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

Damage Control Surgery and Transfer in Emergency General Surgery

Selective non traumatic emergency surgery patients are targets for damage control surgery (DCS) to prevent or treat abdominal compartment syndrome and the lethal triad. However, DCS is still a subject of controversy. As a concept, DCS describes a series of abbreviated surgical procedures to allow rapid source control of hemorrhage and contamination in patients with circulatory shock to allow resuscitation and stabilization in the intensive care unit followed by delayed return to the operating room for definitive surgical management once the patient becomes physiologic stable. If appropriately applied, the DCS morbidity and mortality can be significantly reduced.

Source control in emergency general surgery: WSES, GAIS, SIS-E, SIS-A guidelines

Intra-abdominal infections (IAI) are among the most common global healthcare challenges and they are usually precipitated by disruption to the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Their successful management typically requires intensive resource utilization, and despite the best therapies, morbidity and mortality remain high. One of the main issues required to appropriately treat IAI that differs from the other etiologies of sepsis is the frequent requirement to provide physical source control. Fortunately, dramatic advances have been made in this aspect of treatment. Historically, source control was left to surgeons only. With new technologies non-surgical less invasive interventional procedures have been introduced. Alternatively, in addition to formal surgery open abdomen techniques have long been proposed as aiding source control in severe intra-abdominal sepsis. It is ironic that while a lack or even delay regarding source control clearly associates with death, it is a concept that remains poorly described. For example, no conclusive definition of source control technique or even adequacy has been universally accepted. Practically, source control involves a complex definition encompassing several factors including the causative event, source of infection bacteria, local bacterial flora, patient condition, and his/her eventual comorbidities. With greater understanding of the systemic pathobiology of sepsis and the profound implications of the human microbiome, adequate source control is no longer only a surgical issue but one that requires a multidisciplinary, multimodality approach. Thus, while any breach in the GI tract must be controlled, source control should also attempt to control the generation and propagation of the systemic biomediators and dysbiotic influences on the microbiome that perpetuate multi-system organ failure and death. Given these increased complexities, the present paper represents the current opinions and recommendations for future research of the World Society of Emergency Surgery, of the Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery of Surgical Infection Society Europe and Surgical Infection Society America regarding the concepts and operational adequacy of source control in intra-abdominal infections.

Difference between delayed anastomosis and early anastomosis in damage control laparotomy affecting the infusion volume and NPWT output volume: is infusion restriction necessary in delayed anastomosis? A single-center retrospective analysis

Objectives

During temporary abdominal closure (TAC) with damage control laparotomy (DCL), infusion volume and negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) output volume are associated with the success and prognosis of primary fascial closure. The same may also hold true for anastomosis. The aim of this research is to evaluate whether the difference between early anastomosis and delayed anastomosis in DCL is related to infusion volume and NPWT output volume.

Methods

This single-center retrospective analysis targeted patients managed with TAC during emergency surgery for trauma or intra-abdominal sepsis between January 2011 and December 2019. It included patients who underwent repair/anastomosis/colostomy in the first surgery and patients who underwent intestinal resection in the first surgery followed by delayed anastomosis with no intestinal continuity.

Results

Seventy-three patients were managed with TAC using NPWT, including 19 cases of repair, 17 of colostomy, and 37 of anastomosis. In 16 patients (trauma 5, sepsis 11) with early anastomosis and 21 patients (trauma 16, sepsis 5) with delayed anastomosis, there was no difference in the infusion volume (p=0.2318) or NPWT output volume (p=0.7128) 48 hours after surgery. Additionally, there was no difference in the occurrence of suture failure (p=0.8428). During the second-look surgery after 48 hours, the anastomosis was further postponed for 48% of the patients who underwent delayed anastomosis. There was no difference in the infusion volume (p=0.0783) up to the second-look surgery between the patients whose delayed anastomosis was postponed and those who underwent delayed anastomosis, but there was a tendency toward a large NPWT output volume (p=0.024) in the postponed delayed anastomosis group.

Conclusion

Delayed anastomosis may be managed with the same infusion volume as that used for early anastomosis. There is also the option of postponing anastomosis if the planned delayed anastomosis is complicated.

Level of evidence

Therapeutic/Care Management, Level IV.

