0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Original Article |

Impact of Primary Resection on the Outcome of Patients With Perforated Diverticulitis FREE

Vidhan Chandra, MD; Heidi Nelson, MD; Dirk Russell Larson, MS; Jeffrey Robert Harrington, MA
[+] Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Departments of General Surgery (Dr Chandra), Colon and Rectal Surgery (Dr Nelson), and Biostatistics (Messrs Larson and Harrington), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.


Arch Surg. 2004;139(11):1221-1224. doi:10.1001/archsurg.139.11.1221.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Background  Primary resection has replaced the conventional drainage procedure in the management of patients with generalized peritonitis complicating diverticular disease of the colon. This study investigates the impact of primary resection on operative mortality, identifies predictors of mortality, and compares the results with those of our earlier experience.

Hypothesis  Primary resection of the perforated diseased segment of the colon is associated with lower mortality rates than the drainage procedure in patients with Hinchey stages 3 and 4 diverticulitis.

Design  Retrospective analysis.

Setting  Tertiary care referral center.

Patients  We included 138 consecutive patients who underwent emergent operation for generalized peritonitis complicating diverticular disease of the colon (Hinchey stages 3 and 4) during a period of 16 years (January 1983 to May 1999).

Main Outcome Measures  The 30-day mortality rate was analyzed and predictors of mortality identified.

Results  Patients were classified as having spreading purulent peritonitis (n = 44, 31.9%), diffuse peritonitis (n = 64, 46.4%), or fecal peritonitis (n = 30, 21.7%). One hundred thirty-one patients (94.9%) underwent primary resection, 6 patients (4.3%) underwent resection and primary anastomosis, and 1 patient required total colectomy and end ileostomy. Thirteen of the 138 patients in the present group died (1983-1998), representing a perioperative mortality rate of 9%. There was no significant difference in mortality when compared with our earlier study (1972-1982), which had a mortality rate of 12%, considering that more than 25% of the patients in that group were managed by colostomy and drainage alone. Factors identified univariately as predictors of mortality were age of more than 70 years (P = .047), 2 or more comorbid conditions (P<.01), obstipation at initial examination (P = .02), use of steroids (P = .01), and perioperative sepsis (P<.001).

Conclusions  Primary resection has become the standard practice for patients with generalized peritonitis complicating diverticulitis. Mortality rates have not significantly declined despite more aggressive surgical management of the septic source. Because advanced age, comorbid conditions, and perioperative sepsis predict mortality, it is suggested that further reduction in mortality will require improvement in medical management of perioperative sepsis and comorbid conditions.

Diverticulosis of the colon is very common in the Western population, affecting one third of the population older than 45 years of age and up to two thirds of the population older than 85 years of age.1,2 Fortunately, only 10% to 25% of these individuals develop symptomatic disease.310 Although most patients with symptomatic diverticulitis resolve with conservative management, 20% of them develop complications including obstruction, abscesses, fistulas, and perforation, often requiring surgical intervention.11 Free perforation causing generalized peritonitis (Hinchey stages 3 and 412) is the most severe of these complications.13 These patients require emergent operation with mortality rates reported in the literature ranging from 0% to 100%.14,15 The conventional surgical approach in the management of these patients with generalized peritonitis included a 3-stage drainage procedure as advocated by Smithwick3 in 1942. This was associated with an unacceptably high morbidity and mortality16,17 attributed to the diseased segment of colon, which was left in situ. In an effort to improve the outcome, a 2-stage approach involving resection of the diseased colon at the initial surgery was recommended,1820 which has become the current practice at most centers. Our own institution’s experience with the management of this disease, as reported in 1985, also supported and recommended the 2-stage approach.21

Our continued experience prompted us to undertake this retrospective review to study the changing trend in the surgical approach in the management of this disease and determine its impact on patient outcomes.

