Skip to main content
Log in

Treatment of Hinchey stage III–IV diverticulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Review
  • Published:
International Journal of Colorectal Disease Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

This manuscript is a review of different surgical techniques to manage perforated colon diverticulitis.

Objective

This study was conducted to compare the benefits and disadvantages of different surgical treatments for Hinchey III or IV type of colon diverticulitis.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Science Citation Index (1990 and 2011). A total of 1,809 publications were identified and 14 studies with 1,041 patients were included in the study. Any surgical treatment was considered in this review. Mortality was considered the primary outcome, whereas hospital stay and reoperation rate were considered secondary outcomes.

Results

Primary resection with anastomosis has a significant advantage in terms of lower mortality rate with respect to Hartmann’s procedure (P = 0.02). The postoperative length of hospitalization was significantly shorter in the resection with anastomosis group (P < 0.001). Different findings have emerged from studies of patients with the primary resection with anastomosis vs laparoscopic peritoneal lavage and subsequent resection: overall surgical morbidity and hospital stay were lower in the laparoscopic peritoneal lavage group compared to the primary resection and anastomosis group (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Despite numerous published articles on operative treatments for patients with generalized peritonitis from perforated diverticulitis, we found a marked heterogeneity between included studies limiting the possibility to summarize in a metanalytical method the data provided and make difficult to synthesize data in a quantitative fashion. The advantages in the group of colon resection with primary anastomosis in terms of lower mortality rate and postoperative stay should be interpreted with caution because of several limitations. Future randomized controlled trials are needed to further evaluate different surgical treatments for patients with generalized peritonitis from perforated diverticulitis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Weizman AV, Nguyen GC (2011) Diverticular disease: epidemiology and management. Can J Gastroenterol 25:385–389

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Vermeulen J, Lange JF (2010) Treatment of perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis: past, present, and future. World J Surg 34:587–593

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hughes ES, Cuthbertson AM, Carden AB (1963) The surgical management of acute diverticulitis. Med J Aust 50(1):780–782

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hinchey EJ, Schaal PG, Richards GK (1978) Treatment of perforated diverticular disease of the colon. Adv Surg 12:85–109

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Killingback M (1983) Management of perforative diverticulitis. Surg Clin North Am 63:97–115

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Krukowski ZH, Matheson NA (1984) Emergency surgery for diverticular disease complicated by generalized and faecal peritonitis: a review. Br J Surg 71:921–927

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Aydin HN, Tekkis PP, Remzi FH, Constantinides V, Fazio VW (2006) Evaluation of the risk of a nonrestorative resection for the treatment of diverticular disease: the Cleveland Clinic diverticular disease propensity score. Dis Colon Rectum 49:629–639

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kaiser AM, Jiang JK, Lake JP, Ault G, Artinyan A, Gonzalez-Ruiz C et al (2005) The management of complicated diverticulitis and the role of computed tomography. Am J Gastroenterol 100:910–917

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Smithwick RH (1942) Experiences with the surgical management of diverticulitis of the sigmoid. Ann Surg 115:969–985

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lockhart-Mummery JP (1938) Late results of diverticulitis. Lancet 2:1401–1404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Greif JM, Fried G, McSherry CK (1980) Surgical treatment of perforated diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon. Dis Colon Rectum 23:483–487

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Banerjee S, Leather AJ, Rennie JA, Samano N, Gonzalez JG, Papagrigoriadis S (2005) Feasibility and morbidity of reversal of Hartmann's. Colorectal Dis 7:454–459

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Toorenvliet BR, Bakker RF, Breslau PJ, Merkus JW, Hamming JF (2010) Colonic diverticulitis: a prospective analysis of diagnostic accuracy and clinical decision-making. Colorectal Dis 12:179–186

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. White SI, Frenkiel B, Martin PJ (2010) A ten-year audit of perforated sigmoid diverticulitis: highlighting the outcomes of laparoscopic lavage. Dis Colon Rectum 53:1537–1541

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kohler L, Sauerland S, Neugebauer E (1999) Diagnosis and treatment of diverticular disease: results of a consensus development conference. The Scientific Committee of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery. Surg Endosc 13:430–436

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Lee EC, Murray JJ, Coller JA, Roberts PL, Schoetz DJ Jr (1997) Intraoperative colonic lavage in nonelective surgery for diverticular disease. Dis Colon Rectum 40:669–674

