Hartmann's procedure versus sigmoidectomy with primary anastomosis for perforated diverticulitis with purulent or fecal peritonitis: Three-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial

Colorectal Anastomosis Versus Colostomy Creation in High MELD Patients: An ACS-NSQIP Analysis

BACKGROUND

Liver failure patients are at increased risk of surgical complications. The decision to perform a colonic anastomosis vs a colostomy in urgent colorectal surgery remains unclear.

METHODS

The ACS-NSQIP database was queried for patients undergoing nonelective colorectal surgery between 2016 and 2018. MELD score was calculated and stratified into 3 groups. Subgroup analysis of the high-MELD group was performed.

RESULTS

Higher MELD scores were associated with significantly higher mortality. Colostomy formation was consistent between intermediate and high-MELD groups. In high-MELD patients, colonic anastomosis was associated with higher mortality than those receiving colostomy (41.1% vs 28.4%, P < .001). Patients receiving colostomy had higher rates of wound complications, but lower rates of return to OR and non-wound complications. Regression analysis revealed that colostomy formation remained an independent predictor of survival (mortality OR = .594, P < .001).

DISCUSSION

High-MELD patients undergoing nonelective colorectal surgery have increased risk of complications such as mortality. Patients in this group receiving an anastomosis have increased complications and mortality, and may benefit from colostomy formation.

Goodbye Hartmann trial: a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study on the current use of a surgical procedure developed a century ago

BACKGROUND

Literature suggests colonic resection and primary anastomosis (RPA) instead of Hartmann's procedure (HP) for the treatment of left-sided colonic emergencies. We aim to evaluate the surgical options globally used to treat patients with acute left-sided colonic emergencies and the factors that leading to the choice of treatment, comparing HP and RPA.

METHODS

This is a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. A total 1215 patients with left-sided colonic emergencies who required surgery were included from 204 centers during the period of March 1, 2020, to May 31, 2020. with a 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

564 patients (43.1%) were females. The mean age was 65.9 ± 15.6 years. HP was performed in 697 (57.3%) patients and RPA in 384 (31.6%) cases. Complicated acute diverticulitis was the most common cause of left-sided colonic emergencies (40.2%), followed by colorectal malignancy (36.6%). Severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3b) were higher in the HP group (P < 0.001). 30-day mortality was higher in HP patients (13.7%), especially in case of bowel perforation and diffused peritonitis. 1-year follow-up showed no differences on ostomy reversal rate between HP and RPA. (P = 0.127). A backward likelihood logistic regression model showed that RPA was preferred in younger patients, having low ASA score (≤ 3), in case of large bowel obstruction, absence of colonic ischemia, longer time from admission to surgery, operating early at the day working hours, by a surgeon who performed more than 50 colorectal resections.

CONCLUSIONS

After 100 years since the first Hartmann's procedure, HP remains the most common treatment for left-sided colorectal emergencies. Treatment's choice depends on patient characteristics, the time of surgery and the experience of the surgeon. RPA should be considered as the gold standard for surgery, with HP being an exception.

The influence of preoperative e intraoperative factors in predicting postoperative morbidity and mortality in perforated diverticulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To determine if preoperative-intraoperative factors such as age, comorbidities, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, body mass index (BMI), and severity of peritonitis affect the rate of morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing a primary anastomosis (PA) or Hartmann Procedure (HP) for perforated diverticulitis. This is a systematic review and meta-analysis, conducted according to PRISMA, with an electronic search of the PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases. The search retrieved 614 studies, of which 11 were included. Preoperative-Intraoperative factors including age, ASA classification, BMI, severity of peritonitis, and comorbidities were collected. Primary endpoints were mortality and postoperative complications including sepsis, surgical site infection, wound dehiscence, hemorrhage, postoperative ileus, stoma complications, anastomotic leak, and stump leakage. 133,304 patients were included, of whom 126,504 (94.9%) underwent a HP and 6800 (5.1%) underwent a PA. There was no difference between the groups with regards to comorbidities (p = 0.32), BMI (p = 0.28), or severity of peritonitis (p = 0.09). There was no difference in mortality [RR 0.76 (0.44-1.33); p = 0.33]; [RR 0.66 (0.33-1.35); p = 0.25]. More non-surgical postoperative complications occurred in the HP group (p = 0.02). There was a significant association in the HP group between the severity of peritonitis and mortality (p = 0.01), and surgical site infection (p = 0.01). In patients with perforated diverticulitis, PA can be chosen. Age, comorbidities, and BMI do not influence postoperative outcomes. The severity of peritonitis should be taken into account as a predictor of postoperative morbidity and mortality.

