Damage control surgery with abdominal vacuum and delayed bowel reconstruction in patients with perforated diverticulitis Hinchey III/IV

Damage control surgery in non-traumatic abdominal emergencies: prognostic value of SOFA, APACHEII, and Mannheim peritonitis index

This study aimed to analyze the prognostic value of the SOFA, APACHE II, and MPI (Mannheim Peritonitis Index) scores in the indication for Damage Control Surgery (DCS) in non-trauma. Retrospective analysis of patients undergoing DCS between 2014 and 2019. SOFA and APACHE II scores were calculated using parameters preceding DCS, while MPI was based on surgical descriptions. Statistical analysis: Qualitative variables were compared using the Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test, and quantitative variables using Pearson's correlation coefficient. The Student's T test was employed for mean comparisons. The sample comprised 104 patients (59 males), with a median age of 63.5 years, of whom 52 (50%) were ASA IV. Operative findings leading to DCS included peritonitis (54; 51.9%), intestinal ischemia (39; 37.5%), inability to close the abdomen (8; 7.6%), and bleeding (3; 2.9%). The mortality rate was 75% (78/104). Thirty patients (28.8%) died after DCS; the remainder underwent one (35; 33.6%), two (21; 20.2%); three (8; 7.7%), and four or more (10;9.7%) revision procedures. The median lengths of ICU and hospital stays were 12.5 and 20.5 days, respectively. The median score values were as follows: SOFA: 12 (0-38), APACHE II: 25 (2-47), and MPI: 26 (8-43). Besides ASA classification (p = 0.03), mortality risk was influenced by: age (≤ 65 years vs. > 65 years; p = 0.04), SOFA (≤ 10 vs. > 10; p = 0.03), APACHE II (≤ 25 vs. > 25; p = 0.04), and MPI (≤ 25 vs. > 25; p = 0.003). The SOFA, APACHE II, and MPI scores proved to be valuable tools in the prognostic assessment of patients undergoing DCS in non-traumatic abdominal emergencies.

The results of rapid source control laparotomy or open abdomen for acute diverticulitis

INTRODUCTION

Rapid source control laparotomy (RSCL) for the management of non-traumatic intra-abdominal emergencies has increased over the past 25 years when it was advocated for trauma patients. Little data, however, support its widespread use. We hypothesize that the patients with RSCL will have poorer outcomes than those treated with primary fascial closure (PFC).

METHODS

Patients operated for acute diverticulitis from 2014 to 2016 using The American College of Surgeons sponsored National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) data were reviewed. Two groups were identified: PFC, patients with their closed fascia but skin left open (PFC) and RSCL, patients with their left open fascia after the initial operation. The primary outcome of the study was 30-day mortality, with secondary analyses evaluating complications, discharge location and length of stay. Univariate analysis was initially performed followed by propensity score matching.

RESULTS

A total of 460 patients were surgically treated for Hinchey IV diverticulitis of whom 101 (21.9%) had RSCL. The length of stay of the RSCL patients was significantly longer (15 versus 12 days, p, 0.02) than patients in the PFC group. Similarly, the discharge destination for the PFC group was twice as likely to be discharged home as the RSCL group.

CONCLUSION

RSCL for acute diverticulitis is a widely used but is associated with prolonged hospitalizations resulting in high rates of discharge to skilled nursing or rehabilitation facilities. Its routine use for diverticulitis should be limited.

The WSES/SICG/ACOI/SICUT/AcEMC/SIFIPAC guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of acute left colonic diverticulitis in the elderly

Acute left colonic diverticulitis (ALCD) in the elderly presents with unique epidemiological features when compared with younger patients. The clinical presentation is more nuanced in the elderly population, having higher in-hospital and postoperative mortality. Furthermore, geriatric comorbidities are a risk factor for complicated diverticulitis. Finally, elderly patients have a lower risk of recurrent episodes and, in case of recurrence, a lower probability of requiring urgent surgery than younger patients. The aim of the present work is to study age-related factors that may support a unique approach to the diagnosis and treatment of this problem in the elderly when compared with the WSES guidelines for the management of acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis. During the 1° Pisa Workshop of Acute Care & Trauma Surgery held in Pisa (Italy) in September 2019, with the collaboration of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), the Italian Society of Geriatric Surgery (SICG), the Italian Hospital Surgeons Association (ACOI), the Italian Emergency Surgery and Trauma Association (SICUT), the Academy of Emergency Medicine and Care (AcEMC) and the Italian Society of Surgical Pathophysiology (SIFIPAC), three panel members presented a number of statements developed for each of the four themes regarding the diagnosis and management of ALCD in older patients, formulated according to the GRADE approach, at a Consensus Conference where a panel of experts participated. The statements were subsequently debated, revised, and finally approved by the Consensus Conference attendees. The current paper is a summary report of the definitive guidelines statements on each of the following topics: diagnosis, management, surgical technique and antibiotic therapy.

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.

Evolution of damage control surgery in non-traumatic abdominal pathology: a light in the darkness

Damage control surgery is based on temporal control of the injury, physiologic recovery and posterior deferred definitive management. This strategy began in the 1980s and became a formal concept in 1993. It has proven to be a strategy that reduces mortality in severely injured trauma patients. Nevertheless, the concept of damage control in non-traumatic abdominal pathology remains controversial. This article aims to gather historical experiences in damage control surgery performed in non-traumatic abdominal emergency pathology patients and present a novel management algorithm. This strategy could be a surgical option to treat hemodynamically unstable patients in catastrophic scenarios such as hemorrhagic and septic shock caused by peritonitis, pancreatitis, acute mesenteric ischemia, among others. Therefore, damage control surgery is light amid better short- and long-term results.

Rate of stoma formation following damage-control surgery for severe intra-abdominal sepsis: a single-centre consecutive case series

BACKGROUND

Severe intra-abdominal sepsis (IAS) is associated with high mortality and stoma rates. A two-stage approach with initial damage-control surgery (DCS) and subsequent reconstruction might decrease stoma and mortality rates but requires standardization.

METHODS

A standardized two-stage damage-control algorithm for IAS was implemented in April 2016 and applied systematically.

RESULTS

Some 203 consecutive patients (median age 70 years, 62 per cent ASA score greater than 3) had DCS for severe IAS. Median operation time was 82 minutes, 60 per cent performed during night-time. Median intraoperative noradrenaline doses were 20 (i.q.r. 26) µg/min and blood gas analysis (ABG) was abnormal (metabolic acidosis) in 90 per cent of patients. The second-stage operation allowed definitive surgery in 76 per cent of patients, 24 per cent had up to four re-DCSs until definitive surgery. The in-hospital mortality rate was 26 per cent. At hospital discharge, 65 per cent of patients were stoma free. Risk factors for in-hospital death were noradrenaline (odds ratio 4.25 (95 per cent c.i. 1.72 to 12.83)), abnormal ABG (pH: odds ratio 2.72 (1.24 to 6.65); lactate: odds ratio 6.77 (3.20 to 15.78)), male gender (odds ratio 2.40 (1.24 to 4.85)), ASA score greater than 3 (odds ratio 5.75 (2.58 to 14.68)), mesenteric ischaemia (odds ratio 3.27 (1.71 to 6.46)) and type of resection (odds ratio 2.95 (1.24 to 8.21)). Risk factors for stoma at discharge were ASA score greater than 3 (odds ratio 2.76 (95 per cent c.i. 1.38 to 5.73)), type of resection (odds ratio 30.91 (6.29 to 559.3)) and longer operation time (odds ratio 2.441 (1.22 to 5.06)).

CONCLUSION

Initial DCS followed by secondary reconstruction of bowel continuity for IAS within 48 hours in a tertiary teaching hospital was feasible and safe, following a clear algorithm.

