-
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Jan 2024Although laparoscopic lavage for perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis has been grabbing the headlines, it is known that the clinical presentation of peritonitis... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Although laparoscopic lavage for perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis has been grabbing the headlines, it is known that the clinical presentation of peritonitis can also be caused by an underlying perforated carcinoma. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of patients undergoing inadvertent laparoscopic lavage of perforated colon cancer as well as the delay in cancer diagnosis.
METHODS
The PubMed database was systematically searched to include all studies meeting inclusion criteria. Studies were screened through titles and abstracts with potentially eligible studies undergoing full-text screening. The primary endpoints of this meta-analysis were the rates of perforated colon cancer patients having undergone inadvertent laparoscopic lavage as well as the delay in cancer diagnosis. This was expressed in pooled rate % and 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS
Eleven studies (three randomized, two prospective, six retrospective) totaling 642 patients met inclusion criteria. Eight studies reported how patients were screened for cancer and the number of patients who completed follow-up. The pooled cancer rate was 3.4% (0.9%, 5.8%) with low heterogeneity (Isquare2 = 34.02%) in eight studies. Cancer rates were 8.2% (0%, 3%) (Isquare2 = 58.2%) and 1.7% (0%, 4.5%) (Isquare2 = 0%) in prospective and retrospective studies, respectively. Randomized trials reported a cancer rate of 7.2% (3.1%, 11.2%) with low among-study heterogeneity (Isquare2 = 0%) and a median delay to diagnosis of 2 (1.5-5) months.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review found that 7% of patients undergoing laparoscopic lavage for peritonitis had perforated colon cancer with a delay to diagnosis of up to 5 months.
Topics: Humans; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Therapeutic Irrigation; Colonic Neoplasms; Colonic Diseases; Intestinal Perforation; Laparoscopy; Peritonitis
PubMed: 38197963
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03224-5 -
Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) Oct 2023Probiotics have been widely used in gastroenteritis due to acute and chronic illnesses. However, evidence supporting the effectiveness of probiotics in different health... (Review)
Review
Probiotics have been widely used in gastroenteritis due to acute and chronic illnesses. However, evidence supporting the effectiveness of probiotics in different health conditions is inconclusive and conflicting. The aim of this study was to review the existing literature on the effects of probiotics on gastroenteritis among adults. Only original articles on clinical trials that demonstrated the effects of probiotics in adults with gastroenteritis were used for this analysis. Multiple databases, such as PubMed, Google Scholar, MEDLINE and Scopus databases, were searched for the data. The study followed standard procedures for data extraction using a PRISMA flow chart. A quality appraisal of the selected studies was conducted using CADIMA. Finally, a meta-analysis was performed. Thirty-five articles met the selection criteria; of them, probiotics were found effective in the treatment and/or prevention of chronic inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), including ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease in 17 (49%), and the treatment of in 4 (11.4%), antibiotic-induced diarrhea in 3 (8.6%), infection in 2 (5.7%) and diverticulitis in 1 (2.9%), while the remaining 7 (20%) were ineffective, and 1 study's results were inconclusive. The meta-analysis did not demonstrate any significant protective effects of probiotics. Having a τ value of zero and I of 6%, the studies were homogeneous and had minimum variances. Further studies are suggested to evaluate the beneficial effects of probiotics in IBDs and other chronic bowel diseases.
PubMed: 37873782
DOI: 10.3390/diseases11040138 -
Frontiers in Robotics and AI 2023Complicated diverticulitis is a common abdominal emergency that often requires a surgical intervention. The systematic review and meta-analysis below compare the...
