Primary anastomosis after intraoperative colonic lavage vs. Hartmann's procedure in generalized peritonitis complicating diverticular disease of the colon

Diverticulitis, surgery, evidence-based medicine, and the Steve Jobs' dots: a narrative review

PURPOSE

Emergency treatment of acute diverticulitis remains a hazy field. Despite a number of clinical studies, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), guidelines and surgical societies recommendations, the most critical hot topics have yet to be addressed.

METHODS

Literature research from 1963 until today was performed. Data regarding the principal RCTs and observational studies were summarized in descriptive tables. In particular we aimed to focus on the following topics: the role of laparoscopy, the acute care setting, the RCTs, guidelines, observational studies and classifications proposed by literature, the problem in case of a pandemic, and the importance of adapting treatment /place/surgeon conditions.

RESULTS

In the evaluation of these points we did not try to find any prospective evolution of the concepts achievements. On the contrary we simply report the individuals strands of research from a retrospective point of view, similarly to what Steve Jobes said: "you can't connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backwards. So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future". We have finally obtained what can be defined "a narrative review of the literature on diverticulitis".

CONCLUSIONS

Not only evidence-based medicine but also the contextualization, as also the role of 'competent' surgeons, should guide to novel approach in acute diverticulitis management.

Sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis for perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis: To divert or not to divert-A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The role of proximal diversion in patients undergoing sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis for diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis is unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis and sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis with a proximal diversion in perforated diverticulitis with diffuse peritonitis.

METHOD

A systematic literature search on sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis and sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis with proximal diversion for diverticulitis with diffuse peritonitis was conducted in the Medline and EMBASE databases. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies reporting the primary outcome of interest (30-day mortality) were included. Secondary outcomes were major morbidity, anastomotic leak, reoperation, stoma nonreversal rates, and length of hospital stay. A meta-analysis of proportions and linear regression models were used to assess the effect of each procedure on the different outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 17 studies involving 544 patients (sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis: 287 versus sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis with proximal diversion: 257) were included. Thirty-day mortality (odds ratio 1.12, 95% confidence interval 0.53-2.40, P = .76), major morbidity (odds ratio 1.40, 95% confidence interval 0.80-2.44, P = .24), anastomotic leak (odds ratio 0.34, 95% confidence interval 0.099-1.20, P = .10), reoperation (odds ratio 0.49, 95% confidence interval 0.17-1.46, P = .20), and length of stay (sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis: 12.1 vs resection and primary anastomosis with diverting ileostomy: 15 days, P = .44) were similar between groups. The risk of definitive stoma was significantly lower after sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis (odds ratio 0.05, 95% confidence interval 0.006-0.35, P = .003).

CONCLUSION

Sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis with or without proximal diversion have similar postoperative outcomes in selected patients with diverticulitis and diffuse peritonitis. However, further randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these results.

Evaluating the outcomes of primary anastomosis with hand-sewn full-circular reinforcement in managing perforated left-sided colonic diverticulitis

Background

It is a challenge to avoid stoma formation in emergency surgery of perforated left-sided diverticulum. The hand-sewn full-circular reinforcement of the colorectal anastomosis is used during complete pelvic peritonectomy to avoid a diverting ileostomy. This study examined the effect of applying the reinforcement method to perforated left-sided colonic diverticulitis with respect to the permanent stoma rate and cost-effectiveness.

Materials and methods

This historical cohort study examined all patients who underwent emergency surgery for perforation of a left-sided diverticulum at the Hyogo Prefectural Amagasaki General Medical Center between July 2015 and September 2019. The cohort was divided into two groups: those who underwent conventional method (Group F) and those for whom the hand-sewn full-circular reinforcement method was actively performed (Group L).

Results

The number of patients who underwent emergency surgery which did not lead to an ostomy increased significantly from 12% (3/25) in Group F to 42% (11/26) in Group L (P = 0.0015). The rate of permanent stoma decreased from 80% in Group F to 27% in Group L (P < 0.001). Total treatment costs for patients under the age of 80 in Group L were significantly lower than those in Group F (2170000 ± 1020000 vs 3270000 ± 1960000 JPY; P = 0.018).

Conclusions

In emergency surgery for left-sided perforated colonic diverticulitis, applying the hand-sewn full-circle reinforcement of the anastomotic site may reduce stoma formation at the initial surgery and consequently decrease permanent stoma rate and contribute to cost-effectiveness without increasing complications such as anastomotic leakage.

•

Primary anastomosis was used as an emergency approach to perforated diverticulitis.

•

Primary anastomosis was reinforced by a hand-sewn serosal suture.

•

Full-circle reinforcement of the anastomosis may decrease the permanent stoma rate.

•

Full-circle reinforcement of the anastomosis may be cost effective in approach to perforated diverticulitis.

Intraoperative Colonic Irrigation for Low Rectal Resections With Primary Anastomosis: A Fail-Safe Surgical Model

Aim

Regardless the technological developments in surgery, the anastomotic leakage (AL) rate of low rectal anastomosis remains high. Though various perioperative protocols have been tested to reduce the risk for AL, there is no standard peri-operative management approach in rectal surgery. We aim to assess the short-term outcome of a multidisciplinary approach to reduce the rates of ALs using a fail-safe-model using preoperative and intraoperative colonic irrigation in low rectal resections with primary anastomosis.

Methods

Between January 2015 and December 2020, 92 patients received low rectal resections for rectal cancer with primary anastomosis and diverting ileostomy. All these patients received pre-operative mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) without antibiotics as well as intraoperative colonic irrigation. The intraoperative colonic irrigation was performed via the efferent loop of the ileostomy. All data were analyzed by SPSS for descriptive and inferential analyses.

Results

In the study period, 1.987 colorectal surgical procedures were performed. This study reports AL in 3 (3.3%) of 92 recruited patients. Other postoperative complications (Dindo-Clavien I-IV) were reported in 25 patients (27.2%), which occurred mainly due to non-surgical reasons such as renal dysfunction and sepsis. According to the fail-safe model, AL was treated by endoscopic or re-do surgery. The median postoperative length of hospitalization was 8 days (4–45) days.

Conclusion

This study validates the effectiveness of a multi-disciplinary fail-safe model with a pre-operative MBP and an intraoperative colonic irrigation in reducing AL rates. Intraoperative colonic irrigation is a feasible approach that lowers the AL rates by reducing fecal load and by decontamination of the colon and anastomotic region. Our study does not recommend a pre-operative administration of oral antibiotics for colorectal decontamination.

Is colonic lavage a suitable alternative for left-sided colonic emergencies?

BACKGROUND

The use of intra-operative colonic lavage (IOCL) with primary anastomosis remains controversial in the emergency left-sided large bowel pathologies, with alternatives including Hartmann’s procedure, manual decompression and subtotal colectomy.

AIM

To compare the peri-operative outcomes of IOCL to other procedures.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for articles employing IOCL from inception till July 13, 2020. Odds ratio and weighted mean differences (WMD) were estimated for dichotomous and continuous outcomes respectively. Single-arm meta-analysis was conducted using DerSimonian and Laird random effects.