WSES/GAIS/SIS-E/WSIS/AAST global clinical pathways for patients with intra-abdominal infections

Intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) are common surgical emergencies and have been reported as major contributors to non-trauma deaths in hospitals worldwide. The cornerstones of effective treatment of IAIs include early recognition, adequate source control, appropriate antimicrobial therapy, and prompt physiologic stabilization using a critical care environment, combined with an optimal surgical approach. Together, the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), the Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery (GAIS), the Surgical Infection Society-Europe (SIS-E), the World Surgical Infection Society (WSIS), and the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) have jointly completed an international multi-society document in order to facilitate clinical management of patients with IAIs worldwide building evidence-based clinical pathways for the most common IAIs. An extensive non-systematic review was conducted using the PubMed and MEDLINE databases, limited to the English language. The resulting information was shared by an international task force from 46 countries with different clinical backgrounds. The aim of the document is to promote global standards of care in IAIs providing guidance to clinicians by describing reasonable approaches to the management of IAIs.

Age Is But a Number: Damage Control Surgery Outcomes in Geriatric Emergency General Surgery

BACKGROUND

Damage control surgery (DCS) with temporary abdominal closure (TAC) is increasingly utilized in emergency general surgery (EGS). As the population ages, more geriatric patients (GP) are undergoing EGS operations. Concern exists for GP's ability to tolerate DCS. We hypothesize that DCS in GP does not increase morbidity or mortality and has similar rates of primary closure compared to non-geriatric patients (NGP).

METHODS

A retrospective chart review from 2014-2020 was conducted on all non-trauma EGS patients who underwent DCS with TAC. Demographics, admission lab values, fluid amounts, length of stay (LOS), timing of closure, post-operative complications and mortality were collected. GP were compared to NGP and results were analyzed using Chi square and Wilcox signed rank test.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight patients (n = 50, <65 y; n = 48, ≥65 y) met inclusion criteria. There was no significant difference in median number of operations (3 versus 2), time to primary closure (2.5 versus 3 d), hospital LOS (19 versus 17.5 d), ICU LOS (11 versus 8 d), rate of primary closure (66% versus 56%), post op ileus (44% versus 48%), abscess (14% versus 10%), need for surgery after closure (32% versus 19%), anastomotic dehiscence (16% versus 6%), or mortality (34% versus 42%). Average time until take back after index procedure did not vary significantly between young and elderly group (45.8 versus 38.5 h; P = 0.89). GP were more likely to have hypertension (83% versus 50%; P ≤ 0.05), atrial fibrillation (25% versus 4%; P ≤ 0.05) and lower median heart rate compared to NGP (90 versus 103; P ≤ 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

DCS with TAC in geriatric EGS patients achieves similar outcomes and mortality to younger patients. Indication, not age, should factor into the decision to perform DCS.

Lessons Learned in 11 Years of Experience With Open Abdomen Treatment With Negative-Pressure Therapy for Various Abdominal Emergencies

Introduction: Open abdomen (OA) treatment with negative-pressure therapy (NPT) was initiated for perforated diverticulitis and subsequently extended to other abdominal emergencies. The aim of this retrospective study was to analyze the indications, procedures, duration of NPT, and the outcomes of all our patients. Methods: All consecutive patients treated with intra-abdominal NPT from January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Results: A total of 438 patients (44% females) with a median (range) age of 66 (12-94) years, BMI of 25 (14-48) kg/m², and ASA class I, II, III, and IV scores of 36 (13%), 239 (55%), 95 (22%), and 3(1%), respectively, were treated with NPT. The indication for surgery was primary bowel perforation in 163 (37%), mesenteric ischemia in 53 (12%), anastomotic leakage in 53 (12%), ileus in 53 (12%), postoperative bowel perforation/leakage in 32 (7%), abdominal compartment in 15 (3%), pancreatic fistula in 13 (3%), gastric perforation in 13 (3%), secondary peritonitis in 11 (3%), burst abdomen in nine (2%), biliary leakage in eight (2%), and other in 15 (3%) patients. A damage control operation without reconstruction in the initial procedure was performed in 164 (37%) patients. The duration of hospital and intensive care stay were, median (range), 28 (0-278) and 4 (0-214) days. The median (range) duration of operation was 109 (22-433) min and of NPT was 3(0-33) days. A trend to shorter duration of NPT was observed over time and in the colonic perforation group. The mean operating time was shorter when only blind ends were left in situ, namely 110 vs. 133 min (p = 0.006). The mortality rates were 14% at 30 days, 21% at 90 days, and 31% at 1 year. An entero-atmospheric fistula was observed in five (1%) cases, most recently in 2014. Direct fascia closure was possible in 417 (95%) patients at the end of NPT, but least often (67%, p = 0.00) in patients with burst abdomen. During follow-up, hernia repair was observed in 52 (24%) of the surviving patients. Conclusion: Open abdomen treatment with NPT is a promising concept for various abdominal emergencies, especially when treated outside normal working hours. A low rate of entero-atmospheric fistula formation and a high rate of direct fascia closure were achieved with dynamic approximation of the fascia edges. The authors recommend an early-in and early-out strategy as the prolongation of NPT by more than 1 week ends up in a frozen abdomen and does not improve abdominal sepsis.

The role of damage control surgery in the treatment of perforated colonic diverticulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Damage control surgery (DCS) is the classic approach to manage severe trauma and has recently also been considered an appropriate approach to the treatment of critically ill patients with severe intra-abdominal sepsis. The purpose of the present review is to evaluate the outcomes following DCS for Hinchey II-IV complicated acute diverticulitis (CAD).

METHODS

A comprehensive systematic search was undertaken to identify all randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies, irrespectively of their size, publication status, and language. Adults who have undergone DCS for CAD Hinchey II, III, or IV were included in this review. DCS is compared with the immediate and definitive surgical treatment in the form of HP, colonic resection, and primary anastomosis (RPA) with or without covering stoma or laparoscopic lavage. We searched the following electronic databases: PubMed MEDLINE, Scopus, and ISI Web of Knowledge. The protocol of this systematic review and meta-analysis was published on Prospero (CRD42020144953).

RESULTS

Nine studies with 318 patients, undergoing DCS, were included. The presence of septic shock at the presentation in the emergency department was heterogeneous, and the weighted mean rate of septic shock across the studies was shown to be 35.1% [95% CI 8.4 to 78.6%]. The majority of the patients had Hinchey III (68.3%) disease. The remainder had either Hinchey IV (28.9%) or Hinchey II (2.8%). Phase I is similarly described in most of the studies as lavage, limited resection with closed blind colonic ends. In a few studies, resection and anastomosis (9.1%) or suture of the perforation site (0.9%) were performed in phase I of DCS. In those patients who underwent DCS, the most common method of temporary abdominal closure (TAC) was the negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) (97.8%). The RPA was performed in 62.1% [95% CI 40.8 to 83.3%] and the 22.7% [95% CI 15.1 to 30.3%]: 12.8% during phase I and 87.2% during phase III. A covering ileostomy was performed in 6.9% [95% CI 1.5 to 12.2%]. In patients with RPA, the overall leak was 7.3% [95% CI 4.3 to 10.4%] and the major anastomotic leaks were 4.7% [95% CI 2.0 to 7.4%]; the rate of postoperative mortality was estimated to be 9.2% [95% CI 6.0 to 12.4%].

CONCLUSIONS

The present meta-analysis revealed an approximately 62.1% weighted rate of achieving GI continuity with the DCS approach to generalized peritonitis in Hinchey III and IV with major leaks of 4.7% and overall mortality of 9.2%. Despite the promising results, we are aware of the limitations related to the significant heterogeneity of inclusion criteria. Importantly, the low rate of reported septic shock may point toward selection bias. Further studies are needed to evaluate the clinical advantages and cost-effectiveness of the DCS approach.

Damage control strategy in perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis

Background

The best treatment for perforated colonic diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis is still under debate. Concurrent strategies are resection with primary anastomosis (PRA) with or without diverting ileostomy (DI), Hartmann’s procedure (HP), laparoscopic lavage (LL) and damage control surgery (DCS). This review intends to systematically analyze the current literature on DCS.

