Literature DB >> 23095627

A multicenter randomized clinical trial of primary anastomosis or Hartmann's procedure for perforated left colonic diverticulitis with purulent or fecal peritonitis.

Christian Eugen Oberkofler1, Andreas Rickenbacher, Dimitri Aristotle Raptis, Kuno Lehmann, Peter Villiger, Christian Buchli, Felix Grieder, Hans Gelpke, Marco Decurtins, Adrien A Tempia-Caliera, Nicolas Demartines, Dieter Hahnloser, Pierre-Alain Clavien, Stefan Breitenstein.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the outcome after Hartmann's procedure (HP) versus primary anastomosis (PA) with diverting ileostomy for perforated left-sided diverticulitis.
BACKGROUND: 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.
METHODS: 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).
RESULTS: 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.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first randomized clinical trial favoring PA with diverting ileostomy over HP in patients with perforated diverticulitis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23095627     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31827324ba

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  81 in total

1.  Primary anastomosis with a defunctioning stoma versus Hartmann's procedure for perforated diverticulitis--a comparison of stoma reversal rates.

Authors:  P H Alizai; M Schulze-Hagen; C D Klink; F Ulmer; A A Roeth; U P Neumann; M Jansen; R Rosch
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2013-08-03       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Sigmoid resection with primary anastomosis and ileostomy versus laparoscopic lavage in purulent peritonitis from perforated diverticulitis: outcome analysis in a prospective cohort of 40 consecutive patients.

Authors:  Jonathan Catry; Antoine Brouquet; Frédérique Peschaud; Karina Vychnevskaia; Solafah Abdalla; Robert Malafosse; Benoit Lambert; Bruno Costaglioli; Stéphane Benoist; Christophe Penna
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2016-09-08       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 3.  Management of diverticular disease.

Authors:  Roland H Pfützer; Wolfgang Kruis
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2015-07-14       Impact factor: 46.802

4.  The use of purse-string skin closure in loop ileostomy reversals leads to lower wound infection rates--a single high-volume centre experience.

Authors:  Nils Habbe; Sabine Hannes; Juliane Liese; Guido Woeste; Wolf Otto Bechstein; Christoph Strey
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2014-01-10       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Italian consensus conference for colonic diverticulosis and diverticular disease.

Authors:  Rosario Cuomo; Giovanni Barbara; Fabio Pace; Vito Annese; Gabrio Bassotti; Gian Andrea Binda; Tino Casetti; Antonio Colecchia; Davide Festi; Roberto Fiocca; Andrea Laghi; Giovanni Maconi; Riccardo Nascimbeni; Carmelo Scarpignato; Vincenzo Villanacci; Bruno Annibale
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 4.623

6.  Authors' Reply: Perforated Diverticulitis with Generalized Peritonitis: Low Stoma Rate Using a "Damage Control Strategy".

Authors:  M Sohn; A Agha; P Steiner; A Hochrein; J Pratschke; P Ritschl; F Aigner; I Iesalnieks
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 7.  Recognition and Management of Colonic Perforation following Endoscopy.

Authors:  Earl V Thompson; Jonathan R Snyder
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2019-04-02

8.  Resection enterostomy versus Hartmann's procedure for emergency colonic resections.

Authors:  M Grott; K Horisberger; C Weiß; P Kienle; J Hardt
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2017-04-07       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Authors reply: Damage control surgery in patients with generalized peritonitis secondary to perforated diverticulitis-the risk of overtreatment.

Authors:  M Sohn; I Iesalnieks
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2018-07-06       Impact factor: 3.781

10.  Perforated Diverticulitis with Generalized Peritonitis: Low Stoma Rate Using a "Damage Control Strategy".

Authors:  Maximilian Sohn; I Iesalnieks; A Agha; P Steiner; A Hochrein; J Pratschke; P Ritschl; F Aigner
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 3.352

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.