Laparoscopic Lavage Versus Primary Resection for Acute Perforated Diverticulitis: Review and Meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2018;267:252-258. [PMID: 28338510 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000002236]

Current Management of Diverticulitis

Over the last few decades, our understanding of the pathophysiology and natural history of sigmoid diverticulitis has greatly improved. This knowledge has challenged many of the traditional principles in the management for diverticulitis, such as routine antibiotic administration in all cases, number-based recommendations for elective surgery, and the necessity for an end colostomy in emergency surgery. This review will cover the breadth of management for sigmoid diverticulitis, covering both uncomplicated and complicated disease as well as elective and emergent disease presentations. New and emerging concepts in management will be highlighted with a particular focus on level-1 data, when available.

Current Management of Diverticulitis

Diverticulosis and diverticulitis remain common diagnoses in western countries, and the incidence continues to rise. Diverticulitis accounts for roughly one-third of admissions to acute care hospitals annually, with even more patients being treated as outpatients due to improved understanding of risk stratification and the natural history of disease progression. Thus, having a thorough understanding of the etiology of the disease in conjunction with computed tomography findings and patient presentation can help dictate the appropriate treatment.

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

Objective

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Inadvertent laparoscopic lavage of perforated colon cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Outcomes of surgical treatment of diverticular abscesses after failure of antibiotic therapy

Management of diverticular abscess (DA) is still controversial. Antibiotic therapy is indicated in abscesses ≤ 4 cm, while percutaneous drainage/surgery in abscesses > 4 cm. The study aims to assess the role of antibiotics and surgical treatments in patients affected by DA. We retrospectively analyzed 100 consecutive patients with DA between 2013 and 2020, with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. They were divided into two groups depending on abscess size ≤ or > 4 cm (group 1 and group 2, respectively). All patients were initially treated with intravenous antibiotics. Surgery was considered in patients with generalized peritonitis at admission or after the failure of antibiotic therapy. The primary endpoint was to compare recurrence rates for antibiotics and surgery. The secondary endpoint was to assess the failure rate of each antibiotic regimen resulting in surgery. In group 1, 31 (72.1%) patients were conservatively treated and 12 (27.9%) underwent surgery. In group 2, percentages were respectively 50.9% (29 patients) and 49.1% (28 patients). We observed 4 recurrences in group 1 and 6 in group 2. Recurrence required surgery in 3 patients/group. We administered amoxicillin-clavulanic acid to 74 patients, piperacillin-tazobactam to 14 patients and ciprofloxacin + metronidazole to 12 patients. All patients referred to surgery had been previously treated with amoxicillin-Powered by Editorial Manager^® and ProduXion Manager^® from Aries Systems Corporation clavulanic acid. No percutaneous drainage was performed in a hundred consecutive patients. Surgical treatment was associated with a lower risk of recurrence in patients with abscess > 4 cm, compared to antibiotics. Amoxicillin-clavulanic acid was associated with a higher therapeutic failure rate than piperacillin-tazobactam/ciprofloxacin + metronidazole.

Functional Outcomes of Emergency Surgery for Perforated Diverticulitis, Hinchey Grade III

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic lavage as a treatment for perforated diverticulitis, Hinchey III, has been found safe and feasible in randomized trials. A few studies have reported functional outcomes and quality of life as secondary outcomes. This study investigated distress associated with dysfunction of the bowel or stoma, functional outcomes, and quality of life 2-3 years after surgery in a national unselected cohort.

METHODS

All patients in Sweden who underwent emergency surgery for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis (2016-2018) were invited to answer a comprehensive, study-specific questionnaire 2-3 years after the index surgery.

RESULTS

Out of 499 potential patients, 226 returned the questionnaire, and 209 were included in the analysis. There was no statistically significant difference between laparoscopic lavage and resection in distress associated with dysfunction of the bowel or stoma (odds ratio [OR], 1.32 [95% CI, 0.91-1.92]; p = 0.015). Bowel dysfunction measured by the LARS score was significantly higher for the lavage group (OR, 1.65 [95% CI, 1.11-2.45]), while stoma was more frequent after resection surgery (40 vs 6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients experienced long-term distress from bodily dysfunction after emergency surgery for perforated diverticulitis regardless of the technique used. Regular follow-up could benefit these patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The project was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on 2017-11-06. Identifier: NCT03332550. Acronym: LapLav.