The WSES/SICG/ACOI/SICUT/AcEMC/SIFIPAC guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of acute left colonic diverticulitis in the elderly

Acute left colonic diverticulitis (ALCD) in the elderly presents with unique epidemiological features when compared with younger patients. The clinical presentation is more nuanced in the elderly population, having higher in-hospital and postoperative mortality. Furthermore, geriatric comorbidities are a risk factor for complicated diverticulitis. Finally, elderly patients have a lower risk of recurrent episodes and, in case of recurrence, a lower probability of requiring urgent surgery than younger patients. The aim of the present work is to study age-related factors that may support a unique approach to the diagnosis and treatment of this problem in the elderly when compared with the WSES guidelines for the management of acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis. During the 1° Pisa Workshop of Acute Care & Trauma Surgery held in Pisa (Italy) in September 2019, with the collaboration of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), the Italian Society of Geriatric Surgery (SICG), the Italian Hospital Surgeons Association (ACOI), the Italian Emergency Surgery and Trauma Association (SICUT), the Academy of Emergency Medicine and Care (AcEMC) and the Italian Society of Surgical Pathophysiology (SIFIPAC), three panel members presented a number of statements developed for each of the four themes regarding the diagnosis and management of ALCD in older patients, formulated according to the GRADE approach, at a Consensus Conference where a panel of experts participated. The statements were subsequently debated, revised, and finally approved by the Consensus Conference attendees. The current paper is a summary report of the definitive guidelines statements on each of the following topics: diagnosis, management, surgical technique and antibiotic therapy.

Evolution of damage control surgery in non-traumatic abdominal pathology: a light in the darkness

Damage control surgery is based on temporal control of the injury, physiologic recovery and posterior deferred definitive management. This strategy began in the 1980s and became a formal concept in 1993. It has proven to be a strategy that reduces mortality in severely injured trauma patients. Nevertheless, the concept of damage control in non-traumatic abdominal pathology remains controversial. This article aims to gather historical experiences in damage control surgery performed in non-traumatic abdominal emergency pathology patients and present a novel management algorithm. This strategy could be a surgical option to treat hemodynamically unstable patients in catastrophic scenarios such as hemorrhagic and septic shock caused by peritonitis, pancreatitis, acute mesenteric ischemia, among others. Therefore, damage control surgery is light amid better short- and long-term results.

Rate of stoma formation following damage-control surgery for severe intra-abdominal sepsis: a single-centre consecutive case series

Background

Severe intra-abdominal sepsis (IAS) is associated with high mortality and stoma rates. A two-stage approach with initial damage-control surgery (DCS) and subsequent reconstruction might decrease stoma and mortality rates but requires standardization.

Methods

A standardized two-stage damage-control algorithm for IAS was implemented in April 2016 and applied systematically.

Results

Some 203 consecutive patients (median age 70 years, 62 per cent ASA score greater than 3) had DCS for severe IAS. Median operation time was 82 minutes, 60 per cent performed during night-time. Median intraoperative noradrenaline doses were 20 (i.q.r. 26) µg/min and blood gas analysis (ABG) was abnormal (metabolic acidosis) in 90 per cent of patients. The second-stage operation allowed definitive surgery in 76 per cent of patients, 24 per cent had up to four re-DCSs until definitive surgery. The in-hospital mortality rate was 26 per cent. At hospital discharge, 65 per cent of patients were stoma free. Risk factors for in-hospital death were noradrenaline (odds ratio 4.25 (95 per cent c.i. 1.72 to 12.83)), abnormal ABG (pH: odds ratio 2.72 (1.24 to 6.65); lactate: odds ratio 6.77 (3.20 to 15.78)), male gender (odds ratio 2.40 (1.24 to 4.85)), ASA score greater than 3 (odds ratio 5.75 (2.58 to 14.68)), mesenteric ischaemia (odds ratio 3.27 (1.71 to 6.46)) and type of resection (odds ratio 2.95 (1.24 to 8.21)). Risk factors for stoma at discharge were ASA score greater than 3 (odds ratio 2.76 (95 per cent c.i. 1.38 to 5.73)), type of resection (odds ratio 30.91 (6.29 to 559.3)) and longer operation time (odds ratio 2.441 (1.22 to 5.06)).

Conclusion

Initial DCS followed by secondary reconstruction of bowel continuity for IAS within 48 hours in a tertiary teaching hospital was feasible and safe, following a clear algorithm.