RESULTS

Of 28 studies were included in this meta-analysis, involving 1142 undergoing IOCL, and 634 other interventions. IOCL leads to comparable rates of wound infection when compared to Hartmann’s procedure, and anastomotic leak and wound infection when compared to manual decompression. There was a decreased length of hospital stay (WMD = -7.750; 95%CI: -13.504 to -1.996; P = 0.008) compared to manual decompression and an increased operating time. Single-arm meta-analysis found that overall mortality rates with IOCL was 4% (CI: 0.03-0.05). Rates of anastomotic leak and wound infection were 3% (CI: 0.02-0.04) and 12% (CI: 0.09-0.16) respectively.

CONCLUSION

IOCL leads to similar rates of post-operative complications compared to other procedures. More extensive studies are needed to assess the outcomes of IOCL for emergency left-sided colonic surgeries.

HARTMANN PROCEDURE OR RESECTION WITH PRIMARY ANASTOMOSIS FOR TREATMENT OF PERFORATED DIVERTICULITIS? SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

BACKGROUND

Mortality after emergency surgery in randomized controlled trials. The Hartmann procedure remains the treatment of choice for most surgeons for the urgent surgical treatment of perforated diverticulitis; however, it is associated with high rates of ostomy non-reversion and postoperative morbidity.

AIM

To study the results after the Hartmann vs. resection with primary anastomosis, with or without ileostomy, for the treatment of perforated diverticulitis with purulent or fecal peritonitis (Hinchey grade III or IV), and to compare the advantages between the two forms of treatment.

METHOD

Systematic search in the literature of observational and randomized articles comparing resection with primary anastomosis vs. Hartmann's procedure in the emergency treatment of perforated diverticulitis. Analyze as primary outcomes the mortality after the emergency operation and the general morbidity after it. As secondary outcomes, severe morbidity after emergency surgery, rates of non-reversion of the ostomy, general and severe morbidity after reversion.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between surgical procedures for mortality, general morbidity and severe morbidity. However, the differences were statistically significant, favoring primary anastomosis in comparison with the Hartmann procedure in the outcome rates of stoma non-reversion, general morbidity and severe morbidity after reversion.

CONCLUSION

Primary anastomosis is a good alternative to the Hartmann procedure, with no increase in mortality and morbidity, and with better results in the operation for intestinal transit reconstruction.

Short- and long-term outcomes for primary anastomosis versus Hartmann's procedure in Hinchey III and IV diverticulitis: a multivariate logistic regression analysis of risk factors

Purpose

The management of perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis is still controversial and no preferred standardized therapeutic approach has been determined. We compared surgical outcomes between Hartmann’s procedure (HP) and primary anastomosis (PA) in patients with Hinchey III and IV perforated diverticulitis.

Methods

Multicenter retrospective analysis of 131 consecutive patients with Hinchey III and IV diverticulitis operated either with HP or PA from 2015 to 2018. Postoperative morbidity was compared after adjustment for known risk factors in a multivariate logistic regression.

Results

Sixty-six patients underwent HP, while PA was carried out in 65 patients, 35.8% of those were defunctioned. HP was more performed in older patients (74.6 vs. 61.2 years, p < .001), with Hinchey IV diverticulitis (37% vs. 7%, p < .001) and in patients with worse prognostic scores (P-POSSUM Physiology Score, p < .001, Charlson Comorbidity Index p < .001). Major morbidity and mortality were higher in HP compared to PA (30.3% vs. 9.2%, p = .002 and 10.6% vs. 0%, p = .007, respectively) with lower stoma reversal rate (43.9% vs. 86.9%, p < .001). In a multivariate logistic regression, PA was independently associated with lower postoperative morbidity and mortality (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.06–0.96, p = .044).

Conclusions

In comparison to PA, HP is associated with a higher morbidity, higher mortality, and a lower stoma reversal rate. Although a higher prevalence of risk factors in HP patients may explain these outcomes, a significant increase in morbidity and mortality persisted in a multivariate logistic regression analysis that was stratified for the identified risk factors.

A Review of Normal Intestinal Healing, Intestinal Anastomosis, and the Pathophysiology and Treatment of Intestinal Dehiscence in Foreign Body Obstructions in Dogs

Small intestinal anastomoses are commonly performed in veterinary medicine following resection of diseased or devitalized intestinal tissue. Traditionally, suture has been employed to anastomose intestinal ends. However, use of intestinal staplers has become increasingly popular due to the ability to produce a rapid anastomosis with purported superior healing properties. Under normal conditions, intestinal healing occurs in three phases: inflammatory, proliferative, and maturation. Dehiscence, a devastating consequence of intestinal anastomosis surgery, most often occurs during the inflammatory phase of healing where the biomechanical strength of the anastomosis is almost entirely dependent on the anastomotic technique (suture or staple line). The resulting septic peritonitis is associated with a staggering morbidity rate upwards of 85% secondary to the severe systemic aberrations and financial burden induced by septic peritonitis and requirement of a second surgery, respectively. Intraoperative and postoperative consideration of the multifactorial nature of dehiscence is required for successful patient management to mitigate recurrence. Moreover, intensive postoperative critical care management is necessitated and includes antibiotic and fluid therapy, vasopressor or colloidal support, and monitoring of the patient's fluid balance and cardiovascular status. An understanding of anastomotic techniques and their relation to intestinal healing will facilitate intraoperative decision-making and may minimize the occurrence of postoperative dehiscence.

Sigmoid resection with primary anastomosis versus the Hartmann's procedure for perforated diverticulitis with purulent or fecal peritonitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The optimal surgical approach for perforated diverticulitis with purulent or fecal peritonitis (Hinchey grade III or IV) remains debated. In recent years, accumulating evidence comparing sigmoid resection with primary anastomosis (PA) with the Hartmann's procedure (HP) was presented. Therefore, the aim was to provide an updated and extensive synthesis of the available evidence.

METHODS

A systematic search in Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases was performed. Studies comparing PA to HP for adult patients with Hinchey III or IV diverticulitis were included. Data on mortality, morbidity, stoma reversal, and patient-reported and cost-related outcomes were extracted. Random effects models were used to pool data and estimate odds ratios (ORs).

RESULTS

From a total of 1560 articles, four randomized controlled trials and ten observational studies were identified, reporting on 1066 Hinchey III/IV patients. Based on trial outcomes, PA was found to be favorable over HP in terms of stoma reversal rates (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.29, 5.31) and reversal-related morbidity (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.16, 0.69). No differences in mortality (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.32, 2.19), morbidity (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.65, 1.51), and reintervention rates (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.39, 2.11) after the index procedure were demonstrated. Data on patient-reported and cost-related outcomes were scarce, as well as outcomes in PA patients with or without ileostomy construction and Hinchey IV patients.

CONCLUSION

Although between-study heterogeneity needs to be taken into account, the present results indicate that primary anastomosis seems to be the preferred option over Hartmann's procedure in selected patients with Hinchey III or IV diverticulitis.

Laparoscopic reversal of Hartmann's procedure: A single-center experience

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic reversal of Hartmann's procedure (LHR) is considered a technically complex major surgical procedure. We present a retrospective analysis of a single-institution experience that assesses the treatment patterns and outcomes of patients who underwent LHR.