Current Aspects on the Management of Perforated Acute Diverticulitis: A Narrative Review

Unhealthy nutritional habits and the current western lifestyle have led to an increased incidence of acute diverticulitis, which mainly affects older patients. However, the disease course in younger patients might be more severe. It has a continued increase in surgical practice, as it is the most common clinical condition encountered in the emergencies. Diagnosis and management have changed over the past decade. C-reactive protein > 170 mg/L represents the cut-off point between moderate and severe diverticulitis, and a CT scan is mandatory. It demands urgent surgical management and has high morbidity and mortality rate, especially in immunosuppressed patients, reaching up to 25%. According to the contemporary guidelines, there have been certain indications for conservative management and re-evaluation (administration of antibiotics, CT-guided drainage of the abscess, when it is > 4 cm). They include pericolic air bubbles or a small amount of fluid, absence of abscess within a distance of 5 cm from the affected bowel or abscess ≤4 cm. In other cases, Hartmann's sigmoidectomy is the procedure of choice. An alternative choice, nowadays, is resection and primary anastomosis with or without diverting stoma, especially in younger patients. Laparoscopic lavage only versus primary resection has been performed in severe cases of Hinchey III or IV. Damage control surgery, possible open abdomen, and reoperation are recommended in severe sepsis. Hinchey's classification may not be absolutely adequate, and several modifications have been proposed. Current classification criteria (CRP, qSOFA score) are more appropriate. The decision-making must be individualized depending on the hemodynamic status (septic shock), age, comorbidity, immune status, intraoperative findings, and MPI (Mannheim peritonitis index).

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

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

Emerging evidence and recent controversies in diverticulitis: a 5-year review

Diverticulitis is a common gastrointestinal disease that still garners significant attention and study because of its heterogeneity in presentation and outcome. We provide a review of the newest and most controversial topics in diverticulitis. Recent discoveries on the influence of diet and other environmental risk factors are discussed, showing how the epidemiology of the disease process is shifting away from what was previously felt to be a disorder primarily limited to older western populations. Interestingly, as has long been suspected, genetic mutations and variations associated with the development of diverticulitis are being discovered and are summarized here. The data for non-operative and outpatient management of diverticulitis are reviewed, as are pharmacologic agents studied for use in the secondary prevention of diverticulitis. Lastly, we present controversies in the surgical treatment of diverticulitis. This review will provide a synopsis of the last 5 years of literature relating to diverticulitis.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic lavage is safe in routine care beyond trial evaluations.

[Indications for surgical treatment of diverticular disease]

BACKGROUND

The correct medical indications are the fundamental decision process for the surgical treatment and ensuring the quality.

OBJECTIVE

Description of the indications for surgical treatment of the various types of diverticular disease according to the current level of evidence.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The narrative review is based on current national and international guidelines and a selective literature search.

RESULTS

There are basically three main indications for resection of the sigmoid colon. 1) Prophylactic for avoidance of complications after successful conservative treatment of acute complicated diverticulitis with macroabscess formation and high risk of recurrence (classification of diverticular disease, CDD, type 2b). 2) In patients with persistent symptoms and impaired quality of life resection of the sigmoid colon of various types (CDD types 1-3) can effectively enable a significant improvement in the quality of life and is therefore to be recommended in cases of individually acceptable perioperative risks. 3) Indications for urgent resection of the sigmoid colon are present for free perforation or failure of conservative treatment.

CONCLUSION

The indications for surgery should be defined by the type of diverticular disease, the aim of surgical treatment, the evaluation of the efficacy of surgical treatment in comparison to conservative treatment and an individual appraisal of the risks.

Update on the management of sigmoid diverticulitis

Diverticular disease and diverticulitis are the most common non-cancerous pathology of the colon. It has traditionally been considered a disease of the elderly and associated with cultural and dietary habits. There has been a growing evolution in our understanding and the treatment guidelines for this disease. To provide an updated review of the epidemiology, pathogenesis, classification and highlight changes in the medical and surgical management of diverticulitis. Diverticulitis is increasingly being seen in young patients (< 50 years). Genetic contributions to diverticulitis may be larger than previously thought. Potential similarities and overlap with inflammatory bowel disease and irritable bowel syndrome exist. Computed tomography imaging represents the standard to classify the severity of diverticulitis. Modifications to the traditional Hinchey classification might serve to better delineate mild and intermediate forms as well as better classify chronic presentations of diverticulitis. Non-operative management is primarily based on antibiotics and supportive measures, but antibiotics may be omitted in mild cases. Interval colonoscopy remains advisable after an acute attack, particularly after a complicated form. Acute surgery is needed for the most severe as well as refractory cases, whereas elective resections are individualized and should be considered for chronic, smoldering, or recurrent forms and respective complications (stricture, fistula, etc.) and for patients with factors highly predictive of recurrent attacks. Diverticulitis is no longer a disease of the elderly. Our evolving understanding of diverticulitis as a clinical entity has led into a more nuanced approach in both the medical and surgical management of this common disease. Non-surgical management remains the appropriate treatment for greater than 70% of patients. In individuals with non-relenting, persistent, or recurrent symptoms and those with complicated disease and sequelae, a segmental colectomy remains the most effective surgical treatment in the acute, chronic, or elective-prophylactic setting.

