Two-stage totally minimally invasive approach for acute complicated diverticulitis

Evaluation of laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for perforated diverticulitis: a national registry-based study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic lavage (LPL) has been suggested for treatment of non-feculent perforated diverticulitis. In this observational study, the surgical treatment of diverticular disease in Sweden outside prospective trials was investigated.

METHODS

This population-based study used the National Patient Register to identify all patients in Sweden with emergency admissions for diverticular disease, as defined by ICD codes from July 2014 to December 2020. Demographics, surgical procedures and outcomes were assessed. In addition, register data since 1997 were retrieved to assess co-morbidities, previous abdominal surgeries, and previous admissions for diverticular disease.

RESULTS

Among 47 294 patients with emergency hospital admission, 2035 underwent LPL (427 patients) or sigmoid resection (SR, 1608 patients) for diverticular disease. The mean follow-up was 30.8 months. Patients selected for LPL were younger, healthier and with less previous abdominal surgery for diverticular disease than those in the SR group (P < 0.01). LPL was associated with shorter postoperative hospital stay (mean 9.4 versus 14.9 days, P < 0.001) and lower 30-day mortality (3.5% versus 8.7%, P < 0.001). Diverticular disease-associated subsequent surgery was more common in the SR group than the LPL group except during the first year (P < 0.001). LPL had a lower mortality rate during the study period (stratified HR 0.70, 95% c.i. 0.53-0.92, P = 0.023).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic lavage constitutes a safe alternative to sigmoid resection for selected patients judged clinically to require surgery.

Preliminary Experience with Laparoscopic Peritoneal Lavage for Complicated Diverticulitis: A New Algorithm for Treatment?

Patients with findings suggestive of a perforated diverticulitis may be subject to colostomy with the attendant morbidity and quality-of-life concerns. Recent literature demonstrates decreased use of laparotomy and colostomy when diagnostic laparoscopy reveals absence of fecal peritonitis. Ten patients presenting with diverticulitis between May 2009 and February 2012 underwent diagnostic laparoscopy. The indication for surgery in nine patients was failure of medical management with or without percutaneous drainage and one had significant pneumoperitoneum at presentation. A comprehensive algorithm was subsequently developed governing medical and surgical management of diverticulitis including the use of diagnostic laparoscopy and laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for patients with Hinchey Stage 3 diverticulitis or abscess formation not amenable to percutaneous drainage. Eight patients underwent diagnostic laparoscopy and laparoscopic peritoneal lavage, whereas two patients underwent diagnostic laparoscopy with conversion to open procedures (low-anterior resection with diverting ileostomy and Hartmann's procedure). Mortality was 0 per cent. Four patients were subsequently readmitted for relapse or recurrence. Two required laparotomy at the time of readmission, ultimately receiving a diagnosis of adenocarcinoma. Two were managed medically and later underwent elective laparoscopic sigmoid colon resection. Diagnostic laparoscopy and laparoscopy peritoneal lavage appear feasible and safe and may be an alternative to more invasive surgery, avoiding laparotomy and colostomy and staging patients for elective laparoscopic resection. Based on our institutional experience, we propose a novel algorithm for the treatment of hospitalized patients with diverticulitis, which incorporates diagnostic laparoscopy and laparoscopic peritoneal lavage while emphasizing patient selection based on clinical examination and imaging.

Laparoscopic lavage and drainage for Hinchey III diverticulitis: review of technical aspects

The surgical treatment for patients with generalized peritonitis complicating sigmoid diverticulitis is currently debated; particularly in case of diffuse purulent contamination (Hinchey 3). Laparoscopic lavage and drainage (LLD) has been proposed by some authors as a safe and effective alternative to single- or multi-stage resective surgery. However, among all the different studies on LLD, there is no uniformity in terms of surgical technique adopted and data show significant differences in postoperative outcomes. Aim of this review was to analyze the differences and similarities among the authors in terms of application, surgical technique and outcomes of LLD in Hinchey 3 patients. A bibliographical research was performed by referring to PubMed and Cochrane. "Purulent peritonitis", "Hinchey 3 diverticulitis", "acute diverticulitis", "colonic perforation" and "complicated diverticulitis" were used as key words. Twenty-eight papers were selected, excluding meta-analysis, reviews and case reports with a very small number of patients. The aim of this review was to establish how LLD should be done, suggesting important technical tricks. We found agreement in terms of indications, preoperative management, ports' positioning, antibiotics, enteral feeding and drain management. On the contrast, different statements regarding indications, adhesiolysis and management of colonic hole and failure of laparoscopic lavage are reported. A widespread diffusion of LLD and standardization of its technique are impossible because of data heterogeneity and selection bias in the limited RCTs. It is necessary to wait for long terms results from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in progress to establish the efficacy and safety of this technique. More importantly, an increased number of highly skilled and dedicated colorectal laparoscopic surgeons are required to standardized the procedure.

Multicentre international trial of laparoscopic lavage for Hinchey III acute diverticulitis (LLO Study)

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic lavage was proposed in the 1990s to treat purulent peritonitis in patients with perforated acute diverticulitis. Prospective randomized trials had mixed results. The aim of this study was to determine the success rate of laparoscopic lavage in sepsis control and to identify a group of patients that could potentially benefit from this treatment.

METHODS

This retrospective multicentre international study included consecutive patients from 24 centres who underwent laparoscopic lavage from 2005 to 2015.

RESULTS

A total of 404 patients were included, 231 of whom had Hinchey III acute diverticulitis. Sepsis control was achieved in 172 patients (74·5 per cent), and was associated with lower Mannheim Peritonitis Index score and ASA grade, no evidence of free perforation, absence of extensive adhesiolysis and previous episodes of diverticulitis. The operation was immediately converted to open surgery in 19 patients. Among 212 patients who underwent laparoscopic lavage, the morbidity rate was 33·0 per cent; the reoperation rate was 13·7 per cent and the 30-day mortality rate 1·9 per cent. Twenty-one patients required readmission for early complications, of whom 11 underwent further surgery and one died. Of the 172 patients discharged uneventfully after laparoscopic lavage, a recurrent episode of acute diverticulitis was registered in 46 (26·7 per cent), at a mean of 11 (range 2-108) months. Relapse was associated with younger age, female sex and previous episodes of acute diverticulitis.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic lavage showed a high rate of successful sepsis control in selected patients with perforated Hinchey III acute diverticulitis affected by peritonitis, with low rates of operative mortality, reoperation and stoma formation.

