Nicholas Yock Teck Soh1, Nan Zun Teo2, Carrie Jen Hsi Tan1, Shivani Rajaraman1, Marianne Tsang2, Calvin Jian Ming Ong2, Ramesh Wijaya3. 1. National University of Singapore Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, Singapore, Singapore. 2. Department of General Surgery, Changi General Hospital, 2 Simei Street 3, Singapore, 529889, Republic of Singapore. 3. Department of General Surgery, Changi General Hospital, 2 Simei Street 3, Singapore, 529889, Republic of Singapore. ramesh_wijaya@cgh.com.sg.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is unclear if location of disease matters in perforated diverticulitis. Management guidelines for perforated diverticulitis currently do not make a distinction between right perforated diverticulitis (RPD) and left perforated diverticulitis (LPD). We aim to compare disease presentation and management outcomes between RPD and LPD. METHODS: This was a 10-year retrospective comparative cohort study of 99 patients with acute perforated diverticulitis between 2004 and 2013 in a single institution. Patients were divided into RPD and LPD groups based on location of disease and compared. Disease presentation was compared using modified Hinchey classification. Management outcomes assessed were failure of therapy, length of stay, mortality, surgical complications, and disease recurrence. Univariate analysis was performed using Student's t test and χ2 test where appropriate. RESULTS: RPD patients were younger (45.7 ± 16.1 versus 58.3 ± 14.7 years) and presented with lower modified Hinchey stage and no Hinchey IV diverticulitis when compared to LPD (14.3% Hinchey III versus 44.0% Hinchey III or IV). Conservative management of Hinchey I and II RPD and LPD was similarly successful (96.1 versus 96.5%), although RPD patients had shorter inpatient stay (4.6 ± 2.2 versus 6.3 ± 3.8 days) and less disease recurrence (3.1 versus 17.9%). Ten (20.4%) Hinchey I and II RPD patients were initially misdiagnosed with appendicitis and underwent surgery. CONCLUSION: LPD is a more aggressive disease presenting with greater clinical severity in older patients and is associated with frequent disease recurrence when treated conservatively. Misdiagnosis of RPD as appendicitis is common and may lead to unnecessary surgery.
BACKGROUND: It is unclear if location of disease matters in perforated diverticulitis. Management guidelines for perforated diverticulitis currently do not make a distinction between right perforated diverticulitis (RPD) and left perforated diverticulitis (LPD). We aim to compare disease presentation and management outcomes between RPD and LPD. METHODS: This was a 10-year retrospective comparative cohort study of 99 patients with acute perforated diverticulitis between 2004 and 2013 in a single institution. Patients were divided into RPD and LPD groups based on location of disease and compared. Disease presentation was compared using modified Hinchey classification. Management outcomes assessed were failure of therapy, length of stay, mortality, surgical complications, and disease recurrence. Univariate analysis was performed using Student's t test and χ2 test where appropriate. RESULTS: RPD patients were younger (45.7 ± 16.1 versus 58.3 ± 14.7 years) and presented with lower modified Hinchey stage and no Hinchey IV diverticulitis when compared to LPD (14.3% Hinchey III versus 44.0% Hinchey III or IV). Conservative management of Hinchey I and II RPD and LPD was similarly successful (96.1 versus 96.5%), although RPD patients had shorter inpatient stay (4.6 ± 2.2 versus 6.3 ± 3.8 days) and less disease recurrence (3.1 versus 17.9%). Ten (20.4%) Hinchey I and II RPD patients were initially misdiagnosed with appendicitis and underwent surgery. CONCLUSION: LPD is a more aggressive disease presenting with greater clinical severity in older patients and is associated with frequent disease recurrence when treated conservatively. Misdiagnosis of RPD as appendicitis is common and may lead to unnecessary surgery.
Authors: Sekhar Dharmarajan; Steven R Hunt; Elisa H Birnbaum; James W Fleshman; Matthew G Mutch Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Jae Hak Kim; Jae Hee Cheon; Sooyoung Park; Byung Chang Kim; Sang Kil Lee; Tae Il Kim; Won Ho Kim Journal: Hepatogastroenterology Date: 2008 May-Jun
Authors: Pamela Buchwald; Liane Dixon; Christopher J Wakeman; Tim W Eglinton; Frank A Frizelle Journal: ANZ J Surg Date: 2016-04-08 Impact factor: 1.872
Authors: Jeong Yeon Kim; Sung Gil Park; Hee Joon Kang; Young Ah Lim; Kyung Ho Pak; Tae Yoo; Won Tae Cho; Dong Woo Shin; Jong Wan Kim Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2019-07-02 Impact factor: 2.571