Meta-analysis of the role of colonoscopy after an episode of left-sided acute diverticulitis

Analysis of the outcomes of postdiverticulitis investigations: a multicentre cohort study including 1,120 patients

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to assess the yield of the endoscopic investigations performed following the resolution of acute diverticulitis.

METHODS

A retrospective multicentre study included patients with multislice computed tomography (MSCT)-proven diverticulitis, in four NHS hospitals, between January 2016 and April 2023. The primary outcome was the rate of colonic cancer in the diseased segment. Secondary outcomes included the rate of malignancy in the nondiseased colonic segments, the benign colonic polyp detection rate, the rate of malignancy in the resected surgical specimens in patients who underwent an emergency surgery on the index admission and the rate of complications in the investigated group.

RESULTS

A total of 1,120 patients were included in the study, out of which 604 were females, with a median age of 61 years; 731 patients (65%) had uncomplicated diverticulitis (Hinchey 1A) while 389 (35%) had complicated diverticulitis (Hinchey 1B-4). Following the acute episode, 757 (74%) patients had subsequent endoscopic evaluation. The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) or advanced adenomas (AA) in patients with uncomplicated diverticulitis was 0.14%. In the complicated diverticulitis group, the incidence of CRC/AA in patients with Hinchey 1b and Hinchey 2 was 1.4% and 5.4%, respectively. Out of the 107 patients who underwent emergency colonic resection for suspected perforated diverticulitis, 18 (16.8%) had histological evidence of colonic malignancy.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic investigations following uncomplicated diverticulitis have a low yield for sinister colonic pathology. Colonoscopy should be planned following complicated diverticulitis and in patients with uncomplicated diverticulitis with suspicious radiological finding on index imaging or in patients with ongoing clinical manifestations. In patients who undergo emergency surgery, oncological principles should be applied whenever possible.

DIVERT-Ca: unveiling the hidden link between acute diverticulitis and colorectal cancer risk-multicentre retrospective study

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide, accounting for approximately 10% of all malignancies. Emerging trends of association with risk factors such as diverticulitis highlight the need for updated screening and follow-up protocols. We aimed to examine risk factors associated with the development of CRC within 12 months following an episode of acute diverticulitis, and identify areas to streamline follow-up.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective multicentre study of adult patients admitted in 2022 with computed tomography (CT) confirmed acute diverticulitis across four large NHS Trusts in the UK. Patient demographics, comorbidities, clinical presentation, vital signs, laboratory results, details of in-patient stay, and follow-up investigations were collected and analysed. Our primary outcome was the incidence of CRC within 12 months of index presentation with acute diverticulitis. Analysed secondary outcomes were potential patient risk factors associated with a diagnosis of CRC and follow-up protocols. All statistical analysis was performed using R (version 4.4) and P-values of < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 542 patients with acute diverticulitis over the study period were included. The median age of our cohort was 62 (51-73) years, and 204 (37.6%) were male. Ten (1.8%) patients were diagnosed with CRC within the 12-month period. Hinchey grade Ib was significantly associated with CRC (OR 4.51, P = 0.028). Colonoscopic follow-up requests were associated with age between 40 and 60 years, mild white cell count (WCC) elevation, and a hospital stay of 3-7 days. Male gender, age between 18 and 40 years, and elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) were all strongly associated with CRC but not statistically significant. Follow-up was inconsistent with 53.7% of the cohort having luminal investigations.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of CRC was in-keeping with published literature. Hinchey grade 1b was significantly associated with a subsequent CRC diagnosis. These findings emphasise the need for specialised radiological review of CT scans to detect underlying malignancy. Moreover, standardised follow-up protocols following an episode of acute diverticulitis are needed to avoid missing malignant lesions.

Inclusion of a Society-Endorsed Practice Guideline in Computed Tomography Reports Improves Postdiverticulitis Colonoscopy Adherence

INTRODUCTION

The American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) recommends a follow-up colonoscopy within 6-8 weeks of an episode of complicated diverticulitis or the first episode of uncomplicated diverticulitis if no colonoscopy had been performed within the prior year to rule-out colorectal cancer. Available data suggest that adherence to this recommendation is suboptimal.

METHODS

We conducted a pre/post intervention study to determine whether inclusion of the AGA practice guideline in the diagnostic CT reports increased post-diverticulitis colonoscopy rates.

RESULTS

Post-diverticulitis colonoscopy order and completion rates were significantly higher in the intervention group. Adherence was highest among individuals whose CT reports included the AGA recommendation.

CONCLUSION

Inclusion of a guideline-based recommendation in the diagnostic CT report increases post-diverticulitis colonoscopy adherence rates. The intervention is cheap, easy to implement and amenable to widespread dissemination.

Diverticulitis in Older Adults: A Review of Etiology, Diagnosis, and Management

BACKGROUND

Diverticulitis accounts for over 300,000 hospitalizations annually in the United States and its incidence increases with age. Among older adults, diverticulitis is the fourth leading cause for emergency surgery. Older adults with multimorbidity and geriatric syndromes are often excluded from clinical studies, leaving a gap in the evidence needed to guide management. Here, we provide a clinically oriented review of the diagnosis and management of older adults with diverticulitis through the lens of age-friendly care.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We reviewed the literature describing the epidemiology, diagnosis, management, and prevention of diverticulitis in older adults. Due to age-related physiologic changes, the presence of geriatric syndromes, and multimorbidity, older adults with diverticulitis often present with atypical symptoms, variable laboratory findings, and are at higher risk for complications than younger patients. Guidelines support a more aggressive approach to diagnosis in this population, with lower threshold for obtaining diagnostic imaging. Antibiotics remain a mainstay of treatment for uncomplicated disease, and surgical management should be focused on severity of disease and the balance between the likelihood of improving quality of life and risks and burden of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Diverticulitis is a common disease that has a unique presentation among older individuals with limited evidence to guide management. Diagnosis and treatment should focus on what matters most to the patient, providing the most meaningful outcome possible within the context of multimorbidity, patient goals, symptom burden, and anticipated treatment outcomes.

Outpatient Management Protocol for Uncomplicated Diverticulitis: A 3-Year Monocentric Experience in a Tertiary Hospital

Background/Objectives: The management of acute uncomplicated diverticulitis (AUD) has shifted towards outpatient care in the last decade, challenging the traditional inpatient approach. We aimed to analyze the safety and feasibility of a structured outpatient treatment pathway for AUD in a tertiary hospital. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort analysis of patients who underwent outpatient management for AUD at the Geneva University Hospitals from 2019 to 2021. Patient demographics, selection criteria, treatment protocols, and outcomes were analyzed. Results: Two-hundred and twenty patients were included in the outpatient cohort. Four patients (1.8%) required hospitalization due to the failure of outpatient management, whereas the majority of patients (116 patients, 98.2%) experienced a successful resolution of their symptoms without hospitalization. In a univariate analysis, factors associated with treatment failure included elevated white blood cell counts at admission (14 G/l vs. 10.6 G/l, p = 0.049) and the first follow-up appointment, (10.7 G/l vs. 7.4 G/l, p = 0.011) and the presence of free air on their CT scan (25% vs. 2,3%, p = 0.033). In a multivariate analysis, the presence of free air was the only identified risk factor for unsuccessful outpatient management (p = 0.05). We observed high rates of follow-up compliance (99.1%). Conclusion: Under the condition of a warranted outpatient follow-up appointment and with adequate selection criteria, outpatient management appears to be an effective approach for most patients with AUD, emphasizing the importance of tailored therapeutic interventions and vigilant clinical assessments for optimal outcomes.