Emergency Hartmann's Procedure and Its Reversal: A Totally Laparoscopic 2-Step Surgery for the Treatment of Hinchey III and IV Diverticulitis

BACKGROUND

Hartmann's procedure (HP) followed by reversal restoration is the first choice for treatment of diffuse diverticular peritonitis. There is no unanimous consensus regarding the use of laparoscopy to treat the same condition.

METHODS

Data from 60 patients with diverticular diffuse peritonitis who underwent urgent HP followed by laparoscopic reversal were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the open or laparoscopic HP (OHP, 24 patients; LHP, 36 patients). Outcomes were measured in terms of functional recovery, morbidity, mortality, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

HPs showed no differences among the groups in terms of operative time, blood loss, and length of intensive care unit stay. Overall morbidity was significantly lower in LHP than in OHP, corresponding to 33.3% and 66.7% respectively ( P = .018). The incidence of both surgical and medical complications was higher in OHP than in LHP (41.7% vs 22.2% [ P = .044] and 45.8% vs 24.3% [ P = .023], respectively). Mortality was 16.6% for each group. LHP showed a faster return to bowel movements and a shorter hospital stay than OHP. The secondary intestinal reversal was possible in 92% of cases, successfully completed laparoscopically in 91.3%. No patients of LHP group required a conversion to open intestinal reversal.

CONCLUSION

LHP for treatment of diverticular diffuse peritonitis showed significantly lower morbidity, faster recovery, shorter hospital stay, and higher rates of successful laparoscopic reversal when compared with OHP.

Acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis: clinical expressions, therapeutic insights, and role of computed tomography

The diagnostic approach of patients with suspected acute diverticulitis remains debated. On the one hand, a scoring system with the best predictive value in diagnosing acute diverticulitis has been developed in order to reduce the use of computed tomography (CT) scan, while, on the other hand, patients with a high probability of acute diverticulitis should benefit from CT scan from a clinical viewpoint, ensuring that they will receive the most appropriate treatment. The place and classification of CT scan for acute diverticulitis need to be reassessed. If the management of uncomplicated acute diverticulitis, abscess, and fecal peritonitis is now well codified, urgent surgical or medical treatment of hemodynamically stable patients presenting with intraperitoneal air or fluid without uncontrolled sepsis is still under discussion. Furthermore, the indications for laparoscopic lavage are not yet well established. It is known for years that episode(s) of acute uncomplicated diverticulitis may induce painful recurrent bowel symptoms, known as symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease and irritable bowel syndrome-like diverticular disease. These two clinical expressions of diverticular disease, that may darken quality of life, are treated medically aimed at symptom relief. The possible place of surgery should be discussed. Clinical and CT scan classifications should be separated entities.

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage: a definitive treatment for diverticular peritonitis or a "bridge" to elective laparoscopic sigmoidectomy?: a systematic review

To this day, the treatment of generalized peritonitis secondary to diverticular perforation is still controversial. Recently, in patients with acute sigmoid diverticulitis, laparoscopic lavage and drainage has gained a wide interest as an alternative to resection. Based on this backdrop, we decided to perform a systematic review of the literature to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of peritoneal lavage in perforated diverticular disease.A bibliographic search was performed in PubMed for case series and comparative studies published between January 1992 and February 2014 describing laparoscopic peritoneal lavage in patients with perforated diverticulitis.A total of 19 articles consisting of 10 cohort studies, 8 case series, and 1 controlled clinical trial met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed. In total these studies analyzed data from 871 patients. The mean follow-up time ranged from 1.5 to 96 months when reported. In 11 studies, the success rate of laparoscopic peritoneal lavage, defined as patients alive without surgical treatment for a recurrent episode of diverticulitis, was 24.3%. In patients with Hinchey stage III diverticulitis, the incidence of laparotomy conversion was 1%, whereas in patients with stage IV it was 45%. The 30-day postoperative mortality rate was 2.9%. The 30-day postoperative reintervention rate was 4.9%, whereas 2% of patients required a percutaneous drainage. Readmission rate after the first hospitalization for recurrent diverticulitis was 6%. Most patients who were readmitted (69%) required redo surgery. A 2-stage laparoscopic intervention was performed in 18.3% of patients.Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage should be considered an effective and safe option for the treatment of patients with sigmoid diverticulitis with Hinchey stage III peritonitis; it can also be consider as a "bridge" surgical step combined with a delayed and elective laparoscopic sigmoidectomy in order to avoid a Hartmann procedure. This minimally invasive staged approach should be considered for patients without systemic toxicity and in centers experienced in minimally invasive surgery techniques. Further evidence is needed, and the ongoing RCTs will better define the role of the laparoscopic peritoneal lavage/drainage in the treatment of patients with complicated diverticulitis.

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for perforated colonic diverticulitis: a definitive treatment? Retrospective analysis of 63 cases

BACKGROUND

The ideal treatment of perforated diverticulitis and the indications for elective colon resection remain controversial. Considering the significant morbidity and mortality rates related to traditional resection, efforts have been made to reduce the invasiveness of surgery in recent decades. Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage has emerged as an effective alternative option. We retrospectively investigated the effectiveness of laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for perforated diverticulitis and the possibility that it could be a definitive treatment.

METHODS

We included patients treated with laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for perforated diverticulitis. The inclusion criteria were all emergency patients with generalized peritonitis due to Hinchey III perforated diverticulitis and some cases of Hinchey II and IV.