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Biondo S, Pares D, Kreisler E, Rague JM, Fraccalvieri D, Ruiz AG et al (2005) Anastomotic dehiscence after resection and primary anastomosis in left-sided colonic emergencies. Dis Colon Rectum 48:2272–2280

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Tabbara M, Velmahos GC, Butt MU, Chang Y, Spaniolas K, Demoya M et al (2010) Missed opportunities for primary repair in complicated acute diverticulitis. Surgery 148:919–924

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 6:e1000097

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Higgins J, Green S (eds) (2011) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Wiley, Chichester

  21. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JP et al (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 6:e1000100

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Greenland S, Robins JM (1985) Estimation of a common effect parameter from sparse follow-up data. Biometrics 41:55–68

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Mantel N, Haenszel W (1959) Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst 22:719–748

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Friedman HP, Goldberg JD (1996) Meta-analysis: an introduction and point of view. Hepatology 23:917–928

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. SIGN guidelines. Available at: http://www.sign.ac.uk/guidelines/fulltext/50/checklist3. Accessed 20 Mar 2009

  26. Rangel SJ, Kelsey J, Colby CE, Anderson J, Moss RL (2003) Development of a quality assessment scale for retrospective clinical studies in pediatric surgery. J Pediatr Surg 38:390–396, discussion −6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ et al (1996) Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 17:1–12

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Chalmers TC, Smith H Jr, Blackburn B, Silverman B, Schroeder B, Reitman D et al (1981) A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial. Control Clin Trials 2:31–49

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Egger M (1997) Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 315:629–634

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Fegiz G, Tonelli F, Rossi P, Di Paola M, De Masi E, Simonetti G (1976) Preservation of the superior hemorrhoidal artery in resection of the colon and rectum. Surg Gynecol Obstet 143:919–925

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Napolitano AM, Napolitano L, Costantini R, Ucchino S (1996) Innocenti P [Skeletization of the inferior mesenteric artery in colorectal surgery. Current considerations]. G Chir 17:185–189

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Gooszen AW, Tollenaar RA, Geelkerken RH, Smeets HJ, Bemelman WA, Van Schaardenburgh P et al (2001) Prospective study of primary anastomosis following sigmoid resection for suspected acute complicated diverticular disease. Br J Surg 88:693–697

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Hoemke M, Treckmann J, Schmitz R, Shah S (1999) Complicated diverticulitis of the sigmoid: a prospective study concerning primary resection with secure primary anastomosis. Dig Surg 16:420–424

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Messinetti S, Giacomelli L, Manno A, Finizio R, Fabrizio G, Granai AV et al (1998) Preservation and peeling of the inferior mesenteric artery in the anterior resection for complicated diverticular disease. Ann Ital Chir 69:479–482, discussion 82–3

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Urbanavicius L, Pattyn P, de Putte DV, Venskutonis D (2011) How to assess intestinal viability during surgery: a review of techniques. World J Gastrointest Surg 3:59–69

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Binda GA, Arezzo A, Serventi A, Bonelli L, Facchini M, Prandi M et al (2012) Multicentre observational study of the natural history of left-sided acute diverticulitis. Br J Surg 99:276–285

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Gooszen AW, Gooszen HG, Veerman W, Van Dongen VM, Hermans J, Klien Kranenbarg E et al (2001) Operative treatment of acute complications of diverticular disease: primary or secondary anastomosis after sigmoid resection. Eur J Surg 167:35–39

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Hold M, Denck H, Bull P (1990) Surgical management of perforating diverticular disease in Austria. Int J Colorectal Dis 5:195–199

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Regenet N, Pessaux P, Hennekinne S, Lermite E, Tuech JJ, Brehant O et al (2003) Primary anastomosis after intraoperative colonic lavage vs. Hartmann's procedure in generalized peritonitis complicating diverticular disease of the colon. Int J Colorectal Dis 18:503–507

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Richter S, Lindemann W, Kollmar O, Pistorius GA, Maurer CA, Schilling MK (2006) One-stage sigmoid colon resection for perforated sigmoid diverticulitis (Hinchey stages III and IV). World J Surg 30:1027–1032