Using Machine Learning to Establish Predictors of Mortality in Patients Undergoing Laparotomy for Emergency General Surgical Conditions

INTRODUCTION

Patients undergoing laparotomy for emergency general surgery (EGS) conditions, constitute a high-risk group with poor outcomes. These patients have a high prevalence of comorbidities. This study aims to identify patient factors, physiological and time-related factors, which place patients into a group at increased risk of mortality.

METHODOLOGY

In a retrospective analysis of all patients undergoing an emergency laparotomy at Greys Hospital from December 2012 to 2018, we used decision tree discrimination to identify high-risk groups.

RESULTS

Our cohort included 1461 patients undergoing a laparotomy for an EGS condition. The mortality rate was 12.4% (181). Nine hundred and ten patients (62.3%) had at least one known comorbidity on admission. There was a higher rate of comorbidities among those that died (154; 85.1%). Patient factors found to be associated with mortality were the age of 46 years or greater (p < 0.001), current tuberculosis (p < 0.001), hypertension (p = 0.014), at least one comorbidity (0.006), and malignancy (0.033). Significant physiological risk factors for mortality were base excess less than -6.8 mmol/L (p < 0.001), serum urea greater than 7.0 mmol/L (p < 0.001) and waiting time from admission to operation (p = 0.014). In patients with an enteric breach, those younger than 46 years and a Shock Index of more than 1.0 were high-risk. Patients without an enteric breach were high-risk if operative duration exceeded 90 min (p = 0.004) and serum urea exceeding 7 mmol/dl (p = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

In EGS patients, patient factors as well as physiological factors place patients into a high-risk group. Identifying a high-risk group should prompt consideration for an adjusted approach that ameliorates outcomes.

Staged laparotomy for acute non-traumatic intra-abdominal emergencies in a tertiary South African unit

INTRODUCTION

Patients undergoing laparotomy for emergency general surgery (EGS) have poor outcomes. Attempts have been made to improve these outcomes by adopting damage control principles known to benefit polytraumatized patients. Studies describing the use of staged laparotomy (SL) in EGS have been modest in size and heterogenous. The aim of this study was to describe our experience with SL at a tertiary hospital in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.

METHODS

The Hybrid Electronic Medical Registry (HEMR) at Greys Hospital was interrogated for all consecutive admissions undergoing staged EGS laparotomy. Descriptive and inferential statistics were performed.

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2018, 242 patients (16.5% of all EGS laparotomies) underwent SL for an EGS condition. The median patient age was 38 years old (IQR 27-56 years). Physiological indications were present in 125 patients (51.7%) and non-physiological indications (NPI) in 117 (48.3%). Haemodynamic instability was the most common physiological indication (51; 21.1%) and gross contamination was the most non-physiological indication (91; 37.6%). Adverse event and mortality rates were 84.8% and 26.9%, respectively. Independent predictors of mortality were enteric breach (OR3.9; 95% CI (2.1-7.8)), physiological indication (OR 2.1; 95% CI (1.1-3.7)) and anastomosis (OR 2.0; 1.05-3.73). "Clip and drop" did not contribute to mortality (P = 0.43; OR1.34 (0.64-2.7)). Mortality was higher in the group without repeat laparotomy. Mortality rate was not associated with increasing number of relaparotomies.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing EGS laparotomy form a high-risk group. "Clip and drop" approach and number of relaparotomies were not associated with mortality. Indications and components of this approach need to be standardized.

WSES/GAIS/SIS-E/WSIS/AAST global clinical pathways for patients with intra-abdominal infections

Intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) are common surgical emergencies and have been reported as major contributors to non-trauma deaths in hospitals worldwide. The cornerstones of effective treatment of IAIs include early recognition, adequate source control, appropriate antimicrobial therapy, and prompt physiologic stabilization using a critical care environment, combined with an optimal surgical approach. Together, the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), the Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery (GAIS), the Surgical Infection Society-Europe (SIS-E), the World Surgical Infection Society (WSIS), and the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) have jointly completed an international multi-society document in order to facilitate clinical management of patients with IAIs worldwide building evidence-based clinical pathways for the most common IAIs. An extensive non-systematic review was conducted using the PubMed and MEDLINE databases, limited to the English language. The resulting information was shared by an international task force from 46 countries with different clinical backgrounds. The aim of the document is to promote global standards of care in IAIs providing guidance to clinicians by describing reasonable approaches to the management of IAIs.

Lessons Learned in 11 Years of Experience With Open Abdomen Treatment With Negative-Pressure Therapy for Various Abdominal Emergencies

Introduction: Open abdomen (OA) treatment with negative-pressure therapy (NPT) was initiated for perforated diverticulitis and subsequently extended to other abdominal emergencies. The aim of this retrospective study was to analyze the indications, procedures, duration of NPT, and the outcomes of all our patients. Methods: All consecutive patients treated with intra-abdominal NPT from January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Results: A total of 438 patients (44% females) with a median (range) age of 66 (12-94) years, BMI of 25 (14-48) kg/m², and ASA class I, II, III, and IV scores of 36 (13%), 239 (55%), 95 (22%), and 3(1%), respectively, were treated with NPT. The indication for surgery was primary bowel perforation in 163 (37%), mesenteric ischemia in 53 (12%), anastomotic leakage in 53 (12%), ileus in 53 (12%), postoperative bowel perforation/leakage in 32 (7%), abdominal compartment in 15 (3%), pancreatic fistula in 13 (3%), gastric perforation in 13 (3%), secondary peritonitis in 11 (3%), burst abdomen in nine (2%), biliary leakage in eight (2%), and other in 15 (3%) patients. A damage control operation without reconstruction in the initial procedure was performed in 164 (37%) patients. The duration of hospital and intensive care stay were, median (range), 28 (0-278) and 4 (0-214) days. The median (range) duration of operation was 109 (22-433) min and of NPT was 3(0-33) days. A trend to shorter duration of NPT was observed over time and in the colonic perforation group. The mean operating time was shorter when only blind ends were left in situ, namely 110 vs. 133 min (p = 0.006). The mortality rates were 14% at 30 days, 21% at 90 days, and 31% at 1 year. An entero-atmospheric fistula was observed in five (1%) cases, most recently in 2014. Direct fascia closure was possible in 417 (95%) patients at the end of NPT, but least often (67%, p = 0.00) in patients with burst abdomen. During follow-up, hernia repair was observed in 52 (24%) of the surviving patients. Conclusion: Open abdomen treatment with NPT is a promising concept for various abdominal emergencies, especially when treated outside normal working hours. A low rate of entero-atmospheric fistula formation and a high rate of direct fascia closure were achieved with dynamic approximation of the fascia edges. The authors recommend an early-in and early-out strategy as the prolongation of NPT by more than 1 week ends up in a frozen abdomen and does not improve abdominal sepsis.

The role of damage control surgery in the treatment of perforated colonic diverticulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Damage control surgery (DCS) is the classic approach to manage severe trauma and has recently also been considered an appropriate approach to the treatment of critically ill patients with severe intra-abdominal sepsis. The purpose of the present review is to evaluate the outcomes following DCS for Hinchey II-IV complicated acute diverticulitis (CAD).

METHODS

A comprehensive systematic search was undertaken to identify all randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies, irrespectively of their size, publication status, and language. Adults who have undergone DCS for CAD Hinchey II, III, or IV were included in this review. DCS is compared with the immediate and definitive surgical treatment in the form of HP, colonic resection, and primary anastomosis (RPA) with or without covering stoma or laparoscopic lavage. We searched the following electronic databases: PubMed MEDLINE, Scopus, and ISI Web of Knowledge. The protocol of this systematic review and meta-analysis was published on Prospero (CRD42020144953).

RESULTS

Nine studies with 318 patients, undergoing DCS, were included. The presence of septic shock at the presentation in the emergency department was heterogeneous, and the weighted mean rate of septic shock across the studies was shown to be 35.1% [95% CI 8.4 to 78.6%]. The majority of the patients had Hinchey III (68.3%) disease. The remainder had either Hinchey IV (28.9%) or Hinchey II (2.8%). Phase I is similarly described in most of the studies as lavage, limited resection with closed blind colonic ends. In a few studies, resection and anastomosis (9.1%) or suture of the perforation site (0.9%) were performed in phase I of DCS. In those patients who underwent DCS, the most common method of temporary abdominal closure (TAC) was the negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) (97.8%). The RPA was performed in 62.1% [95% CI 40.8 to 83.3%] and the 22.7% [95% CI 15.1 to 30.3%]: 12.8% during phase I and 87.2% during phase III. A covering ileostomy was performed in 6.9% [95% CI 1.5 to 12.2%]. In patients with RPA, the overall leak was 7.3% [95% CI 4.3 to 10.4%] and the major anastomotic leaks were 4.7% [95% CI 2.0 to 7.4%]; the rate of postoperative mortality was estimated to be 9.2% [95% CI 6.0 to 12.4%].