MATERIALS AND SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

The study involved patients who underwent LHR between January 2004 and December 2017. All patients had previously undergone a conventional Hartmann's procedure for acute complicated diverticulitis or cancer. Patients were placed in a supine position with their legs spread apart and their left arm out to the side. Access into the abdomen was obtained through open laparoscopy, with a 12-mm trocar for a 30° laparascope inserted at the periumbilical site. We placed between three and five trocars depending on the level of operative difficulty encountered. The first surgical step was to dissect any existing adhesions, and then rectal mobilization was systematically performed to ensure the feasibility of the end-to-end anastomosis and to avoid bladder injury. The stoma was mobilized on the level of the abdominal wall and then freed from the fascia. We used a circular stapler to reestablish a tension-free anastomosis. Over 13 years, 20 patients underwent LHR. No patient required a temporary colostomy or ileostomy.

DISCUSSION

Reversal of Hartmann's procedure involves high operative morbidity and mortality, and usually only relatively young and healthy patients are eligible for reversal. Our results are consistent with previously published literature regarding the advantages of LHR compared to the conventional technique. However, high-level evidence is still needed.

Primary resection anastomosis versus Hartmann's procedure in Hinchey III and IV diverticulitis

Introduction

Surgical management of Hinchey III and IV diverticulitis utilizes either Hartmann’s procedure (HP) or primary resection anastomosis (PRA) with or without fecal diversion. The aim of this meta-analysis is to determine which of the two procedures has a more favorable outcome.

Methods

A systematic review of the existing literature was performed using the PRISMA guidelines. A meta-analysis was carried out using a Mantel-Haenszel, random effects model, and forest plots were generated. The Newcastle-Ottawa and Jadad scoring tools were used to assess the included studies.

Results

A total of 25 studies involving 3546 patients were included in this study. The overall mortality in the HP group was 10.8% across the observational studies and 9.4% in the randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The mortality rate in the PRA group was lower than that in the HP group, at 8.2% in the observational studies and 4.3% in the RCTs. A comparison of PRA vs HP demonstrated a 40% lower mortality rate in the PRA group than in the HP (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.38–0.95, p = 0.03) when analyzing the observational studies. However, meta-analysis of the three RCTs did not demonstrate any difference in mortality, (OR 0.44 (95% CI 0.14–1.34, p = 0.15). Wound infection rates between the two groups were comparable (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.20–2.78, p = 0.67).

Conclusion

Analysis of observational studies suggests that PRA may be associated with a lower overall mortality. There were no differences in wound infection rates. Based on the current evidence, both surgical strategies appear to be acceptable.

Hartmann's procedure versus sigmoidectomy with primary anastomosis for perforated diverticulitis with purulent or faecal peritonitis (LADIES): a multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, open-label, superiority trial

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have suggested that sigmoidectomy with primary anastomosis is superior to Hartmann's procedure. The likelihood of stoma reversal after primary anastomosis has been reported to be higher and reversal seems to be associated with lower morbidity and mortality. Although promising, results from these previous studies remain uncertain because of potential selection bias. Therefore, this study aimed to assess outcomes after Hartmann's procedure versus sigmoidectomy with primary anastomosis, with or without defunctioning ileostomy, for perforated diverticulitis with purulent or faecal peritonitis (Hinchey III or IV disease) in a randomised trial.

METHODS

A multicentre, randomised, open-label, superiority trial was done in eight academic hospitals and 34 teaching hospitals in Belgium, Italy, and the Netherlands. Patients aged between 18 and 85 years who presented with clinical signs of general peritonitis and suspected perforated diverticulitis were eligible for inclusion if plain abdominal radiography or CT scan showed diffuse free air or fluid. Patients with Hinchey I or II diverticulitis were not eligible for inclusion. Patients were allocated (1:1) to Hartmann's procedure or sigmoidectomy with primary anastomosis, with or without defunctioning ileostomy. Patients were enrolled by the surgeon or surgical resident involved, and secure online randomisation software was used in the operating room or by the trial coordinator on the phone. Random and concealed block sizes of two, four, or six were used, and randomisation was stratified by age (<60 and ≥60 years). The primary endpoint was 12-month stoma-free survival. Patients were analysed according to a modified intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the Netherlands Trial Register, number NTR2037, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01317485.

FINDINGS

Between July 1, 2010, and Feb 22, 2013, and June 9, 2013, and trial termination on June 3, 2016, 133 patients (93 with Hinchey III disease and 40 with Hinchey IV disease) were randomly assigned to Hartmann's procedure (68 patients) or primary anastomosis (65 patients). Two patients in the Hartmann's group were excluded, as was one in the primary anastomosis group; the modified intention-to-treat population therefore consisted of 66 patients in the Hartmann's procedure group (46 with Hinchey III disease, 20 with Hinchey IV disease) and 64 in the primary anastomosis group (46 with Hinchey III disease, 18 with Hinchey IV disease). In 17 (27%) of 64 patients assigned to primary anastomosis, no stoma was constructed. 12-month stoma-free survival was significantly better for patients undergoing primary anastomosis compared with Hartmann's procedure (94·6% [95% CI 88·7-100] vs 71·7% [95% CI 60·1-83·3], hazard ratio 2·79 [95% CI 1·86-4·18]; log-rank p<0·0001). There were no significant differences in short-term morbidity and mortality after the index procedure for Hartmann's procedure compared with primary anastomosis (morbidity: 29 [44%] of 66 patients vs 25 [39%] of 64, p=0·60; mortality: two [3%] vs four [6%], p=0·44).

INTERPRETATION

In haemodynamically stable, immunocompetent patients younger than 85 years, primary anastomosis is preferable to Hartmann's procedure as a treatment for perforated diverticulitis (Hinchey III or Hinchey IV disease).

FUNDING

Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development.

Resection with primary anastomosis vs nonrestorative resection for perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

It is still controversial whether the optimal operation for perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis is primary anastomosis (PRA) or nonrestorative resection (NRR). The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate mortality and morbidity rates following emergency resection for perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis and ostomy reversal, as well as ostomy nonreversal rates.

METHOD

The Pubmed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE via Ovid, CINAHL and Web of Science databases were systematically searched. Mortality was the primary end-point. A subgroup meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was performed in addition to a meta-analysis of all eligible studies. Odds ratios (ORs) and mean difference (MD) were calculated for dichotomous and continuous outcomes, respectively.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies, including three randomized controlled trials (RCTs), involving 1016 patients (392 PRA vs 624 NRR) were included. Overall, mortality was significantly lower in patients with PRA compared with patients with NRR [OR (95% CI) = 0.38 (0.24, 0.60), P < 0.0001]. Organ/space surgical site infection (SSI) [OR (95% CI) = 0.25 (0.10, 0.63), P = 0.003], reoperation [OR (95% CI) = 0.48 (0.25, 0.91), P = 0.02] and ostomy nonreversal rates [OR (95% CI) = 0.27 (0.09, 0.84), P = 0.02] were significantly decreased in PRA. In the RCTs, the mortality rate did not differ [OR (95% CI) = 0.46 (0.15, 1.38), P = 0.17]. The mean operating time for PRA was significantly longer than for NRR [MD (95% CI) = 19.96 (7.40, 32.52), P = 0.002]. Organ/space SSI [OR (95% CI) = 0.28 (0.09, 0.82), P = 0.02] was lower after PRA. Ostomy nonreversal rates were lower after PRA. The difference was not statistically significant [OR (95% CI) = 0.26 (0.06, 1.11), P = 0.07]. However, it was clinically significant [number needed to treat/harm (95% CI) = 5 (3.1, 8.9)].

