Abstract
Background
To review the results of elective laparoscopic anterior resection (LAR) for recurrent and complicated sigmoid diverticulitis, and determine the factors associated with surgical complications.
Methods
Data on patients who had had elective surgery for recurrent and complicated sigmoid diverticulitis were extracted from a prospective computerized database.
Results
Review of the database revealed 62 consecutive patients who had undergone LAR. These patients were initially compared with 20 patients who had undergone elective open anterior resection (OAR). There were no significant differences between the groups in relation to age, sex, indication for surgery, Hinchey stage of perforation, extent of adhesions or comorbidities. The intraoperative time for LAR was significantly shorter (mean±SEM 110.87±4.8 min vs. OAR 134.35±8.4; p=0.032) and blood loss was less (88±18 ml vs. OAR 134±24 ml; p=0.003). Postoperative passage of flatus occurred earlier after LAR (p<0.003). Hospital stay was shorter after LAR (p<0.001). Complications occurred in nine patients (15%) after LAR and in six patients (30%) after OAR (p=NS). Among the LAR patients the risk of complications was higher in those with preexisting comorbidities (p=0.037). Time to postoperative passage of flatus correlated positively with age (p=0.004).
Conclusions
Elective LAR for recurrent and complicated sigmoid diverticulitis could be performed safely and expediently. Bowel function recovered later in older patients. The risk of medical complications was related to preexisting comorbidities.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ye H, Losada M, West AB (2005) Diverticulosis Coli: Update on a “Western” disease. Adv Anat Pathol 12:74-0
Abedi N, McKinlay R, Park A (2004) Laparoscopic colectomy for diverticulitis. Curr Surg 61:366-69
Chen HH, Wexner SD, Weiss EG et al (1998) Laparoscopic colectomy for benign colorectal disease is associated with a significant reduction in disability as compared with laparotomy. Surg Endosc 12:1397-400
Franklin ME, Rosenthal D, Abrego-Medina D et al (1996) Prospective comparison of open vs. laparoscopic colon surgery for carcinoma. Dis Colon Rectum 39:S35-S46
Lacy AM, Garcia-Valdecasas JC, Delgado S et al (2002) Laparoscopy-assisted colectomy versus open colectomy for treatment of non-metastatic colon cancer: a randomised trial. Lancet 359:2224-229
Ludwig KA, Milsom JW, Church JM, Fazio VW (1996) Preliminary experience with laparoscopic intestinal surgery for Crohn’s disease. Am J Surg 171:52-6
Ramos J, Beart R, Goes R et al (1995) Role of laparoscopy in colorectal surgery. A prospective evaluation of 200 cases. Dis Colon Rectum 38:494-01
Schwenk W, Böhm B, Haase O et al (1998) Laparoscopic versus conventional colorectal resection: a prospective randomised study of postoperative ileus and early postoperative feeding. Langenbecks Arch Surg 383:49-5
Stocchi L, Nelson H, Young-Fadok T et al (2000) Safety and advantages of laparoscopic vs. open colectomy in the elderly: matched-control study. Dis Colon Rectum 43:326-32
Hinchey EJ, Schaal PGH, Richards GK (1978) Treatment of perforated disease of the colon. Adv Surg 12:86-09
Stevenson AR, Stitz RW, Lumley JW, Fielding GA (1998) Laparoscopically assisted anterior resection for diverticular disease: follow-up of 100 consecutive patients. Ann Surg 227:335-42
Muckleroy SK, Ratzer ER, Fenoglio ME (1999) Laparoscopic colon surgery for benign disease: a comparison to open surgery. JSLS 3:33-7
Senagore A, Duepree H, Delaney C et al (2002) Cost structure of laparoscopic and open sigmoid colectomy for diverticular disease. Dis Colon Rectum 45:485-90
Hong D, Lewis M, Tabet J, Anvari M (2002) Prospective comparison of laparoscopic versus open resection for benign colorectal disease. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 12:238-42
Purkayastha S, Constantinides V, Tekkis P et al (2006) Laparoscopic vs. open surgery for diverticular disease: a metaanalysis of nonrandomized studies. Dis Colon Rectum 49:446-63
Bohm B, Milsom JW, Fazio VW (1995) Postoperative intestinal motility following conventional and laparoscopic intestinal surgery. Arch Surg 130:415-19
Khalili T, Fleshner P, Hiatt J et al (1998) Colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 41:832-38
Cali R, Meade P, Swanson M, Freeman C (2000) Effect of morphine and incision length on bowel function after colectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 43:163-68
Sklow B, Read T, Birnbaum E et al (2003) Age and type of procedure influence the choice of patients for laparoscopic colectomy. Surg Endosc 17:923-29
Graber JN, Schulte WJ, Condon RE, Cowles VE (1982) Relationship of duration of postoperative ileus to extent and site of operative dissection. Surgery 92:87-2
Condon RE, Frantzides CT, Cowles VE et al (1986) Resolution of postoperative ileus in humans. Ann Surg 203:574-81
Pessaux P, Muscari F, Ouellet J-F et al (2004) Risk factors for mortality and morbidity after elective sigmoid resection for diverticulitis: prospective multicenter multivariate analysis of 582 patients. World J Surg 28:92-6
Senagore AJ, Delaney CP, Duepree HJ et al (2003) Evaluation of POSSUM and P-POSSUM scoring systems in assessing outcome after laparoscopic colectomy. Br J Surg 90:1280-284
Kang JC, Chung MH, Chao PC et al (2004) Hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy vs open colectomy: a prospective randomized study. Surg Endosc 18:577-81
Kaiser AM, Kang J-C, Chan LS et al (2004) Laparoscopic-assisted vs. open colectomy for colon cancer: a prospective randomized trial. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 14:329-34
Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group (2004) A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med 350:2050-059
Veldkamp R, Kuhry E, Hop W et al (2005) Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 6:477-84
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lu, C.T., Ho, Y.H. Elective laparoscopic surgical management of recurrent and complicated sigmoid diverticulitis. Tech Coloproctol 12, 201–206 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-008-0421-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-008-0421-y