Complicated diverticulitis is a common abdominal emergency that often requires a surgical intervention. The systematic review and meta-analysis below compare the benefits and harms of robotic vs. laparoscopic surgery in patients with complicated colonic diverticular disease. The following databases were searched before 1 March 2023: Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The internal validity of the selected non-randomized studies was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool. The meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis were performed using RevMan 5.4 (Cochrane Collaboration, London, United Kingdom) and Copenhagen Trial Unit Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA) software (Copenhagen Trial Unit, Center for Clinical Intervention Research, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark), respectively. We found no relevant randomized controlled trials in the searched databases. Therefore, we analyzed 5 non-randomized studies with satisfactory internal validity and similar designs comprising a total of 442 patients (184 (41.6%) robotic and 258 (58.4%) laparoscopic interventions). The analysis revealed that robotic surgery for complicated diverticulitis (CD) took longer than laparoscopy (MD = 42 min; 95% CI: [-16, 101]). No statistically significant differences were detected between the groups regarding intraoperative blood loss (MD = -9 mL; 95% CI: [-26, 8]) and the rate of conversion to open surgery (2.17% or 4/184 for robotic surgery vs. 6.59% or 17/258 for laparoscopy; RR = 0.63; 95% CI: [0.10, 4.00]). The type of surgery did not affect the length of in-hospital stay (MD = 0.18; 95% CI: [-0.60, 0.97]) or the rate of postoperative complications (14.1% or 26/184 for robotic surgery vs. 19.8% or 51/258 for laparoscopy; RR = 0.81; 95% CI: [0.52, 1.26]). No deaths were reported in either group. The meta-analysis suggests that robotic surgery is an appropriate option for managing complicated diverticulitis. It is associated with a trend toward a lower rate of conversion to open surgery and fewer postoperative complications; however, this trend does not reach the level of statistical significance. Since no high quality RCTs were available, this meta-analysis isnot able to provide reliable conclusion, but only a remarkable lack of proper evidence supporting robotic technology. The need for further evidence-based trials is important.
PubMed: 37779579
DOI: 10.3389/frobt.2023.1208611 -
European Journal of Gastroenterology &... Oct 2023The need for antimicrobial therapy for uncomplicated acute diverticulitis of the colon remains controversial. We conducted a systematic review of the efficacy of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The need for antimicrobial therapy for uncomplicated acute diverticulitis of the colon remains controversial. We conducted a systematic review of the efficacy of antimicrobial agents against this disease, including new randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported in recent years, and evaluated their efficacy using a meta-analytic approach. RCTs were searched using PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, Ichushi-Web, and eight registries. Keywords were 'colonic diverticulitis', 'diverticulitis', 'antimicrobial agents', ''antibiotics, 'complication', 'abscess', 'gastrointestinal perforation', 'gastrointestinal obstruction', 'diverticular hemorrhage', and 'fistula'. Studies with antimicrobial treatment in the intervention group and placebo or no treatment in the control group were selected by multiple reviewers using uniform inclusion criteria, and data were extracted. Prevention of any complication was assessed as the primary outcome, and efficacy was expressed as risk ratio (RR) and risk difference (RD). A meta-analysis was performed using 5 RCTs of the 21 studies that were eligible for scrutiny in the initial search and which qualified for final inclusion. Three of these studies were not included in the previous meta-analysis. Subjects included 1039 in the intervention group and 1040 in the control group. Pooled RR = 0.86 (95% confidence interval, 0.58-1.28) and pooled RD = -0.01 (-0.03 to 0.01) for the effect of antimicrobial agents in reducing any complications. Recurrences, readmissions, and surgical interventions did not significantly show the efficacies of using antimicrobial agents. A meta-analysis of recently reported RCTs did not provide evidence that antimicrobial therapy improves clinical outcomes in uncomplicated acute diverticulitis of the colon.
Topics: Humans; Diverticulitis; Diverticulitis, Colonic; Anti-Infective Agents; Anti-Bacterial Agents
PubMed: 37577799
DOI: 10.1097/MEG.0000000000002622 -
Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy &... Aug 2023Over the last decade, there has been growing diffusion of minimally invasive surgery in the setting of abdominal emergencies. However, right-colon diverticulitis is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Laparoscopic Surgery for Acute Right-colon Diverticulitis: Video Vignette and Systematic Review With Meta-analysis of Current Evidence of Minimally Invasive Versus Conventional Surgery.