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis found that organ/space SSI rates as well as ostomy nonreversal rates were decreased in PRA at the cost of prolonging the operating time.

Mortality and Morbidity After Hartmann's Procedure Versus Primary Anastomosis Without a Diverting Stoma for Colorectal Perforation: A Nationwide Observational Study

BACKGROUND

The benefit of primary anastomosis (PA) without a diverting stoma over Hartmann's procedure (HP) for colorectal perforation remains controversial. We compared postoperative mortality and morbidity between HP and PA without a diverting stoma for colorectal perforation of various etiologies.

METHODS

Using the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database, we extracted data on patients who underwent emergency open laparotomy for colorectal perforation of various etiologies from July 1, 2010 to March 31, 2014. We compared 30-day mortality, postoperative complication rates, and postoperative critical care interventions between HP and PA groups using propensity score matching, inverse probability of treatment weighting, and instrumental variable analyses to adjust for measured and unmeasured confounding factors.

RESULTS

We identified 8500 eligible patients (5455 HP and 3045 PA). In the propensity score-matched model, a significant difference between the HP and PA groups was detected in 30-day mortality (7.7% vs. 9.6%; risk difference, 1.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5-3.4). The inverse probability of treatment weighting showed similar results (8.8% vs. 10.7%; risk difference, 1.9%; 95% CI, 1.0-2.8). In the instrumental variable analysis, the point estimate suggested similar direction to that of the propensity score analyses (risk difference, 4.4%; 95% CI, -3.3 to 12.1). The PA group had significantly higher rates of secondary surgery for complications (4.6% vs. 8.4%; risk difference, 3.8%; 95% CI, 2.5-4.1) and slightly longer duration of postoperative critical care interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed a significant difference in 30-day mortality between HP and PA without a diverting stoma.

2017 WSES guidelines on colon and rectal cancer emergencies: obstruction and perforation

ᅟ

Obstruction and perforation due to colorectal cancer represent challenging matters in terms of diagnosis, life-saving strategies, obstruction resolution and oncologic challenge. The aims of the current paper are to update the previous WSES guidelines for the management of large bowel perforation and obstructive left colon carcinoma (OLCC) and to develop new guidelines on obstructive right colon carcinoma (ORCC).

Methods

The literature was extensively queried for focused publication until December 2017. Precise analysis and grading of the literature has been performed by a working group formed by a pool of experts: the statements and literature review were presented, discussed and voted at the Consensus Conference of the 4th Congress of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) held in Campinas in May 2017.

Results

CT scan is the best imaging technique to evaluate large bowel obstruction and perforation. For OLCC, self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS), when available, offers interesting advantages as compared to emergency surgery; however, the positioning of SEMS for surgically treatable causes carries some long-term oncologic disadvantages, which are still under analysis. In the context of emergency surgery, resection and primary anastomosis (RPA) is preferable to Hartmann’s procedure, whenever the characteristics of the patient and the surgeon are permissive. Right-sided loop colostomy is preferable in rectal cancer, when preoperative therapies are predicted.

With regards to the treatment of ORCC, right colectomy represents the procedure of choice; alternatives, such as internal bypass and loop ileostomy, are of limited value.

Clinical scenarios in the case of perforation might be dramatic, especially in case of free faecal peritonitis. The importance of an appropriate balance between life-saving surgical procedures and respect of oncologic caveats must be stressed. In selected cases, a damage control approach may be required.

Medical treatments including appropriate fluid resuscitation, early antibiotic treatment and management of co-existing medical conditions according to international guidelines must be delivered to all patients at presentation.

Conclusions

The current guidelines offer an extensive overview of available evidence and a qualitative consensus regarding management of large bowel obstruction and perforation due to colorectal cancer.

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.

The Usefulness of Intraoperative Colonic Irrigation and Primary Anastomosis in Patients Requiring a Left Colon Resection

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to assess the short-term outcome of intraoperative colonic irrigation and primary anastomosis and to suggest the usefulness of the procedure when a preoperative mechanical bowel preparation is inappropriate.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 38 consecutive patients (19 male patients) who underwent intraoperative colonic irrigation and primary anastomosis for left colon disease between January 2010 and December 2016. The medical records of the patients were reviewed to evaluate the patients' characteristics, operative data, and postoperative short-term outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients had colorectal cancer, 7 patients had perforated diverticulitis, and the remaining 2 patients included 1 with sigmoid volvulus and 1 with a perforated colon due to focal colonic ischemia. A diverting loop ileostomy was created in 4 patients who underwent a low anterior resection. Complications occurred in 15 patients (39.5%), and the majority was superficial surgical site infections (18.4%). Anastomotic leakage occurred in one patient (2.6%) who underwent an anterior resection due sigmoid colon cancer with obstruction. No significant difference in overall postoperative complications and superficial surgical site infections between patients with obstruction and those with peritonitis were noted. No mortality occurred during the first 30 postoperative days. The median hospital stay after surgery was 15 days (range, 8-39 days).

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative colonic irrigation and primary anastomosis seem safe and feasible in selected patients. This procedure may reduce the burden of colostomy in patients requiring a left colon resection with an inappropriate preoperative mechanical bowel preparation.

A historical review of surgery for peritonitis secondary to acute colonic diverticulitis: from Lockhart-Mummery to evidence-based medicine

The management of patients with colonic diverticular perforation is still evolving. Initial lavage with or without simple suture and drainage was suggested in the late 19th century, replaced progressively by the three-stage Mayo Clinic or the two-stage Mickulicz procedures. Fears of inadequate source control prompted the implementation of the resection of the affected segment of colon with formation of a colostomy (Hartman procedure) in the 1970’s. Ensuing development of the treatment strategies was driven by the recognition of the high morbidity and mortality and low reversal rates associated with the Hartman procedure. This led to the wider use of resection and primary anastomosis during the 1990’s.

The technique of lavage and drainage regained popularity during the 1990’s. This procedure can also be performed laparoscopically with the advantage of faster recovery and shorter hospital stay. This strategy allows resectional surgery to be postponed or avoided altogether in many patients; and higher rates of primary resection and anastomosis can be achieved avoiding the need for a stoma. The three recent randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic peritoneal lavage alone to resectional surgery reported inconsistent outcomes.

The aim of this review is to review the historical evolution and future reflections of surgical treatment modalities for diffuse purulent and feculent peritonitis. In this review we classified the various surgical strategies according to Krukowski et al. and Vermeulen et al. and reviewed the literature related to surgical treatment separately for each period.

Mortality and complications following surgery for diverticulitis: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The surgical treatment of diverticulitis is in a state of evolution. Clinicians across many disciplines need to counsel patients regarding surgical choices.

OBJECTIVES

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to determine the mortality and complication rates following surgery for diverticulitis in both the emergent and elective setting.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) for relevant articles published from 1980 to 2012. The primary outcome of interest was the point estimate of mortality, following surgery for diverticulitis.