Methods

DCS consists of two stages. Emergency surgery: limited resection of the diseased colon, oral and aboral closure, lavage, vacuum-assisted abdominal closure. Second look surgery after 24–48 h: definite reconstruction with colorectal anastomosis (−/ + DI) or HP after adequate resuscitation. The review was conducted in accordance to the PRISMA-P Statement. PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane central register of controlled trials (CENTRAL) and EMBASE were searched using the following term: (Damage control surgery) AND (Diverticulitis OR Diverticulum OR Peritonitis).

Results

Eight retrospective studies including 256 patients met the inclusion criteria. No randomized trial was available. 67% of the included patients had purulent, 30% feculent peritonitis. In 3% Hinchey stage II diverticulitis was found. In 49% the Mannheim peritonitis index (MPI) was greater than 26. Colorectal anastomosis was constructed during the course of the second surgery in 73%. In 15% of the latter DI was applied. The remaining 27% received HP. Postoperative mortality was 9%, morbidity 31% respectively. The anastomotic leak rate was 13%. 55% of patients were discharged without a stoma.

Conclusion

DCS is a safe technique for the treatment of acute perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis, allowing a high rate of colorectal anastomosis and stoma-free hospital discharge in more than half of the patients.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12893-021-01130-5.

The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland consensus guidelines in emergency colorectal surgery

AIM

There is a requirement for an expansive and up to date review of the management of emergency colorectal conditions seen in adults. The primary objective is to provide detailed evidence-based guidelines for the target audience of general and colorectal surgeons who are responsible for an adult population and who practise in Great Britain and Ireland.

METHODS

Surgeons who are elected members of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland Emergency Surgery Subcommittee were invited to contribute various sections to the guidelines. They were directed to produce a pathology-based document using literature searches that were systematic, comprehensible, transparent and reproducible. Levels of evidence were graded. Each author was asked to provide a set of recommendations which were evidence-based and unambiguous. These recommendations were submitted to the whole guideline group and scored. They were then refined and submitted to a second vote. Only those that achieved >80% consensus at level 5 (strongly agree) or level 4 (agree) after two votes were included in the guidelines.

RESULTS

All aspects of care (excluding abdominal trauma) for emergency colorectal conditions have been included along with 122 recommendations for management.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines provide an up to date and evidence-based summary of the current surgical knowledge in the management of emergency colorectal conditions and should serve as practical text for clinicians managing colorectal conditions in the emergency setting.

Cytokine clearance in serum and peritoneal fluid of patients undergoing damage control surgery with abdominal negative pressure therapy for abdominal sepsis

Objectives

Open abdomen technique with negative pressure therapy (NPT) is widely used in patients with severe abdominal sepsis. The aim of this study was to evaluate cytokine clearance in serum and peritoneal fluid during NPT.

Methods

This prospective pilot study included six patients with severe abdominal sepsis requiring discontinuity resection and NPT for 48 h followed by planned reoperation. Cytokines (IL6, IL8, IL10, TNFalpha, and IL1beta) were measured in the serum and peritoneal fluid during index operation, on postoperative days 0, 1, and 2.

Results

Concentrations of cytokines in peritoneal fluid were higher than in serum. IL10 showed a clearance both in serum (to 16.6%, p=0.019) and peritoneal fluid (to 40.9%, p=0.014). IL6 cleared only in serum (to 24.7%, p=0.001) with persistently high levels in peritoneal fluid. IL8 remained high in both serum and peritoneal fluid. TNFalpha and IL1beta were both low in serum with wide range of high peritoneal concentrations. Only TNFalpha in peritoneal fluid showed significant differences between patients with ischemia vs. perforation (p=0.006).

Conclusions

The present pilot study suggests that cytokines display distinct patterns of clearance or persistence in the peritoneal fluid and serum over the first 48 h of treatment in severe abdominal sepsis with NPT.

Damage control surgery for the treatment of perforated acute colonic diverticulitis: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Acute colonic diverticulitis (ACD) complications arise in approximately 8% to 35% patients and the most common ones are represented by phlegmon or abscess, followed by perforation, peritonitis, obstruction, and fistula. In accordance with current guidelines, patients affected by generalized peritonitis should undergo emergency surgery. However, decisions on whether and when to operate ACD patients remain a substantially debated topic while algorithm for the best treatment has not yet been determined. Damage control surgery (DCS) represents a well-established method in treating critically ill patients with traumatic abdomen injuries. At present, such surgical approach is also finding application in non-traumatic emergencies such as perforated ACD. Thanks to a thorough systematic review of the literature, we aimed at achieving deeper knowledge of both indications and short- and long-term outcomes related to DCS in perforated ACD.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes (PRISMA) guidelines. Pubmed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were used to search all related literature.

RESULTS

The 8 included articles covered an approximately 13 years study period (2006-2018), with a total 359 patient population. At presentation, most patients showed III and IV American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (81.6%) while having Hinchey III perforated ACD (69.9%). Most patients received a limited resection plus vacuum-assisted closure at first-look while about half entire population underwent primary resection anastomosis (PRA) at a second-look. Overall morbidity rate, 30-day mortality rate and overall mortality rate at follow-up were between 23% and 74%, 0% and 20%, 7% and 33%, respectively. Patients had a 100% definitive abdominal wall closure rate and a definitive stoma rate at follow-up ranging between 0% and 33%.

CONCLUSION

DCS application to ACD patients seems to offer good outcomes with a lower percentage of patients with definitive ostomy, if compared to Hartmann's procedure. However, correct definition of DCS eligible patients is paramount in avoiding overtreatment. In accordance to 2016 WSES (World Society of Emergency Surgery) Guidelines, DCS remains an effective surgical strategy in critically ill patients affected by sepsis/septic shock and hemodynamical unstability.

Factors influencing the fascial closure rate after open abdomen treatment: Results from the European Hernia Society (EuraHS) Registry : Surgical technique matters

Purpose

Definitive fascial closure is an essential treatment objective after open abdomen treatment and mitigates morbidity and mortality. There is a paucity of evidence on factors that promote or prevent definitive fascial closure.

Methods

A multi-center multivariable analysis of data from the Open Abdomen Route of the European Hernia Society included all cases between 1 May 2015 and 31 December 2019. Different treatment elements, i.e. the use of a visceral protective layer, negative-pressure wound therapy and dynamic closure techniques, as well as patient characteristics were included in the multivariable analysis. The study was registered in the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform via the German Registry for Clinical Trials (DRK00021719).

Results

Data were included from 630 patients from eleven surgical departments in six European countries. Indications for OAT were peritonitis (46%), abdominal compartment syndrome (20.5%), burst abdomen (11.3%), abdominal trauma (9%), and other conditions (13.2%). The overall definitive fascial closure rate was 57.5% in the intention-to-treat analysis and 71% in the per-protocol analysis. The multivariable analysis showed a positive correlation of negative-pressure wound therapy (odds ratio: 2.496, p < 0.001) and dynamic closure techniques (odds ratio: 2.687, p < 0.001) with fascial closure and a negative correlation of intra-abdominal contamination (odds ratio: 0.630, p = 0.029) and the number of surgical procedures before OAT (odds ratio: 0.740, p = 0.005) with DFC.

Conclusion

The clinical course and prognosis of open abdomen treatment can significantly be improved by the use of treatment elements such as negative-pressure wound therapy and dynamic closure techniques, which are associated with definitive fascial closure.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s10029-020-02336-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Prospectively Randomized Controlled Trial on Damage Control Surgery for Perforated Diverticulitis with Generalized Peritonitis

Introduction

Damage control surgery (DCS) with abdominal negative pressure therapy and delayed anastomosis creation in patients with perforated diverticulitis and generalized peritonitis was established at our Institution in 2006 and has been published. The concept was adopted in other hospitals and published as a case series. This is the first prospectively controlled randomized study comparing DCS and conventional treatment (Group C) in this setting.

Methods

All consecutive patients from 2013 to 2018 with indication for surgery were screened and randomized to Group DCS or Group C. The primary outcome was the rate of reconstructed bowel at discharge and at 6 month. Informed consent was obtained. The trial was approved by the local ethics committee and registered at CinicalTrials.gov: NCT04034407.