Follow-Up Colonoscopy for Detection of Missed Colorectal Cancer After Diverticulitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Colonoscopy often is recommended after an episode of diverticulitis to exclude missed colorectal cancer (CRC). This is a controversial recommendation based on limited evidence. We estimated the prevalence and odds of CRC and advanced colorectal neoplasia on colonoscopy in patients with diverticulitis compared with CRC screening.

METHODS

Using data from the Gastrointestinal Quality Improvement Consortium registry, we performed a cross-sectional study with patients ≥40 years old undergoing outpatient colonoscopy for an indication of diverticulitis follow-up evaluation or CRC screening. The primary outcome was CRC. The secondary outcome was advanced colorectal neoplasia. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were calculated.

RESULTS

We identified 4,591,921 outpatient colonoscopies performed for screening and 91,993 colonoscopies for diverticulitis follow-up evaluation. CRC prevalence was 0.33% in colonoscopies for screening and 0.31% in colonoscopies for diverticulitis. Compared with screening, patients with diverticulitis were less likely to have CRC (adjusted OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.74-0.94). CRC prevalence decreased to 0.17% in colonoscopies performed for diverticulitis only. Compared with screening, patients with diverticulitis as the only indication were less likely to have CRC (adjusted OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.36-0.68). CRC prevalence increased to 1.43% in patients with complicated diverticulitis. Compared with screening, patients with complicated diverticulitis were more likely to have CRC (adjusted OR, 3.57; 95% CI, 1.59-8.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of CRC cancer is low in most patients with diverticulitis. Patients with complicated diverticulitis are the exception. Our results suggest that colonoscopy to detect missed CRC should include diverticulitis patients with a complication and those not current with CRC screening.

Contemporary management of diverticulitis

The treatment of diverticulitis is experiencing a shift in management due to a number of large scale clinical trials. For instance, clinicians are beginning to recognize that avoidance of antibiotics in uncomplicated diverticulitis is not associated with worse outcomes. Additionally, while the decision to proceed with elective surgical resection for recurrent uncomplicated disease is less conclusive and favors a patient-centric approach, complicated disease with a large abscess denotes more aggressive disease and would likely benefit from elective surgical resection. Lastly, in patient with acutely perforated diverticulitis who require urgent surgical intervention, laparoscopic lavage is generally not recommended due to high re-intervention rates and the preferred surgical procedure is primary anastomosis with or without diversion due to high morbidity and low rates of Hartmann reversal.

Colon CApsule endoscopy compared to conventional COlonoscopy in patients with colonic DIverticulitis: the study protocol for a randomised controlled superiority trial (CACODI trial)

INTRODUCTION

Follow-up after an episode of colonic diverticulitis is a common indication for colonoscopy, even though studies have shown a low risk of positive findings in this population. Our objective is to investigate colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) as a follow-up examination in patients with colonic diverticulitis compared with colonoscopy, particularly regarding patient satisfaction and clinical performance.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct a single-centre prospective randomised controlled trial. Patients seen at Odense University Hospital with acute diverticulitis confirmed by CT will be included and randomised to either follow-up by colonoscopy or CCE. Detection of suspected cancer, more than two polyps or any number of polyps larger than 9 mm in CCE will generate an invitation to a diagnostic colonoscopy for biopsies or polyp removal. We will compare colonoscopy and CCE regarding patient satisfaction and tolerance, the number of complete examinations, the number of patients referred to a subsequent colonoscopy after CCE and the prevalence of diverticula, polyps, cancers and other abnormal findings.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Informed consent will be obtained from all participants before randomisation. The study was approved by the regional ethics committee (ref. S-20210127) and the Danish Data Protection Agency (ref. 22/43235). After completion of the trial, we plan to publish two articles in high-impact journals. One article on both primary and secondary outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05700981.

Risk for colorectal cancer after computed tomography verified acute diverticulitis: A retrospective cohort study with long-term follow-up

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) can mimic acute diverticulitis and can thus be misdiagnosed. Therefore, colonic evaluation is recommended after an episode of acute diverticulitis. The aim of this study was to analyze the risk of CRC after computed tomography (CT) verified uncomplicated and complicated acute diverticulitis in short-term and, particularly, long-term follow-up to ensure the feasibility of the primary CT imaging in separating patients with uncomplicated and complicated acute diverticulitis.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted in patients with CT-verified acute diverticulitis in 2003-2012. Data on CT findings and colonic evaluations were analyzed. The patients were divided into those with uncomplicated and complicated acute diverticulitis. Patient charts were reviewed 9-18 years after the initial acute diverticulitis episode.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 270 patients. According to CT scans, 170 (63%) patients had uncomplicated acute diverticulitis and 100 (37%) had complicated acute diverticulitis. Further colonic evaluation was made in 146 (54%) patients. In the whole study population, CRC was found in 7 (2.6%) patients, but CRC was associated with acute diverticulitis in only 4 (1.5%) patients. The short-term risk for CRC was 0.6% (1/170) in uncomplicated acute diverticulitis and 3.0% (3/100) in complicated acute diverticulitis. No additional CRC was found in patients with complicated acute diverticulitis during the long-term follow-up and three cases of CRC found after uncomplicated acute diverticulitis had no observable association with previous diverticulitis.

CONCLUSIONS

In short-term follow-up, the risk of underlying CRC is very low in CT-verified uncomplicated acute diverticulitis but increased in complicated acute diverticulitis. Long-term follow-up revealed no additional CRCs associated with previous acute diverticulitis, indicating that the short-term results remain consistent also in the long run. These long-term results confirm that colonoscopy should be reserved for patients with complicated acute diverticulitis or with persisting or alarming symptoms.

Characteristics, treatment, and outcome of diverticulitis after immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment in patients with malignancies

PURPOSE

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are efficacious for treating various malignancies. In addition to immune-related adverse events (irAEs), growing evidence suggests that ICIs might also be associated with diverticulitis. We aim to assess the clinical presentations and management of colonic diverticulitis among cancer patients after ICI treatment.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on ICI-treated adult cancer patients between 01/2010 and 06/2020. Patients were grouped based on when diverticulitis developed relative to ICI treatment, either before (controls) or after (cases). Patient clinical characters, treatment, and outcomes were compared between both groups.

RESULTS

77 eligible patients were included: 63 patients developed diverticulitis after ICI exposure (46 had initial episode after ICI exposure, 17 had a history of diverticulitis prior then recurred after ICI exposure), and 14 had diverticulitis before ICI exposure. Diverticulitis occurred after a median of 129 days after ICI initiation. Clinical characteristics overlapped with traditional diverticulitis. 93% of patients had symptom resolution after treatment, while 23.8% experienced complications. These patients exhibited higher rates of hospitalization (87% vs 48%, P = 0.015) and surgery/interventional radiology procedures (27% vs 0, P = 0.002), and worse overall survival (P = 0.022). History of diverticulitis was not associated with a more severe disease course. Immunosuppressants (e.g., corticosteroids) were rarely required unless for concurrent ICI-mediated colitis.

CONCLUSION

Colonic diverticulitis can occur after ICI therapy at very low incidence (0.5%). Its clinical presentation, evaluation, and management are similar to traditional diverticulitis, but associated with higher complication rates requiring surgical intervention and has lower overall survival.

A multicentre study assessing the role of routine colonoscopy after acute uncomplicated diverticulitis and the incidence of colorectal cancer diagnosis

PURPOSE

The low rates of colonic malignancy detected on interval colonoscopy for patients diagnosed with diverticulitis have led recent studies to question the utility of the practice. The aim of this study was to assess the detection rate of colorectal cancer on colonoscopy for patients with a first episode of acute uncomplicated diverticulitis across three separate centres in Ireland and the UK.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of patients with a first episode of acute, uncomplicated diverticulitis who underwent interval colonoscopy at three separate centres in the UK and Ireland between 2007 and 2019. The follow-up period was one year.

RESULTS

A total of 5485 patients were admitted with acute diverticulitis between the three centres. All patients had CT verified diverticulitis. A 90.8% (n = 4982) underwent subsequent colonic evaluation with colonoscopy. Of these, a histologically proven diagnosis of colorectal carcinoma was made in 1.28% (n = 64).

CONCLUSION

Routine colonoscopy following an episode of acute, uncomplicated diverticulitis may not be necessary in every patient. It may be appropriate to reserve this more invasive investigation for those with higher risk factors for malignancy.

Can endoscopic follow-up after acute diverticulitis be rationalised?

BACKGROUND

Acute diverticulitis (AD) is a common cause of presentation to emergency surgical services. Follow-up with endoluminal investigation to exclude colorectal cancer (CRC) remains controversial. Guidelines are increasingly moving to a more restrictive follow-up based on severity of disease and age. The purpose of this observational study was to assess the prevalence of CRC in AD patients and the impact of follow-up on endoscopy services.

METHODS

Patients admitted with a diagnosis of AD over a 2-year period were reviewed. The proportion of patients undergoing endoscopic follow-up and the CRC detection rate were recorded. The potential impact of a more conservative approach to follow-up was evaluated.

RESULTS

There were 484 patients with AD presenting 546 times (M:F = 198:286; median age = 63 years). 80% of admissions were aged 50 or older. There were 43 emergency interventions in 39 patients (10 percutaneous drain; 33 surgery). The remainder were managed conservatively. 28 patients (5.1%) underwent colonic resection with cancer found in one specimen (3.6%). 287 patients underwent endoluminal follow-up with cancer diagnosed in 3 cases (1.0%). There was no significant difference in the prevalence of CRC between patients requiring emergency surgery and those managed conservatively, or between patients with complicated versus uncomplicated diverticulitis.

CONCLUSION

CRC masquerading as acute diverticulitis is rare. The incidence of neoplasia both at endoscopic follow-up and in patients requiring emergency intervention is low. Conservative follow-up strategies appear safe, but their effectiveness in reducing the burden on endoscopy services may be limited by current age-based recommendations. Restricting follow-up to those with complicated AD would reduce the number of patients requiring endoluminal investigation by 70%.

German guideline diverticular disease/diverticulitis: Part I: Methods, pathogenesis, epidemiology, clinical characteristics (definitions), natural course, diagnosis and classification

Diverticulosis and diverticular disease are ranked among the most common gastroenterological diseases and conditions. While for many years diverticulitis was found to be mainly an event occurring in the elder population, more recent work in epidemiology demonstrates increasing frequency in younger subjects. In addition, there is a noticeable trend towards more complicated disease. This may explain the significant increase in hospitalisations observed in recent years. It is not a surprise that the number of scientific studies addressing the clinical and socioeconomic consequences in the field is increasing. As a result, diagnosis and conservative as well as surgical management have changed in recent years. Diverticulosis, diverticular disease and diverticulitis are a complex entity and apparently an interdisciplinary challenge. To meet theses considerations the German Societies for Gastroenterology and Visceral Surgery decided to create joint guidelines addressing all aspects in a truely interdisciplinary fashion. The aim of the guideline is to summarise and to evaluate the current state of knowledge on diverticulosis and diverticular disease and to develop statements as well as recommendations to all physicians involved in the management of patients with diverticular disease.

When to Perform a Colonoscopy in Diverticular Disease and Why: A Personalized Approach

Colonoscopy is a crucial diagnostic tool in managing diverticular disease (DD). Diverticulosis can often be an unexpected diagnosis when colonoscopy is performed in asymptomatic subjects, generally for colorectal cancer screening, or it could reveal an endoscopic picture compatible with DD, including acute diverticulitis, in patients suffering from abdominal pain or rectal bleeding. However, alongside its role in the differential diagnosis of colonic diseases, particularly with colon cancer after an episode of acute diverticulitis or segmental colitis associated with diverticulosis, the most promising use of colonoscopy in patients with DD is represented by its prognostic role when the DICA (Diverticular Inflammation and Complication Assessment) classification is applied. Finally, colonoscopy plays a crucial role in managing diverticular bleeding, and it could sometimes be used to resolve other complications, particularly as a bridge to surgery. This article aims to summarize "when" to safely perform a colonoscopy in the different DD settings and "why".

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage versus sigmoidectomy for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis: three-year follow-up of the randomised LOLA trial

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare laparoscopic lavage and sigmoidectomy as treatment for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis during a 36 month follow-up of the LOLA trial.

METHODS

Within the LOLA arm of the international, multicentre LADIES trial, patients with perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis were randomised between laparoscopic lavage and sigmoidectomy. Outcomes were collected up to 36 months. The primary outcome of the present study was cumulative morbidity and mortality. Secondary outcomes included reoperations (including stoma reversals), stoma rates, and sigmoidectomy rates in the lavage group.