RESULTS

Of the 289 citations reviewed, we included 59 studies. Overall, the point estimate for mortality was 3.05%, with a 95% confidence intereval (CI) of 1.73-5.32 and p < 0.001. Mortality following emergent surgery was 10.64% (95% CI 7.95-14.11; p < 0.001), versus 0.50% (95% CI 0.46-0.54; p < 0.001) following elective operations. A laparoscopic approach had an estimated mortality of 0.75% (95% CI 0.35-1.58; p < 0.001), compared to an open surgical approach, which had a mortality of 4.69% (95% CI 2.29-9.36, p < 0.001). The mortality following a resection with primary anastomosis was 1.96% (95% CI 1.22-3.13; p < 0.001) and for the Hartmann's procedure was 14.18% (95% CI 9.83-20.03; p < 0.001). A comparative analysis found that the risk of post-operative mortality was significantly higher following emergent surgery, compared to elective surgery (odds ratio (OR): 6.12 with 95% CI 1.62-23.10; p = 0.008; Q = 2.56, p = 0.46 and I2 = 0); the open approach, compared to a laparoscopic approach (OR: 36.43 with 95% CI 9.94-133.6; p = 0.13; and Q = 2.79, p = 0.25 and I2 = 28.26); and for Hartmann's procedure, compared to primary anastomosis without diversion (OR: 25.45 with 95% CI 15.13-42.81, p < 0.001; and Q = 23.34, p = 0.14 and I2 = 27.16). The overall reported post-operative complication rate was 32.64% (95% CI 27.43-38.32; p < 0.00). The overall surgical and medical complication rates were 18.96% and 13.93%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Urgent surgical treatment of diverticulitis has a significant complication rate. Even elective surgery has a significant complication rate that needs to be considered when doing the clinical decision-making for recurrent diverticulitis.

[Treatment of the acute diverticulitis: A systematic review]

Acute diverticulitis is a common disease with increasing incidence. In most of cases, diagnosis is made at an uncomplicated stage offering a curative attempt under medical treatment and use of antibiotics. There is a risk of diverticulitis recurrence. Uncomplicated diverticulitis is opposed to complicated forms (perforation, abscess or fistula). Recent insights in the pathophysiology of diverticulitis, the natural history, and treatments have permitted to identify new treatment strategies. For example, the use of antibiotics tends to decrease; surgery is now less invasive, percutaneous drainage is preferred, peritoneal lavage is encouraged. Treatments of the diverticulitis are constantly evolving. In this review, we remind the pathophysiology and natural history, and summarize new recommendations for the medical and surgical treatment of acute diverticulitis.

Influence of Surgical Technique, Performance Status, and Peritonitis Exposure on Surgical Site Infection in Acute Complicated Diverticulitis: A Matched Case-Control Study

BACKGROUND

Acute generalized peritonitis secondary to complicated diverticulitis is a life-threatening condition; the standard treatment is surgery. Despite advances in peri-operative care, this condition is accompanied by a high peri-operative complication rate (22%-25%). No definitive evidence is available to recommend a preferred surgical technique in patients with Hinchey stage III/IV disease.

METHODS

A matched case-control study enrolling patients from four surgical units at Italian university hospital was planned to assess the most appropriate surgical treatment on the basis of patient performance status and peritonitis exposure, with the aim of minimizing the surgical site infection (SSI). A series of 1,175 patients undergoing surgery for Hinchey III/IV peritonitis in 2003-2013 were analyzed. Cases (n=145) were selected from among those patients who developed an SSI.

THE CASE

control ratio was 1:3. Cases and control groups were matched by age, gender, body mass index, and Hinchey grade. We considered three surgical techniques: T1=Hartman's procedure; T2=sigmoid resection, anastomosis, and ileostomy; and T3=sigmoid resection and anastomosis. Six scoring systems were analyzed to assess performance status; subsequently, patients were divided into low, mild, and high risk (LR, MR, HR) according to the system producing the highest area under the curve. We classified peritonitis exposition as P1=<12 h; P2=12-24 h; P3=>24 h. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The Apgar scoring system defined the risk groups according to performance status. Lowest SSI risk was expected when applying T3 in P1 (OR=0.22), P2 (OR=0.5) for LR and in P1 (OR=0.63) for MR; T2 in P2 (OR=0.5) in LR and in P1 (OR=0.61) in MR; T1 in P3 (OR=0.56) in LR; in P2 (OR=0.63) and P3 (OR=0.54) in MR patients, and in each P subgroup (OR=0.93;0.97;1.01) in HR.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-operative assessment based on Apgar scoring system integrated with peritonitis exposure in complicated diverticulitis may offer a ready-to-use tool for reducing SSI-related complications and applying appropriate treatment, reducing the need for disabling ostomy.

Validation of a grading system for complicated diverticulitis in the prediction of need for operative or percutaneous intervention

INTRODUCTION

The current surgical management of acute complicated diverticulitis has seen a major paradigm shift from routine operative intervention to a more conservative approach. This has been made possible by the widespread availability of computed tomography (CT) to enable stratification of the disease severity of acute complicated diverticulitis. The aim of this study was to retrospectively validate a CT grading system for acute complicated diverticulitis in the prediction of the need for operative or percutaneous intervention.

METHODS

Hospital and radiology records were reviewed to identify patients with acute complicated diverticulitis confirmed by CT. A consultant gastrointestinal radiologist, blinded to the clinical outcomes of patients, assigned a score according to the CT grading system.

RESULTS

Three hundred and sixty-seven patients (34.6%) had CT performed for acute diverticulitis during the study period. Forty-four patients (12.0%) had acute complicated diverticulitis (abscess and/or free intraperitoneal air) confirmed on CT. There were 22 women (50%) and the overall median age was 59 years (range: 19-92 years). According to the CT findings, there was one case with grade 1, eighteen patients with grade 2, four with grade 3 and twenty-one with grade 4 diverticulitis. Three patients with grade 2, three patients with grade 3 and ten patients with grade 4 disease underwent acute radiological or surgical intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a CT grading system for acute complicated diverticulitis did not predict the need for acute radiological or operative intervention in this small study. Decision making guided by the patient's clinical condition still retains a primary role in the management of acute complicated diverticulitis.

Italian consensus conference for colonic diverticulosis and diverticular disease

The statements produced by the Consensus Conference on Diverticular Disease promoted by GRIMAD (Gruppo Italiano Malattia Diverticolare, Italian Group on Diverticular Diseases) are reported. Topics such as epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis, medical and surgical treatment of diverticular disease (DD) in patients with uncomplicated and complicated DD were reviewed by a scientific board of experts who proposed 55 statements graded according to level of evidence and strength of recommendation, and approved by an independent jury. Each topic was explored focusing on the more relevant clinical questions. Comparison and discussion of expert opinions, pertinent statements and replies to specific questions, were presented and approved based on a systematic literature search of the available evidence. Comments were added explaining the basis for grading the evidence, particularly for controversial areas.

