J K Schultz1,2, C Wallon3, L Blecic4, H M Forsmo5,6, J Folkesson7, P Buchwald8, H Kørner6,9, F A Dahl10,2, T Øresland1,2, S Yaqub11. 1. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway. 2. Institute of Clinical Medicine, Campus Ahus, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. 3. Department of Surgery and Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. 4. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Østfold Hospital Kalnes, Fredrikstad, Norway. 5. Department of Gastrointestinal and Emergency Surgery, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway. 6. Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway. 7. Colorectal Surgery Unit, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. 8. Colorectal Unit, Department of Surgery, Skåne University Hospital Malmö, Malmö, Sweden. 9. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway. 10. Health Services Research Centre, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway. 11. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent randomized trials demonstrated that laparoscopic lavage compared with resection for Hinchey III perforated diverticulitis was associated with similar mortality, less stoma formation but a higher rate of early reintervention. The aim of this study was to compare 1-year outcomes in patients who participated in the randomized Scandinavian Diverticulitis (SCANDIV) trial. METHODS:Between February 2010 and June 2014, patients from 21 hospitals in Norway and Sweden presenting with suspected perforated diverticulitis were enrolled in a multicentre RCT comparing laparoscopic lavage and sigmoid resection. All patients with perforated diverticulitis confirmed during surgery were included in a modified intention-to-treat analysis of 1-year results. RESULTS: Of 199 enrolled patients, 101 were assigned randomly tolaparoscopic lavage and 98 to colonic resection. Perforated diverticulitis was confirmed at the time of surgery in 89 and 83 patients respectively. Within 1 year after surgery, neither severe complications (34 versus 27 per cent; P = 0·323) nor disease-related mortality (12 versus 11 per cent) differed significantly between the lavage and surgery groups. Among the 144 patients with purulent peritonitis, the rate of severe complications (27 per cent (20 of 74) versus 21 per cent (15 of 70) respectively; P = 0·445) and disease-related mortality (8 versus 9 per cent) were similar. Laparoscopic lavage was associated with more deep surgical-site infections (32 versus 13 per cent; P = 0·006) but fewer superficial surgical-site infections (1 versus 17 per cent; P = 0·001). More patients in the lavage group underwent unplanned reoperations (27 versus 10 per cent; P = 0·010). Including stoma reversals, a similar proportion of patients required a secondary operation (28 versus 29 per cent). The stoma rate at 1 year was lower in the lavage group (14 versus 42 per cent in the resection group; P < 0·001); however, the Cleveland Global Quality of Life score did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: The advantages of laparoscopic lavage should be weighed against the risk of secondary intervention (if sepsis is unresolved). Assessment to exclude malignancy (although uncommon) is advised. Registration number: NCT01047462 ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Recent randomized trials demonstrated that laparoscopic lavage compared with resection for Hinchey III perforated diverticulitis was associated with similar mortality, less stoma formation but a higher rate of early reintervention. The aim of this study was to compare 1-year outcomes in patients who participated in the randomized Scandinavian Diverticulitis (SCANDIV) trial. METHODS: Between February 2010 and June 2014, patients from 21 hospitals in Norway and Sweden presenting with suspected perforated diverticulitis were enrolled in a multicentre RCT comparing laparoscopic lavage and sigmoid resection. All patients with perforated diverticulitis confirmed during surgery were included in a modified intention-to-treat analysis of 1-year results. RESULTS: Of 199 enrolled patients, 101 were assigned randomly to laparoscopic lavage and 98 to colonic resection. Perforated diverticulitis was confirmed at the time of surgery in 89 and 83 patients respectively. Within 1 year after surgery, neither severe complications (34 versus 27 per cent; P = 0·323) nor disease-related mortality (12 versus 11 per cent) differed significantly between the lavage and surgery groups. Among the 144 patients with purulent peritonitis, the rate of severe complications (27 per cent (20 of 74) versus 21 per cent (15 of 70) respectively; P = 0·445) and disease-related mortality (8 versus 9 per cent) were similar. Laparoscopic lavage was associated with more deep surgical-site infections (32 versus 13 per cent; P = 0·006) but fewer superficial surgical-site infections (1 versus 17 per cent; P = 0·001). More patients in the lavage group underwent unplanned reoperations (27 versus 10 per cent; P = 0·010). Including stoma reversals, a similar proportion of patients required a secondary operation (28 versus 29 per cent). The stoma rate at 1 year was lower in the lavage group (14 versus 42 per cent in the resection group; P < 0·001); however, the Cleveland Global Quality of Life score did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: The advantages of laparoscopic lavage should be weighed against the risk of secondary intervention (if sepsis is unresolved). Assessment to exclude malignancy (although uncommon) is advised. Registration number: NCT01047462 ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).