RESULTS

Sixty-three patients were treated with laparoscopic peritoneal lavage. Six patients (9.5 %) had Hinchey II diverticulitis; 54 patients (85.7 %) had Hinchey III; and three patients (4.8 %) had Hinchey IV. The mean operative time was 87.3 min (±25.4 min), and the overall morbidity rate was 14.3 %. One patient died because of pulmonary embolism, and there were six early reinterventions because of treatment failure. Delayed colon resection was performed in four of the remaining 57 patients (7 %) because of recurrent diverticulitis. In the other 53 patients (93 %), we saw no recurrence of diverticulitis and no intervention was performed after a median follow-up period of 54 months (interquartile range 27-98 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for perforated diverticulitis can be considered a safe and effective alternative to traditional surgical resection, and using this approach, most elective colon resection might be avoided.

Systematic review of emergent laparoscopic colorectal surgery for benign and malignant disease

Laparoscopic surgery has become well established in the management of both and malignant colorectal disease. The last decade has seen increasing numbers of surgeons trained to a high standard in minimally-invasive surgery. However there has not been the same enthusiasm for the use of laparoscopy in emergency colorectal surgery. There is a perception that emergent surgery is technically more difficult and may lead to worse outcomes. The present review aims to provide a comprehensive and critical appraisal of the available literature on the use of laparoscopic colorectal surgery (LCS) in the emergency setting. The literature is broadly divided by the underlying pathology; that is, inflammatory bowel disease, diverticulitis and malignant obstruction. There were no randomized trials and the majority of the studies were case-matched series or comparative studies. The overall trend was that LCS is associated with shorter hospital stay, par or fewer complications but an increased operating time.Emergency LCS can be safely undertaken for both benign and malignant disease providing there is appropriate patient selection, the surgeon is adequately experienced and there are sufficient resources to allow for a potentially more complex operation.

Nonoperative management of perforated diverticulitis with extraluminal air is safe and effective in selected patients

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment for diverticulitis with extraluminal air is controversial.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this research was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of nonoperative treatment of acute diverticulitis with extraluminal air.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at an academic teaching hospital functioning as both a tertiary and secondary care referral center.

PATIENTS

All of the patients with CT-diagnosed acute perforated diverticulitis with extraluminal air from 2006 through 2010 were included in this study.

INTERVENTIONS

Nonoperative treatment composed of intravenous antibiotics, bowel rest, and percutaneous drainage were the included interventions.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The need for operative management and mortality were measured.

RESULTS

A total of 132 patients underwent nonoperative treatment, whereas 48 patients were primarily operated on. Patients treated nonoperatively were divided into 3 groups on the basis of identified factors that independently predicted risk for failure: 1) patients with pericolic air (n = 82) without abscess had a 99% success rate with 0% mortality. 2) Patients with distant intraperitoneal air (n = 29) had a 62% success ratewith 0% mortality. Abundant distant intraperitoneal air and fluid in the fossa Douglas were identified as risk factors for failure. Patients without these risk factors had an 86% success rate with nonoperative management. 3) Patients with distant retroperitoneal air (n = 14) had a 43% success rate with 7% mortality.

LIMITATIONS

Comparison of nonoperative versus operative treatment cannot be made because of the study's retrospective nature.

CONCLUSIONS

Nonoperative treatment of acute diverticulitis with extraluminal air is safe and effective in patients with a small amount of distant intraperitoneal air or pericolic air without clinical signs of peritonitis.

Management of acute diverticulitis and its complications

Colonic diverticular disease is a common condition, and around a quarter of people affected by it will experience acute symptoms at some time. The most common presentation is uncomplicated acute diverticulitis that can be managed conservatively with bowel rest and antibiotics. However, some patients will present with diverticular abscesses or purulent or faeculent peritonitis due to perforated diverticular disease. Whilst most mesocolic abscesses can be managed with percutaneous drainage alone, pelvic abscesses are associated with a higher rate of future complications and usually require percutaneous drainage followed by interval sigmoid resection. Patients who require emergency surgery for complicated acute diverticulitis most commonly undergo a Hartmann's procedure, although resection with primary anastomosis and laparoscopic peritoneal lavage have emerged as alternative treatment options for patients with purulent peritonitis in recent years. However, robust evidence from randomized trials is lacking for these alternative procedures, and the studies that have reported good outcomes from them have included carefully selected patient groups. There has been a move away from recommending elective prophylactic colectomy after two episodes of acute diverticulitis in the light of evidence that most patients will not experience a significant recurrence of their symptoms; elective surgery is indicated for those with ongoing symptoms, pelvic abscesses, complications-such as fistulating disease, strictures or recurrent diverticular bleeding-and those who are at high risk of perforation during future episodes, for example, due to immunosuppression, chronic renal failure or collagen-vascular diseases.

Laparoscopic treatment of colovesical fistulas due to complicated colonic diverticular disease: a systematic review

Colovesical fistulas originating from complicated sigmoid diverticular disease are rare. The primary aim of this review was to evaluate the role of laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of this complication. The secondary aim was to determine the best surgical treatment for this disease. A systematic search was conducted for studies published between 1992 and 2012 in PubMed, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, Scopus, and Publish or Perish. Studies enrolling adults undergoing fully laparoscopic, laparoscopic-assisted, or hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery for colovesical fistula secondary to complicated sigmoid diverticular disease were considered. Data extracted concerned the surgical technique, intraoperative outcomes, and postoperative outcomes based on the Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group's template. Descriptive statistics were reported according to the PRISMA statement. In all, 202 patients from 25 studies were included in this review. The standard treatment was laparoscopic colonic resection and primary anastomosis or temporary colostomy with or without resection of the bladder wall. Operative time ranged from 150 to 321 min. It was not possible to evaluate the conversion rate to open surgery because colovesical fistulas were not distinguished from other types of enteric fistulas in most of the studies. One anastomotic leak after bowel anastomosis was reported. There was zero mortality. Few studies conducted follow-up longer than 12 months. One patient required two reoperations. Laparoscopic treatment of colovesical fistulas secondary to sigmoid diverticular disease appears to be a feasible and safe approach. However, further studies are needed to establish whether laparoscopy is preferable to other surgical approaches.

The evolving role of laparoscopy in colonic diverticular disease: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

A PubMed search of the biomedical literature was carried out to systematically review the role of laparoscopy in colonic diverticular disease. All original reports comparing elective laparoscopic, hand-assisted, and open colon resection for diverticular disease of the colon, as well as original reports evaluating outcomes after laparoscopic lavage for acute diverticulitis, were considered. Of the 21 articles chosen for final review, nine evaluated laparoscopic versus open elective resection, six compared hand-assisted colon resection versus conventional laparoscopic resection, and six considered laparoscopic lavage. Five were randomized controlled trials.