Laparoscopic Lavage in the Management of Hinchey III/IV Diverticulitis

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

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

Importance

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

Objective

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

Design, Setting, and Participants

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

Interventions

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

Main Outcomes and Measures

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

Results

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

Conclusions and Relevance

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

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01047462.

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

The Indications for and Timing of Surgery for Diverticular Disease

BACKGROUND

Diverticular disease is one of the more common abdominal disorders. In 2016, approximately 130 000 patients received inpatient treatment for diverticular disease in Germany. The disease has a number of subtypes, each of which has an appropriate treatment. In this article, we present the current surgical indications and optimal timing of surgery for diverticular disease.

METHODS

This review is based on publications that were retrieved by an extensive, selective search in Medline and the Cochrane Library (1998-2018) for studies and guidelines with information on the indications for surgery in diverticular disease.

RESULTS

Studies of evidence grades 2 to 4 were available. Patients receiving a diagnosis of freely perforated diverticulitis and peritonitis (Classification of Diverticular Disease [CDD] type 2c) should be operated on at once. Covered perforated diverticulitis with a macroabscess (>1 cm, CDD type 2b) may be an indication for elective surgery after successful conservative treatment. New evidence from a randomized, controlled trial suggests that elective surgery should also be considered for patients with chronic recurrent diverticulitis (CDD type 3b). The decisive factor in such cases is the impairment of the quality of life for the individual patient. Elective surgery is indicated in chronic recurrent diverticulitis with complications (fistulae, stenoses). Asymptomatic diverticulosis (CDD type 0) and uncomplicated diverticulitis (CDD type 1) are not surgical indications. Likewise, in diverticular hemorrhage (CDD type 4), surgery is only indicated in exceptional cases, when conservative treatment fails.

CONCLUSION

The surgical indication and the proper timing of surgery depend on the type of disease that is present. Future studies should more thoroughly investigate the effect of surgery on the quality of life in patients with the various types of diverticular disease.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

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

Complicated Diverticular Disease

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

Diverticulitis: An Update From the Age Old Paradigm

For a disease process that affects so many, we continue to struggle to define optimal care for patients with diverticular disease. Part of this stems from the fact that diverticular disease requires different treatment strategies across the natural history- acute, chronic and recurrent.

To understand where we are currently, it is worth understanding how treatment of diverticular disease has evolved. Diverticular disease was rarely described in the literature prior to the 1900’s. In the late 1960’s and early 1970’s, Painter and Burkitt popularized the theory that diverticulosis is a disease of Western civilization based on the observation that diverticulosis was rare in rural Africa but common in economically developed countries. Previous surgical guidelines focused on early operative intervention to avoid potential complicated episodes of recurrent complicated diverticulitis (e.g., with free perforation) that might necessitate emergent surgery and stoma formation. More recent data has challenged prior concerns about decreasing effectiveness of medical management with repeat episodes and the notion that the natural history of diverticulitis is progressive. It has also permitted more accurate grading of the severity of disease and permitted less invasive management options to attempt conversion of urgent operations into the elective setting, or even avoid an operation altogether.

The role of diet in preventing diverticular disease has long been debated. A high fiber diet appears to decrease the likelihood of symptomatic diverticulitis. The myth of avoid eating nuts, corn, popcorn, and seeds to prevent episodes of diverticulitis has been debunked with modern data. Overall, the recommendations for “diverticulitis diets” mirror those made for overall healthy lifestyle – high fiber, with a focus on whole grains, fruits and vegetables.

Diverticulosis is one of the most common incidental findings on colonoscopy and the eighth most common outpatient diagnosis in the United States. Over 50% of people over the age of 60 and over 60% of people over age 80 have colonic diverticula. Of those with diverticulosis, the lifetime risk of developing diverticulitis is estimated at 10–25%, although more recent studies estimate a 5% rate of progression to diverticulitis. Diverticulitis accounts for an estimated 371,000 emergency department visits and 200,000 inpatient admissions per year with annual cost of 2.1–2.6 billion dollars per year in the United States. The estimated total medical expenditure (inpatient and outpatient) for diverticulosis and diverticulitis in 2015 was over 5.4 billion dollars. The incidence of diverticulitis is increasing.