Management of acute diverticulitis and its complications

Colonic diverticular disease is a common condition, and around a quarter of people affected by it will experience acute symptoms at some time. The most common presentation is uncomplicated acute diverticulitis that can be managed conservatively with bowel rest and antibiotics. However, some patients will present with diverticular abscesses or purulent or faeculent peritonitis due to perforated diverticular disease. Whilst most mesocolic abscesses can be managed with percutaneous drainage alone, pelvic abscesses are associated with a higher rate of future complications and usually require percutaneous drainage followed by interval sigmoid resection. Patients who require emergency surgery for complicated acute diverticulitis most commonly undergo a Hartmann's procedure, although resection with primary anastomosis and laparoscopic peritoneal lavage have emerged as alternative treatment options for patients with purulent peritonitis in recent years. However, robust evidence from randomized trials is lacking for these alternative procedures, and the studies that have reported good outcomes from them have included carefully selected patient groups. There has been a move away from recommending elective prophylactic colectomy after two episodes of acute diverticulitis in the light of evidence that most patients will not experience a significant recurrence of their symptoms; elective surgery is indicated for those with ongoing symptoms, pelvic abscesses, complications-such as fistulating disease, strictures or recurrent diverticular bleeding-and those who are at high risk of perforation during future episodes, for example, due to immunosuppression, chronic renal failure or collagen-vascular diseases.

Surgeon, not disease severity, often determines the operation for acute complicated diverticulitis

BACKGROUND

The "best" operation in the setting of acute complicated diverticulitis has been debated for decades. Multiple studies, including a recent prospective randomized trial, have reported improved outcomes with primary anastomosis. The aim of this study was to determine whether surgeon or patient-specific factors drives the choice of operative procedure.

STUDY DESIGN

Consecutive adult patients with sigmoid diverticulitis, requiring emergent operative treatment for acute complicated diverticulitis, from 1997 to 2012 at an academic medical center, were identified from a prospectively maintained complications database. Patient characteristics, surgeon, choice of operation, and outcomes including postoperative complications and stoma reversal were noted. The use of primary anastomosis and associated outcomes between colorectal and noncolorectal surgeons were compared.

RESULTS

There were 151 patients who underwent urgent resection during the study period, and 136 met inclusion criteria. Eighty-two resections (65.1%) were performed by noncolorectal surgeons and 44 by colorectal surgeons (34.9%). Noncolorectal surgeons performed more Hartmann procedures (68.3% vs 40.9%, p = 0.01) despite similar demographics, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, and Hinchey stage. Length of stay, time to stoma reversal, ICU days, and postoperative complications were lower in the colorectal group (43.2% vs 16.7, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Although patient-specific factors are important, surgeon is a potent predictor of operation performed in the setting of severe acute diverticulitis. A more aggressive approach to primary anastomosis may lower the complication rate after surgical treatment for severe acute diverticulitis.

Primary anastomosis with a defunctioning stoma versus Hartmann's procedure for perforated diverticulitis--a comparison of stoma reversal rates

PURPOSE

The ideal treatment of patients with perforated diverticulitis is still controversial. Hartmann's procedure has been the treatment of choice for decades, but primary anastomosis with a defunctioning stoma has become an accepted alternative. The aim of this study was to evaluate the stoma reversal rates after these two surgical strategies.

METHODS

A retrospective review of the data from patients with perforated sigmoid diverticulitis between 2002 and 2011 undergoing a Hartmann's procedure (HP) versus a primary anastomosis with a defunctioning stoma (PA) was performed. Additionally, patients were contacted by mail or telephone in March 2012 using a standardized questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 98 patients were identified: 72 undergoing HP and 26 patients receiving PA. The median follow-up time was 63 months (range 4-118). Whilst 85 % of patients with PA have had their stoma reversed, only 58 % of patients with an HP had a stoma reversal (p = 0.046). The median period until stoma reversal was significantly longer for HP (19 weeks) than for PA (12 weeks; p = 0.03). The 30-day mortality for PA was 12 % as opposed to 25 % for HP (p = 0.167). According to the Clavien-Dindo classification, surgical complications occurred significantly less frequently in patients with PA (p = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

The stoma reversal rates for PA are significantly higher than for HP. Thus, depending on the overall clinical situation, primary resection and anastomosis with a proximal defunctioning stoma might be the optimal procedure for selected patients with perforated diverticular disease.

Complications of Hartmann takedown in a decade of preferred primary anastomosis

BACKGROUND

Primary anastomosis with or without proximal diversion is increasingly applied to patients requiring urgent colectomy for complicated disease of the left colon. As such, the Hartmann procedure is now often restricted to patients who are unstable or otherwise poor candidates for primary anastomosis. We sought to define the complication rate of Hartmann takedown in a contemporary setting.

METHODS

Consecutive adult patients undergoing colostomy takedown with colorectal anastomosis at an academic teaching hospital from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2010, were included in the study. Complications were captured prospectively by a single trained nurse practitioner. Demographics, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, interval between Hartmann procedure and subsequent takedown, surgical indication, duration of surgery, surgeon volume and specialty, length of stay, and complications were recorded.

RESULTS

One hundred three patients underwent Hartmann reversal by 16 different surgeons; 7 of these surgeons performed 4 or fewer procedures during the study period. During the same time period, 334 patients underwent a Hartmann procedure at our institution. Seventy-seven of 104 patients (74%) had their index resection for complicated diverticulitis; an anastomotic leak was the second most common indication. The median age was 61 years (range 31 to 84 years), and the interval from Hartmann procedure to reversal ranged from 87 to 1,489 days. Only 8 patients (7.7%) had an ASA of 1. Thirty patients (29.1%) had postoperative complications, and 12 (11%) had 2 or more complications. There were 2 deaths and 4 anastomotic leaks, and 7 patients had inadvertent enterotomies. Only ASA status predicted postoperative complications (P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Hartmann takedown is a morbid operation with a substantial risk of inadvertent enterotomy and serious complications. Excluding cases referred from elsewhere, there were more than 5-fold the number of Hartmann procedures than takedowns performed during the study period. This suggests that Hartmann procedures are typically restricted to patients who are also poor candidates for takedown and that their colostomy is likely to be permanent.

Anastomotic stability and wound healing of colorectal anastomoses sealed and sutured with a collagen fleece in a rat peritonitis model

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Anastomotic insufficiency is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. A collagen fleece that supports anastomosis is effective for preventing anastomosis insufficiency. The objective of this study was to compare between the stability of sutured anastomoses and that of anastomoses sealed with a thrombin/fibrinogen-coated collagen fleece in a rat peritonitis model.

METHODS

In 72 male Wistar rats, peritonitis was induced with a specially prepared human fecal solution. Surgery at the rectosigmoid junction was performed 24-36 hours later. The different anastomotic techniques used were circular sutured anastomoses, semicircular sutured anastomosis and closure of the anterior wall with collagen patch, and complete closure with a collagen fleece. Bursting pressure, histology of anastomosis, mRNA expression of collagen types I and III, matrix metalloproteinase-13, and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) were investigated after 24 hours, 72 hours, and 120 hours.

RESULTS

All animals developed peritonitis of comparable severity. There were no differences in bursting pressures between the three suture techniques after 24 hours, 72 hours, or 120 hours. Anastomoses sealed with a collagen fleece appeared to be slightly less stable only at 24 hours, whereas they appeared to be more stable than semisutured or fully sutured anastomoses at 72 hours and 120 hours. Sealing with a collagen fleece was associated with an increase in granulation tissue, higher mRNA levels for collagen types I and III, and higher VEGF compared to sutured anastomoses.

CONCLUSION

The use of a thrombin/fibrinogen-coated collagen fleece showed similar efficacy to conventional sutures in colorectal anastomoses in the presence of peritonitis inflammation, and may provide additional benefits due to an increase in mature granulation tissue.