RESULTS

Elective laparoscopic colon resection for diverticular disease is associated with increased operative time, decreased postoperative pain, fewer postoperative complications, less paralytic ileus, and shorter hospital stay compared to open colectomy. Laparoscopic lavage and drainage appears to be a safe and effective therapy for selected patients with complicated diverticulitis.

CONCLUSIONS

Elective laparoscopic colectomy for diverticular disease is associated with decreased postoperative morbidity compared to open colectomy, leading to shorter hospital stay and fewer costs. Laparoscopic lavage has an increasing but poorly defined role in complicated diverticulitis.

Appendicitis/diverticulitis: minimally invasive surgery

Complicated intra-abdominal infections such as acute appendicitis and complicated diverticulitis represent both diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. Both diseases, although different in many ways, are caused by the obstruction of a blind pouch leading to inflammation, abscesses, and perforation of surrounding tissues. For many decades, acute appendicitis was managed through a conventional surgical incision in the right iliac fossa. As for other diseases, there is a significant tendency to propose less invasive treatments. For many teams, laparoscopy, which leads to less postoperative pain, a shorter hospital stay, and a quicker recovery, represents the standard of care for appendectomy. For selected cases, a medical approach can be proposed with satisfactory outcomes. Additionally, the management of complicated diverticulitis is also quickly moving towards less invasive procedures than the deleterious '3-phase surgery', which is Hartmann's procedure, followed by reversal protected with a stoma, and finally stoma closure. Benefiting from the evolution of antimicrobial therapy and interventional radiology, many complicated cases classified as Hinchey stage I and Hinchey stage II complicated diverticulitis are now treated medically. CT images allow the identification of patients requiring radiological drainage of localized abscesses or collections over 5 cm in size. Patients with Hinchey stage III sigmoiditis may benefit from an initial laparoscopic exploration allowing, in some cases, a conservative nonresective approach that will prevent laparotomy and stoma. Major resection leading to temporary or definitive stoma is usually indicated for stage IV complications and is required only in exceptional cases. Although a surgical intervention can be the definitive treatment for complicated intra-abdominal infections, multidisciplinary management including radiology, medical treatment, and laparoscopic surgery may limit the severe consequences of an acute surgical approach in patients suffering from complicated appendicitis and diverticulitis. Today, the ultimate goal of acutely infected abdomen management is to reduce hospital stay, disability, and numerous operations for these patients.

Laparoscopic versus open Hartmann procedure for the emergency treatment of diverticulitis: a propensity-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

A laparoscopic approach has been proposed to reduce the high morbidity and mortality associated with the Hartmann procedure for the emergency treatment of diverticulitis.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our study was to determine whether a laparoscopic Hartmann procedure reduces early morbidity or mortality for patients undergoing an emergency operation for diverticulitis.

DESIGN

This is a comparative effectiveness study. A subset of the entire American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program patient sample matched on propensity for undergoing their procedure with the laparoscopic approach were used to compare postoperative outcomes between laparoscopic and open groups.

SETTING

This study uses data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Participant User Files from 2005 through 2009.

PATIENTS

All patients who underwent an emergency laparoscopic or open partial colectomy with end colostomy for colonic diverticulitis were reviewed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measures were 30-day mortality and morbidity.

RESULTS

Included in the analysis were 1186 patients undergoing emergency partial colectomy with end colostomy for diverticulitis. Among the entire cohort, the laparoscopic group had fewer overall complications (26% vs 41.7%, p = 0.008) and shorter mean length of hospitalization (8.9 vs 11.6 days, p = 0.0008). Operative times were not significantly different between groups. When controlling for potential confounders, a laparoscopic approach was not associated with a decrease in morbidity or mortality. In comparison with a propensity-match cohort, the laparoscopic approach did not reduce postoperative morbidity or mortality.

LIMITATIONS

This study is limited by its retrospective nature and the absence of pertinent variables such as postoperative pain indices, time for return of bowel function, and rates of readmission.

CONCLUSIONS

A laparoscopic approach to the Hartmann procedure for the emergency treatment of complicated diverticulitis does not significantly decrease postoperative morbidity or mortality in comparison with the open technique.

Laparoscopic lavage for perforated diverticulitis: a population analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic lavage has shown promising results in nonfeculent perforated diverticulitis. It is an appealing strategy; it avoids the complications associated with resection. However, there has been some reluctance to widespread uptake because of the scarcity of large-scale studies.

OBJECTIVE

This study investigated national trends in management of perforated diverticulitis.

DESIGN

This retrospective population study used an Irish national database to identify patients acutely admitted with diverticulitis, as defined by the International Classification of Diseases. Demographics, procedures, comorbidities, and outcomes were obtained for the years 1995 to 2008.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted in Ireland.

PATIENTS

Patients with International Classification of Diseases codes corresponding to diverticulitis who underwent operative intervention were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was mortality, and secondary outcomes were length of stay and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Two thousand four hundred fifty-five patients underwent surgery for diverticulitis, of whom 427 underwent laparoscopic lavage. Patients selected for laparoscopic lavage had lower mortality (4.0% vs 10.4%, p < 0.001), complications (14.1% vs 25.0%, p < 0.001), and length of stay (10 days vs 20 days, p < 0.001) than those requiring laparotomy/resection. Patients older than 65 years were more likely to die (OR 4.1, p < 0.001), as were those with connective tissue disease (OR 7.3, p < 0.05) or chronic kidney disease (OR 8.0, p < 0.001).

LIMITATIONS

This retrospective study is limited by the quality of data obtained and is subject to selection bias. Furthermore, the lack of disease stratification means it is not possible to identify the extent of peritonitis; feculent peritonitis has worse outcomes and is not likely to be included in the lavage group.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of patients selected for laparoscopic lavage in perforated diverticulitis is increasing, and the outcomes in this study are comparable to other reports. Those patients in whom laparoscopic lavage alone was suitable had lower mortality and morbidity than those in whom resection was considered necessary.