RESULTS

Long-term follow-up was recorded in 77 of the 88 originally included patients, 39 were randomised to sigmoidectomy (51%) and 38 to laparoscopic lavage (49%). After 36 months, overall cumulative morbidity (sigmoidectomy 28/39 (72%) versus lavage 32/38 (84%), p = 0·272) and mortality (sigmoidectomy 7/39 (18%) versus lavage 6/38 (16%), p = 1·000) did not differ. The number of patients who underwent a reoperation was significantly lower for lavage compared to sigmoidectomy (sigmoidectomy 27/39 (69%) versus lavage 17/38 (45%), p = 0·039). After 36 months, patients alive with stoma in situ was lower in the lavage group (proportion calculated from the Kaplan-Meier life table, sigmoidectomy 17% vs lavage 11%, log-rank p = 0·0268). Eventually, 17 of 38 (45%) patients allocated to lavage underwent sigmoidectomy.

CONCLUSION

Long-term outcomes showed that laparoscopic lavage was associated with less patients who underwent reoperations and lower stoma rates in patients alive after 36 months compared to sigmoidectomy. No differences were found in terms of cumulative morbidity or mortality. Patient selection should be improved to reduce risk for short-term complications after which lavage could still be a valuable treatment option.

Diverticulitis does not increase the long-term risk of developing colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this review was to examine if diverticulitis increases the long-term risk (> 6 months) of developing colon cancer.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL. Google Scholar was also searched. We included studies with human adults of 18 years of age and above. Studies that included only patients with diverticulitis as well as studies comparing groups with and without diverticulitis were included. The primary outcome was the incidence of colon cancer 6 months or more after an episode of diverticulitis.

RESULTS

Twelve records were included with 38,621 patients with diverticulitis. The crude rate of colon cancer among the prospectively followed populations with diverticulitis was by meta-analysis found to be 0.6% (95% CI 0.5-0.6%). The limitations of this review include heterogeneous reporting of outcomes across studies, specifically regarding population and outcome as well as variations in the design and reporting of the studies.

CONCLUSION

We found that the long-term risk of colon cancer after diverticulitis is not increased. The results of our review support current practice on follow-up after an episode of diverticulitis with short-term follow-up being the primary focus.

Antibiotics for uncomplicated diverticulitis

BACKGROUND

Diverticulitis is a complication of the common condition, diverticulosis. Uncomplicated diverticulitis has traditionally been treated with antibiotics, as diverticulitis has been regarded as an infectious disease. Risk factors for diverticulitis, however, may suggest that the condition is inflammatory rather than infectious which makes the use of antibiotics questionable.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this systematic review were to determine if antibiotic treatment of uncomplicated acute diverticulitis affects the risk of complications (immediate or late) or the need for emergency surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, a comprehensive systematic literature search was conducted in Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trial Registry Platform on February 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including all types of patients with a radiologically confirmed diagnosis of left-sided uncomplicated acute diverticulitis. Comparator and interventions included antibiotics compared to no antibiotics, placebo, or to any other antibiotic treatment (different regimens, routes of administration, dosage or duration of treatment). Primary outcome measures were complications and emergency surgery. Secondary outcomes were recurrence, late complications, elective colonic resections, length of hospital stay, length to recovery of symptoms, adverse events and mortality.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors performed the searches, identification and assessment of RCTs and data extraction. Disagreements were resolved by discussion or involvement of the third author. Authors of trials were contacted to obtain additional data if needed or for preliminary results of ongoing trials. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias was used to assess the methodological quality of the identified trials. The overall quality of evidence for outcomes was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Effect estimates were extracted as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed with the Mantel-Haenzel method.

MAIN RESULTS

The authors included five studies. Three studies compared no antibiotics to antibiotics; all three were original RCTs of which two also published long-term follow-up information.  For the outcome of short-term complications there may be little or no difference between antibiotics and no antibiotics (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.30 to 2.62; 3 studies, 1329 participants; low-certainty evidence). The rate of emergency surgery within 30 days may be lower with no antibiotics compared to antibiotics (RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.13, 1.71; 1329 participants; 3 studies; low-certainty evidence). However, there is considerable imprecision due to wide confidence intervals for this effect estimate causing uncertainty which means that there may also be a benefit with antibiotics. One of the two remaining trials compared single to double compound antibiotic therapy and, due to wide confidence intervals, the estimate was imprecise and indicated an uncertain clinical effect between these two antibiotic regimens (RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.11 to 4.58; 51 participants; 1 study; low-certainty evidence). The last trial compared short to long intravenous administration of antibiotics and did not report any events for our primary outcomes. Both trials included few participants and one had overall high risk of bias. Since the first publication of this systematic review, an increasing amount of evidence supporting the treatment of uncomplicated acute diverticulitis without antibiotics has been published, but the total body of evidence is still limited.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence on antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated acute diverticulitis suggests that the effect of antibiotics is uncertain for complications, emergency surgery, recurrence, elective colonic resections, and long-term complications. The quality of the evidence is low. Only three RCTs on the need for antibiotics are currently available. More trials are needed to obtain more precise effect estimates.

Emerging evidence and recent controversies in diverticulitis: a 5-year review

Diverticulitis is a common gastrointestinal disease that still garners significant attention and study because of its heterogeneity in presentation and outcome. We provide a review of the newest and most controversial topics in diverticulitis. Recent discoveries on the influence of diet and other environmental risk factors are discussed, showing how the epidemiology of the disease process is shifting away from what was previously felt to be a disorder primarily limited to older western populations. Interestingly, as has long been suspected, genetic mutations and variations associated with the development of diverticulitis are being discovered and are summarized here. The data for non-operative and outpatient management of diverticulitis are reviewed, as are pharmacologic agents studied for use in the secondary prevention of diverticulitis. Lastly, we present controversies in the surgical treatment of diverticulitis. This review will provide a synopsis of the last 5 years of literature relating to diverticulitis.

Changing Paradigms in the Management of Acute Uncomplicated Diverticulitis

Left-sided colonic diverticulitis is a common condition with significant morbidity and health care costs in Western countries. Acute uncomplicated diverticulitis which is characterized by the absence of organ dysfunction, abscesses, fistula, or perforations accounts for around 80% of the cases. In the last decades, several traditional paradigms in the management of acute uncomplicated diverticulitis have been replaced by evidence-based routines. This review provides a comprehensive evidence-based and clinical-oriented overview of up-to-date diagnostics with computer tomography, non-antibiotic treatment, outpatient treatment, and surgical strategies as well as follow-up of patients with acute uncomplicated diverticulitis.

Evaluation of follow-up colonoscopy in acute colonic diverticulitis for detection of advanced adenoma and colon cancer: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Due to variable rates of colon carcinoma or advanced adenoma mimicking an acute diverticulitis episode, the necessity of colonoscopy to detect colon cancer or advanced adenoma remains to be explored. This study investigated the incidence and predictive factors of colon cancer or advanced adenoma following acute diverticulitis.