Results

A total of 56 patients were screened; 41 patients gave informed consent to participate and ultimately 21 patients (9 female) with intraoperatively confirmed Hinchey III (n = 14, 67%) or IV (n = 7, 33%), and a median (range) age of 66 (42–92), Mannheim Peritonitis Index of 25 (12–37) and Charlson Comorbidity Index of 3 (0–10) were intraoperatively randomized and treated as Group DCS (n = 13) or Group C (n = 8). Per protocol analysis: A primary anastomosis without ileostomy (PA) was performed in 92% (11/12) patients in Group DCS at the second-look operation, one patient died before second look, and one underwent a Hartmann procedure (HP). In Group C 63% (5/8) patients received a PA and 38% (3/8) patients a HP. Two patients in Group C, but none in Group DCS experienced anastomotic leakage (AI). ICU and hospital stay was median (range) 2 (1–10) and 17.5 (12–43) in DCS and 2 (1–62) and 22 (13–65) days in group C. In Group DCS 8% (1/12) patients was discharged with a stoma versus 57% (4/7) in Group C (p = 0.038, n.s., α = 0.025); one patient died before discharge. The odds ratio (95% confidence interval) for discharge with a stoma is 0.068 (0.005–0.861). Intent to treat analysis: A PA was performed in 90% (9/10) of patients randomized to DCS, one patient died before the second look, and one patient received a HP. In group C, 70% (7/10) were treated with PA and 30% (3/10) with HP. 29% (2/7) experienced AI treated with protective ileostomy. In group DCS, 9% (1/11) were discharged with a stoma versus 40% (4/10) in group C (p = 0.14, n.s.). The odds ratio for discharge with a stoma is 0.139 (0.012–1.608).

Conclusion

This is the first prospectively randomized controlled study showing that damage control surgery in perforated diverticulitis Hinchey III and IV enhances reconstruction of bowel continuity and can reduce the stoma rate at discharge.

La laparotomía de control de daños en pacientes sin trauma reduce el número de ostomías

Introducción. El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar si la laparotomía de control de daños con ligadura y reconstrucción intestinal diferida, en pacientes con peritonitis secundaria a compromiso de víscera hueca, reduce el número de ostomías. Métodos. Se incluyeron todos los pacientes menores de 18 años de edad que ingresaron a la clínica con sospecha de peritonitis de origen no traumático y que se sometieron a laparotomía entre enero del 2003 y diciembre del 2018. Se evaluaron las características sociodemográficas, comorbilidades, escalas de gravedad fisiológica, técnicas de reconstrucción intestinal y resultados clínicos. Resultados. Se incluyeron 306 pacientes, distribuidos en tres grupos: 1) 120 (39,2 %) sometidos a resección y anastomosis, 2) 87 (28,4 %) sometidos a ostomía, y 3) 99 (32,3 %) sometidos inicialmente a ligadura intestinal. Los pacientes sometidos a ligadura intestinal presentaron mayor compromiso fisiológico al ingreso a la unidad de cuidado intensivo, con puntuación APACHE II: 14 (rango intercuartílico, RIC=10-18) en el grupo 1, 13 (RIC=11-18) en el grupo 2, y 18 (RIC=14-24) en el grupo 3 (p<0,01). Sin embargo, más de la mitad se reconstruyeron en la siguiente laparotomía: anastomosis mecánica (16/99; 16,1 %), anastomosis manual (49/99; 49,5 %), ostomía (34/99; 34,3 %). Además, estos pacientes sometidos a ligadura intestinal tuvieron un número significativamente mayor de nuevas laparotomías, y de días de asistencia respiratoria mecánica, de estancia en la unidad de cuidado intensivo y de estancia hospitalaria. No hubo diferencias estadísticamente significativas en la mortalidad entre los subgrupos: (grupo 1=19 (15,8 %), grupo 2=16 (18,4 %), grupo 3=19 (19,2 %) (p=0,79). Conclusión. En este estudio, se logró evitar la ostomía como técnica de reconstrucción definitiva en más de la mitad de los pacientes con peritonitis que se sometieron a laparotomía de control de daños con ligadura intestinal.

Acute diverticulitis: old challenge, current trends, open questions

Acute diverticulitis (AD) is an increasing issue for health systems worldwide. As accuracy of clinical symptoms and laboratory examinations is poor, a pivotal role in preoperative diagnosis and severity assessment is played by CT scan. Several new classifications trying to adapt the intraoperative Hinchey's classification to preoperative CT findings have been proposed, but none really entered clinical practice. Treatment of early AD is mostly conservative (antibiotics) and may be administered in outpatients in selected cases. Larger abscesses (exceeding 3 to 5 cm) need percutaneous drainage, while management of stages 3 (purulent peritonitis) and 4 (fecal peritonitis) is difficult to standardize, as various approaches are nowadays suggested. Three situations are identified: situation A, stage 3 in stable/healthy patients, where various options are available, including conservative management, lavage/drainage and primary resection/anastomosis w/without protective stoma; situation B, stage 3 in unstable and/or unhealthy patients, and stage 4 in stable/healthy patients, where stoma-protected primary resection/anastomosis or Hartmann procedure should be performed; situation C, stage 4 in unstable and/or unhealthy patients, where Hartmann procedure or damage control surgery (resection without any anastomosis/stoma) are suggested. Late, elective sigmoid resection is less and less performed, as a new trend towards a patient-tailored management is spreading.

2020 update of the WSES guidelines for the management of acute colonic diverticulitis in the emergency setting

Acute colonic diverticulitis is one of the most common clinical conditions encountered by surgeons in the acute setting. An international multidisciplinary panel of experts from the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) updated its guidelines for management of acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis (ALCD) according to the most recent available literature. The update includes recent changes introduced in the management of ALCD. The new update has been further integrated with advances in acute right-sided colonic diverticulitis (ARCD) that is more common than ALCD in select regions of the world.

Open abdomen closure methods for severe abdominal sepsis: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

The open abdomen (OA) procedure as part of damage control surgery represents a significant surgical advance in severe intra-abdominal infections. Major techniques used for OA are negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) and non-NPWT. The aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate the effects of different abdominal closure methods and their outcomes in patients presenting with abdominal sepsis treated with OA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed clinical outcomes of patients affected by severe intra-abdominal sepsis treated with OA. Demographic features, mortality prediction score, abdominal closure methods, length of hospital stay, complications and mortality rates of patients were determined and compared.

RESULTS

This study included 106 patients, of whom 77 underwent OA with NPWT and 29 with non-NPWT. OA duration was longer in NPWT patients (p = 0.007). In-hospital mortality rates in NPWT and in non-NPWT patients were 40.3% and 51.7%, respectively (p = 0.126), with an overall 30-day mortality rate of 18.2% and 51.7%, respectively (p = 0.0002). After emergency colorectal surgery, patients who underwent OA with NPWT had a lower rate of colostomy (p = 0.025).

CONCLUSIONS

NPWT is the best temporary abdominal closure technique to decrease mortality and colostomy rates in patients managed with OA for severe intra-abdominal infections.

Single-Center Retrospective Analysis of the Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Staged Peritoneal Lavage for Secondary Peritonitis

Background

Secondary peritonitis is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Data on the effect of staged re-laparotomy or re-laparoscopy as a surgical option in the management of abdominal sepsis due to secondary peritonitis are limited and conflicting. Herein, we report the outcomes of patients undergoing staged peritoneal lavage (SPL) for secondary peritonitis in our department.

Methods

This is a single-center retrospective analysis of the data of patients undergoing SPL for secondary peritonitis. SPL was performed via either re-laparotomy or re-laparoscopy. The simplified acute physiology score (SAPS II) was calculated at the time of the initial operation and for each SPL. The end points of interest included: the evolution of sepsis characterized by the SAPS II score, the mortality rate and the rate of definitive abdominal wall closure.

