Advertisement

World Journal of Surgery

, Volume 43, Issue 5, pp 1395–1396 | Cite as

Authors’ Reply: Perforated Diverticulitis with Generalized Peritonitis: Low Stoma Rate Using a “Damage Control Strategy”

  • M. SohnEmail author
  • A. Agha
  • P. Steiner
  • A. Hochrein
  • J. Pratschke
  • P. Ritschl
  • F. Aigner
  • I. Iesalnieks
Reply, Letter to the Editor
  • 68 Downloads

Dear Editor,

We highly appreciate comments by Mattone and his coworkers. In this context, we totally agree about certain limitations of our study.

Within our first analysis, we compared 19 patients after the use of a damage control strategy (DCS) with a control group, consisting of 18 patients (Hartmann’s procedure: n = 14, primary anastomosis: n = 4). Both groups were equally weighted in terms of demographics, severity of peritonitis, and comorbidities. The overall postoperative mortality was 11% (n = 4). Postoperative morbidity and mortality were without statistically significant difference between both groups; however, a significantly higher proportion of patients in the control group had a stoma after the initial hospital stay (83 vs. 47%, p = 0.038) [1]. These favorable results led to a routine application of DCS in patients, hospitalized for perforated diverticular disease with generalized peritonitis. Indeed, the individual clinical condition was not involved into the decision...

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Sohn M, Agha A, Heitland W, Gundling F, Steiner P, Iesalnieks I (2016) Damage control strategy for the treatment of perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis. Tech Coloproctol 20(8):577–583.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-016-1506-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gachabayov M, Oberkofler CE, Tuech JJ, Hahnloser D, Bergamaschi R (2018) Resection with primary anastomosis vs nonrestorative resection for perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Colorectal Dis. 20(9):753–770.  https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.14237 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Binda GA, Karas JR, Serventi A, Sokmen S, Amato A, Hydo L et al (2012) Primary anastomosis vs nonrestorative resection for perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis: a prematurely terminated randomized controlled trial. Colorectal Dis Off J Assoc Coloproctol G B Irel 14(11):1403–1410Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Oberkofler CE, Rickenbacher A, Raptis DA, Lehmann K, Villiger P, Buchli C et al (2012) A multicenter randomized clinical trial of primary anastomosis or Hartmann’s procedure for perforated left colonic diverticulitis with purulent or fecal peritonitis. Ann Surg 256(5):819–827CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bridoux V, Regimbeau JM, Ouaissi M, Mathonnet M, Mauvais F, Houivet E et al (2017) Hartmann’s procedure or primary anastomosis for generalized peritonitis due to perforated diverticulitis: a prospective multicenter randomized trial (DIVERTI). J Am Coll Surg 225(6):798–805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hodgson R, An V, Stupart DA, Guest GD, Watters DA (2016) Who gets Hartmann’s reversed in a regional centre? Surgeon. 14(4):184–189.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surge.2014.11.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Sohn
    • 1
    Email author
  • A. Agha
    • 1
  • P. Steiner
    • 3
  • A. Hochrein
    • 4
  • J. Pratschke
    • 2
  • P. Ritschl
    • 2
  • F. Aigner
    • 2
  • I. Iesalnieks
    • 1
  1. 1.Klinik für Allgemein, Viszeral-, Endokrine- und Minimalinvasive Chirurgie, Klinikum BogenhausenMünchen Klinik BogenhausenMunichGermany
  2. 2.Chirurgische KlinikCharité – Universitätsmedizin BerlinMunichGermany
  3. 3.Klinik für Allgemein, Viszeral- und Gefäßchirurgie, Klinikum HarlachingStädtisches Klinikum München GmbHMunichGermany
  4. 4.OCM - MünchenMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations