BACKGROUND: The classical treatment of perforated sigmoid diverticulitis with generalised peritonitis is based on the principle of two-stage surgical procedures with a temporary initial defunctioning colostomy. This approach is associated with significant morbidity, concerning mainly the abdominal wall. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ten consecutive patients, eight female and two male, with a mean age of 54.6 years, underwent an emergency laparoscopy for generalised peritonitis secondary to perforated diverticula. Six had had previous infectious episodes; six were obese; four were diabetic and two had chronic lung disease. After exploration of the abdominal cavity and discovery of a purulent peritonitis (n = 8) or faecal peritonitis (n = 2), an extensive peritoneal lavage was performed (average 15 litres), the contaminating sigmoid lesion was covered with biological glue and a drain inserted at the site of the lesion. In some cases, drainage of dependent zones was also performed. No colostomies were performed. Antibiotic therapy instituted as soon as the diagnosis had been made was continued, on average, for 7 days. RESULTS: There was no mortality. There was a low morbidity: one case of lymphangitis on catheter and one of broncho-pulmonary infection. No cases of abdominal wall sepsis or residual deep collections were observed. The mean duration of hospitalisation was 8 days. Nine patients underwent a sigmoid resection (laparoscopic in eight cases) 3 to 4 months later, with a mean duration of hospitalisation of 6 days. One conversion to laparotomy was necessary. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic treatment of generalised peritonitis secondary to perforated sigmoid diverticulitis constitutes an alternative to classical surgery. It is associated with a decreased morbidity and a marked reduction in duration of the hospitalisation. Colostomy can be avoided and the patient's quality of life is improved during the period previous to secondary colectomy, performed by laparoscopy eight times out of nine. In addition, the cost of this approach is significantly lower.
BACKGROUND: The classical treatment of perforated sigmoid diverticulitis with generalised peritonitis is based on the principle of two-stage surgical procedures with a temporary initial defunctioning colostomy. This approach is associated with significant morbidity, concerning mainly the abdominal wall. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ten consecutive patients, eight female and two male, with a mean age of 54.6 years, underwent an emergency laparoscopy for generalised peritonitis secondary to perforated diverticula. Six had had previous infectious episodes; six were obese; four were diabetic and two had chronic lung disease. After exploration of the abdominal cavity and discovery of a purulent peritonitis (n = 8) or faecal peritonitis (n = 2), an extensive peritoneal lavage was performed (average 15 litres), the contaminating sigmoid lesion was covered with biological glue and a drain inserted at the site of the lesion. In some cases, drainage of dependent zones was also performed. No colostomies were performed. Antibiotic therapy instituted as soon as the diagnosis had been made was continued, on average, for 7 days. RESULTS: There was no mortality. There was a low morbidity: one case of lymphangitis on catheter and one of broncho-pulmonary infection. No cases of abdominal wall sepsis or residual deep collections were observed. The mean duration of hospitalisation was 8 days. Nine patients underwent a sigmoid resection (laparoscopic in eight cases) 3 to 4 months later, with a mean duration of hospitalisation of 6 days. One conversion to laparotomy was necessary. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic treatment of generalised peritonitis secondary to perforated sigmoid diverticulitis constitutes an alternative to classical surgery. It is associated with a decreased morbidity and a marked reduction in duration of the hospitalisation. Colostomy can be avoided and the patient's quality of life is improved during the period previous to secondary colectomy, performed by laparoscopy eight times out of nine. In addition, the cost of this approach is significantly lower.
Authors: Emmanuel A Agaba; Raza M Zaidi; Peter Ramzy; Muhammad Aftab; Eugene Rubach; Gary Gecelter; Thanjur S Ravikumar; George DeNoto Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2009-03-05 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: R Gonzalez; C D Smith; S G Mattar; K R Venkatesh; E Mason; T Duncan; R Wilson; J Miller; B J Ramshaw Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2003-12-29 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Joanne Favuzza; John C Friel; John J Kelly; Richard Perugini; Timothy C Counihan Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2009-01-23 Impact factor: 2.571