We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
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 ......
Invited Critique |

Clarity, Confusion, or Conundrum Comment on “Trends in Diverticulitis Management in the United States From 2002 to 2007”

David A. Rothenberger, MD
Arch Surg. 2011;146(4):406. doi:10.1001/archsurg.2011.58.
Text Size: A A A
Published online


It is not a surprise that Masoomi and colleagues documented that patients hospitalized for diverticulitis between 2002 and 2007 continue to experience significant morbidity. What may be surprising to many is that their analysis of more than a million patients in the NIS database revealed an unexplained dramatic increase of 38% in elective colectomy and a 4.3% increase in urgent colectomy. This occurred despite a growing consensus that indication(s) for surgery should be more restricted than in the past. Additionally, it is surprising that they could only discern “a trend toward increased use of laparoscopic techniques for elective operations and primary anastomosis for urgent operations.” This conclusion flies in the face of anecdotes that “nearly everyone” is successfully using laparoscopic resection and primary anastomosis for diverticulitis. The facts, as reported in this retrospective trends analysis, are that laparoscopic colectomy increased to only 13.5% for elective cases and a mere 3.9% for urgent surgery by 2007. Primary anastomosis with or without diversion increased from 38.8% in 2002 to 46% in 2007 following urgent surgery. Etzioni et al,1 in a similar study of trends from 1998 to 2005, reported “little change over time in the likelihood of a primary anastomosis” after resection for diverticulitis.

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview





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.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
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.


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

0 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

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

See Also...
Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles