colonic diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis

PURPOSE

Surgical strategies for perforated diverticulitis (Hinchey stages III and IV) remain controversial. This systematic review aimed to compare the outcome of primary anastomosis, Hartmann procedure and laparoscopic lavage.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted through Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register and Health Technology Assessment Database to identify randomized and non-randomized controlled trials involving patients with perforated left-sided colonic diverticulitis comparing different surgical strategies. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed systematically (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) and a meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

After screening 4090 titles and abstracts published between 1958 and January 2018, 148 were selected for full text assessment. Sixteen trials (7 RCTs, 9 non-RCTs) with 1223 patients were included. Mortality rates were not significantly different between Hartmann procedure and primary anastomosis for Hinchey III and IV, neither in the meta-analysis of three RCTs (RR 2.03 (95% CI 0.79 to 5.25); p = 0.14, moderate quality of evidence) nor in the meta-analysis of six observational studies (RR 1.53 (95% CI 0.89 to 2.65); p = 0.13, very low quality of evidence). However, stoma reversal rates were significantly higher in the primary anastomosis group (RR 0.73 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.98); p = 0.008, moderate quality of evidence). Meta-analysis of four RCTs showed no significant difference between laparoscopic lavage for Hinchey III compared to sigmoid resection neither for mortality (RR 1.07 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.76); p = 0.79, moderate quality of evidence) nor for major complications (RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.69 to 1.08); p = 0.20, moderate quality of evidence).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review suggests similar rates of complications but higher rates of colonic restoration after primary anastomosis compared to Hartmann procedure in perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis (Hinchey III and IV). Results in laparoscopic lavage for Hinchey III are not superior to primary resection. However, further studies with a careful interpretation of the meaning of re-interventions are required.

Inflammation management in acute diverticulitis: current perspectives

The pathogenesis of diverticular disease and acute diverticulitis is still unclear and many different hypotheses have been formulated. Seemingly, there are several related factors such as chronic inflammation, gut microbiome, obesity and the immunogenic properties of fat tissue and diet. Inflammation plays a pivotal role in diverticular disease and acute diverticulitis. The aim of the present review is to investigate the role of inflammation in diverticular disease as well as in mild and complicated acute diverticulitis with a focus on current research and treatment perspectives.

Two-year results of the randomized clinical trial DILALA comparing laparoscopic lavage with resection as treatment for perforated diverticulitis

Background

Traditionally, perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis was treated with resection and colostomy (Hartmann's procedure), with inherent complications and risk of a permanent stoma. The DILALA (DIverticulitis – LAparoscopic LAvage versus resection (Hartmann's procedure) for acute diverticulitis with peritonitis) and other randomized trials found laparoscopic lavage to be a feasible and safe alternative. The medium‐term follow‐up results of DILALA are reported here.

Methods

Patients were randomized during surgery after being diagnosed with Hinchey grade III perforated diverticulitis at diagnostic laparoscopy. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with one or more secondary operations from 0 to 24 months after the index procedure in the laparoscopic lavage versus Hartmann's procedure groups. The trial was registered as ISRCTN82208287.

Results

Forty‐three patients were randomized to laparoscopic lavage and 40 to Hartmann's procedure. Patients in the lavage group had a 45 per cent reduced risk of undergoing one or more operations within 24 months (relative risk 0·55, 95 per cent c.i. 0·36 to 0·84; P = 0·012) and had fewer operations (ratio 0·51, 95 per cent c.i. 0·31 to 0·87; P = 0·024) compared with those in the Hartmann's group. No difference was found in mean number of readmissions (1·37 versus 1·50; P = 0·221) or mortality between patients randomized to laparoscopic lavage or Hartmann's procedure. Three patients in the lavage group and nine in the Hartmann's group had a colostomy at 24 months.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic lavage is a better option for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis than open resection and colostomy.

Laparoscopic lavage still an option

Management of Diverticulitis in 2017

Diverticulitis has become increasingly more common in the 20^th century and is now one of the most frequent indications for gastrointestinal tract-related hospitalizations. The spectrum of clinical presentation can vary widely from mild, uncomplicated disease that can be managed as an outpatient, to complicated diverticulitis with peritonitis and sepsis. Historically, all patients with diverticulitis were managed with, at a minimum, a course of antibiotics, with many patients undergoing urgent or emergent surgery with a sigmoid colectomy, end colostomy, and oversewn rectosigmoid "Hartmann's" stump. However, the treatment paradigm has shifted away from more aggressive surgical management over the years, with recent literature supporting the notion that nonoperative management may lead to equivalent or even superior outcomes in many circumstances. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to summarize and interpret the existing literature on the management of uncomplicated and complicated left-sided diverticulitis in 2017.

Diverticulitis recurrence after percutaneous abscess drainage

PURPOSE

Recurrent diverticulitis has been reported in 30-50% of patients who recover from an episode of diverticular-associated abscess. Our aim was to review the outcomes of patients who underwent non-operative management after percutaneous drainage (PD) of colonic diverticular abscess.

METHODS

All patients with a diverticular-associated abscess were identified between 2001 and 2012. Individual charts were queried for peri-procedural data and follow-up. The most recent follow-up data were acquired via the electronic medical record or telephone call.

RESULTS

A total of 165 patients underwent PD of diverticular-associated abscesses. Abscess locations were pelvic (n = 122), abdominal (n = 36), and both (n = 7), while median abscess size was 6.1 ± 2.2 cm. One hundred eighteen patients clinically improved following non-operative management, and 81 of these patients did not undergo subsequent colonic resection within 4 months of PD. Of these, 8 died within 12 months. Among the remaining 73 patients, there were no significant differences in demographics or abscess variables compared to those who underwent elective surgery within 4 months. Only 7 of 73 patients had documented episodes of recurrences, while 22 patients later had elective surgery (1.1 ± 1.2 years from the index case). Five-year colectomy-free survival was 55% (95%CI 42-66%), while the recurrence-free survival at 5 years was 77% (95%CI 65-86%). All recurrences were managed non-operatively initially and one patient went on to have elective resection.

CONCLUSION

A sizable number of patients successfully recover from complicated diverticulitis following PD. Subsequent non-operative management carries an acceptable risk for recurrent episodes and may be considered as a reasonable management option.