Besides increasing age, other risk factors for diverticular disease include use of NSAIDS, aspirin, steroids, opioids, smoking and sedentary lifestyle. Diverticula most commonly occur along the mesenteric side of the antimesenteric taeniae resulting in parallel rows. These spots are thought to be relatively weak as this is the location where vasa recta penetrate the muscle to supply the mucosa. The exact mechanism that leads to diverticulitis from diverticulosis is not definitively known.

The most common presenting complaint is of left lower quadrant abdominal pain with symptoms of systemic unwellness including fever and malaise, however the presentation may vary widely. The gold standard cross-sectional imaging is multi-detector CT. It is minimally invasive and has sensitivity between 98% and specificity up to 99% for diagnosing acute diverticulitis. Uncomplicated acute diverticulitis may be safely managed as an out-patient in carefully selected patients. Hospitalization is usually necessary for patients with immunosuppression, intolerance to oral intake, signs of severe sepsis, lack of social support and increased comorbidities. The role of antibiotics has been questioned in a number of randomized controlled trials and it is likely that we will see more patients with uncomplicated disease treated with observation in the future

Acute diverticulitis can be further sub classified into complicated and uncomplicated presentations. Uncomplicated diverticulitis is characterized by inflammation limited to colonic wall and surrounding tissue. The management of uncomplicated diverticulitis is changing. Use of antibiotics has been questioned as it appears that antibiotic use can be avoided in select groups of patients. Surgical intervention appears to improve patient’s quality of life. The decision to proceed with surgery is recommended in an individualized manner.

Complicated diverticulitis is defined as diverticulitis associated with localized or generalized perforation, localized or distant abscess, fistula, stricture or obstruction. Abscesses can be treated with percutaneous drainage if the abscess is large enough. The optimal long-term strategy for patients who undergo successful non-operative management of their diverticular abscess remains controversial. There are clearly patients who would do well with an elective colectomy and a subset who could avoid an operation all together however, the challenge is appropriate risk-stratification and patient selection. Management of patients with perforation depends greatly on the presence of feculent or purulent peritonitis, the extent of contamination and hemodynamic status and associated comorbidities. Fistulas and strictures are almost always treated with segmental colectomy.

After an episode of acute diverticulitis, routine colonoscopy has been recommended by a number of societies to exclude the presence of colorectal cancer or presence of alternative diagnosis like ischemic colitis or inflammatory bowel disease for the clinical presentation. Endoscopic evaluation of the colon is normally delayed by about 6 weeks from the acute episode to reduce the risk associated with colonoscopy. Further study has questioned the need for endoscopic evaluation for every patient with acute diverticulitis. Colonoscopy should be routinely performed after complicated diverticulitis cases, when the clinical presentation is atypical or if there are any diagnostic ambiguity, or patient has other indications for colonoscopy like rectal bleeding or is above 50 years of age without recent colonoscopy.

For patients in whom elective colectomy is indicated, it is imperative to identify a wide range of modifiable patient co-morbidities. Every attempt should be made to improve a patient’s chance of successful surgery. This includes optimization of patient risk factors as well as tailoring the surgical approach and perioperative management. A positive outcome depends greatly on thoughtful attention to what makes a complicated patient “complicated”.

Operative management remains complex and depends on multiple factors including patient age, comorbidities, nutritional state, severity of disease, and surgeon preference and experience. Importantly, the status of surgery, elective versus urgent or emergent operation, is pivotal in decision-making, and treatment algorithms are divergent based on the acuteness of surgery. Resection of diseased bowel to healthy proximal colon and rectal margins remains a fundamental principle of treatment although the operative approach may vary.

For acute diverticulitis, a number of surgical approaches exist, including loop colostomy, sigmoidectomy with colostomy (Hartmann’s procedure) and sigmoidectomy with primary colorectal anastomosis. Overall, data suggest that primary anastomosis is preferable to a Hartman’s procedure in select patients with acute diverticulitis. Patients with hemodynamic instability, immunocompromised state, feculent peritonitis, severely edematous or ischemic bowel, or significant malnutrition are poor candidates. The decision to divert after colorectal anastomosis is at the discretion of the operating surgeon. Patient factors including severity of disease, tissue quality, and comorbidities should be considered. Technical considerations for elective cases include appropriate bowel preparation, the use of a laparoscopic approach, the decision to perform a primary anastomosis, and the selected use of ureteral stents.

