Laparoscopic treatment of complicated colonic diverticular disease: A review

Open Versus Minimally Invasive Emergent Colectomy for Diverticulitis

BACKGROUND

The role of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) in the acute management of diverticulitis remains controversial. Using a national cohort, we examined the relationship between operative approaches with acute clinical and financial outcomes.

METHODS

Adults undergoing emergent colectomy for diverticulitis were tabulated from the 2015-2020 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Regression models were developed to analyze the association between open and MIS approaches with major adverse events (MAE), as well as secondary endpoints. A subgroup analysis was conducted to compare outcomes between open and MIS requiring conversion to open (CTO).

RESULTS

Of 9194 patients, 1580 (17.3%) underwent MIS colectomy. The proportion of MIS resection increased from 15.1% in 2015 to 19.1% in 2020 (nptrend<.001). Compared to Open, MIS patients were younger, equally likely to be female, had a lower proportion of patients with ASA class ≥3, and a higher BMI. Preoperatively, MIS patients were less frequently diagnosed with sepsis. Following adjustment with open as reference, MIS approach had reduced odds of MAE (AOR .56), ostomy creation (AOR .12), shorter postoperative length of stay (LOS; β -1.63), and a lower likelihood of nonhome discharge (AOR .45, all P < .001). Additionally, CTO was linked to decreased likelihood of MAE (AOR .78, P = .01), ostomy creation (AOR .02, P < .001), comparable LOS (β -.46, P = .41), and reduced odds of nonhome discharge (AOR .58, P < .001), relative to open.

DISCUSSION

Compared to planned open colectomy, MIS resection was associated with improved clinical and financial outcomes, even in cases of CTO. Our findings suggest that whenever possible, MIS should be attempted first in emergent colectomy for diverticulitis. Nevertheless, future prospective studies are likely needed to further elucidate specific patient and clinical factors.

German guideline diverticular disease/diverticulitis: Part II: Conservative, interventional and surgical management

Diverticulosis and diverticular disease are ranked among the most common gastroenterological diseases and conditions. While for many years diverticulitis was found to be mainly an event occurring in the elder population, more recent work in epidemiology demonstrates increasing frequency in younger subjects. In addition, there is a noticeable trend towards more complicated disease. This may explain the significant increase in hospitalisations observed in recent years. It is not a surprise that the number of scientific studies addressing the clinical and socioeconomic consequences in the field is increasing. As a result, diagnosis and conservative as well as surgical management have changed in recent years. Diverticulosis, diverticular disease and diverticulitis are a complex entity and apparently an interdisciplinary challenge. To meet theses considerations the German Societies for Gastroenterology and Visceral Surgery decided to create joint guidelines addressing all aspects in a truely interdisciplinary fashion. The aim of the guideline is to summarise and to evaluate the current state of knowledge on diverticulosis and diverticular disease and to develop statements as well as recommendations to all physicians involved in the management of patients with diverticular disease.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic resections for diverticular disease

AIM

Resection of diverticular disease can be technically challenging. Tissue planes can be difficult to identify intraoperatively due to inflammation or fibrosis. Robotic surgery may improve identification of tissue planes and dissection which can facilitate difficult minimally invasive resections. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the role of robotic surgery compared to laparoscopic surgery in diverticular resection.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed in accordance with the PRISMA statement. The search was completed using PubMed, OVID MEDLINE and EMBASE. A total of 490 articles were retrieved, and studies reporting primary outcomes for robotic diverticular resection were included in the final analysis. A meta-analysis of studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic surgery was performed on rate of conversion to open surgery and complications.

RESULTS

Fifteen articles (8 cohort studies and 7 case series) reporting 3711 robotic diverticular resections were analysed. In comparison to laparoscopic, robotic surgery for diverticular disease was associated with a reduced conversion to open and a longer operating time. Meta-analysis showed robotic resection was associated with a lower conversion rate compared to laparoscopic surgery (OR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.49-0.66, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in grade III and above complications (OR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.49-1.13, p = 0.17). Operating time was longer with a robotic approach (Hedge's G: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.04-0.81, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Robotic resection is a feasible and safe option in diverticular disease. Although associated with a longer operating time, robotic surgery may render diverticular disease resectable with a minimally invasive approach that would have otherwise necessitated a laparotomy. Randomised controlled data is required to better define the role of robotic surgery for diverticular disease resections.

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).

[Choice of operative procedure in diverticular disease : Taking the latest treatment strategies into consideration]

BACKGROUND

There are various procedures to be considered in the surgical treatment of complicated diverticulitis, which must be selected depending on the classification of diverticular disease (CDD) type and the condition of the patient.