Results

The data of 74 patients with a median age of 73 years requiring at least one SPL between 2012 and 2019 were analyzed. The median number of SPL performed was three (range 1–12). A sequential drop of SAPS II score from 41 at the initial procedure to 32 at the third SPL was documented. The overall mortality rate was 16.2%, definitive abdominal closure was achieved in all surviving patients and the median length of stay was 17.5d

Conclusion

Staged re-laparotomy or re-laparoscopy with peritoneal lavage may reduce the severity of peritonitis and reduce the risk of mortality in patients with abdominal sepsis. Maintaining the abdominal wall under constant retraction using a rigid mesh while creating an open abdomen is a crucial step in achieving definite abdominal wall closure. Thus, staged peritoneal lavage may be a good surgical option for selected patients with peritonitis.

Emergency Surgery in Acute Diverticulitis: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Acute diverticulitis is a common disease with public health significance. Many studies with a high level of evidence have been published recently on the surgical management of acute diverticulitis.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to define the accurate surgical management of acute diverticulitis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were sources used.

STUDY SELECTION

One reviewer conducted a systematic study with combinations of key words for the disease and the surgical procedure. Additional studies were searched in the reference lists of all included articles. The results of the systematic review were submitted to a working group composed of 13 practitioners. All of the conclusions were obtained by full consensus and validated by an external committee.

INTERVENTIONS

The interventions assessed were laparoscopic peritoneal lavage, primary resection with anastomosis with or without ileostomy, and the Hartmann procedure, with either a laparoscopic or an open approach.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Morbidity, mortality, long-term stoma rates, and quality of life were measured.

RESULTS

Seventy-one articles were included. Five guidelines were retrieved, along with 4 meta-analyses, 14 systematic reviews, and 5 randomized controlled trials that generated 8 publications, all with a low risk of bias, except for blinding. Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage showed concerning results of deep abscesses and unplanned reoperations. Studies on Hinchey III/IV diverticulitis showed similar morbidity and mortality. A reduced length of stay with Hartmann procedure compared with primary resection with anastomosis was reported in the short term, and in the long term, more definite stoma along with poorer quality of life was reported with Hartmann procedure. No high-quality data were found to support the laparoscopic approach.

LIMITATIONS

Trials specifically assessing Hinchey IV diverticulitis have not yet been completed.

CONCLUSIONS

High-quality studies showed that laparoscopic peritoneal lavage was associated with an increased morbidity and that Hartmann procedure was associated with poorer long-term outcomes than primary resection with anastomosis with ileostomy, but Hartmann procedure is still acceptable, especially in high-risk patients.

Are the Benefits of Rapid Source Control Laparotomy Realized after Acute Colonic Perforation?

Background: The indications for damage-control laparotomy (DCL) in patients with intra-abdominal injuries have evolved from its use in trauma patients with hypothermia, coagulopathy, and acidosis to use in general surgical patients with acute intestinal perforations. Whereas some patients may be acidotic, most are not hypothermic or afflicted with coagulopathies. Recent study suggests the benefits to patients of rapid source-control laparotomy (RSCL) are not realized in patients with acute abdominal emergencies. Methods: Three years of data (2014-2016) from The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACSNSQIP) were assessed. The patient populations were separated into RSCL patients who had their fascia left open after the initial source control operation and those who had primary fascial closure (PFC). The principal outcome of interest in this study was death within thirty days. A secondary analysis was performed evaluating complications and length of stay. Results: Of the 1,381 patients who qualified for the study, 396 (28.7%) were managed with RSCL and the remaining 985 patients had PFC. After a univariable analysis, propensity score matching was performed. The median hospital length of stay was 20 days (95% confidence interval [CI] 18-22) versus 14 (95% CI 13-16; p < 0.001) in RSCL and PFC, respectively. A larger number of patients having RSCL went to a rehabilitation facility than those having PFC (18.7%; versus 11.2%; p = 0.014). The 30-day mortality rate in patients in the RSCL group was significantly higher than in the PFC group ((32.6% versus 16.9%; p < 0.001). Conclusion: These data provide strong evidence that RSCL may not be beneficial for routine use in perforated colon surgery.

Damage control surgery for perforated diverticulitis: a two center experience with two different abdominal negative pressure therapy devices

Purpose: The adoption of abdominal negative pressure therapy (NPT) during urgent laparotomy has shown to be helpful to control abdominal sepsis, improve morbidity and increase anastomosis rate. The aim of this study was to compare feasibility and outcome of two different abdominal negative pressure devices. Methods: The retrospective two-center study includes 78 consecutive patients with perforated sigmoid diverticulitis, who underwent urgent laparotomy using the ABThera™ (KCI, Wien, Austria) abdominal NPT device (Group A, n = 51) or the Suprasorb® CNP (Lohmann & Rauscher, Wien, Austria) abdominal NPT device (Group B, n = 27). Results: The mean length of abdominal NPT was 3.6 days in Group A and 2.8 days in Group B. Revisional surgery after closure of the abdomen was necessary due to surgical site infections, fascial dehiscence or anastomotic insufficiency in 25% and 29%, respectively. NPT-associated complications like fistula formation or acute bleeding were not observed. Mortality was 15% (Group A) and 7% (Group B). Conclusion: Despite the good feasibility and the well-known positive effect of abdominal NPT, perforated diverticulitis is still associated with high morbidity. However, the analysis did not show significant differences between the two abdominal NPT devices.

Advantages of Damage Control Strategy With Abdominal Negative Pressure and Instillation in Patients With Diffuse Peritonitis From Perforated Diverticular Disease

Purpose. To evaluate the results of Damage Control Strategy (DCS) in the treatment of generalized peritonitis from perforated diverticular disease in patients with preoperative severe systemic diseases. Methods. All the patients with diffuse peritonitis (Hinchey 3 and 4) and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score ≥3 were included and underwent DCS consisting of a 2-step procedure. The first was peritoneal lavage, perforated colon-stapled resection, and temporary abdominal closure with negative pressure wound therapy combined with instillation. The second step, 48 hours later, included the possibility of restoring intestinal continuity basing on local and general patients' conditions. Results. Thirty patients (18 [60%] women and 12 [40%] men, median age 68.5 [range = 35-84] years) were included (18 [60%] ASA III, 11 [36.7%] ASA IV, and 1 [0.03%] ASA V). Seven patients (23.3%) showed sepsis and 1 (3.33%) septic shock. At second surgery, 24 patients (80%) received a colorectal anastomosis and 6 patients (20%) underwent a Hartmann's procedure. Median hospital stay was 18 days (range = 12-62). Postoperative morbidity rate was 23.3% (7/30) and included 1 anastomotic leak treated with Hartmann's procedure. Consequently, at discharge from hospital, 23 patients (76.6%) were free of stoma. Primary fascial closure was possible in all patients. Conclusions. DCS with temporary abdominal closure by negative pressure wound therapy combined with instillation in patients with diffuse peritonitis from complicated diverticulitis could represent a feasible surgical option both in hemodynamically stable and no stable patients, showing encouraging results including a low stoma rate and an acceptable morbidity rate.

Damage control surgery for perforated diverticulitis with diffuse peritonitis: saves lives and reduces ostomy

INTRODUCTION

Over the last decade, damage control surgery (DCS) has been emerging as a feasible alternative for the management of patients with abdominal infection and sepsis. So far, there is no consensus about the role of DCS for acute perforated diverticulitis. In this study, we present the outcome of a multi-institutional series of patients presenting with Hinchey's grade III and IV diverticulitis managed by DCS.

METHODS

All the participating centers were tertiary referral hospitals. A total of 34 patients with perforated diverticulitis treated with DCS during the period 2011-2017 were included in the study. During the first laparotomy, a limited resection of the diseased segment was performed followed by lavage and use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT). After 24/48 h of resuscitation, patients returned to the operating room for a second look. Mortality, morbidity, and restoration of bowel continuity were the primary outcomes of the study.