We collected data on 138 consecutive patients with generalized peritonitis following diverticulitis who underwent an emergency operation at our institution from January 1983 to December 1998. Patients were identified from the hospital’s diagnostic index and operating records. The grading system for the degree of perforation by Hinchey et al12 was used for classification of perforation. Patients belonging to Hinchey stages 3 and 4 were included. Patients were classified as having spreading purulent peritonitis (n = 44, 31.9%), diffuse peritonitis (n = 64, 46.4%), and fecal peritonitis (n = 30, 21.7%). Patients with perforations causing phlegmons, fistulae, or contained intramesenteric or pericolonic abscesses were excluded. Patient demographics; clinical features; physical, radiological, and laboratory findings; type of surgical procedure; length of hospital stay; postoperative complications; and mortality statistics were abstracted from patient records. Follow-up was continued until intestinal continuity was reestablished or judged to be medically contraindicated.

Collected data were analyzed focusing on the association of preoperative and postoperative risk factors with perioperative mortality. Risk factors included demographics, the clinical profile, operative approach, and postoperative complications. Means and standard deviations were used as data summaries for continuous measures and counts, and percentages were used for discrete variables. Initially, χ2 analysis was used to evaluate the univariate association of each risk factor with perioperative mortality. While the small number of events suggests against using multivariable analysis, the associations among the significant risk factors presented a complex scenario for interpretation of the univariate results. Consequently, a logistic regression model using stepwise selection was used, including each of the univariately significant factors as potential covariates. The final model contained 2 covariates; the effects of these variables on perioperative mortality were reported as odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. All statistical tests were 2-sided, and P values <.05 were considered significant. The analyses were performed using SAS version 8.02 (SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC).

DEMOGRAPHICS

We reviewed the records of 138 consecutive patients with perforated sigmoid diverticulitis and generalized peritonitis admitted to the Mayo Clinic between January 1983 and May 1999. There were 78 women (56.5%), and the median age was 70 years (range, 30-94 years). The difference in median age of the men (68 years) and women (72 years) was not statistically significant (P = .10).

CLINICAL PROFILE

Eighty-three percent of the patients had abdominal pain. Other symptoms at the initial examination included fever (oral >100.9°F, 46%), obstipation (31%), vomiting (38%), diarrhea (23%), bleeding per rectum (8%), and hypotension (systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg, 8%). The median duration from the initial onset of symptoms to referral to the Mayo Clinic for operative intervention was 2 days.

COMORBIDITIES

Eighty-one percent of the patients had 1 or more of the following comorbid conditions: coronary artery disease/hypertension, respiratory disease (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, emphysema), diabetes mellitus, visceral malignancy, and immunosuppressive therapy. The median number of comorbid conditions was 1 (range, 0-4).

LABORATORY FINDINGS

Sixty-seven percent of the patients had preoperative leucocytosis (white blood count >12 000), with a median absolute leukocyte count of 14 400 cells/μL (range, 1200-34 000). Forty-one percent of the patients were anemic, with a median absolute hemoglobin value of 12 g/dL (range, 7-18 g/dL). Free intraperitoneal air was evident in 80 patients (58%), while 114 patients (83%) had evidence of ileus or partial intestinal obstruction.

PERITONITIS

Ruptured pericolonic abscess with spreading purulent peritonitis was found in 44 patients (32%), diffuse purulent peritonitis involving the entire peritoneal cavity was found in 64 patients (46%), and diffuse fecal peritonitis (gross feces throughout the peritoneal cavity) was present in 30 patients (22%). Among clinical and laboratory findings, bleeding per rectum was the only item that resulted in a statistically significant difference (P = .04) between patients with spreading purulent peritonitis (15.9%) and those with diffuse or fecal peritonitis (4.3%).

