Oberkofler CE, et al. A multicenter randomized clinical trial of primary anastomosis or Hartmann’s procedure for perforated left colonic diverticulitis with purulent or fecal peritonitis. Ann Surg. 2012 Nov; 256(5):819-26; discussion 826-7.
Full-text for Emory users.
Results: Patient demographics were equally distributed in both groups (Hinchey III: 76% vs 75% and Hinchey IV: 24% vs 25%, for HP vs PA, respectively). The overall complication rate for both resection and stoma reversal operations was comparable (80% vs 84%, P = 0.813). Although the outcome after the initial colon resection did not show any significant differences (mortality 13% vs 9% and morbidity 67% vs 75% in HP vs PA), the stoma reversal rate after PA with diverting ileostomy was higher (90% vs 57%, P = 0.005) and serious complications (Grades IIIb-IV: 0% vs 20%, P = 0.046), operating time (73 minutes vs 183 minutes, P < 0.001), hospital stay (6 days vs 9 days, P = 0.016), and lower in-hospital costs (US $16,717 vs US $24,014) were significantly reduced in the PA group.
Conclusions: This is the first randomized clinical trial favoring PA with diverting ileostomy over HP in patients with perforated diverticulitis.
Thornell A, et al. Laparoscopic Lavage for Perforated Diverticulitis With Purulent Peritonitis: A Randomized Trial. Ann Intern Med. 2016 Feb 2;164(3):137-45.
Full-text for Emory users.
Koedam TWA, et al.; COLOR COLOR II study group. Oncological Outcomes After Anastomotic Leakage After Surgery for Colon or Rectal Cancer: Increased Risk of Local Recurrence. Ann Surg. 2020 Mar 27. [Epub ahead of print]
Results: For colon cancer, anastomotic leakage was not associated with increased percentage of local recurrence or decreased disease-free-survival. For rectal cancer, an increase of local recurrences (13.3% vs 4.6%; hazard ratio 2.96; 95% confidence interval 1.38-6.34; P = 0.005) and a decrease of disease-free survival (53.6% vs 70.9%; hazard ratio 1.67; 95% confidence interval 1.16-2.41; P = 0.006) at 5-year follow-up were found in patients with anastomotic leakage.
Conclusion: Short-term morbidity, mortality, and long-term oncological outcomes are negatively influenced by the occurrence of anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery. For colon cancer, no significant effect was observed; however, due to low power, no conclusions on the influence of anastomotic leakage on outcomes after colon surgery could be reached. Clinical awareness of increased risk of local recurrence after anastomotic leakage throughout the follow-up is mandatory.
Huisman DE, Reudink M, van Rooijen SJ, et al. LekCheck: A Prospective Study to Identify Perioperative Modifiable Risk Factors for Anastomotic Leakage in Colorectal Surgery. Ann Surg. 2020 Jun 4. [Epub ahead of print]
Full-text for Emory users.
Objective: To assess potentially modifiable perioperative risk factors for anastomotic leakage in adult patients undergoing colorectal surgery.
Summary background data: Colorectal anastomotic leakage (CAL) is the single most important denominator of postoperative outcome after colorectal surgery. To lower the risk of CAL, the current research focused on the association of potentially modifiable risk factors, both surgical and anesthesiological.
Sherman KL, Wexner SD. Considerations in Stoma Reversal. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2017 Jul;30(3):172-177.
Temporary stomas are frequently used in the management of diverticulitis, colorectal cancer, and inflammatory bowel disease. These temporary stomas are used to try to mitigate septic complications from anastomotic leaks and to avoid the need for reoperation. Once acute medical conditions have improved and after the anastomosis has been proven to be healed, stomas can be reversed. Contrast enemas, digital rectal examination, and endoscopic evaluation are used to evaluate the anastomosis prior to reversal. Stoma reversal is associated with complications including anastomotic leak, postoperative ileus, bowel obstruction, enterocutaneous fistula, and, most commonly, surgical site infection. Furthermore, many stomas, which were intended to be temporary, may not be reversed due to postoperative complications, adjuvant therapy, or prohibitive comorbidities.
Kapadia MR. Volvulus of the Small Bowel and Colon. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2017 Feb; 30(1):40-45.