CONCLUSIONS

The present meta-analysis revealed an approximately 62.1% weighted rate of achieving GI continuity with the DCS approach to generalized peritonitis in Hinchey III and IV with major leaks of 4.7% and overall mortality of 9.2%. Despite the promising results, we are aware of the limitations related to the significant heterogeneity of inclusion criteria. Importantly, the low rate of reported septic shock may point toward selection bias. Further studies are needed to evaluate the clinical advantages and cost-effectiveness of the DCS approach.

Damage control strategy in perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis

Background

The best treatment for perforated colonic diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis is still under debate. Concurrent strategies are resection with primary anastomosis (PRA) with or without diverting ileostomy (DI), Hartmann’s procedure (HP), laparoscopic lavage (LL) and damage control surgery (DCS). This review intends to systematically analyze the current literature on DCS.

Methods

DCS consists of two stages. Emergency surgery: limited resection of the diseased colon, oral and aboral closure, lavage, vacuum-assisted abdominal closure. Second look surgery after 24–48 h: definite reconstruction with colorectal anastomosis (−/ + DI) or HP after adequate resuscitation. The review was conducted in accordance to the PRISMA-P Statement. PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane central register of controlled trials (CENTRAL) and EMBASE were searched using the following term: (Damage control surgery) AND (Diverticulitis OR Diverticulum OR Peritonitis).

Results

Eight retrospective studies including 256 patients met the inclusion criteria. No randomized trial was available. 67% of the included patients had purulent, 30% feculent peritonitis. In 3% Hinchey stage II diverticulitis was found. In 49% the Mannheim peritonitis index (MPI) was greater than 26. Colorectal anastomosis was constructed during the course of the second surgery in 73%. In 15% of the latter DI was applied. The remaining 27% received HP. Postoperative mortality was 9%, morbidity 31% respectively. The anastomotic leak rate was 13%. 55% of patients were discharged without a stoma.

Conclusion

DCS is a safe technique for the treatment of acute perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis, allowing a high rate of colorectal anastomosis and stoma-free hospital discharge in more than half of the patients.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12893-021-01130-5.

The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland consensus guidelines in emergency colorectal surgery

AIM

There is a requirement for an expansive and up to date review of the management of emergency colorectal conditions seen in adults. The primary objective is to provide detailed evidence-based guidelines for the target audience of general and colorectal surgeons who are responsible for an adult population and who practise in Great Britain and Ireland.

METHODS

Surgeons who are elected members of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland Emergency Surgery Subcommittee were invited to contribute various sections to the guidelines. They were directed to produce a pathology-based document using literature searches that were systematic, comprehensible, transparent and reproducible. Levels of evidence were graded. Each author was asked to provide a set of recommendations which were evidence-based and unambiguous. These recommendations were submitted to the whole guideline group and scored. They were then refined and submitted to a second vote. Only those that achieved >80% consensus at level 5 (strongly agree) or level 4 (agree) after two votes were included in the guidelines.

RESULTS

All aspects of care (excluding abdominal trauma) for emergency colorectal conditions have been included along with 122 recommendations for management.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines provide an up to date and evidence-based summary of the current surgical knowledge in the management of emergency colorectal conditions and should serve as practical text for clinicians managing colorectal conditions in the emergency setting.

Cytokine clearance in serum and peritoneal fluid of patients undergoing damage control surgery with abdominal negative pressure therapy for abdominal sepsis

Objectives

Open abdomen technique with negative pressure therapy (NPT) is widely used in patients with severe abdominal sepsis. The aim of this study was to evaluate cytokine clearance in serum and peritoneal fluid during NPT.

Methods

This prospective pilot study included six patients with severe abdominal sepsis requiring discontinuity resection and NPT for 48 h followed by planned reoperation. Cytokines (IL6, IL8, IL10, TNFalpha, and IL1beta) were measured in the serum and peritoneal fluid during index operation, on postoperative days 0, 1, and 2.