Management of the patient with an end colostomy after a Hartmann’s procedure for acute diverticulitis can be a challenging clinical scenario. Between 20 – 50% of patients treated with sigmoid resection and an end colostomy after an initial severe bout of diverticulitis will never be reversed to their normal anatomy. The reasons for high rates of permanent colostomies are multifactorial. The debate on the best timing for a colostomy takedown continues. Six months is generally chosen as the safest time to proceed when adhesions may be at their softest allowing for a more favorable dissection. The surgical approach will be a personal decision by the operating surgeon based on his or her experience. Colostomy takedown operations are challenging surgeries. The surgeon should anticipate and appropriately plan for a long and difficult operation. The patient should undergo a full antibiotic bowel preparation. Preoperative planning is critical; review the initial operative note and defining the anatomy prior to reversal. When a complex abdominal wall closure is necessary, consider consultation with a hernia specialist. Open surgery is the preferred surgical approach for the majority of colostomy takedown operations. Finally, consider ureteral catheters, diverting loop ileostomy, and be prepared for all anastomotic options in advance.

Since its inception in the late 90’s, laparoscopic lavage has been recognized as a novel treatment modality in the management of complicated diverticulitis; specifically, Hinchey III (purulent) diverticulitis. Over the last decade, it has been the subject of several randomized controlled trials, retrospective studies, systematic reviews as well as cost-efficiency analyses. Despite being the subject of much debate and controversy, there is a clear role for laparoscopic lavage in the management of acute diverticulitis with the caveat that patient selection is key.

Segmental colitis associated with diverticulitis (SCAD) is an inflammatory condition affecting the colon in segments that are also affected by diverticulosis, namely, the sigmoid colon. While SCAD is considered a separate clinical entity, it is frequently confused with diverticulitis or inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). SCAD affects approximately 1.4% of the general population and 1.15 to 11.4% of those with diverticulosis and most commonly affects those in their 6th decade of life. The exact pathogenesis of SCAD is unknown, but proposed mechanisms include mucosal redundancy and prolapse occurring in diverticular segments, fecal stasis, and localized ischemia. Most case of SCAD resolve with a high-fiber diet and antibiotics, with salicylates reserved for more severe cases. Relapse is uncommon and immunosuppression with steroids is rarely needed. A relapsing clinical course may suggest a diagnosis of IBD and treatment as such should be initiated. Surgery is extremely uncommon and reserved for severe refractory disease.

While sigmoid colon involvement is considered the most common site of colonic diverticulitis in Western countries, diverticular disease can be problematic in other areas of the colon. In Asian countries, right-sided diverticulitis outnumbers the left. This difference seems to be secondary to dietary and genetic factors. Differential diagnosis might be difficult because of similarity with appendicitis. However accurate imaging studies allow a precise preoperative diagnosis and management planning. Transverse colonic diverticulitis is very rare accounting for less than 1% of colonic diverticulitis with a perforation rate that has been estimated to be even more rare. Rectal diverticula are mostly asymptomatic and diagnosed incidentally in the majority of patients and rarely require treatment. Giant colonic diverticula (GCD) is a rare presentation of diverticular disease of the colon and it is defined as an air-filled cystic diverticulum larger than 4 cm in diameter. The pathogenesis of GCD is not well defined.

Overall, the management of diverticular disease depends greatly on patient, disease and surgeon factors. Only by tailoring treatment to the patient in front of us can we achieve optimal outcomes.

[Recommendations for treatment of diverticular disease]

BACKGROUND

Diverticular disease is of major clinical and health economic importance in Germany. Treatment recommendations in many international guidelines have changed significantly in recent years. The German national S2k guidelines are currently being revised.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the most important clinical aspects in the management of diverticular disease from a surgical perspective.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The recommendations were compiled based on current national and international guidelines and a selective literature search.

RESULTS

Acute uncomplicated diverticulitis without risk factors can be treated on an outpatient basis without antibiotics. For patients with complicated diverticulitis, hospital admission with parenteral antibiotic treatment is recommended. In the case of abscess formation >5 cm, percutaneous drainage can be performed. The indications for immediate sigmoid resection are free perforation and failure of conservative treatment. Elective resection is indicated in chronic recurrent diverticulitis with complications; all other indications are increasingly based on the individual quality of life of the patient.

CONCLUSION

Uncomplicated diverticulitis is increasingly being treated on an outpatient basis and without antibiotics. Apart from emergency settings, the indications for surgery are increasingly dependent on the quality of life. Elective sigmoid resection should be performed as laparoscopic surgery with primary anastomosis after obtaining results of computed tomography and total colonoscopy.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

DESIGN

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

SETTING

This study measured outcomes over patients' lifetime horizon.

PATIENTS

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

INTERVENTIONS

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

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Quality-adjusted life years were the primary outcome measured.

RESULTS

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

LIMITATIONS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Spontaneous colonic perforation in adults: Evaluation of a pooled case series

Spontaneous colonic perforation in adults (SCPA) is rare but important. Its clinicopathological features and outcomes remain unclear. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to explore and investigate the clinicopathological characteristics, clinical outcomes and potential risk factors for patients with SCPA. Data of seven patients with SCPA treated in our hospitals from January 2008 to December 2017, and 221 cases from research databases before 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. The description of SCPA included stercoral perforation of the colon (SPC), idiopathic perforation of the colon (IPC) and spontaneous colonic perforation (SCP) in the study. All SCPA patients presented with unexplained abdominal pain and peritonitis. The median age was 62.5 years. The definite diagnosis preoperatively was 20.6%. The commonest lesion location was sigmoid colon and Hartmann's operation accounted for 59.3%. Histopathology of stercoral perforation (HSP) and histopathology of idiopathic perforation (HIP) were two histopathological findings. Postoperative complication was 67.7% and mortality was 31.1%. Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that chronic constipation was an independent risk factor for histopathological features (p ≤ 0.001, p = 0.005). Age of patients was associated with both postoperative complication (p = 0.012, p = 0.044) and mortality (p = 0.013, p = 0.034). Univariate analysis showed that HSP was associated with postoperative complication (p = 0.015). Our findings from the analysis pertaining to SCPA confirm those from previous studies, supporting the SCPA, as a uniform description, is an infrequent and life-threatening disease requiring early surgical intervention. We found that the elderly with chronic constipation was a high-risk category and those with HIP had a more favorable outcome than that of patients with HSP.

[Minimally invasive interventions in emergency large bowel surgery]

The current trends in the treatment of various surgical diseases of large bowel using minimally invasive operations are reviewed in the manuscript. It is shown that laparoscopy is currently possible in most cases for urgent large bowel diseases.

2020 update of the WSES guidelines for the management of acute colonic diverticulitis in the emergency setting

Acute colonic diverticulitis is one of the most common clinical conditions encountered by surgeons in the acute setting. An international multidisciplinary panel of experts from the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) updated its guidelines for management of acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis (ALCD) according to the most recent available literature. The update includes recent changes introduced in the management of ALCD. The new update has been further integrated with advances in acute right-sided colonic diverticulitis (ARCD) that is more common than ALCD in select regions of the world.

Operative Surgery is Rarely Required in the Acute Management of Diverticulitis in the Modern Era

Acute diverticulitis is an emergency surgical condition that is commonly managed via an acute surgical unit model. Operative surgery is indicated in selected situations including generalized peritonitis or fistulous disease; however, limited data exist on how borderline patients potentially needing surgery may be salvaged by close clinical management with modern interventional techniques. The aims of the study were to identify the operative surgery rates in acute diverticulitis and predictors for identifying patients with complicated diverticulitis. Retrospective data collection was performed on a prospectively held database at a high-volume acute surgical unit at Logan Hospital, Queensland. Patient demographic data, disease-related factors, and treatment-related factors were collected for reporting and analysis. Over three years (2016–2018), 201 patients (64%) were admitted with uncomplicated diverticulitis and 113 patients (36%) with complicated diverticulitis. An observable downward trend was noted in the number of yearly admissions for uncomplicated diverticulitis. Complicated diverticulitis was associated with male gender ( P = 0.039), increased length of hospital stay ( P < 0.001), temperature ≥37.5 ( P = 0.025), increased white cell count ( P < 0.001), and elevated C-reactive protein ( P < 0.001). Twelve patients (11%) with complicated diverticulitis initially failed conservative management. Seven patients (6%) underwent a definitive Hartmann's procedure, and 5 patients (4%) underwent percutaneous drainage of abscesses. Acute diverticulitis can be safely managed nonoperatively by medical therapy and percutaneous drainage of abscesses, with surgery reserved for patients with complicated diver-ticulitis with sepsis or peritonitis.

Colonic diverticular disease

Diverticula are outpouchings of the intestinal wall and are common anatomical alterations detected in the human colon. Colonic diverticulosis (the presence of diverticula in the colon; referred to as diverticulosis) remains asymptomatic in most individuals but ~25% of individuals will develop symptomatic diverticulosis, termed colonic diverticular disease (also known as diverticular disease). Diverticular disease can range in severity from symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease (SUDD) to symptomatic disease with complications such as acute diverticulitis or diverticular haemorrhage. Since the early 2000s, a greater understanding of the pathophysiology of diverticulosis and diverticular disease, which encompasses genetic alterations, chronic low-grade inflammation and gut dysbiosis, has led to improvements in diagnosis and management. Diagnosis of diverticular disease relies on imaging approaches, such as ultrasonography, CT and MRI, as biomarkers alone are insufficient to establish a diagnosis despite their role in determining disease severity and progression as well as in differential diagnosis. Treatments for diverticular disease include dietary fibre, pharmacological treatments such as antibiotics (rifaximin), anti-inflammatory drugs (mesalazine) and probiotics, alone or in combination, and eventually surgery. Despite being effective in treating primary disease, their effectiveness in primary and secondary prevention of complications is still uncertain.

Conservative management of acute perforated diverticulitis: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Acute perforated diverticulitis is frequently observed and spans a spectrum in the severity of its presentation. Emergency surgery is required in patients with generalized peritonitis; however, a large proportion of patients are clinically stable with localized peritonitis. This article aimed to examine this specific group of patients by reviewing the outcomes of their conservative management.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed on the MEDLINE and PubMed databases. The management outcomes of patients undergoing non-operative treatment for acute perforated diverticulitis were synthesized and tabulated.

RESULTS

Of 479 patients, 407 (85%) were successfully managed non-operatively. In total 70 (14.6%) patients failed non-operative treatment and underwent operative surgical management, and two (0.4%) died. Emergency surgery includes a Hartmann's operation (40%) and resection with anastomosis with or without stoma (24%), laparoscopic lavage (16%) and surgical drainage (20%). The success rate of conservative management was 94.0% and 71.4% for patients with pericolic and distant free air, respectively. Treatment failure was associated with a high volume of free air, distant free air and the presence of abscess.

CONCLUSIONS

Conservative management is safe and successful in patients with acute perforated diverticulitis without generalized peritonitis. The early recognition of patients who show clinical signs of persistent perforation is important to ensure the success of this strategy.

Essential updates 2018/2019: Colorectal (benign): Recent updates (2018-2019) in the surgical treatment of benign colorectal diseases

This review outlines current topics on the surgical treatment of benign colorectal diseases, with a focus on inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and diverticulitis. Treatment options for IBD and diverticulitis have evolved in the last few years as a result of medical advances in technology and new clinical trials. Therefore, treatment options and strategies need to be updated to provide optimal care for patients. The purpose of this review is to elucidate recent global trends and update the surgical treatment strategy for IBD and diverticulitis based on literature published in the past 2 years. Prevalence of IBD, including ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, has increased over the last few decades. During this period, many new medical therapies were introduced for the treatment of IBD, including biological therapy, immunomodulators, and leukocyte apheresis therapy. As a result, new surgical strategies for IBD are required. In order to improve surgical outcomes in IBD patients, the influence of preoperative treatment on postoperative complications needs to be considered. The incidence of diverticulitis is also increasing with lifestyle changes and increasing numbers of older people. For diverticulitis with perforation and generalized peritonitis, surgery is the gold standard. Elective surgery after conservative treatment of diverticulitis is also an option because of high recurrence rates. With an increase in diverticulitis, systematic strategies are essential for an appropriate approach to diverticulitis, taking into account various factors, including the patient's background.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Diverting Ostomy: For Whom, When, What, Where, and Why

Fecal diversion is an important tool in the surgical armamentarium. There is much controversy regarding which clinical scenarios warrant diversion. Throughout this article, we have analyzed the most recent literature and discussed the most common applications for the use of a diverting stoma. These include construction of diverting ileostomy or colostomy, ostomy for low colorectal/coloanal anastomosis, inflammatory bowel disease, diverticular disease, and obstructing colorectal cancer. We conclude the following: diverting loop ileostomy is preferred to loop colostomy, an ostomy should be used for a pelvic anastomosis < 5 to 6 cm including coloanal anastomosis and ileo-anal-pouch anastomosis, severe perianal Crohn's disease frequently requires diversion, a primary anastomosis with diverting ileostomy in the setting of diverticular perforation is safe, and a diverting stoma can be used as a bridge to primary resection in the setting of an obstructing malignancy.