Minimally invasive surgical treatment of sigmoid diverticulitis

INTRODUCTION

Diverticular disease is very common in Western societies. However, there is a trend towards reducing indications for the surgical management of diverticulitis. Minimally invasive surgery offers many potential advantages to patients in the treatment of diverticulitis and may optimise surgical indications.

METHODS

A systematic literature review of minimally invasive techniques was carried out for the treatment of diverticulitis. The following techniques were reviewed: laparoscopic, single-port, natural orifice specimen extraction, natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery and laparoscopic lavage for the treatment of diverticulitis.

RESULTS

In total, 2,050 minimally invasive cases were reviewed. Of all the different minimally invasive techniques published regarding the management of diverticular disease, laparoscopic surgery is the only technique that has undergone the rigours of randomised controlled trials. The documented benefits are less blood loss, less pain and analgesic requirements, a reduction in major complications, a reduction in the frequency of drain usage, a reduction in the duration of postoperative ileus and shorter hospital stay. However, operative time does appear to be longer. It has also been demonstrated that elective laparoscopic surgery results in improved quality of life and social functioning.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of diverticular disease appears feasible and safe. The result of future randomised trials will more clearly define the role each minimally invasive technique will play in the future.

Damage control strategy for the management of perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis: laparoscopic lavage and drainage vs. laparoscopic Hartmann's procedure

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to compare laparoscopic peritoneal lavage and drainage (LLD) with laparoscopic Hartmann's procedure (LHP) in the management of perforated diverticulitis and to investigate a safer and more effective laparoscopic method for managing acute perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis.

METHODS

A consecutive series of patients who underwent emergent LHP or LLD for perforated diverticulitis were identified from a prospectively designed database. All procedure-related information was collected and analyzed. P < 5 % was considered statistically significant in this study.

RESULTS

A total of 88 patients underwent emergent laparoscopic procedures (47 LLD and 41 LHP) between 1995 and 2010 for acute perforated diverticulitis. Diagnostic laparoscopy classified 74 (84.1 %) patients as Hinchey III or IV perforated diverticulitis. OT for LHP was 182 ± 54.7 min, and EBL was 210 ± 170.5 ml. Six LHP (14.6 %) were converted to open Hartmann's for various reasons. Moreover the rates of LHP-associated postoperative mortality and morbidity were 2.4 and 17.1 %, respectively. For LLD, the operating time was 99.7 ± 39.8 min, and blood loss was 34.4 ± 21.2 ml. Three patients (6.4 %) were reoperated for the worsening of septic symptoms during post-LLD course. Moreover, the patients with LHP had significantly longer hospital stay than the ones with LLD did (16.3 ± 10.1 vs. 6.7 ± 2.2 days, P < 0.01). In the long-term follow-up, the rate of colostomy closure for LHP is 72.2 %, and 21 of 47 patients who underwent LLD had elective sigmoidectomy for the source control with the rate of 44.7 %.

CONCLUSIONS

Both LHP and LLD can be performed safely and effectively for managing severe diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis. Compared with LHP, LLD does not remove the pathogenic source; however, the clinical application of this damage control operation to our patients showed significantly better short- and long-term clinical outcomes for managing perforated diverticulitis with various Hinchey classifications.

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for perforated sigmoid diverticulitis

AIM

Currently in the UK the standard surgical practice for the management of perforated sigmoid diverticulitis is a Hartmann's procedure. There have been a number of recent publications on the use of laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for perforated sigmoid diverticulitis, as an alternative to the emergency Hartmann's procedure, with its associated morbidity and mortality. We aim to review the current literature on this topic.

METHOD

A search was made on the electronic database MEDLINE from PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane library. The keywords 'diverticulitis', 'perforated' and 'laparoscopy' were searched for in the titles and abstracts without language restrictions. Further studies were identified from searches on Google Scholar, as well as manual searches through reference lists of the relevant studies found. All included studies were quality assessed.

RESULTS

Twelve relevant studies were included. A total of 301 patients were reported, with a mean age of 57 years. All were non-randomized studies. The majority of patients were of Hinchey classification III. All were treated with intravenous antibiotics followed by laparoscopic lavage and insertion of intra-abdominal/pelvic drains. The mean conversion rate was 4.9% and mean length of hospital stay was 9.3 days. The mean complication rate was 18.9% and the overall mortality rate was 0.25%. Subsequent elective resections with primary anastamosis were performed in 51% of patients and the majority were completed laparoscopically.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for perforated sigmoid diverticulitis appears to be a potentially effective and more conservative alternative to a Hartmann's procedure. Randomized control trials are needed to better evaluate its role.

Treatment of acute diverticulitis laparoscopic lavage vs. resection (DILALA): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background

Perforated diverticulitis is a condition associated with substantial morbidity. Recently published reports suggest that laparoscopic lavage has fewer complications and shorter hospital stay. So far no randomised study has published any results.

Methods

DILALA is a Scandinavian, randomised trial, comparing laparoscopic lavage (LL) to the traditional Hartmann's Procedure (HP). Primary endpoint is the number of re-operations within 12 months. Secondary endpoints consist of mortality, quality of life (QoL), re-admission, health economy assessment and permanent stoma. Patients are included when surgery is required. A laparoscopy is performed and if Hinchey grade III is diagnosed the patient is included and randomised 1:1, to either LL or HP. Patients undergoing LL receive > 3L of saline intraperitoneally, placement of pelvic drain and continued antibiotics. Follow-up is scheduled 6-12 weeks, 6 months and 12 months. A QoL-form is filled out on discharge, 6- and 12 months. Inclusion is set to 80 patients (40+40).

Discussion

HP is associated with a high rate of complication. Not only does the primary operation entail complications, but also subsequent surgery is associated with a high morbidity. Thus the combined risk of treatment for the patient is high. The aim of the DILALA trial is to evaluate if laparoscopic lavage is a safe, minimally invasive method for patients with perforated diverticulitis Hinchey grade III, resulting in fewer re-operations, decreased morbidity, mortality, costs and increased quality of life.