Results

Concentrations of cytokines in peritoneal fluid were higher than in serum. IL10 showed a clearance both in serum (to 16.6%, p=0.019) and peritoneal fluid (to 40.9%, p=0.014). IL6 cleared only in serum (to 24.7%, p=0.001) with persistently high levels in peritoneal fluid. IL8 remained high in both serum and peritoneal fluid. TNFalpha and IL1beta were both low in serum with wide range of high peritoneal concentrations. Only TNFalpha in peritoneal fluid showed significant differences between patients with ischemia vs. perforation (p=0.006).

Conclusions

The present pilot study suggests that cytokines display distinct patterns of clearance or persistence in the peritoneal fluid and serum over the first 48 h of treatment in severe abdominal sepsis with NPT.

Damage control surgery for the treatment of perforated acute colonic diverticulitis: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Acute colonic diverticulitis (ACD) complications arise in approximately 8% to 35% patients and the most common ones are represented by phlegmon or abscess, followed by perforation, peritonitis, obstruction, and fistula. In accordance with current guidelines, patients affected by generalized peritonitis should undergo emergency surgery. However, decisions on whether and when to operate ACD patients remain a substantially debated topic while algorithm for the best treatment has not yet been determined. Damage control surgery (DCS) represents a well-established method in treating critically ill patients with traumatic abdomen injuries. At present, such surgical approach is also finding application in non-traumatic emergencies such as perforated ACD. Thanks to a thorough systematic review of the literature, we aimed at achieving deeper knowledge of both indications and short- and long-term outcomes related to DCS in perforated ACD.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes (PRISMA) guidelines. Pubmed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were used to search all related literature.

RESULTS

The 8 included articles covered an approximately 13 years study period (2006-2018), with a total 359 patient population. At presentation, most patients showed III and IV American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (81.6%) while having Hinchey III perforated ACD (69.9%). Most patients received a limited resection plus vacuum-assisted closure at first-look while about half entire population underwent primary resection anastomosis (PRA) at a second-look. Overall morbidity rate, 30-day mortality rate and overall mortality rate at follow-up were between 23% and 74%, 0% and 20%, 7% and 33%, respectively. Patients had a 100% definitive abdominal wall closure rate and a definitive stoma rate at follow-up ranging between 0% and 33%.

CONCLUSION

DCS application to ACD patients seems to offer good outcomes with a lower percentage of patients with definitive ostomy, if compared to Hartmann's procedure. However, correct definition of DCS eligible patients is paramount in avoiding overtreatment. In accordance to 2016 WSES (World Society of Emergency Surgery) Guidelines, DCS remains an effective surgical strategy in critically ill patients affected by sepsis/septic shock and hemodynamical unstability.

Prospectively Randomized Controlled Trial on Damage Control Surgery for Perforated Diverticulitis with Generalized Peritonitis

Introduction

Damage control surgery (DCS) with abdominal negative pressure therapy and delayed anastomosis creation in patients with perforated diverticulitis and generalized peritonitis was established at our Institution in 2006 and has been published. The concept was adopted in other hospitals and published as a case series. This is the first prospectively controlled randomized study comparing DCS and conventional treatment (Group C) in this setting.

Methods

All consecutive patients from 2013 to 2018 with indication for surgery were screened and randomized to Group DCS or Group C. The primary outcome was the rate of reconstructed bowel at discharge and at 6 month. Informed consent was obtained. The trial was approved by the local ethics committee and registered at CinicalTrials.gov: NCT04034407.