RESULTS

There were 15 males (44%) and 19 females (56%) with a mean age of 66.9 years (SD ± 12.7). Mean BMI was 28.42 kg/m2 (SD ± 3.33). Thirteen cases (38%) were Wasvary's modified Hinchey's stage III, and 21 cases (62%) Hinchey's stage IV. Mean Mannheim Peritonitis Index (MPI) was 25.12 (SD ± 6.28). In 22 patients (65%), ASA score was ≥ grade III. Twenty-four patients (71%) had restoration of bowel continuity, while 10 (29%) patients had an end colostomy (Hartmann's procedure). Three of these patients received a temporary loop ileostomy. One patient had an anastomotic leak. Mortality rate was 12%. Mean length of hospital stay was 21.9 days. At multivariate analysis, male gender (p = 0.010) and MPI (p = 0.034) correlated with a high percentage of Hartmann's procedures.

CONCLUSION

DCS is a feasible procedure for patients with generalized peritonitis secondary to perforated diverticulitis, and it appears to be related to a higher rate of bowel reconstruction. Due to the open abdomen, stay in ICU with prolonged mechanical ventilation is required, but these aggressive measures may be needed by most patients undergoing surgery for perforated diverticulitis, whatever the procedure is done.

Chinese Trauma Surgeon Association for management guidelines of vacuum sealing drainage application in abdominal surgeries-Update and systematic review

Vacuum sealing drainage (VSD) is frequently used in abdominal surgeries. However, relevant guidelines are rare. Chinese Trauma Surgeon Association organized a committee composed of 28 experts across China in July 2017, aiming to provide an evidence-based recommendation for the application of VSD in abdominal surgeries. Eleven questions regarding the use of VSD in abdominal surgeries were addressed: (1) which type of materials should be respectively chosen for the intraperitoneal cavity, retroperitoneal cavity and superficial incisions? (2) Can VSD be preventively used for a high-risk abdominal incision with primary suture? (3) Can VSD be used in severely contaminated/infected abdominal surgical sites? (4) Can VSD be used for temporary abdominal cavity closure under some special conditions such as severe abdominal trauma, infection, liver transplantation and intra-abdominal volume increment in abdominal compartment syndrome? (5) Can VSD be used in abdominal organ inflammation, injury, or postoperative drainage? (6) Can VSD be used in the treatment of intestinal fistula and pancreatic fistula? (7) Can VSD be used in the treatment of intra-abdominal and extra-peritoneal abscess? (8) Can VSD be used in the treatment of abdominal wall wounds, wound cavity, and defects? (9) Does VSD increase the risk of bleeding? (10) Does VSD increase the risk of intestinal wall injury? (11) Does VSD increase the risk of peritoneal adhesion? Focusing on these questions, evidence-based recommendations were given accordingly. VSD was strongly recommended regarding the questions 2-4. Weak recommendations were made regarding questions 1 and 5-11. Proper use of VSD in abdominal surgeries can lower the risk of infection in abdominal incisions with primary suture, treat severely contaminated/infected surgical sites and facilitate temporary abdominal cavity closure.

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

PURPOSE

Optimal surgical management of perforated diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon has yet to be clearly defined. The purpose of this study was to evaluate efficacy of a "Damage Control Strategy" (DCS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with perforated diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon complicated by generalized peritonitis (Hinchey III and IV) surgically treated according to a damage control strategy between May 2011 and February 2017 were enrolled in the present multicenter retrospective cohort study. Data were collected at three surgical centers. DCS comprises a two-stage concept: [1] limited resection of the perforated colon segment with oral and aboral blind closure during the emergency procedure and [2] definitive reconstruction at scheduled second laparotomy (anastomosis ∓ loop ileostomy or a Hartmann's procedure) after 24-48 h.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight patients were included into the analysis [W:M 28:30, median age 70.1 years (30-92)]. Eleven patients (19%) initially presented with fecal peritonitis (Hinchey IV) and 47 patients with purulent peritonitis (Hinchey III). An anastomosis could be created during the second procedure in 48 patients (83%), 14 of those received an additional loop ileostomy. In the remaining ten patients (n = 17%), an end colostomy was created at second laparotomy. A fecal diversion was performed in five patients to treat anastomotic complications. Thus, altogether, 29 patients (50%) had stoma at the end of the hospital stay. The postoperative mortality was 9% (n = 5), and median postoperative hospital stay was 18.5 days (3-66). At the end of the follow-up, 44 of 53 surviving patients were stoma free (83%).

CONCLUSION

The use of the Damage Control strategy leads to a comparatively low stoma rate in patients suffering from perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis.

Damage Control Surgery for Non-traumatic Abdominal Emergencies

BACKGROUND

Damage control surgery (DCS) was a major paradigm change in the management of critically ill trauma patients and has gradually expanded in the general surgery arena, but data in this setting are still scarce. The study aim was to evaluate outcomes of DCS in patients with general surgery emergencies.

METHODS

Between 2005 and 2015, 164 patients (104 men, age 66) underwent DCS for non-traumatic abdominal emergencies. The decision to perform DCS was triggered by the presence of at least one trauma DCS criterion: hypotension (<70 mmHg), hypothermia (<35 °C), acidosis (pH < 7.25), coagulopathy (INR ≥ 1.7) and massive (>5 RBC) transfusion. Statistical tests were performed to identify risk factors for operative mortality. Observed outcomes were compared to those predicted by commonly employed scores (APACHE II, POSSUM, P-POSSUM, SAPS II).

RESULTS

DCS was performed for acute mesenteric ischemia (n = 68), peritonitis (n = 44), pancreatitis (n = 28), bleeding (n = 14) and other (n = 10). Abdominal compartment syndrome was associated in 52 patients (32%). Seventy-four (45%) patients died and 150 patients (91%) experienced complications. On multivariate analysis, age (p = 0.018) and INR ≥ 1.7 (p = 0.001) were independent predictors of mortality. Mortality was 24% (13/55), 48% (22/46) and 62% (39/63) in patients with one, two and ≥3 DCS criteria, respectively. Comparison of observed and score-predicted mortality suggested DCS use resulted in significant survival benefit of the whole cohort and of patients with pancreatitis and postoperative peritonitis.

CONCLUSIONS

DCS can be lifesaving in critically ill patients with general surgery emergencies. Patients with peritonitis and acute pancreatitis are those who benefit most of the DCS approach.

Damage control surgery in perforated diverticulitis: ongoing peritonitis at second surgery predicts a worse outcome

PURPOSE

Damage control strategy (DCS) is a two-staged procedure for the treatment of perforated diverticular disease complicated by generalized peritonitis. The aim of this retrospective multicenter cohort study was to evaluate the prognostic impact of an ongoing peritonitis at the time of second surgery.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent DCS for perforated diverticular disease of the sigmoid colon with generalized peritonitis at four surgical centers were included. Damage control strategy is a two-stage emergency procedure: limited resection of the diseased colonic segment, closure of oral and aboral colon, and application of a negative pressure assisted abdominal closure system at the initial surgery followed by second laparotomy 48 h later. Therein, decision for definite reconstruction (anastomosis or Hartmann's procedure (HP)) is made. An ongoing peritonitis at second surgery was defined as presence of visible fibrinous, purulent, or fecal peritoneal fluid. Microbiologic findings from peritoneal smear at first surgery were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Between 5/2011 and 7/2017, 74 patients underwent a DCS for perforated diverticular disease complicated by generalized peritonitis (female: 40, male: 34). At second surgery, 55% presented with ongoing peritonitis (OP). Patients with OP had higher rate of organ failure (32 vs. 9%, p = 0.024), higher Mannheim Peritonitis Index (25.2 vs. 18.9; p = 0.001), and increased operation time (105 vs. 84 min., p = 0.008) at first surgery. An anastomosis was constructed in all patients with no OP (nOP) at second surgery as opposed to 71% in the OP group (p < 0.001). Complication rate (44 vs. 24%, p = 0.092), mortality (12 vs. 0%, p = 0.061), overall number of surgeries (3.4 vs. 2.4, p = 0.017), enterostomy rate (76 vs. 36%, p = 0.001), and length of hospital stay (25 vs. 18.8 days, p = 0.03) were all increased in OP group. OP at second surgery occurred significantly more often in patients with Enterococcus infection (81 vs. 44%, p = 0.005) and with fungal infection (100 vs. 49%, p = 0.007). In a multivariate analysis, Enterococcus infection was associated with increased morbidity (67 vs. 21%, p < 0.001), enterostomy rate (81 vs. 48%, p = 0.017), and anastomotic leakage (29 vs. 6%, p = 0.042), whereas fungal peritonitis was associated with an increased mortality (43 vs. 4%, p = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

Ongoing peritonitis after DCS is a predictor of a worse outcome in patients with perforated diverticulitis. Enterococcal and fungal infections have a negative impact on occurrence of OP and overall outcome.