Trial registration

British registry (ISRCTN) for clinical trials ISRCTN82208287http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN82208287

Laparoscopic management of diverticular disease

Despite its potential advantages, laparoscopic management of diverticular disease is currently performed by a minority of surgeons on a small group of patients. However, the role for laparoscopy in diverticular disease continues to develop. At present, adequate evidence exists for the routine use of laparoscopy for uncomplicated diverticular disease. Complicated disease, including fistulizing disease and free perforation requires additional expertise and study. As the experience grows among individual surgeons and institutions, it can be expected that the complication and conversion rates will continue to decline allowing even further evolution of laparoscopy for the treatment of this challenging disease process.

Laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for diverticulitis: a prospective study

Results of this study suggest that laparoscopic surgery for diverticular disease is a safe, feasible, and effective management strategy.

Background:

Surgical treatment of complicated colonic diverticular disease is still debatable. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the outcome of laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy in patients with diverticulitis. Patients offered laparoscopic surgery presented with acute complicated diverticulitis (Hinchey type I, II, III), chronically recurrent diverticulitis, bleeding, or sigmoid stenosis caused by chronic diverticulitis.

Method:

All patients who underwent laparoscopic colectomy within a 12-year period were prospectively entered into a database registry. One-stage laparoscopic resection and primary anastomosis constituted the planned procedure. A 4-trocar approach with suprapubic minilaparotomy was performed. Main data recorded were age, sex, postoperative pain, return of bowel function, operation time, duration of hospital stay, and early and late complications.

Results:

During the study period, 260 sigmoid colectomies were performed for diverticulitis. The cohort included 104 male and 156 female patients; M to F ratio was 4:6. Postoperative pain was controlled by NSAIDs or weak opioid analgesia. Fifteen patients (5.7%) required conversion from laparoscopic to open colectomy. The most common reasons for conversion were directly related to the inflammatory process, abscess, and peritonitis. Mean operative time was 130±54. Average postoperative hospital stay was 10±3 days. A longer hospital stay was recorded for Hinchey type IIb patients. Complications were recorded in 30 patients (11.5%). The most common complications that required reoperation were hemorrhage in 2 patients (0.76) and anastomotic leak in 5 patients (only 3 of them required reoperation). The mortality among them was 2 patients (0.76%).

Conclusions:

Laparoscopic surgery for diverticular disease is safe, feasible, and effective. Therefore, laparoscopic colectomy has replaced open resection as standard surgery for recurrent and complicated diverticulitis at our institution.

Laparoscopic colostomy reversal after a Hartmann procedure: a prospective series, literature review and an argument against laparotomy as the primary approach

BACKGROUND

Open restoration of bowel continuity after a Hartmann procedure has been associated with significant morbidity, including anastomotic leak, incisional hernia, wound infections and inability to re-establish intestinal continuity. Few studies have examined the role of laparoscopy in performing a Hartmann reversal. The aim of this study was to review our laparoscopic Hartmann reversal (LHR) experience with an emphasis on intra- and postoperative adverse events.

METHODS

A prospectively collected laparoscopic colorectal database involving 3 surgeons in 4 academic centres between 1991 and 2008 was reviewed. Factors evaluated were patient demographics, diagnosis, duration of surgery, intra- and postoperative complications, recovery of bowel function and length of stay in hospital.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight consecutive patients (13 men, 15 women) with a mean age of 61.1 (standard deviation [SD] 15.3) years and a mean weight of 72.3 (SD 20.1) kg underwent LHR. The diagnosis at initial surgery was complicated diverticulitis in 19 patients (67.9%), cancer in 6 patients (21.4%) and "other" in 3 patients (10.7%). The median duration of surgery was 166.2 (SD 74.4) minutes. There were no conversions. There was 1 major intraoperative complication (bleeding; 3.6%). There were 3 postoperative complications (10.7%): 1 abscess, 1 prolonged ileus and 1 wound hematoma. Only 1 patient with an abscess required readmission. There were no observed clinical anastomotic leaks. All patients underwent successful reanastomosis. The median time to return of bowel function was 4 (interquartile range [IQR] 3-4) days. The median length of stay in hospital was 5 (IQR 3-6) days. There was no mortality.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic colostomy reversal after a Hartmann procedure is safe and feasible in experienced hands. It is associated with low morbidity, quick return of bowel function and short stay in hospital.

A ten-year audit of perforated sigmoid diverticulitis: highlighting the outcomes of laparoscopic lavage

PURPOSE

This study was designed to review the results of laparoscopic lavage for the management of perforated sigmoid diverticulitis.

METHODS

A 10-year retrospective review was conducted of 78 consecutive cases of sigmoid diverticulitis warranting emergency surgical intervention (1999-2008).

RESULTS

Hinchey grades were I (12 patients), II (31 patients), III (29 patients), and IV (6 patients). The patients' mean age was 72 years. Procedures performed were laparoscopic washout (35), Hartmann procedure (31), percutaneous drainage of abscess (4), and resection and primary anastomosis (8). Overall mortality was 5 of 78 (7%); all of these patients were in the Hartmann group. Washout was successful in 27 of 35 cases, meaning recovery from the initial episode of peritonitis without resection. The short-term failures of washout in 8 patients were because of perforated cancer (1), fecal fistula formation (2), and inadequate washout and ongoing sepsis (5). In long-term follow-up, 8 patients in the washout group developed symptoms of recurrent complicated diverticulitis, including painful phlegmon (3), stricture (1), fistulas (3), and repeat perforation (1); all 8 patients underwent delayed resection. Eight patients underwent early planned resection without experiencing further symptoms. Eleven patients were observed without further symptoms with a mean follow-up of 20 months (range, 6-60 mo).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic washout is an emerging technique that is particularly applicable to the management of Hinchey III perforated peritonitis. Short- and long-term problems exist with the technique that may be overcome with further improvement in technique and case selection. Resection and radiological drainage remain widely used in managing perforated sigmoid diverticulitis.