One hundred thirty-one patients (94.9%) underwent primary resection, 6 patients (4.3%) underwent resection and primary anastomosis, and 1 patient required total colectomy and end ileostomy. All patients received broad-spectrum intravenous antibiotics for the duration of their hospital stay. The clinical profile of patients in this study (Group A) was similar to our earlier review of 121 similar patients (Group B) at our institution published in 1985 by Nagorney et al21 (Table 1). However, none of the patients in the present study underwent a drainage procedure, as compared with 26% of the patients in the earlier group. The overall mortality, however, was not markedly different between the 2 studies.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Comparison of Age, Sex, Degree of Contamination, and Mortality in Groups A and B*
MORTALITY

There were 13 perioperative deaths (mortality rate, 9.4%). Perioperative mortality was defined as death in hospital or postdischarge and within 30 days of surgery. There were 5 men and 8 women, with a median age of 75 years. All patients who died had significant comorbid conditions (at least 1 condition) (Table 2). Eight (61.5%) of the 13 patients had diffuse peritonitis, 4 patients (30.8%) had fecal peritonitis, and 1 patient (7.7%) had spreading purulent peritonitis. Withdrawal of life-supportive measures was the immediate cause of death in 12 patients (92.3%). Underlying pathologic features contributing to mortality were septicemia and its associated complications in 10 patients (77%), perioperative myocardial infarction/cardiac failure in 2 patients (15%), and cerebrovascular accident in 1 patient (8%).

On univariate analysis, the 5 factors predictive of perioperative mortality were age older than 70 years, 2 or more comorbid conditions, obstipation at initial examination, use of steroid, and postoperative septicemia (Table 3).

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Predictors of Perioperative Mortality

A multivariable model was used to simultaneously evaluate the 5 univariately significant risk factors. Two statistically significant covariates were identified: the existence of 2 or more comorbidities (odds ratio, 8.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-44.7; P = .01) and the presence of postoperative septicemia (odds ratio, 18.9; 95% confidence interval, 4.7-76.3; P<.001). After accounting for these 2 factors, none of the other candidate variables contributed significantly to the model.

This study confirms that primary resection has replaced the conventional 3-stage drainage procedure in the management of patients with generalized peritonitis complicating diverticular disease of the colon (Hinchey stages 3 and 4). Perioperative sepsis is the major cause of death, and the mortality associated with this condition continues to be high.

In the past, critically ill patients with significant comorbid conditions were considered to be at high surgical risk for colonic resection and were managed by drainage alone. The results of our study, however, prove that primary resection is as safe and can be performed in sick patients without added mortality. Primary resection is more appealing than drainage; it not only eradicates the source of infection but also provides histological confirmation of diagnosis and involves 1 less operation compared with the conventional 3-stage procedure. In our own earlier study, we had observed a significant difference (P<.05) in mortality in patients managed by colostomy and drainage (mortality rate, 26%) compared with primary resection (mortality rate, 7%). More than one fourth of the patients in that study had undergone the drainage procedure. Based on the results of several similar studies, it was assumed that the drainage procedure was the underlying problem, which contributed to postoperative sepsis and death. The drainage procedure gradually lost ground, and primary resection became the preferred approach in managing these patients.

With the adoption of primary resection as the standard of care, it was anticipated that results would improve. Unfortunately, our present study fails to show a significant difference in mortality rates despite totally abandoning the drainage procedure. Perhaps patients in the past were managed by drainage alone only because they were considered to be at high surgical risk. When this subset of patients is managed by primary resection, as is the current surgical practice, the outcome remains the same. Thus, it is probable that the medical conditions of the patients, rather than the choice of the surgical procedure, predispose them to the high death rate. The findings of our study support this belief. In our study, the 5 factors of age older than 70 years, 2 or more comorbid conditions, obstipation at initial examination, use of steroids, and perioperative sepsis on univariate analysis identify a patient group as being at high risk for perioperative mortality. All these factors reflect the medical condition of the patient at initial examination prior to surgical intervention. The presence of perioperative sepsis and 2 or more comorbid conditions were also significant on multivariable analysis. Other studies22,23 in the recent literature also have failed to demonstrate a survival benefit following the Hartmann procedure.

Overwhelming sepsis was the cause of death in the majority (78%) of the patients who died. Thus, despite optimal local control of the septic focus, patients succumb to the systemic effects of the initial infective process. Sepsis is poorly tolerated in the elderly, especially if they are immunosuppressed. Ten (77%) of the 13 were immunocompromised by virtue of taking steroids for various medical conditions. Although the precise mechanism of the deleterious effects of steroids is unclear, the association between steroid use and mortality is well established. Interestingly, withdrawal of life support per the family’s request was the immediate cause of death in 12 of the 13 patients who died.