Results

A total of 56 patients were screened; 41 patients gave informed consent to participate and ultimately 21 patients (9 female) with intraoperatively confirmed Hinchey III (n = 14, 67%) or IV (n = 7, 33%), and a median (range) age of 66 (42–92), Mannheim Peritonitis Index of 25 (12–37) and Charlson Comorbidity Index of 3 (0–10) were intraoperatively randomized and treated as Group DCS (n = 13) or Group C (n = 8). Per protocol analysis: A primary anastomosis without ileostomy (PA) was performed in 92% (11/12) patients in Group DCS at the second-look operation, one patient died before second look, and one underwent a Hartmann procedure (HP). In Group C 63% (5/8) patients received a PA and 38% (3/8) patients a HP. Two patients in Group C, but none in Group DCS experienced anastomotic leakage (AI). ICU and hospital stay was median (range) 2 (1–10) and 17.5 (12–43) in DCS and 2 (1–62) and 22 (13–65) days in group C. In Group DCS 8% (1/12) patients was discharged with a stoma versus 57% (4/7) in Group C (p = 0.038, n.s., α = 0.025); one patient died before discharge. The odds ratio (95% confidence interval) for discharge with a stoma is 0.068 (0.005–0.861). Intent to treat analysis: A PA was performed in 90% (9/10) of patients randomized to DCS, one patient died before the second look, and one patient received a HP. In group C, 70% (7/10) were treated with PA and 30% (3/10) with HP. 29% (2/7) experienced AI treated with protective ileostomy. In group DCS, 9% (1/11) were discharged with a stoma versus 40% (4/10) in group C (p = 0.14, n.s.). The odds ratio for discharge with a stoma is 0.139 (0.012–1.608).

Conclusion

This is the first prospectively randomized controlled study showing that damage control surgery in perforated diverticulitis Hinchey III and IV enhances reconstruction of bowel continuity and can reduce the stoma rate at discharge.

European Society of Coloproctology: guidelines for the management of diverticular disease of the colon

AIM

The goal of this European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP) guideline project is to give an overview of the existing evidence on the management of diverticular disease, primarily as a guidance to surgeons.

METHODS

The guideline was developed during several working phases including three voting rounds and one consensus meeting. The two project leads (JKS and EA) appointed by the ESCP guideline committee together with one member of the guideline committee (WB) agreed on the methodology, decided on six themes for working groups (WGs) and drafted a list of research questions. Senior WG members, mostly colorectal surgeons within the ESCP, were invited based on publication records and geographical aspects. Other specialties were included in the WGs where relevant. In addition, one trainee or PhD fellow was invited in each WG. All six WGs revised the research questions if necessary, did a literature search, created evidence tables where feasible, and drafted supporting text to each research question and statement. The text and statement proposals from each WG were arranged as one document by the first and last authors before online voting by all authors in two rounds. For the second voting ESCP national representatives were also invited. More than 90% agreement was considered a consensus. The final phrasing of the statements with < 90% agreement was discussed in a consensus meeting at the ESCP annual meeting in Vienna in September 2019. Thereafter, the first and the last author drafted the final text of the guideline and circulated it for final approval and for a third and final online voting of rephrased statements.

RESULTS

This guideline contains 38 evidence based consensus statements on the management of diverticular disease.

CONCLUSION

This international, multidisciplinary guideline provides an up to date summary of the current knowledge of the management of diverticular disease as a guidance for clinicians and patients.

[Evidence for standard surgical procedures: appendicitis, diverticulitis and cholecystitis]

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis, cholecystitis and sigmoid diverticulitis are the most common inflammatory visceral surgical emergencies. According to the principles of evidence-based medicine, treatment methods and surgical indications should be constantly questioned and validated by high-quality clinical studies.

OBJECTIVE

To identify and classify the current evidence on surgical treatment of acute appendicitis, cholecystitis and sigmoid diverticulitis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Targeted literature search in Medline, the Cochrane Library and study registers (clinicaltrials.gov).

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

The indications for surgery are changing due to increasing numbers of high-quality clinical studies. Conservative treatment seems to be feasible in the early stages. In contrast, many surgical steps have not yet been sufficiently validated. Furthermore, there is a great need for high-quality, prospective randomized clinical trials, so that promotion of studies and the study culture in surgery should continue to be of greatest interest.

Anastomotic leak after transanal total mesorectal excision: grading of severity and management aimed at preservation of the anastomosis

AIM

The transanal approach to total mesorectal excision (TaTME) as an alternative to conventional anterior resection offers an improved view to otherwise restricted anatomical regions in obese and narrow male pelves and unfavourable tumour locations. Guidelines for the management of anastomotic leakage (AL) following low rectal resections are scarce.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Prospectively collected data of all consecutive patients undergoing TaTME between December 2014 and April 2017 in our centre were analysed retrospectively. Existing classification systems for AL were modified with regard to transanal anastomotic-preserving management.

