No abstract

No abstract

Objective Hartmann's procedure (HP) still remains the most frequently performed procedure in acute perforated diverticulitis, but it results in a end colostomy. Primary anastomosis (PA) with or without defunctioning loop ileostomy (DI) seems a good alternative. The aim of this study was to assess differences in the rate of stomal reversal after HP and PA with DI and to evaluate factors associated with postreversal morbidity in patients operated for acute perforated diverticulitis.Method All 158 patients who had survived emergency surgery for acute perforated diverticulitis in five teaching hospitals in The Netherlands between 1995 and 2005 and underwent HP or PA with DI were retrospectively studied. Age, gender, ASA-classification, severity of primary disease, delay of stoma reversal, surgeon's experience, surgical procedure and type of anastomosis were analysed in relation to outcome after stoma reversal.Results Of the 158 patients, 139 had undergone HP and 19 PA with DI. The reversal-rate was higher in patients with DI (14 ⁄ 19; 74%) compared to HP (63 ⁄ 139; 45%) (P = 0.027) Delay between primary surgery and stoma reversal was shorter after PA with DI compared with HP (3.9 vs 9.1 months; P < 0.001). Cumulative postreversal morbidity after HP was 44%. Early surgical complications occurred in 22 of 63 patients. Morbidity after DI reversal was 15% (P < 0.001). Three patients died after HP reversal, none died after DI reversal. Anastomotic leakage was observed in 10 patients after HP reversal. This was less frequently observed when the operation was performed by a specialist colorectal surgeon (10% vs 33%; P = 0.049) and when a stapled anastomosis was performed (4% vs 24%; P = 0.037).Conclusions Reversal of HP should only be performed by an experienced colorectal surgeon, preferably performing a stapled anastomosis, or probably not be performed at all, as it is accompanied by high postoperative morbidity and even mortality. It is important that these findings are taken in account for when performing primary emergency surgery for acute perforated diverticulitis.

IntroductionThe existing literature regarding acute perforated diverticulitis only reports about short-term outcome; long-term following outcomes have not been assessed before. The aim of this study was to assess long-term quality of life (QOL) after emergency surgery for perforated diverticulitis.Patients and MethodsValidated QOL questionnaires (EQ-VAS, EQ-5D index, QLQ-C30, and QLQ-CR38) were sent to all eligible patients who had undergone emergency surgery for perforated diverticulitis in five teaching hospitals between 1990 and 2005. Differences were compared between patients that had undergone Hartmann’s procedure (HP) or resection with primary anastomosis (PA) and also compared to a sex- and age-matched sample of healthy subjects.ResultsOf a total of 340 patients, only 150 patients (44%) were found still alive in July 2007 (median follow-up 71 months). The response rate was 87%. In patients with PA, QOL was similar to the general population, whereas QOL after HP was significantly lower. The presence of a stoma was found to be an independent factor related to worse QOL. The deterioration in QOL was mainly due to problems in physical function and body image.ConclusionsSurvivors after perforated diverticulitis had a worse QOL than the general population, which was mainly due to the presence of an end colostomy. QOL may improve if these stomas are reversed or not be performed in the first place.

BackgroundRecently, excellent results are reported on laparoscopic lavage in patients with purulent perforated diverticulitis as an alternative for sigmoidectomy and ostomy.The objective of this study is to determine whether LaparOscopic LAvage and drainage is a safe and effective treatment for patients with purulent peritonitis (LOLA-arm) and to determine the optimal resectional strategy in patients with a purulent or faecal peritonitis (DIVA-arm: perforated DIVerticulitis: sigmoidresection with or without Anastomosis).Methods/DesignIn this multicentre randomised trial all patients with perforated diverticulitis are included. Upon laparoscopy, patients with purulent peritonitis are treated with laparoscopic lavage and drainage, Hartmann's procedure or sigmoidectomy with primary anastomosis in a ratio of 2:1:1 (LOLA-arm). Patients with faecal peritonitis will be randomised 1:1 between Hartmann's procedure and resection with primary anastomosis (DIVA-arm). The primary combined endpoint of the LOLA-arm is major morbidity and mortality. A sample size of 132:66:66 patients will be able to detect a difference in the primary endpoint from 25% in resectional groups compared to 10% in the laparoscopic lavage group (two sided alpha = 5%, power = 90%). Endpoint of the DIVA-arm is stoma free survival one year after initial surgery. In this arm 212 patients are needed to significantly demonstrate a difference of 30% (log rank test two sided alpha = 5% and power = 90%) in favour of the patients with resection with primary anastomosis. Secondary endpoints for both arms are the number of days alive and outside the hospital, health related quality of life, health care utilisation and associated costs.DiscussionThe Ladies trial is a nationwide multicentre randomised trial on perforated diverticulitis that will provide evidence on the merits of laparoscopic lavage and drainage for purulent generalised peritonitis and on the optimal resectional strategy for both purulent and faecal generalised peritonitis.Trial registrationNederlands Trial Register NTR2037

Background: Mortality and morbidity rates of acute perforated diverticulitis remain high. The ideal treatment is still controversial. The object of this study was to compare patients with perforated diverticulitis treated either by resection with primary anastomosis (PA) or Hartmann’s procedure (HP). Methods: A multicenter study was carried out on 200 consecutive patients with acute perforated diverticulitis who were presented in the surgical units of four affiliated teaching hospitals in Rotterdam, The Netherlands, between 1995 and 2005. Mortality and morbidity were compared in relation to type of surgery, ASA classification, age, gender, Mannheim Peritonitis Index (MPI), Hinchey score, surgeon’s experience, and the time of operation. Results: There was a tendency for more severely affected patients (Hinchey, MPI, ASA and age) to undergo HP. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed no significant difference in mortality between HP and PA. After HP, more patients needed one or more reinterventions to treat postoperative complications compared to PA. Besides, HP resulted in a longer total hospital and intensive care unit stay. Specialist colorectal surgeons performed significantly more frequently a PA instead of a HP and had fewer postoperative complications than general surgeons. The time of operation did not influence the choice of surgical procedure. Conclusion: Selected patients with perforated diverticulitis can be managed well by PA, as it does not seem to be inferior to HP in terms of severe postoperative complications that need surgical or radiological reintervention and mortality. This decision should be made while taking into account the patient’s concomitant diseases, response on preoperative resuscitation and the availability of a surgeon experienced in colorectal surgery.

FCBT was useful in patients with PNI and active bleeding. Stable patients should undergo additional investigation based on clinical findings only.

BackgroundThe supposed optimal treatment of perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis has changed several times during the last century, but at present is still unclear.Methods/resultsThe first cases of complicated perforated diverticulitis of the colon were reported in the beginning of the twentieth century. At that time the first therapeutic guidelines were postulated in which an initial nonresectional procedure was provided to be the safest plan of management. After many years in which resection had become standard practice, today, one century later, again (laparoscopic) nonresectional surgery is presented as a safe and promising alternative in treatment of complicated perforated diverticulitis. The question rises what had happened to close the circle?ConclusionsThis paper includes a historic summary of changing patterns in surgical strategies in perforated diverticulitis complicated by generalized peritonitis.