“Volvulus of the intestines involves twisting around a fixed point. It may occur anywhere along the gastrointestinal tract where there is a long, mobile intestinal segment with a narrow mesenteric attachment. Volvulus leads to luminal obstruction and can compromise intestinal blood flow. For this reason, it tends to be a surgical emergency which requires prompt attention. Failure to recognize the signs and symptoms of intestinal volvulus may lead to bowel ischemia and perforation.”
Today’s discussion topics included the Barnett continent intestinal reservoir.
Worsey J, Fazio VW. (2017). Continent Ileostomy. In: Current Therapy in Colon and Rectal Surgery, 3rd ed, pgs. 204-208. Elsevier: NY.
Full-text for Emory users.
FIGURE 40-3. Barnett modification of the continent ileostomy. (Cleveland Clinic Center for Medical Art & Photography.)
Veld JV, et al. Changes in Management of Left-Sided Obstructive Colon Cancer: National Practice and Guideline Implementation. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2019 Dec;17(12):1512-1520.
Results: A total of 2,587 patients were included (2,013 ER, 345 DS, and 229 SEMS). A trend was observed in reversal of ER (decrease from 86.2% to 69.6%) and SEMS (increase from 1.3% to 7.8%) after 2014, with an ongoing increase in DS (from 5.2% in 2009 to 22.7% in 2016). DS after 2014 was associated with more laparoscopic resections (66.0% vs 35.5%; P<.001) and more 2-stage procedures (41.5% vs 28.6%; P=.01) with fewer permanent stomas (14.7% vs 29.5%; P=.005). Overall, more laparoscopic resections (25.4% vs 13.2%; P<.001) and shorter total hospital stays (14 vs 15 days; P<.001) were observed after 2014. However, similar rates of primary anastomosis (48.7% vs 48.6%; P=.961), 90-day complications (40.4% vs 37.9%; P=.254), and 90-day mortality (6.5% vs 7.0%; P=.635) were observed.
CONCLUSIONS: Guideline revision resulted in a notable change from ER to BTS for LSOCC. This was accompanied by an increased rate of laparoscopic resections, more 2-stage procedures with a decreased permanent stoma rate in patients receiving DS as BTS, and a shorter total hospital stay. However, overall 90-day complication and mortality rates remained relatively high.
This week’s discussions included the causes of diversion colitis.
Tominaga K, et al. Diversion colitis and pouchitis: A mini-review. World J Gastroenterol. 2018 Apr 28;24(16):1734-1747.
“The basic mechanisms underlying diversion colitis are still unclear. Glotzer hypothesized that it might be the result of bacterial overgrowth, the presence of harmful bacteria, nutritional deficiencies, toxins, or disturbance in the symbiotic relationship between luminal bacteria and the mucosal layer. Reportedly, concentrations of carbohydrate-fermenting anaerobic bacteria and pathogenic bacteria are reduced in de-functioned colons[5,23,53] and these reports indicate that the overgrowth of anaerobic bacteria or a pathogenic bacterium is unlikely to be an important etiological factor. On the other hand, there is an increase of nitrate-reducing bacteria in patients with diversion colitis and nitrate-reducing bacteria produce nitric oxide (NO) which plays a protective role in low concentrations, but at higher levels it becomes toxic to the colonic tissue. Thus, it has been suggested that increases in nitrate-reducing bacteria may result in toxic levels of NO, leading to the diversion colitis.” (Tominaga, 2018, p. 1739)
A discussion this week included a diagnostic CTA prior to flourscopic angiography.
Reference: Wells ML, et al. CT for evaluation of acute gastrointestinal bleeding. RadioGraphics. 2018 Jul-Aug;38(4):1089-1107. doi:10.1148/rg.2018170138
Summary: “Teaching point: CT angiography is gaining popularity for use in emergent evaluations of acute GI bleeding. It has potential for use in the first-line evaluation of acute LGIB and the evaluation of UGIB after failed or nondiagnostic endoscopy.”
One discussion this week included the effectiveness of CTA, angiography, and tagged RBC scan.
Reference: Radiologic Diagnosis and Intervention for Gastrointestinal Bleeding (p.105)