METHODS

We evaluated retrospectively all consecutive patients with an episode of computed tomography-proven acute diverticulitis between June 2016 and August 2019. A follow-up colonoscopy was performed. Demographic and clinical parameters were recorded. Patients with clinically substantial colonic neoplasia (colon cancer or advanced adenoma) were classified as Group A, while Group B included patients without clinically significant colonic neoplasia. The incidence of clinically significant colonic neoplasia in acute diverticulitis patients was regarded as the primary outcome.

RESULTS

The mean age of 233 patients with acute diverticulitis was 58.6 ± 12.7 years. Complicated diverticulitis was detected in 39 patients (16.7 %). Sixteen patients (6.9 %) were assigned to Group A and 217 patients (93.1 %) to Group B. The age of the patients in group A was significantly higher than in Group B (p =0.001). Age above 50 and 65 years was also significantly associated with clinically significant colonic neoplasia (p =0.015 and p =0.012, respectively). The other variables did not influence the development of clinically significant colonic neoplasia (p >0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Colonoscopy examination following an episode of acute diverticulitis may not be recommended for all patients due to the rare occurrence of colon cancer or clinically significant colonic neoplasia in those younger than 50 years. HIPPOKRATIA 2021, 25 (2):69-74.

Update on the management of sigmoid diverticulitis

Diverticular disease and diverticulitis are the most common non-cancerous pathology of the colon. It has traditionally been considered a disease of the elderly and associated with cultural and dietary habits. There has been a growing evolution in our understanding and the treatment guidelines for this disease. To provide an updated review of the epidemiology, pathogenesis, classification and highlight changes in the medical and surgical management of diverticulitis. Diverticulitis is increasingly being seen in young patients (< 50 years). Genetic contributions to diverticulitis may be larger than previously thought. Potential similarities and overlap with inflammatory bowel disease and irritable bowel syndrome exist. Computed tomography imaging represents the standard to classify the severity of diverticulitis. Modifications to the traditional Hinchey classification might serve to better delineate mild and intermediate forms as well as better classify chronic presentations of diverticulitis. Non-operative management is primarily based on antibiotics and supportive measures, but antibiotics may be omitted in mild cases. Interval colonoscopy remains advisable after an acute attack, particularly after a complicated form. Acute surgery is needed for the most severe as well as refractory cases, whereas elective resections are individualized and should be considered for chronic, smoldering, or recurrent forms and respective complications (stricture, fistula, etc.) and for patients with factors highly predictive of recurrent attacks. Diverticulitis is no longer a disease of the elderly. Our evolving understanding of diverticulitis as a clinical entity has led into a more nuanced approach in both the medical and surgical management of this common disease. Non-surgical management remains the appropriate treatment for greater than 70% of patients. In individuals with non-relenting, persistent, or recurrent symptoms and those with complicated disease and sequelae, a segmental colectomy remains the most effective surgical treatment in the acute, chronic, or elective-prophylactic setting.

Update on the management of sigmoid diverticulitis

Diverticular disease and diverticulitis are the most common non-cancerous pathology of the colon. It has traditionally been considered a disease of the elderly and associated with cultural and dietary habits. There has been a growing evolution in our understanding and the treatment guidelines for this disease. To provide an updated review of the epidemiology, pathogenesis, classification and highlight changes in the medical and surgical management of diverticulitis. Diverticulitis is increasingly being seen in young patients (< 50 years). Genetic contributions to diverticulitis may be larger than previously thought. Potential similarities and overlap with inflammatory bowel disease and irritable bowel syndrome exist. Computed tomography imaging represents the standard to classify the severity of diverticulitis. Modifications to the traditional Hinchey classification might serve to better delineate mild and intermediate forms as well as better classify chronic presentations of diverticulitis. Non-operative management is primarily based on antibiotics and supportive measures, but antibiotics may be omitted in mild cases. Interval colonoscopy remains advisable after an acute attack, particularly after a complicated form. Acute surgery is needed for the most severe as well as refractory cases, whereas elective resections are individualized and should be considered for chronic, smoldering, or recurrent forms and respective complications (stricture, fistula, etc.) and for patients with factors highly predictive of recurrent attacks. Diverticulitis is no longer a disease of the elderly. Our evolving understanding of diverticulitis as a clinical entity has led into a more nuanced approach in both the medical and surgical management of this common disease. Non-surgical management remains the appropriate treatment for greater than 70% of patients. In individuals with non-relenting, persistent, or recurrent symptoms and those with complicated disease and sequelae, a segmental colectomy remains the most effective surgical treatment in the acute, chronic, or elective-prophylactic setting.

Acute complicated diverticulitis is associated with an increased advanced neoplasia diagnosis rate: A retrospective study on 1852 patients

Recent reports have documented an unchanged rate of occurrence of colorectal cancer (CRC) and have publicised doubts regarding the benefit of prompt colonoscopy procedures after an episode of acute diverticulitis (AD). These reports mandate further evaluation of colonoscopy yield and timing in this regard. The current study aims to determine whether the rate of advanced colonic neoplasia after AD differs from that of average-risk patients, and to identify risk factors that are associated with their development.In this retrospective study, we included all patients who had been hospitalized to the surgery ward in the years 2008 to 2016 with radiographically confirmed AD, and had completed colonoscopies within one year of index hospitalization. Patients who were referred for screening colonoscopies during the same years were included as a control group. We compared the rates of diagnosis of CRC and advanced polyps for both groups before and after adjustment for multiple confounders. Moreover, we investigated risk factors that were associated with increased rate of advanced neoplasia diagnosis.A total of 350 patients were included in the AD group and 1502 patients in the screening colonoscopy control group. The CRC diagnosis rates (1.7% vs 0.3%; P = .09) and overall diagnosis rates of advanced neoplasia (12.3% vs 9.6%; P = .19) were not significantly different when findings were compared between the AD and control groups, respectively. Cases of complicated diverticulitis, however, were associated with increased risk of advanced neoplasia diagnosis (odds ratio (OR) 3.729, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.803-7.713; P = .01).The diagnosis rate for advanced neoplasia after AD was not significantly different from that of average-risk populations. A course of complicated AD, however, was a potential risk factor.

CT colonography followed by elective surgery in patients with acute diverticulitis: a radiological-pathological correlation study

Purpose

To perform a radiologic-pathologic correlation analysis of sigmoid colon in patients undergoing pre-operative CT Colonography (CTC) after an episode of acute diverticulitis (AD).

Methods

Fifty-nine consecutive patients (31/28 M/F; 58 ± 13 years) underwent CTC 55 ± 18 days after AD, 8 ± 4 weeks before surgery. Thirty-seven patients (63%) underwent conventional abdominal CT at time of AD. An experienced blinded radiologist retrospectively analyzed all images: disease severity was graded according to the Ambrosetti classification on conventional CT and according to the diverticular disease severity score (DDSS) on CTC. A GI pathologist performed a dedicated analysis, evaluating the presence of acute and chronic inflammation, and fibrosis, using 0–3 point scale for each variable.