Fragility of Statistically Significant Outcomes in Colonic Diverticular Disease Randomized Trials: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The p value has been criticized as an oversimplified determination of whether a treatment effect exists. One alternative is the fragility index. It is a representation of the minimum number of nonevents that would need to be converted to events to increase the p value above 0.05.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the fragility index of randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy of interventions for patients with diverticular disease since 2010 to assess the robustness of current evidence.

DESIGN

MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to August 2022.

SETTINGS

Articles were eligible for inclusion if they were randomized trials conducted between 2010 and 2022 with parallel, superiority designs evaluating interventions in patients with diverticular disease. Only randomized trials with dichotomous primary outcomes with an associated p value of <0.05 were considered for inclusion.

PARTICIPANTS

Any surgical or medical intervention for patients with diverticular disease.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The fragility index was determined by adding events and subtracting nonevents from the groups with the smaller number of events. Events were added until the p value exceeded 0.05. The smallest number of events required was considered the fragility index.

RESULTS

After screening 1271 citations, 15 randomized trials met the inclusion criteria. Nine of the studies evaluated surgical interventions and 6 evaluated medical interventions. The mean number of patients randomly assigned and lost to follow-up per randomized controlled trial was 92 (SD 35.3) and 9 (SD 11.4), respectively. The median fragility index was 1 (range, 0-5). The fragility indices for the included studies did not correlate significantly with any study characteristics.

LIMITATIONS

Small sample, heterogeneity, and lack of inclusion of studies with continuous outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The randomized trials evaluating surgical and medical interventions for diverticular disease are not robust. Changing a single-outcome event in most studies was sufficient to make a statistically significant study finding not significant. See Video Abstract .

FRAGILIDAD DE LOS RESULTADOS ESTADSTICAMENTE SIGNIFICATIVOS EN ENSAYOS ALEATORIOS DE ENFERMEDAD DIVERTICULAR DEL COLON UNA REVISIN SISTEMTICA

ANTECEDENTES:El valor p ha sido criticado por una determinación demasiado simplificada de si existe un efecto del tratamiento. Una alternativa es el Índice de Fragilidad. Es una representación del número mínimo de no eventos que deberían convertirse en eventos para aumentar el valor p por encima de 0,05.OBJETIVO:Determinar el IF de ensayos controlados aleatorios que evalúan la eficacia de las intervenciones para pacientes con enfermedad diverticular desde 2010 para evaluar la solidez de la evidencia actual.FUENTES DE DATOS:Se realizaron búsquedas en MEDLINE, Embase y CENTRAL desde el inicio hasta agosto de 2022.SELECCIÓN DE ESTUDIOS:Los artículos eran elegibles para su inclusión si eran ensayos aleatorizados realizados entre 2010 y 2022 con diseños paralelos de superioridad que evaluaran intervenciones en pacientes con enfermedad diverticular. Sólo se consideraron para su inclusión los ensayos aleatorizados con resultados primarios dicotómicos con un valor de p asociado menor que 0,05.INTERVENCIÓNES:Cualquier intervención quirúrgica o médica para pacientes con enfermedad diverticular.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACIÓN:El índice de fragilidad se determinó sumando eventos y restando no eventos de los grupos con el menor número de eventos. Se agregaron eventos hasta que el valor p superó 0,05. El menor número de eventos requeridos se consideró índice de fragilidad.RESULTADOS:Después de examinar 1271 citas, 15 ensayos aleatorios cumplieron los criterios de inclusión. Nueve de los estudios evaluaron intervenciones quirúrgicas y seis evaluaron intervenciones médicas. El número medio de pacientes aleatorizados y perdidos durante el seguimiento por ECA fue 92 (DE 35,3) y 9 (DE 11,4), respectivamente. La mediana del índice de fragilidad fue 1 (rango: 0-5). Los índices de fragilidad de los estudios incluidos no se correlacionaron significativamente con ninguna característica del estudio.LIMITACIONES:Muestra pequeña, heterogeneidad y falta de inclusión de estudios con resultados continuos.CONCLUSIONES:Los ensayos aleatorios que evalúan las intervenciones quirúrgicas y médicas para la enfermedad diverticular no son sólidos. Cambiar un solo evento de resultado en la mayoría de los estudios fue suficiente para que un hallazgo estadísticamente significativo del estudio no fuera significativo. (Traducción- Dr. Ingrid Melo ).

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

OBJECTIVE

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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