RESULTS

TaTME was performed in 66 patients with a median age of 56.2 years. The overall incidence of AL was 12.1% (n = 8). AL grading was differentiated in Grades I to V according to the severity of necrosis and abscess development. Two patients suffered from AL Grade II, one patient from Grade III, three patients from Grade IV and two patients from Grade V. Preservation of the anastomosis following AL was achieved by the damage control concept in six of eight patients (75%) with a median duration of hospital stay of 36 days. Two patients received a Hartmann procedure (Grades IV and V).

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrates that management of AL following TaTME is challenging but definitely amenable to strategies aimed at preserving the anastomosis by appropriate damage control. The modified classification system might serve as guidance for anastomosis-preserving management.

Advantages of Damage Control Strategy With Abdominal Negative Pressure and Instillation in Patients With Diffuse Peritonitis From Perforated Diverticular Disease

Purpose. To evaluate the results of Damage Control Strategy (DCS) in the treatment of generalized peritonitis from perforated diverticular disease in patients with preoperative severe systemic diseases. Methods. All the patients with diffuse peritonitis (Hinchey 3 and 4) and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score ≥3 were included and underwent DCS consisting of a 2-step procedure. The first was peritoneal lavage, perforated colon-stapled resection, and temporary abdominal closure with negative pressure wound therapy combined with instillation. The second step, 48 hours later, included the possibility of restoring intestinal continuity basing on local and general patients' conditions. Results. Thirty patients (18 [60%] women and 12 [40%] men, median age 68.5 [range = 35-84] years) were included (18 [60%] ASA III, 11 [36.7%] ASA IV, and 1 [0.03%] ASA V). Seven patients (23.3%) showed sepsis and 1 (3.33%) septic shock. At second surgery, 24 patients (80%) received a colorectal anastomosis and 6 patients (20%) underwent a Hartmann's procedure. Median hospital stay was 18 days (range = 12-62). Postoperative morbidity rate was 23.3% (7/30) and included 1 anastomotic leak treated with Hartmann's procedure. Consequently, at discharge from hospital, 23 patients (76.6%) were free of stoma. Primary fascial closure was possible in all patients. Conclusions. DCS with temporary abdominal closure by negative pressure wound therapy combined with instillation in patients with diffuse peritonitis from complicated diverticulitis could represent a feasible surgical option both in hemodynamically stable and no stable patients, showing encouraging results including a low stoma rate and an acceptable morbidity rate.

Damage control surgery for perforated diverticulitis with diffuse peritonitis: saves lives and reduces ostomy

Introduction

Over the last decade, damage control surgery (DCS) has been emerging as a feasible alternative for the management of patients with abdominal infection and sepsis. So far, there is no consensus about the role of DCS for acute perforated diverticulitis. In this study, we present the outcome of a multi-institutional series of patients presenting with Hinchey's grade III and IV diverticulitis managed by DCS.

Methods

All the participating centers were tertiary referral hospitals. A total of 34 patients with perforated diverticulitis treated with DCS during the period 2011–2017 were included in the study. During the first laparotomy, a limited resection of the diseased segment was performed followed by lavage and use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT). After 24/48 h of resuscitation, patients returned to the operating room for a second look. Mortality, morbidity, and restoration of bowel continuity were the primary outcomes of the study.

Results

There were 15 males (44%) and 19 females (56%) with a mean age of 66.9 years (SD ± 12.7). Mean BMI was 28.42 kg/m² (SD ± 3.33). Thirteen cases (38%) were Wasvary’s modified Hinchey's stage III, and 21 cases (62%) Hinchey's stage IV. Mean Mannheim Peritonitis Index (MPI) was 25.12 (SD ± 6.28). In 22 patients (65%), ASA score was ≥ grade III. Twenty-four patients (71%) had restoration of bowel continuity, while 10 (29%) patients had an end colostomy (Hartmann’s procedure). Three of these patients received a temporary loop ileostomy. One patient had an anastomotic leak. Mortality rate was 12%. Mean length of hospital stay was 21.9 days. At multivariate analysis, male gender (p = 0.010) and MPI (p = 0.034) correlated with a high percentage of Hartmann’s procedures.

Conclusion

DCS is a feasible procedure for patients with generalized peritonitis secondary to perforated diverticulitis, and it appears to be related to a higher rate of bowel reconstruction. Due to the open abdomen, stay in ICU with prolonged mechanical ventilation is required, but these aggressive measures may be needed by most patients undergoing surgery for perforated diverticulitis, whatever the procedure is done.