It seems that there exists a significant challenge to mortality associated with this group of patients, which has not improved despite adoption of primary resection. In fact, the medical condition of the patients may be more critical than the precise surgical procedure in determining the overall outcome. Until further randomized prospective data are available, primary resection, which so far provides the best control of the disease process, will remain the standard of care for this highly challenging group of patients.

This study confirms that patients with Hinchey stages 3 and 4 disease still have a high rate of perioperative mortality. The change in the surgical approach from the conventional 3-stage diversion with drainage to a 2-stage procedure of resection and drainage is a safe practice and has not resulted in an increase in mortality. Future efforts to reduce perioperative mortality need to be focused on the management of comorbid conditions and the systemic manifestations of sepsis.

Correspondence: Heidi Nelson, MD, Department ofColon and Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905 (nelson.heidi@mayo.edu).

Accepted for Publication: May 20, 2004.

Welch  CEAleen  AWDonaldson  GA An appraisal of resection of the colon for diverticulitis of the sigmoid. Ann Surg 1953;138332- 343
PubMed Link to Article
Roberts  PAbel  MRosen  L  et al. the Standards Task Force American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Practice parameters for sigmoid diverticulitis. Dis Colon Rectum 1995;38125- 132
PubMed Link to Article
Smithwick  RH Experiences with the surgical management of diverticulitis of sigmoid. Ann Surg 1942;115969- 983
Link to Article
Boles  RS  JrJordan  SM The clinical significance of diverticulosis. Gastroenterology 1958;35579- 581
PubMed
Brown  PWMarcley  DM Prognosis of diverticulitis and diverticulosis of the colon. JAMA 1937;1091328- 1333
Link to Article
Horner  JL A study of diverticulitis of the colon in office practice. Gastroenterology 1952;21223- 229
PubMed
McGowan  FJWolff  WI Diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon. Gastroenterology 1952;21119- 132
PubMed
Pemberton  J deJBlack  BMMaino  CR Progress in the surgical management of diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1947;85523- 534
Waugh  JMWalt  AJ Current trends in the surgical treatment of diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon. Surg Clin North Am 1962;421267- 1276
PubMed
Thompson  DABailey  HR Management of acute diverticulitis with abscess. Semin Colon Rectal Surg 1990;174- 80
Ferzoco  LBRaptopoulos  VSilen  W Current concepts: acute diverticulitis. N Engl J Med 1998;3381521- 1526
PubMed Link to Article
Hinchey  EJSchaal  PGHRichard  GK Treatment of perforated diverticular disease of the colon. Adv Surg 1978;1285- 109
PubMed
Rodkey  GVWelch  CE Colonic diverticular disease with surgical treatment: a study of 338 cases. Surg Clin North Am 1974;54655- 674
PubMed
Killingback  MJ Acute diverticulitis: progress report, Australasian survey (1967-1969). Dis Colon Rectum 1970;13444- 447
PubMed Link to Article
Botsford  TWZollinger  RMHicks  R Mortality of the surgical treatment of diverticulitis. Am J Surg 1971;121702- 705
PubMed Link to Article
Greif  JMFried  GMcSherry  CK Surgical treatment of perforated diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon. Dis Colon Rectum 1980;23483- 487
PubMed Link to Article
Underwood  JWMarks  CG The septic complications of sigmoid diverticular disease. Br J Surg 1984;71209- 221
PubMed Link to Article
Endrey-Walder  PJudd  ES Acute perforating diverticulitis: emergency surgical treatment. Minn Med 1973;5627- 30
PubMed
Belding  HH Acute perforated diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon with generalized peritonitis. Arch Surg 1957;74511- 515
Link to Article
Risholm  L Primary resection in perforating diverticulitis of the colon. WorldJ Surg 1982;6490- 491
PubMed Link to Article
Nagorney  DMAdson  MAPemberton  JH Sigmoid diverticulitis with perforation and generalized peritonitis. Dis Colon Rectum 1985;2871- 75
PubMed Link to Article
Berry  ARTurner  WHMortensen  NJKettlewell  MG Emergency surgery for complicated diverticular disease: a five-year experience. Dis Colon Rectum 1989;32849- 854
PubMed Link to Article
Tudor  RGFarmakis  NKeighley  MRB National audit of complicated diverticular disease: analysis of index cases. Br J Surg 1994;81730- 732
PubMed Link to Article