Authors: Nicolás H Dreifuss; Francisco Schlottmann; Jose M Piatti; Maximiliano E Bun; Nicolás A Rotholtz Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2019-06-17 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Daniël P V Lambrichts; Arianna Birindelli; Valeria Tonini; Roberto Cirocchi; Maurizio Cervellera; Johan F Lange; Willem A Bemelman; Salomone Di Saverio Journal: Inflamm Intest Dis Date: 2018-02-16
Authors: Massimo Sartelli; Federico Coccolini; Yoram Kluger; Ervis Agastra; Fikri M Abu-Zidan; Ashraf El Sayed Abbas; Luca Ansaloni; Abdulrashid Kayode Adesunkanmi; Boyko Atanasov; Goran Augustin; Miklosh Bala; Oussama Baraket; Suman Baral; Walter L Biffl; Marja A Boermeester; Marco Ceresoli; Elisabetta Cerutti; Osvaldo Chiara; Enrico Cicuttin; Massimo Chiarugi; Raul Coimbra; Elif Colak; Daniela Corsi; Francesco Cortese; Yunfeng Cui; Dimitris Damaskos; Nicola De' Angelis; Samir Delibegovic; Zaza Demetrashvili; Belinda De Simone; Stijn W de Jonge; Sameer Dhingra; Stefano Di Bella; Francesco Di Marzo; Salomone Di Saverio; Agron Dogjani; Therese M Duane; Mushira Abdulaziz Enani; Paola Fugazzola; Joseph M Galante; Mahir Gachabayov; Wagih Ghnnam; George Gkiokas; Carlos Augusto Gomes; Ewen A Griffiths; Timothy C Hardcastle; Andreas Hecker; Torsten Herzog; Syed Mohammad Umar Kabir; Aleksandar Karamarkovic; Vladimir Khokha; Peter K Kim; Jae Il Kim; Andrew W Kirkpatrick; Victor Kong; Renol M Koshy; Igor A Kryvoruchko; Kenji Inaba; Arda Isik; Katia Iskandar; Rao Ivatury; Francesco M Labricciosa; Yeong Yeh Lee; Ari Leppäniemi; Andrey Litvin; Davide Luppi; Gustavo M Machain; Ronald V Maier; Athanasios Marinis; Cristina Marmorale; Sanjay Marwah; Cristian Mesina; Ernest E Moore; Frederick A Moore; Ionut Negoi; Iyiade Olaoye; Carlos A Ordoñez; Mouaqit Ouadii; Andrew B Peitzman; Gennaro Perrone; Manos Pikoulis; Tadeja Pintar; Giuseppe Pipitone; Mauro Podda; Kemal Raşa; Julival Ribeiro; Gabriel Rodrigues; Ines Rubio-Perez; Ibrahima Sall; Norio Sato; Robert G Sawyer; Helmut Segovia Lohse; Gabriele Sganga; Vishal G Shelat; Ian Stephens; Michael Sugrue; Antonio Tarasconi; Joel Noutakdie Tochie; Matti Tolonen; Gia Tomadze; Jan Ulrych; Andras Vereczkei; Bruno Viaggi; Chiara Gurioli; Claudio Casella; Leonardo Pagani; Gian Luca Baiocchi; Fausto Catena Journal: World J Emerg Surg Date: 2021-09-25 Impact factor: 5.469
Authors: A Kohl; J Rosenberg; D Bock; T Bisgaard; S Skullman; A Thornell; J Gehrman; E Angenete; E Haglind Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2018-04-16 Impact factor: 6.939