Management of acute diverticulitis

Acute diverticulitis is a major health-care concern. The optimal management of this common condition has been critically examined in recent years leading to a number of paradigm changes. In many areas, the debate continues. Acute uncomplicated diverticulitis may be safely managed without antibiotics. A number of randomized controlled trials have examined the role of laparoscopic lavage vs resection for purulent peritonitis. In cases where resection is indicated the traditional Hartmann's procedure is being trialled against resection with primary anastomosis. In the follow up of an acute uncomplicated episode, the value of colonoscopy is being questioned but remains in current guidelines. In the elective setting, more recent studies have led to a trend away from resection to prevent complications but towards resection to improve quality of life. This article presents an overview of the current guidance, areas of controversy and the associated evidence base.

Meta-analysis of peritoneal lavage in appendicectomy

Background

The use of peritoneal lavage to prevent postoperative intra‐abdominal abscess (IAA) after appendicectomy has been debated widely.

Methods

A systematic review and meta‐analysis of suction alone versus lavage for appendicitis was performed to determine the relative benefit of lavage. Primary outcomes were postoperative IAA and wound infection (WI). Inclusion criteria were human studies reporting a comparison of appendicectomy with or without peritoneal lavage.

Results

Eight studies met the inclusion criteria, the majority of which were retrospective. Only three were RCTs. Four studies included analysis only of the paediatric population. The rate of IAA was 1·0–19·5 per cent in patients receiving suction alone and 1·5–18·6 per cent in those having lavage. WI rates were 1·0–29·2 per cent for suction alone and 0·8–20·5 per cent for lavage. The pooled risk difference for IAA was 0·01 (95 per cent c.i. −0·03 to 0·06; P = 0·50) and that for WI was 0·00 (−0·05 to 0·05; P = 0·98). Analyses of both outcomes indicated a medium degree of heterogeneity between effect estimates with I² values of 71 per cent (P = 0·001) and 70 per cent (P = 0·010) for IAA and WI respectively.

Conclusion

There is no evidence of benefit of lavage over suction for postoperative infective complications, and no individual study demonstrated a significant benefit in patients receiving lavage.

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.

Inflammation management in acute diverticulitis: current perspectives

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

Acute Colonic Diverticulitis

Acute colonic diverticulitis is a gastrointestinal condition frequently encountered by primary care practitioners, hospitalists, surgeons, and gastroenterologists. Clinical presentation ranges from mild abdominal pain to peritonitis with sepsis. It can often be diagnosed on the basis of clinical features alone, but imaging is necessary in more severe presentations to rule out such complications as abscess and perforation. Treatment depends on the severity of the presentation, presence of complications, and underlying comorbid conditions. Medical and surgical treatment algorithms are evolving. This article provides an evidence-based, clinically relevant overview of the epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of acute diverticulitis.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Laparoscopic lavage still an option

The Multidisciplinary Management of Acute Complicated Diverticulitis

BACKGROUND

Acute complicated diverticulitis (ACD) is an important and increasing issue in Western countries that leads to a significant impact and burden for patients, but also for the society due to its effects on hospital costs. In recent years, essential progression has been made regarding the research and implementation of novel or improved treatment strategies for the various disease entities of ACD. Much debated topics in the multidisciplinary approach of patients with ACD, such as the choice for nonoperative treatment options, the role of percutaneous drainage for diverticular abscesses, the role of laparoscopic lavage for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis, and the role of sigmoidectomy with primary anastomosis for patients with perforated diverticulitis, require clinicians to attentively follow and participate in these discussions.

SUMMARY

The aim of this review article is to provide clinicians with a structured overview of the recent literature on the multidisciplinary management of complicated diverticulitis by a panel of experts on the topic. By performing an extensive literature search in the online medical databases MEDLINE (Ovid) and Embase, insights into nonoperative treatment, percutaneous drainage, minimally invasive and open surgical treatment of ACD are provided. Furthermore, a comprehensive algorithm for the treatment of ACD has been developed.

KEY MESSAGES

Accurate patient evaluation and selection based on patient and disease characteristics is of paramount importance to determine the appropriate treatment strategy for patients with complicated diverticulitis. The presence of an experienced surgeon with advanced skills in laparoscopic emergency colorectal surgery is crucial for the treatment of patients with perforated diverticulitis in order to properly evaluate, select and treat patients suitable for nonoperative or operative treatment with an open or laparoscopic approach.