Treatment of Hinchey stage III-IV diverticulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This manuscript is a review of different surgical techniques to manage perforated colon diverticulitis.

OBJECTIVE

This study was conducted to compare the benefits and disadvantages of different surgical treatments for Hinchey III or IV type of colon diverticulitis.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Science Citation Index (1990 and 2011). A total of 1,809 publications were identified and 14 studies with 1,041 patients were included in the study. Any surgical treatment was considered in this review. Mortality was considered the primary outcome, whereas hospital stay and reoperation rate were considered secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Primary resection with anastomosis has a significant advantage in terms of lower mortality rate with respect to Hartmann's procedure (P = 0.02). The postoperative length of hospitalization was significantly shorter in the resection with anastomosis group (P < 0.001). Different findings have emerged from studies of patients with the primary resection with anastomosis vs laparoscopic peritoneal lavage and subsequent resection: overall surgical morbidity and hospital stay were lower in the laparoscopic peritoneal lavage group compared to the primary resection and anastomosis group (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite numerous published articles on operative treatments for patients with generalized peritonitis from perforated diverticulitis, we found a marked heterogeneity between included studies limiting the possibility to summarize in a metanalytical method the data provided and make difficult to synthesize data in a quantitative fashion. The advantages in the group of colon resection with primary anastomosis in terms of lower mortality rate and postoperative stay should be interpreted with caution because of several limitations. Future randomized controlled trials are needed to further evaluate different surgical treatments for patients with generalized peritonitis from perforated diverticulitis.

A multicenter randomized clinical trial of primary anastomosis or Hartmann's procedure for perforated left colonic diverticulitis with purulent or fecal peritonitis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the outcome after Hartmann's procedure (HP) versus primary anastomosis (PA) with diverting ileostomy for perforated left-sided diverticulitis.

BACKGROUND

The surgical management of left-sided colonic perforation with purulent or fecal peritonitis remains controversial. PA with ileostomy seems to be superior to HP; however, results in the literature are affected by a significant selection bias. No randomized clinical trial has yet compared the 2 procedures.

METHODS

Sixty-two patients with acute left-sided colonic perforation (Hinchey III and IV) from 4 centers were randomized to HP (n = 30) and to PA (with diverting ileostomy, n = 32), with a planned stoma reversal operation after 3 months in both groups. Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary end point was the overall complication rate. The study was discontinued following an interim analysis that found significant differences of relevant secondary end points as well as a decreasing accrual rate (NCT01233713).

RESULTS

Patient demographics were equally distributed in both groups (Hinchey III: 76% vs 75% and Hinchey IV: 24% vs 25%, for HP vs PA, respectively). The overall complication rate for both resection and stoma reversal operations was comparable (80% vs 84%, P = 0.813). Although the outcome after the initial colon resection did not show any significant differences (mortality 13% vs 9% and morbidity 67% vs 75% in HP vs PA), the stoma reversal rate after PA with diverting ileostomy was higher (90% vs 57%, P = 0.005) and serious complications (Grades IIIb-IV: 0% vs 20%, P = 0.046), operating time (73 minutes vs 183 minutes, P < 0.001), hospital stay (6 days vs 9 days, P = 0.016), and lower in-hospital costs (US $16,717 vs US $24,014) were significantly reduced in the PA group.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first randomized clinical trial favoring PA with diverting ileostomy over HP in patients with perforated diverticulitis.

Morbidity and mortality of the Hartmann procedure for diverticular disease over 18 years in a single institution

AIM

Hartmann's procedure for perforated diverticulitis is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. This study analyses factors associated with morbidity/mortality and possible changes over time.

METHOD

Patients treated by urgent Hartmann's procedure for perforated diverticulitis between 1992 and 2010 were studied, and information was collected on age, sex, perioperative details, 30-day morbidity and mortality recorded in an institutional review board approved database supplemented by chart review. Patients were divided into four groups based on the year of surgery. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors associated with morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

In all, 199 patients (51% female, mean age 65 years, mean body mass index 28 kg/m(2)) were identified. The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score was 4 in 30% of patients and Hinchey Stage IV in 16%. The mean length of stay was 12.5 ± 10 days. Mortality was 15% and did not change significantly over time. Overall morbidity was 52% and significantly increased over time on univariate analysis (P = 0.007) but not on multivariate analysis (P = 0.11). Independent predictors of morbidity on multivariate analysis were Hinchey IV (P < 0.001) and hypoproteinaemia (P = 0.001). Independent predictors for mortality were ASA > 3 (P = 0.01), abnormal creatinine (P = 0.007), steroid use (P = 0.007), Hinchey IV (P = 0.032), low albumin (P < 0.001) and low body mass index (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Mortality after Hartmann's procedure for perforated diverticulitis has not decreased during the last 18 years. Morbidity has actually increased over time although this is related to increased disease severity and comorbidity. Future efforts should focus on the identification of patient subgroups benefiting from earlier elective surgery and alternative surgical approaches when perforated diverticulitis does occur.

The influence of mechanical bowel preparation in elective colorectal surgery for diverticulitis

Background

Mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) has been shown to have no influence on the incidence of anastomotic leakage in overall colorectal surgery. The role of MBP in elective surgery in combination with an inflammatory component such as diverticulitis is yet unclear. This study evaluates the effects of MBP on anastomotic leakage and other septic complications in 190 patients who underwent elective surgery for colonic diverticulitis.

Methods

A subgroup analysis was performed in a prior multicenter (13 hospitals) randomized trial comparing clinical outcome of MBP versus no MBP in elective colorectal surgery. Primary endpoint was the occurrence of anastomotic leakage in patients operated on for diverticulitis, and secondary endpoints were septic complications and mortality.

Results

Out of a total of 1,354 patients, 190 underwent elective colorectal surgery (resection with primary anastomosis) for (recurrent or stenotic) diverticulitis. One hundred and three patients underwent MBP prior to surgery and 87 did not. Anastomotic leakage occurred in 7.8 % of patients treated with MBP and in 5.7 % of patients not treated with MBP (p = 0.79). There were no significant differences between the groups in septic complications and mortality.

Conclusion

Mechanical bowel preparation has no influence on the incidence of anastomotic leakage, or other septic complications, and may be safely omitted in case of elective colorectal surgery for diverticulitis.

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for perforated sigmoid diverticulitis

AIM

Currently in the UK the standard surgical practice for the management of perforated sigmoid diverticulitis is a Hartmann's procedure. There have been a number of recent publications on the use of laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for perforated sigmoid diverticulitis, as an alternative to the emergency Hartmann's procedure, with its associated morbidity and mortality. We aim to review the current literature on this topic.

METHOD

A search was made on the electronic database MEDLINE from PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane library. The keywords 'diverticulitis', 'perforated' and 'laparoscopy' were searched for in the titles and abstracts without language restrictions. Further studies were identified from searches on Google Scholar, as well as manual searches through reference lists of the relevant studies found. All included studies were quality assessed.