Current Options for the Emergency Management of Diverticular Disease and Options to Reduce the Need for Colostomy

This article reviews the current options and recommendations for the emergency management of acute diverticulitis, including the spectrum of antibiotics, percutaneous drainage, laparoscopic lavage, and surgical options for resection with the restoration of bowel continuity.

Inflammation management in acute diverticulitis: current perspectives

The pathogenesis of diverticular disease and acute diverticulitis is still unclear and many different hypotheses have been formulated. Seemingly, there are several related factors such as chronic inflammation, gut microbiome, obesity and the immunogenic properties of fat tissue and diet. Inflammation plays a pivotal role in diverticular disease and acute diverticulitis. The aim of the present review is to investigate the role of inflammation in diverticular disease as well as in mild and complicated acute diverticulitis with a focus on current research and treatment perspectives.

Systematic review and comparison of national and international guidelines on diverticular disease

PURPOSE

Diverticular disease is common and of increasing medical and economical importance. Various practice guidelines on diagnostic and treatment on this disease exist. We compared current guidelines on the disease in order to identify concordant and discordant recommendations.

METHOD

Eleven national and international guidelines on diverticular disease published over the last 10 years have been identified by a systematic literature review on PubMed and compared in detail for 20 main and 51 subtopics.

RESULTS

The available evidence for the most aspects was rated as moderate or low. There was concordance for the following items: Diagnosis of diverticulitis should be confirmed by imaging methods (10 of 10 guidelines). Mild forms may be treated out-patient (10/10). Abscesses are treated non-surgically (9/9). Elective surgery should be indicated by individual patient-related factors, only, and be performed laparoscopically (10/10, 9/9 respectively). Main differences were found in the questions of appropriate classification, imaging diagnostic (computed-tomography versus ultra-sound), need for antibiotics in out-patient treatment and mode of surgery for diverticular perforation. Despite growing evidence that antibiotics are not needed for treating mild diverticulitis, only 3/10 guidelines have corresponding recommendations. Hartmann's procedure has been abandoned several years ago and is now recommended for feculent peritonitis by the three most recent guidelines. In contrast, laparoscopic lavage without resection is not recommended anymore.

CONCLUSION

There are dissents in the recommendations for central aspects regarding the diagnostic and treatment of diverticular disease in recently published guidelines.

2017 WSES guidelines for the management of iatrogenic colonoscopy perforation

Iatrogenic colonoscopy perforation (ICP) is a severe complication that can occur during both diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Although 45-60% of ICPs are diagnosed by the endoscopist while performing the colonoscopy, many ICPs are not immediately recognized but are instead suspected on the basis of clinical signs and symptoms that occur after the endoscopic procedure. There are three main therapeutic options for ICPs: endoscopic repair, conservative therapy, and surgery. The therapeutic approach must vary based on the setting of the diagnosis (intra- or post-colonoscopy), the type of ICP, the characteristics and general status of the patient, the operator's level of experience, and surgical device availability. Although ICPs have been the focus of numerous publications, no guidelines have been created to standardize the management of ICPs. The aim of this article is to present the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) guidelines for the management of ICP, which are intended to be used as a tool to promote global standards of care in case of ICP. These guidelines are not meant to substitute providers' clinical judgment for individual patients, and they may need to be modified based on the medical team's level of experience and the availability of local resources.

Rapid Source-Control Laparotomy: Is There a Mortality Benefit in Septic Shock?

BACKGROUND

In the 1990s, damage control laparotomy (DCL) became a proved approach to treat intra-abdominal injuries caused by trauma. In the ensuing two decades, this approach has been applied to non-traumatic abdominal processes as well. Although the benefits of DCL are clear, the benefit of rapid source-control laparotomy (RSCL) for non-traumatic abdominal diseases is much less clear. However, two recent cohort analyses identified significant increases in the mortality rate with RCSL compared with primary fascial closure (PFC). The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of RSCL in patients with septic shock.

METHODS

The 2015 National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (NSQIP) database was queried for 11 International Statistical Classifications of Diseases (ICD)-10 codes associated with septic shock. Collected data included age, gender, body mass index (BMI), wound class, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, operative time, number of risk factors, and presence or absence of post-operative pneumonia. The risk factors were diabetes mellitus, alcohol or tobacco abuse, blood dyscrasias, disseminated cancer, and cardiac, gastrointestinal, pulmonary, hepatobiliary, or renal dysfunction. The primary outcomes were rate of re-operation, prevalence of post-operative pneumonia, hospital length of stay (LOS), and death by 30 days.

RESULTS

The RSCL and PFC cohorts were each comprised of 56 patients matched for propensity scores for ICD-10 code. There were no significant differences in wound or ASA class, BMI, gender, or number of risk factors between the two cohorts. The operative time for RSCL was significantly shorter than for PFC (median 84 vs. 128 min, respectively; p = 0.002). There was no significant difference in re-operation rate, prevalence of post-operative pneumonia, LOS, or mortality rate between the two cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Although this analysis showed no clear advantage to RSCL in the management of septic shock, it may be a means to salvage certain patients. The best way to assess the relative value of RSCL is a prospective trial.

Laparoscopic versus open colectomy for obstructing right colon cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hemicolectomy is the treatment of choice for intestinal obstruction from right colon cancer. This review compares the laparoscopic vs open access in hemicolectomy for patients with right colon cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies published after January 2017 was performed according to the Prisma guidelines. The study has been recorded on the Prospero register (CRD42016044108).

RESULTS

Five studies were included for review. Only one anastomotic leak was reported in conventional open anastomosis group (1.9%) and none of the studies included in the meta-analysis reported re-operations during the first 30 postoperative days. The 30-day postoperative mortality did not differ between the two groups. The length of incision, blood loss, early mobilization after surgery, the 30-day postoperative overall complication rate and hospital length of stay were significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group. The difference in the duration of procedure was statistically significant in favor of the open group. The number of dissected lymph nodes, the overall survival at 5 years and time to flatus were described only in one study, without any significant difference. Finally, none of the trials reported any information concerning differences in the costs between the two techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

The better outcomes described in this study achieved with laparoscopy, must be interpreted with caution because of the small number of patients involved, the selection and publication bias and the low level of evidence of the analysed trials. Indeed, the advantages of a minimally invasive approach, which have been demonstrated by the present meta-analysis, should encourage the use of laparoscopy also in emergency setting.

Rapid Source-Control Laparotomy: Is There a Mortality Benefit?

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to determine the influence rapid source-control laparotomy (RSCL) has on the mortality rate in non-trauma patients with intra-abdominal infection. The hypothesis was that RSCL reduces deaths and hospital lengths of stay (LOS) in patients compared with definitive repair and primary fascial closure (PFC).

METHODS

The International Classification of Diseases-10 codes for sepsis, gastric and duodenal ulcer perforation or hemorrhage, incisional or ventral hernia with obstruction, intestinal volvulus, ileus with obstruction, diverticulitis with perforation or abscess, vascular disorder of intestine, non-traumatic intestinal perforation, peritoneal abscess, and unspecified peritonitis were used to query the 2015 National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (NSQIP) database for all patients treated with either RSCL or PFC. The two groups of patients were compared on the basis of LOS and deaths. Collected data included age, gender, body mass index (BMI), site classification, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, operative time, number of risk factors, and pre-operative septic state.