The ladies trial: laparoscopic peritoneal lavage or resection for purulent peritonitis and Hartmann's procedure or resection with primary anastomosis for purulent or faecal peritonitis in perforated diverticulitis (NTR2037)

BACKGROUND

Recently, excellent results are reported on laparoscopic lavage in patients with purulent perforated diverticulitis as an alternative for sigmoidectomy and ostomy.The objective of this study is to determine whether LaparOscopic LAvage and drainage is a safe and effective treatment for patients with purulent peritonitis (LOLA-arm) and to determine the optimal resectional strategy in patients with a purulent or faecal peritonitis (DIVA-arm: perforated DIVerticulitis: sigmoidresection with or without Anastomosis).

METHODS/DESIGN

In this multicentre randomised trial all patients with perforated diverticulitis are included. Upon laparoscopy, patients with purulent peritonitis are treated with laparoscopic lavage and drainage, Hartmann's procedure or sigmoidectomy with primary anastomosis in a ratio of 2:1:1 (LOLA-arm). Patients with faecal peritonitis will be randomised 1:1 between Hartmann's procedure and resection with primary anastomosis (DIVA-arm). The primary combined endpoint of the LOLA-arm is major morbidity and mortality. A sample size of 132:66:66 patients will be able to detect a difference in the primary endpoint from 25% in resectional groups compared to 10% in the laparoscopic lavage group (two sided alpha = 5%, power = 90%). Endpoint of the DIVA-arm is stoma free survival one year after initial surgery. In this arm 212 patients are needed to significantly demonstrate a difference of 30% (log rank test two sided alpha = 5% and power = 90%) in favour of the patients with resection with primary anastomosis. Secondary endpoints for both arms are the number of days alive and outside the hospital, health related quality of life, health care utilisation and associated costs.

DISCUSSION

The Ladies trial is a nationwide multicentre randomised trial on perforated diverticulitis that will provide evidence on the merits of laparoscopic lavage and drainage for purulent generalised peritonitis and on the optimal resectional strategy for both purulent and faecal generalised peritonitis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Nederlands Trial Register NTR2037.

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for perforated colonic diverticulitis: a systematic review

AIM

This systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy, morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for patients with perforated diverticulitis.

METHOD

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library and CINAHL databases, Google Scholar and five major publisher websites without language restriction. All articles which reported the use of laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for patients with perforated diverticulitis were included.

RESULTS

Two prospective cohort studies, nine retrospective case series and two case reports reporting 231 patients were selected for data extraction. Most (77%) patients had purulent peritonitis (Hinchey III). Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage successfully controlled abdominal and systemic sepsis in 95.7% of patients. Mortality was 1.7%, morbidity 10.4% and only four (1.7%) of the 231 patients received a colostomy.

CONCLUSION

There have been no publications of high methodological quality on laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for patients with perforated colonic diverticulitis. The published papers do, however, show promising results, with high efficacy, low mortality, low morbidity and a minimal need for a colostomy.

Laparoscopic management of foreign body perforation in diverticular disease

A case is described where laparoscopic principles in the management of spontaneous sigmoid diverticular perforation are applied to foreign body perforation.

[Conservative laparoscopic treatment of diverticular peritonitis]

GOAL

To evaluate the results of a strategy of conservative laparoscopic treatment of peritonitis due to perforated diverticulitis for all patients, without exception for intraoperative findings or general patient condition, and to study the feasibility of eventual second-stage laparoscopic colectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2003 and May 2007, 25 consecutive patients were urgently hospitalized with acute peritonitis due to perforated diverticulitis. All patients underwent laparoscopic peritoneal lavage and debridement; when there was a large perforation (ten cases), suture closure under laparoscopic control was performed. The Hinchey classification of peritonitis was Stage I in 2, Stage IIB in 8, Stage III in 9, and Stage IV in 6.

RESULTS

Postoperative morbidity occurred in 12% of cases. Mean operative time was 71 minutes. Conversion to open laparotomy was not required. Complications included residual abscess (drained percutaneously with CT guidance), urinary tract infection, and prolonged drainage via the drain tract. Mortality was zero. Mean hospital stay was 13.8 days. Sixteen patients (64%) subsequently underwent laparoscopic colectomy as a second stage procedure.

CONCLUSION

Conservative laparoscopic treatment of acute peritonitis due to perforated diverticulitis is a reliable alternative to open laparotomy in many cases; eventual laparoscopic colectomy at a subsequent stage is possible in the majority of patients.

Acute complicated diverticulitis managed by laparoscopic lavage

PURPOSE

The classic surgical treatment of acute complicated sigmoid diverticulitis with peritonitis is often a two-stage operation with colon resection and a temporary stoma. This approach is associated with high mortality and morbidity and the reversal of the stoma is in many cases not performed because of concurrent diseases and age. Recently, several studies have experimented with laparoscopic lavage as a treatment of acute complicated diverticulitis. The aim of this review was to give an overview of the literature for this new approach and to determine the safety compared with Hartmann's procedure for patients with acute complicated sigmoid diverticulitis.

METHODS

A PubMed search was performed for publications between 1990 and May 2008. The terms acute, perforated, diverticulitis, lavage, drainage, and laparoscopy were used in combination. The EMBASE and Cochrane databases were also searched.

RESULTS

Eight studies met the inclusion criteria and reported 213 patients with acute complicated diverticulitis managed by laparoscopic lavage. None of these studies were randomized. The patients' mean age was 59 years and most patients had Hinchey Grade 3 disease. All patients were treated with antibiotics and laparoscopic lavage. Conversion to laparotomy was made in six (3%) patients and the mean hospital stay was nine days. Ten percent of the patients had complications. During the mean follow-up of 38 months, 38% of the patients underwent elective sigmoid resection with primary anastomosis.

CONCLUSION

Primary laparoscopic lavage for complicated diverticulitis may be a promising alternative to more radical surgery in selected patients. Larger studies have to be made before clinical recommendations can be given.

Emergency laparoscopic surgery for complicated diverticular disease

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to analyse the outcome of emergency laparoscopic surgical management of complicated diverticular disease.

METHOD

A prospectively collected electronic database of all colorectal laparoscopic procedures between April 2001 and September 2007 has been used to identify outcomes in patients presenting with complicated diverticular disease.