OBJECTIVE

Comparison of surgical procedures with respect to aspects such as morbidity, mortality, reconstructive surgery and postoperative quality of life.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Evaluation, analysis and assessment of the current literature on surgical treatment of diverticular disease.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic sigmoid resection with primary anastomosis is now considered the standard procedure for complicated sigmoid diverticulitis. It is preferable to open resection because of the better results of the minimally invasive approach with respect to the incidence of wound infections, abdominal abscesses and the occurrence of fascial dehiscence. In an emergency situation with perforation and peritonitis (CDD type 2c1/2), primary anastomosis with protective ileostomy should be favored over discontinuity resection (Hartmann's procedure). In particular, it must be taken into account that in a large proportion of patients there is no restoration of continuity after Hartmann's operation. The damage control strategy can be used in perforated sigmoid diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis (CDD type 2c1/2). In individual cases, laparoscopic lavage with insertion of a drainage may be considered as a therapeutic treatment strategy for perforated sigmoid diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis (CDD type 2c1).

CONCLUSION

Selection of the surgical procedure for complicated sigmoid diverticulitis remains challenging. Randomized controlled trials of new treatment strategies as well as robotic-assisted surgery should be considered in the choice of surgical procedure in the future.

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.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Emergent Sigmoid Resection for Perforated Diverticulitis

BACKGROUND

Potential advantages of laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for perforated diverticulitis are still under consideration. This study is designed to determine if emergent laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for perforated diverticulitis is associated with outcomes comparable to the traditional open approach.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons-National-Surgical-Quality-Improvement-Program (ACS-NSQIP) database was queried for laparoscopic and open emergent sigmoidectomy cases for perforated diverticulitis from 2012 through 2017. Using propensity score weights, 30-day outcomes between laparoscopic and open approaches were compared in two ways: one with converted cases as a separate group and another with converted cases combined with the laparoscopic-completed group (intention-to-treat).

RESULTS

A total of 3756 cases met inclusion criteria-282 laparoscopic-completed, 175 laparoscopic-converted-to-open, and 3299 open. The laparoscopic-completed approach had significantly better outcomes than open and laparoscopic-converted cases. When combining laparoscopic-completed and laparoscopic-converted cases (intention-to-treat), the laparoscopic approach still had significantly fewer complications per patient, less unplanned intubation (p = 0.01), and acute renal failure (p = 0.005) than the open group. Laparoscopic groups had longer operating times and shorter hospital length of stay than the open group. Subgroup analysis comparing laparoscopic and open Hartmann's procedure and primary anastomosis with and without diverting stoma also showed favorable outcomes for the laparoscopic group.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic emergent sigmoid resection for perforated diverticulitis is associated with favorable outcomes compared to the open approach. Hartmann's procedure is still common and conversion rate is high. Training efforts that increase adoption of minimally invasive surgery and decrease conversion rates are justified. Randomized trials comparing laparoscopic and open approaches may allow further critical assessment of these findings.

The role of emergency laparoscopic colectomy for complicated sigmoid diverticulits: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Nowadays sigmoidectomy is recommended as "gold standard" treatment for generalized purulent or faecal peritonitis from sigmoid perforated diverticulitis. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic access versus open sigmoidectomy in acute setting.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs published in PubMed, SCOPUS and Web of Science.

RESULTS

The search yielded four non-RCTs encompassing 436 patients undergoing either laparoscopic (181 patients, 41.51%) versus open sigmoid resection (255 patients, 58.49%). All studies reported ASA scores, but only four studies reported other severity scoring systems (Mannheim Peritonitis Index, P-POSSUM). Level of surgical expertise was reported in only one study. Laparoscopy improves slightly the rates of overall post-operative complications and post-operative hospital stay, respectively (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.80 and MD -6.53, 95% CI -16.05 to 2.99). Laparoscopy did not seem to improve the other clinical outcomes: rate of Hartmann's vs anastomosis, operating time, reoperation rate and postoperative 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

In this review four prospective studies were included, over 20 + year period, including overall 400 + patients. This meta-analysis revealed significant advantages associated with a laparoscopic over open approach to emergency sigmoidectomy in acute diverticulitis in terms of postoperative complication rates, although no differences were found in other outcomes. The lack of hemodynamic data and reasons for operative approach hamper interpretation of the data suggesting that patients undergoing open surgery were sicker and these results must be considered with extreme caution and this hypothesis requires confirmation by future prospective randomised controlled trials.

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.

An outcome analysis of laparoscopic management of diverticulitis

BACKGROUND

All operative procedures for simple or complicated diverticulitis, including primary resection and anastomosis (PRA) with or without a diverting stoma, Hartmann procedure (HP), or stoma reversal, whether done in an elective setting or as an emergency, can be performed laparoscopically. However, owing to low incidence of the disease and complexity of the procedure, there are very few studies on outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for sigmoid diverticulitis from India.

AIM

The present study was undertaken to evaluate outcomes of laparoscopically treated patients of sigmoid diverticulitis.

METHODS

Prospective observational study enrolled 37 patients with sigmoid diverticulitis managed laparoscopically from March 2015 to March 2017. Demographic, clinical, operative, postoperative, and complication data were entered into a patient proforma and analyzed.