RESULTS

After adjusting for the aforementioned variables, propensity score-matched cohorts (n = 210 in each cohort) were used to evaluate the influence of incision closure type on LOS and mortality rate. The odds of death (31.4% vs. 21.4%) with RSCL was 1.78 (95% confidence interval 1.08-2.95; p = 0.02) times that of PFC. Closure type was not significantly associated with an increased LOS (median 14 vs. 11 days; p = 0.35).

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective cohort analysis demonstrated that RSCL is associated with higher odds of death in general surgical patients with intra-abdominal infection. There is a need for further studies to delineate what, if any, physiologic parameters indicate a need for RSCL.

The role of open abdomen in non-trauma patient: WSES Consensus Paper

The open abdomen (OA) is defined as intentional decision to leave the fascial edges of the abdomen un-approximated after laparotomy (laparostomy). The abdominal contents are potentially exposed and therefore must be protected with a temporary coverage, which is referred to as temporal abdominal closure (TAC). OA use remains widely debated with many specific details deserving detailed assessment and clarification. To date, in patients with intra-abdominal emergencies, the OA has not been formally endorsed for routine utilization; although, utilization is seemingly increasing. Therefore, the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), Abdominal Compartment Society (WSACS) and the Donegal Research Academy united a worldwide group of experts in an international consensus conference to review and thereafter propose the basis for evidence-directed utilization of OA management in non-trauma emergency surgery and critically ill patients. In addition to utilization recommendations, questions with insufficient evidence urgently requiring future study were identified.

Open abdomen with vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction in patients with complicated diffuse secondary peritonitis: A single-center 8-year experience

BACKGROUND

Open abdomen (OA) treatment in patients with peritonitis is increasing worldwide. Various temporary abdominal closure devices are being used. This study included patients with complicated diffuse secondary peritonitis, OA, and vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction (VAWCM). The aim of this study was to describe mortality and major morbidity in terms of delayed primary fascial closure and enteroatmospheric fistula rates.

METHODS

This was a single-academic-center retrospective study of consecutive patients with diffuse peritonitis, OA, and VAWCM between years 2008 and 2016. Descriptive and univariate analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients were identified and analyzed. Median age was 59 years, preoperative septic shock was diagnosed in 54% (n = 22), and 59% (n = 24) had a postoperative peritonitis. Mortality was 29% (n = 12), and 76% (n = 31) of patients were admitted in the intensive care unit. The median duration of OA was 7 days with a median of two dressing changes. Delayed primary fascial closure rate among survivors was 92% (n = 33), and enteroatmospheric fistulas developed in 7% (n = 3). In a subgroup analysis, patients with OA in the primary laparotomy for peritonitis (n = 27) were compared with patients with OA in the subsequent laparotomies (n = 14). There were no significant differences between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The VAWCM technique in patients with complicated secondary diffuse peritonitis and OA yields excellent results in terms of delayed primary fascial closure rate and a low number of enteroatmospheric fistulas. It seems to be safe to close the abdomen at the index laparotomy, if possible, even if there is a risk of a need of OA later.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/care management study, level IV.

Intensive care and health outcomes of open abdominal treatment: long-term results of vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction (VAWCM)

PURPOSE

The study's purpose is to evaluate the long-term outcome after vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction (VAWCM) and to identify predictors of quality of life associated with intensive care.

METHODS

Fifty-five patients who underwent open abdomen management at our institution from 2006 to 2013 were prospectively enrolled in this study. After a median follow-up period of 3.8 years, 27 patients completed the 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) quality of life questionnaire. As this is a report solely focused on quality of life, direct treatment-related outcome measures like mortality, closure rates, and incisional hernia development of this study cohort have been reported previously.

RESULTS

SF-36 physical role (54.6 ± 41.0 (0-100), p < 0.01), physical functioning (68.4 ± 29.5 (0-100), p = 0.01), and physical component summary (41.6 ± 13.0 (19-62), p = 0.01) scores for the patient population were significantly lower than normative scores. Significant correlations were found between physical functioning and total treatment costs (r = -0.66, p = 0.01), total units of packed red blood cells (r = -0.56, p = 0.04), and the complex intensive care scores (r = -0.50, p = 0.02). Simple and multiple regression analyses demonstrated that the complex intensive care score was the only predictor of physical functioning (R 2 = 0.50, β = -0.70, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite high short-term mortality and morbidity rates for these critically ill patients, open abdomen treatment using VAWCM allows patients to recover to an acceptable long-term quality of life. The complex intensive care score can be used as a surrogate parameter for the global severity of illness and was the only predictor of physical functioning (SF-36).

Complications and Mortality Associated with Temporary Abdominal Closure Techniques: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Temporary abdominal closure (TAC) techniques are routinely used in the open abdomen. Ideally, they should prevent evisceration, aid in removal of unwanted fluid from the peritoneal cavity, facilitate in achieving safe definitive fascial closure, as well as prevent the development of intra-abdominal complications. TAC techniques used in the open abdomen were compared with negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) to identify which was superior. A systematic review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines involving Medline, Excerpta Medica, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Clinicaltrials.gov. All studies describing TAC technique use in the open abdomen were eligible for inclusion. Data were analyzed per TAC technique in the form of a meta-analysis. A total of 225 articles were included in the final analysis. A meta-analysis involving only randomized controlled trials showed that NPWT with continuous fascial closure was superior to NPWT alone for definitive fascial closure [mean difference (MD): 35% ± 23%; P = 0.0044]. A subsequent meta-analysis involving all included studies confirmed its superiority across outcomes for definitive fascial closure (MD: 19% ± 3%; P < 0.0001), perioperative (MD: -4.0% ± 2.4%; P = 0.0013) and in-hospital (MD: -5.0% ± 2.9%; P = 0.0013) mortality, entero-atmospheric fistula (MD: 22.0% ± 1.8%; P = 0.0041), ventral hernia (MD: -4.0% ± 2.4%; P = 0.0010), and intra-abdominal abscess (MD: -3.1% ± 2.1%; P = 0.0044). Therefore, it was concluded that NPWT with continuous fascial traction is superior to NPWT alone.

Abdominal wall integrity after open abdomen: long-term results of vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction (VAWCM)

PURPOSE

The open abdomen has become a standard technique in the management of critically ill patients undergoing surgery for severe intra-abdominal conditions. Negative pressure and mesh-mediated fascial traction are commonly used and achieve low fistula rates and high fascial closure rates. In this study, long-term results of a standardised treatment approach are presented.

METHODS

Fifty-five patients who underwent OA management for different indications at our institution from 2006 to 2013 were enrolled. All patients were treated under a standardised algorithm that uses a combination of vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction. Structured follow-up assessments were offered to patients and included a medical history, a clinical examination and abdominal ultrasonography. The data obtained were statistically analysed.

RESULTS

The fascial closure rate was 74 % in an intention-to-treat analysis and 89 % in a per-protocol analysis. The fistula rate was 1.8 %. Thirty-four patients attended follow-up. The median follow-up was 46 months (range 12-88 months). Incisional hernias developed in 35 %. Patients with hernias needed more operative procedures (10.3 vs 3.4, p = 0.03) than patients without hernia formation. A Patient Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) of 31.1 was calculated. Patients with symptomatic hernias (NAS of 2-10) had a significantly lower mean POSAS score (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction (VAWCM) seem to result in low complication rates and high fascial closure rates. Abdominal wall reconstruction, which is a challenging and complex procedure and causes considerable patient discomfort, can thus be avoided in the majority of cases. Available results are based on studies involving only a small number of cases. Multi-centre studies and registry-based data are therefore needed to validate these findings.

WSES Guidelines for the management of acute left sided colonic diverticulitis in the emergency setting

Acute left sided colonic diverticulitis is one of the most common clinical conditions encountered by surgeons in acute setting. A World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) Consensus Conference on acute diverticulitis was held during the 3rd World Congress of the WSES in Jerusalem, Israel, on July 7th, 2015. During this consensus conference the guidelines for the management of acute left sided colonic diverticulitis in the emergency setting were presented and discussed. This document represents the executive summary of the final guidelines approved by the consensus conference.