Results

Of 59 patients, 41 (69%) had at least one previous AD episode; twenty-six patients (44%) had a complicated AD. DDSS was mild-moderate in 34/59 (58%), and severe in 25/59 (42%). All patients had chronic inflammation, while 90% had low-to-severe fibrosis. Patients with moderate/severe fibrosis were older than those with no/mild fibrosis (61 ± 13 versus 54 ± 13). We found a significant correlation between DDSS and chronic inflammation (p = 0.004), as well as DDSS and fibrosis (p = 0.005). Furthermore, fibrosis was correlated with complicated acute diverticulitis (p = 0.0.27), and with age (p = 0.067). At multivariate analysis, complicated diverticulitis was the best predictor of fibrosis (odds ratio 4.4). Patient age and DDSS were other independent predictors.

Conclusion

DDSS-based assessment on preoperative CTC was a good predictor of chronic colonic inflammation and fibrosis. In addition, the presence of complicated diverticulitis on CT during the acute episode was most predictive of fibrosis.

Interval colonoscopy following acute diverticulitis should not be discouraged yet: results from a retrospective cohort

BACKGROUND

Although included in some guidelines, the recommendation of interval colonoscopy after an acute diverticulitis (AD) episode has recently been questioned. In this study, we evaluated the incidence of colon cancer during the follow-up of an episode of AD.

METHODS

A retrospective review was carried out of patients with conservatively treated AD at our Institution (January 2011 to December 2018) with or without endoscopic study. Patients who had no colonoscopy performed were followed for two years. The demographic, clinical, radiological, follow-up and anatomopathological records were analysed. We determined CT scan validity for the differential diagnosis of CC and AD; sensibility, specificity, predictive values and likelihood ratios were calculated. Patients lost to follow-up and patients who had had colonoscopy in the previous three years were excluded.

RESULTS

This study included 285 patients with a mean age of 59 years. A total of 225 interval colonoscopies were performed and 60 patients without colonoscopy were followed up. There were 19 CC (6.7%) diagnosed, 14 with interval colonoscopy and 5 during follow-up; 8 (42.1%) happened in patients who had had an episode of uncomplicated AD. Although CT scan accuracy is high, 87.7%, positive and negative likelihood ratios were low, 4.67 and 0.64, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Interval colonoscopy should still be advisable after an episode of AD. The rationale for this statement is based on a non-negligible rate of hidden CC and an important uncertainty in the differential diagnosis.

Drains, Germs, or Steel: Multidisciplinary Management of Acute Colonic Diverticulitis

The medical and surgical management of uncomplicated diverticulitis has changed over the last several years. Although immunocompetent patients or those without comorbidities can be treated with antibiotics as an outpatient, the efficacy of high-fiber intake or drugs such as mesalamine or rifaximin is not yet clearly established in the treatment of acute episodes and in the prevention of recurrences. On the other hand, the choice between antibiotic treatment and percutaneous drainage is not always obvious in diverticulitis complicated by abscess formation, especially for larger abscesses; although the results of studies comparing the two approaches remain controversial, surgery must be pursued for abscesses > 8 cm. For emergency surgery, the debate is still ongoing regarding laparoscopic lavage and surgical resection followed by primary anastomosis, since for both approaches the published reports are not in agreement regarding possible benefits. Therefore, these approaches are recommended only for selected patients under the care of experienced surgeons. Also, the contribution of elective surgery toward the overall approach has been revised; currently, it is reserved primarily for patients with a high risk of recurrence and whenever more conservative treatments were not effective.

Diverticulitis: An Update From the Age Old Paradigm

For a disease process that affects so many, we continue to struggle to define optimal care for patients with diverticular disease. Part of this stems from the fact that diverticular disease requires different treatment strategies across the natural history- acute, chronic and recurrent.

To understand where we are currently, it is worth understanding how treatment of diverticular disease has evolved. Diverticular disease was rarely described in the literature prior to the 1900’s. In the late 1960’s and early 1970’s, Painter and Burkitt popularized the theory that diverticulosis is a disease of Western civilization based on the observation that diverticulosis was rare in rural Africa but common in economically developed countries. Previous surgical guidelines focused on early operative intervention to avoid potential complicated episodes of recurrent complicated diverticulitis (e.g., with free perforation) that might necessitate emergent surgery and stoma formation. More recent data has challenged prior concerns about decreasing effectiveness of medical management with repeat episodes and the notion that the natural history of diverticulitis is progressive. It has also permitted more accurate grading of the severity of disease and permitted less invasive management options to attempt conversion of urgent operations into the elective setting, or even avoid an operation altogether.

The role of diet in preventing diverticular disease has long been debated. A high fiber diet appears to decrease the likelihood of symptomatic diverticulitis. The myth of avoid eating nuts, corn, popcorn, and seeds to prevent episodes of diverticulitis has been debunked with modern data. Overall, the recommendations for “diverticulitis diets” mirror those made for overall healthy lifestyle – high fiber, with a focus on whole grains, fruits and vegetables.

Diverticulosis is one of the most common incidental findings on colonoscopy and the eighth most common outpatient diagnosis in the United States. Over 50% of people over the age of 60 and over 60% of people over age 80 have colonic diverticula. Of those with diverticulosis, the lifetime risk of developing diverticulitis is estimated at 10–25%, although more recent studies estimate a 5% rate of progression to diverticulitis. Diverticulitis accounts for an estimated 371,000 emergency department visits and 200,000 inpatient admissions per year with annual cost of 2.1–2.6 billion dollars per year in the United States. The estimated total medical expenditure (inpatient and outpatient) for diverticulosis and diverticulitis in 2015 was over 5.4 billion dollars. The incidence of diverticulitis is increasing.

Besides increasing age, other risk factors for diverticular disease include use of NSAIDS, aspirin, steroids, opioids, smoking and sedentary lifestyle. Diverticula most commonly occur along the mesenteric side of the antimesenteric taeniae resulting in parallel rows. These spots are thought to be relatively weak as this is the location where vasa recta penetrate the muscle to supply the mucosa. The exact mechanism that leads to diverticulitis from diverticulosis is not definitively known.

The most common presenting complaint is of left lower quadrant abdominal pain with symptoms of systemic unwellness including fever and malaise, however the presentation may vary widely. The gold standard cross-sectional imaging is multi-detector CT. It is minimally invasive and has sensitivity between 98% and specificity up to 99% for diagnosing acute diverticulitis. Uncomplicated acute diverticulitis may be safely managed as an out-patient in carefully selected patients. Hospitalization is usually necessary for patients with immunosuppression, intolerance to oral intake, signs of severe sepsis, lack of social support and increased comorbidities. The role of antibiotics has been questioned in a number of randomized controlled trials and it is likely that we will see more patients with uncomplicated disease treated with observation in the future

Acute diverticulitis can be further sub classified into complicated and uncomplicated presentations. Uncomplicated diverticulitis is characterized by inflammation limited to colonic wall and surrounding tissue. The management of uncomplicated diverticulitis is changing. Use of antibiotics has been questioned as it appears that antibiotic use can be avoided in select groups of patients. Surgical intervention appears to improve patient’s quality of life. The decision to proceed with surgery is recommended in an individualized manner.