Figures

Tables

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Comparison of Age, Sex, Degree of Contamination, and Mortality in Groups A and B*
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Predictors of Perioperative Mortality

References

Welch  CEAleen  AWDonaldson  GA An appraisal of resection of the colon for diverticulitis of the sigmoid. Ann Surg 1953;138332- 343
PubMed Link to Article
Roberts  PAbel  MRosen  L  et al. the Standards Task Force American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Practice parameters for sigmoid diverticulitis. Dis Colon Rectum 1995;38125- 132
PubMed Link to Article
Smithwick  RH Experiences with the surgical management of diverticulitis of sigmoid. Ann Surg 1942;115969- 983
Link to Article
Boles  RS  JrJordan  SM The clinical significance of diverticulosis. Gastroenterology 1958;35579- 581
PubMed
Brown  PWMarcley  DM Prognosis of diverticulitis and diverticulosis of the colon. JAMA 1937;1091328- 1333
Link to Article
Horner  JL A study of diverticulitis of the colon in office practice. Gastroenterology 1952;21223- 229
PubMed
McGowan  FJWolff  WI Diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon. Gastroenterology 1952;21119- 132
PubMed
Pemberton  J deJBlack  BMMaino  CR Progress in the surgical management of diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1947;85523- 534
Waugh  JMWalt  AJ Current trends in the surgical treatment of diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon. Surg Clin North Am 1962;421267- 1276
PubMed
Thompson  DABailey  HR Management of acute diverticulitis with abscess. Semin Colon Rectal Surg 1990;174- 80
Ferzoco  LBRaptopoulos  VSilen  W Current concepts: acute diverticulitis. N Engl J Med 1998;3381521- 1526
PubMed Link to Article
Hinchey  EJSchaal  PGHRichard  GK Treatment of perforated diverticular disease of the colon. Adv Surg 1978;1285- 109
PubMed
Rodkey  GVWelch  CE Colonic diverticular disease with surgical treatment: a study of 338 cases. Surg Clin North Am 1974;54655- 674
PubMed
Killingback  MJ Acute diverticulitis: progress report, Australasian survey (1967-1969). Dis Colon Rectum 1970;13444- 447
PubMed Link to Article
Botsford  TWZollinger  RMHicks  R Mortality of the surgical treatment of diverticulitis. Am J Surg 1971;121702- 705
PubMed Link to Article
Greif  JMFried  GMcSherry  CK Surgical treatment of perforated diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon. Dis Colon Rectum 1980;23483- 487
PubMed Link to Article
Underwood  JWMarks  CG The septic complications of sigmoid diverticular disease. Br J Surg 1984;71209- 221
PubMed Link to Article
Endrey-Walder  PJudd  ES Acute perforating diverticulitis: emergency surgical treatment. Minn Med 1973;5627- 30
PubMed
Belding  HH Acute perforated diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon with generalized peritonitis. Arch Surg 1957;74511- 515
Link to Article
Risholm  L Primary resection in perforating diverticulitis of the colon. WorldJ Surg 1982;6490- 491
PubMed Link to Article
Nagorney  DMAdson  MAPemberton  JH Sigmoid diverticulitis with perforation and generalized peritonitis. Dis Colon Rectum 1985;2871- 75
PubMed Link to Article
Berry  ARTurner  WHMortensen  NJKettlewell  MG Emergency surgery for complicated diverticular disease: a five-year experience. Dis Colon Rectum 1989;32849- 854
PubMed Link to Article
Tudor  RGFarmakis  NKeighley  MRB National audit of complicated diverticular disease: analysis of index cases. Br J Surg 1994;81730- 732
PubMed Link to Article

Correspondence

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Web of Science® Times Cited: 32

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles