A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Primary Anastomosis or Hartmann's Procedure for Perforated Left Colonic Diverticulitis With Purulent or Fecal Peritonitis.

*Department of Surgery University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland §Department of Visceral Surgery, University Hospital Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland †Department of Surgery, Cantonal Hospital, Chur, Switzerland ‡Department of Surgery, Cantonal Hospital, Winterthur, Switzerland.
Annals of surgery (Impact Factor: 7.19). 11/2012; 256(5):819-27. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31827324ba
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT : To evaluate the outcome after Hartmann's procedure (HP) versus primary anastomosis (PA) with diverting ileostomy for perforated left-sided diverticulitis.
: The surgical management of left-sided colonic perforation with purulent or fecal peritonitis remains controversial. PA with ileostomy seems to be superior to HP; however, results in the literature are affected by a significant selection bias. No randomized clinical trial has yet compared the 2 procedures.
: Sixty-two patients with acute left-sided colonic perforation (Hinchey III and IV) from 4 centers were randomized to HP (n = 30) and to PA (with diverting ileostomy, n = 32), with a planned stoma reversal operation after 3 months in both groups. Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary end point was the overall complication rate. The study was discontinued following an interim analysis that found significant differences of relevant secondary end points as well as a decreasing accrual rate (NCT01233713).
: Patient demographics were equally distributed in both groups (Hinchey III: 76% vs 75% and Hinchey IV: 24% vs 25%, for HP vs PA, respectively). The overall complication rate for both resection and stoma reversal operations was comparable (80% vs 84%, P = 0.813). Although the outcome after the initial colon resection did not show any significant differences (mortality 13% vs 9% and morbidity 67% vs 75% in HP vs PA), the stoma reversal rate after PA with diverting ileostomy was higher (90% vs 57%, P = 0.005) and serious complications (Grades IIIb-IV: 0% vs 20%, P = 0.046), operating time (73 minutes vs 183 minutes, P < 0.001), hospital stay (6 days vs 9 days, P = 0.016), and lower in-hospital costs (US $16,717 vs US $24,014) were significantly reduced in the PA group.
: This is the first randomized clinical trial favoring PA with diverting ileostomy over HP in patients with perforated diverticulitis.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: To test whether the newly developed comprehensive complication index (CCI) is more sensitive than traditional endpoints for detecting between-group differences in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Background: A major challenge in RCTs is the choice of optimal endpoints to detect treatment effects. Mortality is no longer a sufficient marker in studies, and morbidity is often poorly defined. The CCI, integrating all complications including their severity in a linear scale ranging from 0 (no complication) to 100 (death), is a new tool, which may be more sensitive than other traditional endpoints to detect treatment effects on postoperative morbidity. Methods: The CCI was tested in 3 published RCTs from European centers evaluating pancreas, esophageal and colon resections. To compare the sensitivity of the CCI with traditional morbidity endpoints, for example, presence of any (yes/no) or only the most severe complications, all postoperative events were assessed, and the CCI calculated. Treatment effects and sample size calculations were compared using the CCI and traditional endpoints. Results: Although RCTs failed to show between-group differences using any or most severe complications, the CCI revealed significant differences between treatment groups in 2 RCTs-after pancreas (P = 0.009) and esophageal surgery (P = 0.014). The CCI in the RCT on colon resections confirmed the absence of between-group differences (P = 0.39). The required sample sizes in trials are up to 9 times lower for the CCI than for traditional morbidity endpoints. Conclusions: This study demonstrates superiority of the CCI to traditional endpoints. The CCI may serve as an appealing endpoint for future RCTs and may reduce the sample size.
    Annals of Surgery 11/2014; 260(5):757-763. DOI:10.1097/SLA.0000000000000948 · 7.19 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Colonic diverticular disease is a common condition, and around a quarter of people affected by it will experience acute symptoms at some time. The most common presentation is uncomplicated acute diverticulitis that can be managed conservatively with bowel rest and antibiotics. However, some patients will present with diverticular abscesses or purulent or faeculent peritonitis due to perforated diverticular disease. Whilst most mesocolic abscesses can be managed with percutaneous drainage alone, pelvic abscesses are associated with a higher rate of future complications and usually require percutaneous drainage followed by interval sigmoid resection. Patients who require emergency surgery for complicated acute diverticulitis most commonly undergo a Hartmann's procedure, although resection with primary anastomosis and laparoscopic peritoneal lavage have emerged as alternative treatment options for patients with purulent peritonitis in recent years. However, robust evidence from randomized trials is lacking for these alternative procedures, and the studies that have reported good outcomes from them have included carefully selected patient groups. There has been a move away from recommending elective prophylactic colectomy after two episodes of acute diverticulitis in the light of evidence that most patients will not experience a significant recurrence of their symptoms; elective surgery is indicated for those with ongoing symptoms, pelvic abscesses, complications-such as fistulating disease, strictures or recurrent diverticular bleeding-and those who are at high risk of perforation during future episodes, for example, due to immunosuppression, chronic renal failure or collagen-vascular diseases.
    Indian Journal of Surgery 12/2014; 76(6):429-35. DOI:10.1007/s12262-014-1086-6 · 0.27 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Sigmoid diverticulitis is an increasingly common Western disease associated with a high morbidity and cost of treatment. Improvement in the understanding of the disease process, along with advances in the diagnosis and medical management has led to recent changes in treatment recommendations. The natural history of diverticulitis is more benign than previously thought, and current trends favor more conservative, less invasive management. Despite current recommendations of more restrictive indications for surgery, practice trends indicate an increase in elective operations being performed for the treatment of diverticulitis. Due to diversity in disease presentation, in many cases, optimal surgical treatment of acute diverticulitis remains unclear with regard to patient selection, timing, and technical approach in both elective and urgent settings. As a result, data is limited to mostly retrospective and non-randomized studies. This review addresses the current treatment recommendations for surgical management of diverticulitis, highlighting technical aspects and patterns of care.


Available from
May 31, 2014