Complicated diverticulitis is defined as diverticulitis associated with localized or generalized perforation, localized or distant abscess, fistula, stricture or obstruction. Abscesses can be treated with percutaneous drainage if the abscess is large enough. The optimal long-term strategy for patients who undergo successful non-operative management of their diverticular abscess remains controversial. There are clearly patients who would do well with an elective colectomy and a subset who could avoid an operation all together however, the challenge is appropriate risk-stratification and patient selection. Management of patients with perforation depends greatly on the presence of feculent or purulent peritonitis, the extent of contamination and hemodynamic status and associated comorbidities. Fistulas and strictures are almost always treated with segmental colectomy.

After an episode of acute diverticulitis, routine colonoscopy has been recommended by a number of societies to exclude the presence of colorectal cancer or presence of alternative diagnosis like ischemic colitis or inflammatory bowel disease for the clinical presentation. Endoscopic evaluation of the colon is normally delayed by about 6 weeks from the acute episode to reduce the risk associated with colonoscopy. Further study has questioned the need for endoscopic evaluation for every patient with acute diverticulitis. Colonoscopy should be routinely performed after complicated diverticulitis cases, when the clinical presentation is atypical or if there are any diagnostic ambiguity, or patient has other indications for colonoscopy like rectal bleeding or is above 50 years of age without recent colonoscopy.

For patients in whom elective colectomy is indicated, it is imperative to identify a wide range of modifiable patient co-morbidities. Every attempt should be made to improve a patient’s chance of successful surgery. This includes optimization of patient risk factors as well as tailoring the surgical approach and perioperative management. A positive outcome depends greatly on thoughtful attention to what makes a complicated patient “complicated”.

Operative management remains complex and depends on multiple factors including patient age, comorbidities, nutritional state, severity of disease, and surgeon preference and experience. Importantly, the status of surgery, elective versus urgent or emergent operation, is pivotal in decision-making, and treatment algorithms are divergent based on the acuteness of surgery. Resection of diseased bowel to healthy proximal colon and rectal margins remains a fundamental principle of treatment although the operative approach may vary.

For acute diverticulitis, a number of surgical approaches exist, including loop colostomy, sigmoidectomy with colostomy (Hartmann’s procedure) and sigmoidectomy with primary colorectal anastomosis. Overall, data suggest that primary anastomosis is preferable to a Hartman’s procedure in select patients with acute diverticulitis. Patients with hemodynamic instability, immunocompromised state, feculent peritonitis, severely edematous or ischemic bowel, or significant malnutrition are poor candidates. The decision to divert after colorectal anastomosis is at the discretion of the operating surgeon. Patient factors including severity of disease, tissue quality, and comorbidities should be considered. Technical considerations for elective cases include appropriate bowel preparation, the use of a laparoscopic approach, the decision to perform a primary anastomosis, and the selected use of ureteral stents.

Management of the patient with an end colostomy after a Hartmann’s procedure for acute diverticulitis can be a challenging clinical scenario. Between 20 – 50% of patients treated with sigmoid resection and an end colostomy after an initial severe bout of diverticulitis will never be reversed to their normal anatomy. The reasons for high rates of permanent colostomies are multifactorial. The debate on the best timing for a colostomy takedown continues. Six months is generally chosen as the safest time to proceed when adhesions may be at their softest allowing for a more favorable dissection. The surgical approach will be a personal decision by the operating surgeon based on his or her experience. Colostomy takedown operations are challenging surgeries. The surgeon should anticipate and appropriately plan for a long and difficult operation. The patient should undergo a full antibiotic bowel preparation. Preoperative planning is critical; review the initial operative note and defining the anatomy prior to reversal. When a complex abdominal wall closure is necessary, consider consultation with a hernia specialist. Open surgery is the preferred surgical approach for the majority of colostomy takedown operations. Finally, consider ureteral catheters, diverting loop ileostomy, and be prepared for all anastomotic options in advance.

Since its inception in the late 90’s, laparoscopic lavage has been recognized as a novel treatment modality in the management of complicated diverticulitis; specifically, Hinchey III (purulent) diverticulitis. Over the last decade, it has been the subject of several randomized controlled trials, retrospective studies, systematic reviews as well as cost-efficiency analyses. Despite being the subject of much debate and controversy, there is a clear role for laparoscopic lavage in the management of acute diverticulitis with the caveat that patient selection is key.

Segmental colitis associated with diverticulitis (SCAD) is an inflammatory condition affecting the colon in segments that are also affected by diverticulosis, namely, the sigmoid colon. While SCAD is considered a separate clinical entity, it is frequently confused with diverticulitis or inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). SCAD affects approximately 1.4% of the general population and 1.15 to 11.4% of those with diverticulosis and most commonly affects those in their 6th decade of life. The exact pathogenesis of SCAD is unknown, but proposed mechanisms include mucosal redundancy and prolapse occurring in diverticular segments, fecal stasis, and localized ischemia. Most case of SCAD resolve with a high-fiber diet and antibiotics, with salicylates reserved for more severe cases. Relapse is uncommon and immunosuppression with steroids is rarely needed. A relapsing clinical course may suggest a diagnosis of IBD and treatment as such should be initiated. Surgery is extremely uncommon and reserved for severe refractory disease.

While sigmoid colon involvement is considered the most common site of colonic diverticulitis in Western countries, diverticular disease can be problematic in other areas of the colon. In Asian countries, right-sided diverticulitis outnumbers the left. This difference seems to be secondary to dietary and genetic factors. Differential diagnosis might be difficult because of similarity with appendicitis. However accurate imaging studies allow a precise preoperative diagnosis and management planning. Transverse colonic diverticulitis is very rare accounting for less than 1% of colonic diverticulitis with a perforation rate that has been estimated to be even more rare. Rectal diverticula are mostly asymptomatic and diagnosed incidentally in the majority of patients and rarely require treatment. Giant colonic diverticula (GCD) is a rare presentation of diverticular disease of the colon and it is defined as an air-filled cystic diverticulum larger than 4 cm in diameter. The pathogenesis of GCD is not well defined.

Overall, the management of diverticular disease depends greatly on patient, disease and surgeon factors. Only by tailoring treatment to the patient in front of us can we achieve optimal outcomes.

Risk of colorectal cancer following CT-verified acute diverticulitis: a nationwide population-based cohort study

AIM

Routine colonoscopy to exclude colorectal cancer (CRC) after CT-verified acute diverticulitis is controversial. This study aimed to compare the incidence of CRC in patients with acute diverticulitis with that in the general population.