RESULTS

Eleven simple and 26 complicated diverticulitis patients were operated laparoscopically, 22 in emergency setting and 15 in elective setting. Only three patients required conversion to open surgery-two due to dense adhesions and one due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). No patients had ureteric or bowel injury. Eighteen patients underwent laparoscopic PRA without stoma, 11 patients had PRA with stoma, 6 had HP, and 2 had laparoscopic lavage. Results showed lesser blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and fewer complications in the elective group and simple diverticulitis patients. None of the patients had anastomosis-related complications. Two patients had stoma-related complications.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic management of diverticulitis is feasible, safe, provides the benefits of less wound-related complications, and shorter hospital stay and should be the surgical procedure of choice in elective or emergency setting for simple/complicated diverticulitis.

[Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted procedures for chronic complications of diverticular disease]

AIM

To estimate efficacy of laparoscopic-assisted procedures for chronic complications of diverticular disease (DD).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

It was made a prospective comparative study within 2007-2015. Inclusion criteria were verified chronic DD (>6 weeks after the first attack) and bowel resection followed by primary anastomosis.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

contraindications for pneumoperitoneum, BMI ≥35 kg/m², infiltrate dimension >10 cm, preoperatively non-excluded neoplasm.

RESULTS

233 patients with chronic DD underwent elective surgery, 136 (58.4%) of them were included in the study. There were 80 (58.8%) females aged 57.2±6.2 (24-83) years. Main group consisted of 75 patients after laparoscopic-assisted procedures, 61 were in control group (open ones). Both groups were homogeneous in age, gender, BMI, type of chronic complications, extent of inflammation, extent of bowel resection, surgery time (211.1 vs 206.3 min; p=0.16), incidence of preventive stoma (12.9 vs 19.7%; p=0.32) and complications rate (10.7 vs 14.7%; p=0.47). Maximal time of surgery was noted in case of chronic abdominal mass with statistically significance for main group (240.0±12.2 min vs 207.6±13.7 min; р=0.01). Conversion rate was 12.0% in main group. Main group showed significant higher rate of stapler anastomoses (66.7 vs 22.9%; р<0.0001), less intraoperative blood loss (100 ml vs 350 ml; р=0.001). Early postoperative period was significantly shorter in main group (9.5±0.4 days vs 12.9±1.2 days, р=0.02).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic-assisted procedures for diverticular disease are associated with more favorable early postoperative period with the same complication rate. Technical complexity and operative time depend on the extent of pelvic inflammatory changes.

Emergency Hartmann's Procedure and Its Reversal: A Totally Laparoscopic 2-Step Surgery for the Treatment of Hinchey III and IV Diverticulitis

BACKGROUND

Hartmann's procedure (HP) followed by reversal restoration is the first choice for treatment of diffuse diverticular peritonitis. There is no unanimous consensus regarding the use of laparoscopy to treat the same condition.

METHODS

Data from 60 patients with diverticular diffuse peritonitis who underwent urgent HP followed by laparoscopic reversal were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the open or laparoscopic HP (OHP, 24 patients; LHP, 36 patients). Outcomes were measured in terms of functional recovery, morbidity, mortality, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

HPs showed no differences among the groups in terms of operative time, blood loss, and length of intensive care unit stay. Overall morbidity was significantly lower in LHP than in OHP, corresponding to 33.3% and 66.7% respectively ( P = .018). The incidence of both surgical and medical complications was higher in OHP than in LHP (41.7% vs 22.2% [ P = .044] and 45.8% vs 24.3% [ P = .023], respectively). Mortality was 16.6% for each group. LHP showed a faster return to bowel movements and a shorter hospital stay than OHP. The secondary intestinal reversal was possible in 92% of cases, successfully completed laparoscopically in 91.3%. No patients of LHP group required a conversion to open intestinal reversal.

CONCLUSION

LHP for treatment of diverticular diffuse peritonitis showed significantly lower morbidity, faster recovery, shorter hospital stay, and higher rates of successful laparoscopic reversal when compared with OHP.

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage or surgical resection for acute perforated sigmoid diverticulitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage (LPL) has been proposed as an alternative, less invasive technique in the treatment of acute perforated sigmoid diverticulitis (APSD). The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the effectiveness of LPL versus surgical resection (SR) in terms of morbidity and mortality in the management of APSD.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LPL versus SR in the treatment of APSD. The end points included peri-operative mortality, severe adverse events, overall mortality, post-operative abscess, percutaneous reinterventions, reoperation, operative time, postoperative stay, and readmissions.

RESULTS

Three RCTs with a total of 372 patients, randomised to either LPL or SR were included. There was no significant difference in peri-operative mortality between LPL and SR (OR 1.356, 95% CI 0.365 to 5.032, p = 0.649), or serious adverse events (OR = 1.866, 95% CI = 0.680 to 5.120, p = 0.226). The LPL required significantly less time to complete than SR (WMD = -72.105, 95% CI = -88.335 to -55.876, p < 0.0001). The LPL group was associated with a significantly higher rate of postoperative abscess formation (OR = 4.121, 95% CI = 1.890 to 8.986, p = 0.0004) and subsequent percutaneous interventions (OR = 5.414, 95% CI 1.618 to 18.118, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage is a safe and quick alternative in the management of APSD. In comparison to SR, LPL results in higher rates of postoperative abscess formation requiring more percutaneous drainage interventions without any difference in perioperative mortality and serious morbidity.