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients (28 men), median age 69 years (23-95), ASA grade II (12), III (38), IV (16) have undergone emergency surgery for complicated diverticulitis--Hinchey grades I (27), II (29), III (7) and diverticular bleeding (3) over a 6(1/2)-year period: 43 high anterior resections, 17 Hartmann's resections and seven low anterior resections. Diverticular fistulas were seen in 16 patients: colovaginal (7), colovesical (2), colo-fallopian (4), entero-colic (3). The median operation time was 110 min (45-195 min). There was one conversion to open surgery. Postoperative analgesia was provided by intravenous Paracetamol in 33 patients (50%), patient-controlled analgesia in 24 (36%), oral Paracetamol and Oramorph (12%) and epidural opioid infusion (1.5%). The median time to normal diet was 24 h (4 h-6 days) and median hospital stay 5 days (2-30). There were two deaths (3.3%); anastomotic leak, ventricular fibrillation (VF) cardiac arrest. Other complications included: wound infection eight (12%), anastomotic leak four (8%), port-site hernia one and one case of Clostridium difficile colitis requiring colectomy. There were five (7.5%) returns to theatre and two readmissions (3%).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic resectional surgery in complicated diverticular disease is a feasible, safe and a largely predictable operation that allows for early hospital discharge and, in our opinion, improved patient care. We are encouraged to continue to offer our patients the option of an emergency laparoscopic resection.

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage or primary anastomosis with defunctioning stoma for Hinchey 3 complicated diverticulitis: results of a comparative study

PURPOSE

This study was designed to compare postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic peritoneal lavage and open primary anastomosis with defunctioning stoma in the management of Hinchey 3 diverticulitis.

METHODS

From 1994 to 2006, 35 patients underwent laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for Hinchey 3 diverticulitis in three institutions. Data prospectively collected were compared with those of a retrospective series of 24 patients matched for Hinchey's classification and who underwent primary anastomosis with defunctioning stoma.

RESULTS

There was no postoperative death. Postoperative morbidity was not different between the two groups. One patient in the laparoscopic peritoneal lavage group required a Hartmann's procedure because of a colonic fistula. One patient in the primary anastomosis with defunctioning stoma group underwent a reoperation for incisional dehiscence. The median hospital stay was lower in patients treated by laparoscopic peritoneal lavage (8 vs. 17 days, P < 0.0001). Twenty-five patients in the laparoscopic peritoneal lavage group underwent elective laparoscopic resection. One of them required conversion to laparotomy. All patients in the primary anastomosis with defunctioning stoma group have had their ileostomy closed. Cumulative surgical morbidity (16 vs. 37.5 percent, P = 0.0507) and hospital stay (14 vs. 23 days, P < 0.0001) were lower in the laparoscopic peritoneal lavage group.

CONCLUSION

In the management of Hinchey 3 diverticulitis, laparoscopic peritoneal lavage does not result in excess morbidity or mortality, it reduces the length of hospital stay and avoids a stoma in most patients, and it is, therefore, a reasonable alternative to primary anastomosis with defunctioning stoma.

[Pylephlebitis in the course of diverticulitis]

Pylephlebitis or septic portal thrombophlebitis is a rare but serious condition which may occur following intra-abdominal sepsis from any source. Sigmoid diverticulitis is one of the most common sources. Modern imaging modalities, particularly CT, have increased the recognition of this condition. Standard treatment consists of anticoagulation plus antibiotic therapy to cover anaerobic and gram negative organisms. The duration of anticoagulation therapy remains controversial. Sigmoid colectomy may be required in cases of perforated diverticulitis or failure of medical therapy.

Emergency laparoscopic management of perforated sigmoid diverticulitis: a promising alternative to more radical procedures

BACKGROUND

Classic emergency surgical management of complicated perforated sigmoid diverticulitis is based on the principle of a two-stage operation, with colon resection and temporary stoma (Hartmann's procedure). But the later second-stage operation can be technically difficult and can be associated with a significant morbidity rate. We argue that laparoscopy may be beneficial in such patients with peritonitis in terms of operative results and could facilitate later surgical management.

STUDY DESIGN

We studied all consecutive patients with perforated sigmoid diverticulitis requiring emergency surgery between January 2000 and December 2004.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients underwent emergency laparoscopic management for perforated sigmoid diverticulitis. Nineteen patients (80%) were found to have a purulent or fecal diffuse peritonitis. No conversion and colostomy were necessary. The overall morbidity rate was 8%; 2 patients with pelvic abscesses required radiologic drainage. The median hospital stay was 12 days (range 7 to 35 days). Prophylactic sigmoid resection was performed by laparoscopy in all patients, with a conversion rate of 16%.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic treatment of generalized peritonitis secondary to diverticulitis is feasible and safe and may be a promising alternative to more radical surgery in selected patients, avoiding fecal diversion and allowing a delayed elective laparoscopic sigmoid resection.

Laparoscopic reintervention for anastomotic leakage after primary laparoscopic colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. The aim of this study was to assess the potential benefits of a laparoscopic reintervention for anastomotic leakage after primary laparoscopic surgery.

METHODS

Between January 2003 and January 2006, ten patients who had laparoscopic colorectal resection and later developed anastomotic leakage had a laparoscopic reintervention. A second group included 15 patients who had relaparotomy after primary open surgery.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics were comparable in the two groups. The median time from first operation to reintervention was 6 days in both groups. There were no conversions. The intensive care stay was shorter in the laparoscopic group (1 versus 3 days; P = 0.002). Resumption of a normal diet (median 3 versus 6 days; P = 0.031) and first stoma output (2 versus 3 days; P = 0.041) occurred earlier in the laparoscopic group. The postoperative 30-day morbidity rate was lower (four of ten patients versus 12 of 15; P = 0.087) and hospital stay was shorter (median 9 versus 13 days; P = 0.058) in the laparoscopic group. No patient developed incisional hernia in the laparoscopic group compared with five of 15 in the open group (P = 0.061).

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that laparoscopic reintervention for anastomotic leakage after primary laparoscopic surgery is associated with less morbidity, faster recovery and fewer abdominal wall complications than relaparotomy.