RESULTS

Twelve relevant studies were included. A total of 301 patients were reported, with a mean age of 57 years. All were non-randomized studies. The majority of patients were of Hinchey classification III. All were treated with intravenous antibiotics followed by laparoscopic lavage and insertion of intra-abdominal/pelvic drains. The mean conversion rate was 4.9% and mean length of hospital stay was 9.3 days. The mean complication rate was 18.9% and the overall mortality rate was 0.25%. Subsequent elective resections with primary anastamosis were performed in 51% of patients and the majority were completed laparoscopically.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for perforated sigmoid diverticulitis appears to be a potentially effective and more conservative alternative to a Hartmann's procedure. Randomized control trials are needed to better evaluate its role.

Prospective, controlled, randomized study of intraoperative colonic lavage versus stent placement in obstructive left-sided colonic cancer

BACKGROUND

The main aim of this study was to compare short-term results and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent intraoperative colonic lavage (IOCL) with primary anastomosis with those who had stent placement prior to scheduled surgery for obstructive left-sided colonic cancer (OLCC).

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, controlled, randomized study of patients diagnosed with OLCC. Patients were divided into two groups: stent and deferred surgery (group 1) and emergency IOCL (group 2). Demographic variables, risk prediction models, postoperative morbidity and mortality, staging, complications due to stent placement, surgical time, clinical follow-up, health costs, and follow-up of survival were recorded.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients (15 group 1 and 13 group 1) were enrolled. The study was suspended upon detecting excess morbidity in group 2. The two groups were homogeneous in clinical and demographic terms. Overall morbidity in group 1 was 2/15 (13.3%) compared with 7/13 (53.8%) in group 2 (p = 0.042). None of the 15 patients in group 1 presented anastomotic dehiscence compared with 4/13 (30.7%) in group 2 (p = 0.035). Surgical site infection was detected in 2 (13.3%) patients in group 1 and in 6 (46.1%) in group 2 (p = 0.096). Postoperative stay was 8 days (IQR 3, group 1) and 10 days (IQR 10, group 2) (p = 0.05). The mean follow-up period was 37.6 months (SD = 16.08) with no differences in survival between the groups.

CONCLUSION

In our setting, the use of a stent and scheduled surgery is safer than IOCL and is associated with lower morbidity, shorter hospital stay, and equally good long-term survival.

Laparoscopic reversal of Hartmann procedure

Background:

The Hartmann procedure is a standard life-saving operation for acute left colonic complications. It is usually performed as a temporary procedure with the intent to reverse it later on. This reversal is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality by open method. The laparoscopic reestablishment of intestinal continuity after Hartmann procedure has shown better results in terms of decrease in morbidity and mortality.

Materials and Methods:

The laparoscopic technique was used consecutively in 12 patients for the reversal of Hartmann procedure in the last 3 years. The adhesiolysis and mobilization of the colon was done under laparoscopic guidance. The colostomy was mobilized and returned to abdominal cavity after tying the anvil in the proximal end. An end-to-end intracorporeal anastomosis was performed between the proximal colon and the rectum using the circular stapler.

Results:

Mean age of the patients was 40 years and the mean time of restoration of intestinal continuity was 130 days. Two patients were converted to open. The mean time of operation was 90 min. There were no postoperative complications and mortality. The mean hospital stay was 5 days.

Conclusion:

Laparoscopic reversal of Hartmann is technically safe and feasible.

Generalized peritonitis due to perforated diverticulitis: Hartmann's procedure or primary anastomosis?

PURPOSE

Hartmann's procedure (HP) still remains the most frequently performed procedure for diffuse peritonitis due to perforated diverticulitis. The aims of this study were to assess the feasibility and safety of resection with primary anastomosis (RPA) in patients with purulent or fecal diverticular peritonitis and review morbidity and mortality after single stage procedure and Hartmann in our experience.

METHODS

From January 1995 through December 2008, patients operated for generalized diverticular peritonitis were studied. Patients were classified into two main groups: RPA and HP.

RESULTS

A total of 87 patients underwent emergency surgery for diverticulitis complicated with purulent or diffuse fecal peritonitis. Sixty (69%) had undergone HP while RPA was performed in 27 patients (31%). At the multivariate analysis, RPA was associated with less post-operative complications (P < 0.05). Three out of the 27 patients with RPA (11.1%) developed a clinical anastomotic leakage and needed re-operation.

CONCLUSIONS

RPA can be safely performed without adding morbidity and mortality in cases of diffuse diverticular peritonitis. HP should be reserved only for hemodynamically unstable or high-risk patients. Specialization in colorectal surgery improves mortality and raises the percentage of one-stage procedures.

Predictors of outcome following surgery in colonic perforation: an institution's experience over 6 years

BACKGROUND

Colonic perforation is associated with abysmal outcome. The aims of our study were to review the surgical outcome of patients with perforated colon and to identify factors predicting peri-operative complications.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients who underwent surgery for colonic perforation from January 2003 to August 2008 was performed. Patients with iatrogenic or traumatic perforation were excluded. The severity of abdominal sepsis was graded using the Mannheim peritonitis index (MPI).

RESULTS

A total of 129 patients, with median age of 65 years (22-97 years), formed the study group. While 29.5% had severe peritoneal contamination, 56.6% had an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score ≥3. Sigmoid colon (47.3%) and caecum (24.8%) were the most common sites of perforation. Diverticulitis and malignancy were the diagnoses in 51.9% and 34.9%, respectively. Hartmann's procedure and right hemicolectomy were performed in 43.4% and 34.1% of the patients, respectively. Stoma was created in 59.7%. The in-hospital mortality rate in our series was 15.5%. After multivariate analysis, the independent variables associated with worse peri-operative complications were ASA score ≥3, MPI >26 and creation of stoma. Malignant perforation was associated with higher ASA score and lower haematocrit level compared to diverticular perforation. Stoma was created more frequently in patients with MPI >26 and left-sided perforation, and was associated with worse complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgery for colonic perforation is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Short-term outcome is determined by ASA score and severity of peritonitis. A lower haematocrit level must alert the possibility of malignancy.

Sigmoid diverticulitis. Longitudinal analysis of 222 patients with a minimal follow up of 5 years

OBJECTIVE

The surgical treatment of severe attacks of sigmoid diverticulitis and the indications for prophylactic surgery are currently matters of debate. We have analysed our experience in a university hospital, bringing new information into the discussion.

METHOD

All patients admitted to our department between 1995 and 2002 for an attack of sigmoid diverticulitis were reviewed. There were 222 who had had a first attack and these formed the basis of the study. Analysis of short- and long-term outcomes was made.

RESULTS

Of the 222 patients, 66 underwent an operation during the first admission (mainly Hartmann's operation) with no death. Twenty-five patients were operated during a subsequent admission, either for a deterioration of their symptoms or prophylaxis. One hundred and twenty-eight patients were managed conservatively, and were followed up for 5-12 years. Recurrence was observed in 43% of the patients with a trend to a higher incidence in patients under 50 years. Recurrent exacerbating diverticulitis were severe in 13% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Complicated diverticulitis can be managed with a low mortality. Hartmann's operation was proven safe in our experience. The risk of recurrence was higher than observed in many recent studies but few recurrences were severe.

Reoperation for stoma-related complications

Stoma complications are common. Most do not require reoperation, but when surgery is indicated, numerous options are available. Complications can arise early or late, and they can vary from benign to life-threatening. Meticulous preoperative planning is crucial in preventing stoma complications. Good communication with the patient is important in the decision-making process.