METHOD

Patients with an emergency admission for diverticular disease to any Norwegian hospital between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2010 were included through identification in the Norwegian Patient Registry using International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) codes K57.1-9. To estimate the age-specific distribution of CT-verified acute uncomplicated diverticulitis (AUD) and acute complicated diverticulitis (ACD) in this nationwide study population, numbers from the largest Norwegian emergency hospital were used. Patients diagnosed with CRC within 1 year following their admission for acute diverticulitis were detected through cross-matching with the Cancer Registry of Norway. Based on both Norwegian age-specific incidence of CRC and estimated age-specific distribution of CT-verified diverticulitis, standard morbidity ratios (SMRs) were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 7473 patients with emergency admissions for diverticular disease were identified (estimated CT-verified AUD n = 3523, ACD n = 1206); of these 155 patients were diagnosed with CRC within 1 year. Eighty had a CT-verified diverticulitis at index admission [41 AUD (51.3%); 39 ACD (49.7%)]. Compared with the general population, the SMR was 6.6 following CT-verified AUD and 16.3 following ACD, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In the first year after CT-verified acute diverticulitis, especially after ACD, the risk of CRC is higher than in the general population. This probably represents misdiagnosis of CRC as acute diverticulitis. Follow-up colonoscopy should be recommended to all patients admitted with acute diverticulitis.

European Society of Coloproctology: guidelines for the management of diverticular disease of the colon

AIM

The goal of this European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP) guideline project is to give an overview of the existing evidence on the management of diverticular disease, primarily as a guidance to surgeons.

METHODS

The guideline was developed during several working phases including three voting rounds and one consensus meeting. The two project leads (JKS and EA) appointed by the ESCP guideline committee together with one member of the guideline committee (WB) agreed on the methodology, decided on six themes for working groups (WGs) and drafted a list of research questions. Senior WG members, mostly colorectal surgeons within the ESCP, were invited based on publication records and geographical aspects. Other specialties were included in the WGs where relevant. In addition, one trainee or PhD fellow was invited in each WG. All six WGs revised the research questions if necessary, did a literature search, created evidence tables where feasible, and drafted supporting text to each research question and statement. The text and statement proposals from each WG were arranged as one document by the first and last authors before online voting by all authors in two rounds. For the second voting ESCP national representatives were also invited. More than 90% agreement was considered a consensus. The final phrasing of the statements with < 90% agreement was discussed in a consensus meeting at the ESCP annual meeting in Vienna in September 2019. Thereafter, the first and the last author drafted the final text of the guideline and circulated it for final approval and for a third and final online voting of rephrased statements.

RESULTS

This guideline contains 38 evidence based consensus statements on the management of diverticular disease.

CONCLUSION

This international, multidisciplinary guideline provides an up to date summary of the current knowledge of the management of diverticular disease as a guidance for clinicians and patients.

Colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy for follow-up of patients with left-sided diverticulitis

INTRODUCTION

The prevalence of diverticular disease has been increasing in the western world over the last few decades, causing a growing burden on health care systems. This study compared the uses of flexible sigmoidoscopy with colonoscopy as a follow-up investigation for patients diagnosed with acute left-sided diverticulitis and to evaluate the need for using either procedure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study of 327 patients diagnosed with acute diverticulitis was carried out. Of this total, 240 patients with left-sided diverticulitis diagnosed via computed tomography were included. These patients were categorised into two equal groups: the first 120 patients underwent colonoscopy and the second 120 patients underwent flexible sigmoidoscopy.

RESULTS

All colonoscopes and flexible sigmoidoscopes confirmed the computed tomography diagnosis of sigmoid diverticular disease with no major new findings. All colonoscopes and flexible sigmoidoscopes were reported as having no complications, with nine colonoscopes reported as being difficult compared with only three flexible sigmoidoscopes. All biopsies were reported as no malignancy. Full bowel preparation was required in all colonoscopes, compared with no preparation required for flexible sigmoidoscopes.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence to support the routine use of endoscopic evaluation after an episode of left-sided diverticulitis diagnosed on computed tomography if no worrying radiological findings have been reported. This study supports similar findings from other studies and therefore we disagree with The Royal College of Surgeons of England (Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland recommendations) commissioning guide, which advocates routine surveillance of the colon.

Is routine colonoscopy necessary for patients who have an unequivocal computerised tomography diagnosis of acute diverticulitis?

AIMS

To assess the incidence of underlying colorectal malignancy in patients admitted as an emergency with a CT diagnosis of acute diverticulitis and determine the need for routine follow up colonoscopy.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed on all patients who had been admitted to our surgical unit with CT diagnosed diverticulitis from September 2016 to September 2018 (n = 125).

RESULTS

11 patients (8.8%) required emergency resection with no underlying malignancy found. 76 patients (61%) had a follow up colonoscopy after being discharged. 4 patients were found to have an underlying colorectal malignancy, one of them suspected on CT and another an incidentally detected caecal polyp cancer. Therefore 3/87(3.4%) had an unexpected cancer diagnosis and all those in the diseased segment were within complicated diverticulitis.

CONCLUSION

Nowadays, multi-slice CT scanners are so good at giving an accurate assessment of colonic pathology. In our study, 96.6% of the patients with a CT diagnosis of acute diverticulitis had no underlying malignancy in the diseased segment with all the cancers within complicated diverticulitis. With such a low yield of underlying malignancy in uncomplicated diverticulitis, we question the need for routine follow up colonoscopy when there is no CT suspicion of malignancy in these patients.

Colonic diverticular disease

Diverticula are outpouchings of the intestinal wall and are common anatomical alterations detected in the human colon. Colonic diverticulosis (the presence of diverticula in the colon; referred to as diverticulosis) remains asymptomatic in most individuals but ~25% of individuals will develop symptomatic diverticulosis, termed colonic diverticular disease (also known as diverticular disease). Diverticular disease can range in severity from symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease (SUDD) to symptomatic disease with complications such as acute diverticulitis or diverticular haemorrhage. Since the early 2000s, a greater understanding of the pathophysiology of diverticulosis and diverticular disease, which encompasses genetic alterations, chronic low-grade inflammation and gut dysbiosis, has led to improvements in diagnosis and management. Diagnosis of diverticular disease relies on imaging approaches, such as ultrasonography, CT and MRI, as biomarkers alone are insufficient to establish a diagnosis despite their role in determining disease severity and progression as well as in differential diagnosis. Treatments for diverticular disease include dietary fibre, pharmacological treatments such as antibiotics (rifaximin), anti-inflammatory drugs (mesalazine) and probiotics, alone or in combination, and eventually surgery. Despite being effective in treating primary disease, their effectiveness in primary and secondary prevention of complications is still uncertain.