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Schilling MK, Maurer CA, Kollmar O, Buchler MW (2001) Primary vs. secondary anastomosis after sigmoid colon resection for perforated diverticulitis (Hinchey Stage III and IV): a prospective outcome and cost analysis. Dis Colon Rectum 44:699–703, discussion −5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Trenti L, Biondo S, Golda T, Monica M, Kreisler E, Fraccalvieri D et al (2011) Generalized peritonitis due to perforated diverticulitis: Hartmann's procedure or primary anastomosis? Int J Colorectal Dis 26:377–384

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Finlay IG, Carter DC (1987) A comparison of emergency resection and staged management in perforated diverticular disease. Dis Colon Rectum 30:929–933

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Karoui M, Champault A, Pautrat K, Valleur P, Cherqui D, Champault G (2009) Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage or primary anastomosis with defunctioning stoma for Hinchey 3 complicated diverticulitis: results of a comparative study. Dis Colon Rectum 52:609–615

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Nagorney DM, Adson MA, Pemberton JH (1985) Sigmoid diverticulitis with perforation and generalized peritonitis. Dis Colon Rectum 28:71–75

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Vermeulen J, Akkersdijk GP, Gosselink MP, Hop WC, Mannaerts GH, van der Harst E et al (2007) Outcome after emergency surgery for acute perforated diverticulitis in 200 cases. Dig Surg 24:361–366

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Zingg U, Pasternak I, Dietrich M, Seifert B, Oertli D, Metzger U (2010) Primary anastomosis vs Hartmann's procedure in patients undergoing emergency left colectomy for perforated diverticulitis. Colorectal Dis 12:54–60

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Zeitoun G, Laurent A, Rouffet F, Hay J, Fingerhut A, Paquet J et al (2000) Multicentre, randomized clinical trial of primary versus secondary sigmoid resection in generalized peritonitis complicating sigmoid diverticulitis. Br J Surg 87:1366–1374

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Kronborg O (1993) Treatment of perforated sigmoid diverticulitis: a prospective randomized trial. Br J Surg 80:505–507

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Perathoner A, Klaus A, Muhlmann G, Oberwalder M, Margreiter R, Kafka-Ritsch R (2010) Damage control with abdominal vacuum therapy (VAC) to manage perforated diverticulitis with advanced generalized peritonitis—a proof of concept. Int J Colorectal Dis 25:767–774

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Pasternak I, Dietrich M, Woodman R, Metzger U, Wattchow DA, Zingg U (2010) Use of severity classification systems in the surgical decision-making process in emergency laparotomy for perforated diverticulitis. Int J Colorectal Dis 25:463–470

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Krukowski ZH (2009) Diverticular disease. In: Phillips RKS (ed) Colorectal surgery: a companion to specialist surgical practice, 3rd edn. Saunders, Edinburgh, p 107–124

  53. Practice parameters for sigmoid diverticulitis (2000) The Standards Task Force, American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 10:142–148.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Mayo WJ, Wilson LB, Griffin HZ (1907) Acquired diverticulitis of the large intestine. Surg Gynecol Obstet 5:8–15

    Google Scholar 

  55. Bauer VP (2009) Emergency management of diverticulitis. Clin Colon Rectal Surg 22:161–168

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Constantinides VA, Tekkis PP, Athanasiou T, Aziz O, Purkayastha S, Remzi FH et al (2006) Primary resection with anastomosis vs. Hartmann's procedure in nonelective surgery for acute colonic diverticulitis: a systematic review. Dis Colon Rectum 49:966–981

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Afshar S, Kurer MA (2012) Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for perforated sigmoid diverticulitis. Colorectal Dis 14:135–142

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Naraynsingh V, Maharaj R, Hassranah D, Hariharan S, Dan D, Zbar AP (2011) Perforated left-sided diverticulitis with faecal peritonitis: is the Hinchey classification the best guide for surgical decision making? Tech Coloproctol 15:199–203

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Mueller MH, Karpitschka M, Renz B, Kleespies A, Kasparek MS, Jauch KW et al (2011) Co-morbidity and postsurgical outcome in patients with perforated sigmoid diverticulitis. Int J Colorectal Dis 26:227–234

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jacopo Desiderio.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cirocchi, R., Trastulli, S., Desiderio, J. et al. Treatment of Hinchey stage III–IV diverticulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis 28, 447–457 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-012-1622-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-012-1622-4

Keywords

Navigation