Peripheral vs pedicle division in laparoscopic resection of sigmoid diverticulitis: a 10-year experience

The Dilemma of the Level of the Inferior Mesenteric Artery Ligation in the Treatment of Diverticular Disease: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Background and aim: Although sigmoidectomy is a well-standardized procedure for diverticular disease, there are still unclear areas related to the varying morphology and vascular supply of the sigmoid colon. The level of vascular ligation could affect the functional outcomes of patients operated on for diverticular disease. The aim of this review is to primarily evaluate sexual, urinary and defecatory function outcomes, as well as postoperative results, in patients who underwent surgery for diverticular disease, with or without inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) preservation. Materials and methods: The MEDLINE/PubMed, WOS and Scopus databases were interrogated. Comparative studies including patients who underwent sigmoidectomy for diverticular diseases were considered. Bowel function, genitourinary function, anastomotic leak, operation time, conversion to open surgery, anastomotic bleeding, bowel obstruction were the main items of interest. Results: Twelve studies were included in the review, three randomized and nine comparative studies. Bowel and genitourinary function are not differently affected by the level of vascular ligation. The site of ligation of IMA did not influence the rate of functional complications, anastomotic leak and bleeding. Of note, the preservation of IMA is associated with a higher conversion rate and longer operative time. Conclusions: Despite the heterogeneity of patient groups, and although the findings should be interpreted with caution, functional and clinical outcomes after sigmoidectomy for diverticular disease do not seem to be affected by the level of vascular ligation as long as the IMA is ligated far from its origin.

Risk of anastomotic bleeding after left colectomy with preservation of inferior mesenteric artery for diverticular disease: preliminary results

BACKGROUND

The inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) preservation in elective laparoscopic left colectomy for diverticular disease may reduce the risk of anastomotic leakage. However, an increased risk of bleeding is assumed. The aim of this study was to investigate the risk of colorectal anastomosis bleeding when IMA is resected or preserved during left colectomy.

METHODS

A retrospective study of a prospectively collected database was performed. All patients who underwent elective left colectomy, from December 2018 to September 2020 were included. Patients' data and clinical information were collected and analyzed. Patients were categorized in two groups: IMA resected (IMA-R) and IMA preserving (IMA-P) left colectomy. Perioperative outcomes between the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

Sixty-three consecutive patients who underwent left colectomy over a period of three years were enrolled: 42 in IMA-R group and 22 in the IMA-P group. There were no significant differences in demographic and intraoperative characteristics between the two groups, except for patients' age and primary disease. Six patients (9.37%) developed anastomotic bleeding during recovery, more frequently in the IMA-P than IMA-R group, although the difference is not statistically significative (13.6% and 7.3%; P=0.406). All bleedings were self-limited and only one needed red blood cells transfusion. Using the bioabsorbable staple line reinforcement (BSLR) has proved to be advantageous in preventing anastomotic bleeding in the IMA-P group.

CONCLUSIONS

IMA preserving left colectomy seems to be associated with a higher risk of mostly self-limited anastomotic bleeding during recovery. BSLR seems to be effective in this group of patients.

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.

Sigmoid resection for diverticular disease - to ligate or to preserve the inferior mesenteric artery? Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

In colorectal cancer, ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) is a standard surgical approach. In contrast, ligation of the IMA is not mandatory during treatment of diverticular disease. The object of this meta-analysis was to assess if preservation of the IMA reduces the risk of anastomotic leakage.

METHOD

A search was performed up to August 2018 using the following electronic databases: MEDLINE/PubMed, ISI Web of Knowledge and Scopus. The measures of treatment effect utilized risk ratios for dichotomous variables with calculation of the 95% CI. Data analysis was performed using the meta-analysis software Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

Eight studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis: two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and six non-RCTs with 2190 patients (IMA preservation 1353, ligation 837). The rate of anastomotic leakage was higher in the IMA ligation group (6%) than the IMA preservation group (2.4%), but this difference was not statistically significant [risk ratio (RR) 0.59, 95% CI 0.26-1.33, I²  = 55%]. The conversion to laparotomy was significantly lower in the IMA ligation group (5.1%) than in the IMA preservation group (9%) (RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.14-2.65, I²  = 0%). Regarding the other outcomes (anastomotic bleeding, bowel injury and splenic damage), no significant differences between the two techniques were observed.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis failed to demonstrate a statistically significant difference in the anastomotic leakage rate when comparing IMA preservation with IMA ligation. Thus, to date there is insufficient evidence to recommend the IMA-preserving technique as mandatory in resection for left-sided colonic diverticular disease.