BACKGROUND
Over the last decade, there has been growing diffusion of minimally invasive surgery in the setting of abdominal emergencies. However, right-colon diverticulitis is still mainly approached by conventional celiotomy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A video vignette is presented showing the details of an emergent laparoscopic right colectomy as performed to treat a 59-year-old woman who presented with clinical signs of peritonitis, and radiologic findings suggestive of acute right-colon diverticulitis complicated by perforation of the hepatic flexure and periduodenal abscess. We also aimed to evaluate the relative outcomes of laparoscopic versus conventional surgery by meta-analyzing the currently available comparative evidence on the argument.
RESULTS
A total of 2848 patients were included in the analysis, of which 979 patients received minimally invasive surgery and 1869 had conventional surgery. Laparoscopic surgery had a longer operating time and resulted in an abbreviated hospital stay. Overall, patients receiving laparoscopy had significantly lower morbidity than those whose surgery was undertaken by laparotomy, while there was no statistically significant difference in terms of postoperative mortality.
CONCLUSIONS
According to the existing literature, minimally invasive surgery improves the postoperative outcomes of patients receiving surgery for right-sided colonic diverticulitis.
Topics: Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Diverticulitis; Diverticulitis, Colonic; Laparoscopy; Colectomy; Treatment Outcome; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 37311024
DOI: 10.1097/SLE.0000000000001186 -
Surgery Aug 2023The role of proximal diversion in patients undergoing sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis for diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis is unclear. The aim of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The role of proximal diversion in patients undergoing sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis for diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis is unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis and sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis with a proximal diversion in perforated diverticulitis with diffuse peritonitis.
METHOD
A systematic literature search on sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis and sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis with proximal diversion for diverticulitis with diffuse peritonitis was conducted in the Medline and EMBASE databases. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies reporting the primary outcome of interest (30-day mortality) were included. Secondary outcomes were major morbidity, anastomotic leak, reoperation, stoma nonreversal rates, and length of hospital stay. A meta-analysis of proportions and linear regression models were used to assess the effect of each procedure on the different outcomes.
RESULTS
A total of 17 studies involving 544 patients (sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis: 287 versus sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis with proximal diversion: 257) were included. Thirty-day mortality (odds ratio 1.12, 95% confidence interval 0.53-2.40, P = .76), major morbidity (odds ratio 1.40, 95% confidence interval 0.80-2.44, P = .24), anastomotic leak (odds ratio 0.34, 95% confidence interval 0.099-1.20, P = .10), reoperation (odds ratio 0.49, 95% confidence interval 0.17-1.46, P = .20), and length of stay (sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis: 12.1 vs resection and primary anastomosis with diverting ileostomy: 15 days, P = .44) were similar between groups. The risk of definitive stoma was significantly lower after sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis (odds ratio 0.05, 95% confidence interval 0.006-0.35, P = .003).
CONCLUSION
Sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis with or without proximal diversion have similar postoperative outcomes in selected patients with diverticulitis and diffuse peritonitis. However, further randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these results.
Topics: Humans; Diverticulitis, Colonic; Anastomotic Leak; Colostomy; Intestinal Perforation; Diverticulitis; Anastomosis, Surgical; Peritonitis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37258308
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2023.04.035 -
Intestinal Research Oct 2023Immunocompromised patients with acute colonic diverticulitis are at high risk for complications and failure of non-surgical treatment. However, evidence on the...
BACKGROUND/AIMS
Immunocompromised patients with acute colonic diverticulitis are at high risk for complications and failure of non-surgical treatment. However, evidence on the comparative outcomes of immunocompromised and immunocompetent patients with diverticulitis is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the outcomes of medical treatment in immunocompromised and immunocompetent patients with diverticulitis.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Studies comparing the clinical outcomes of immunocompromised and immunocompetent patients with diverticulitis were included.
RESULTS
A total of 10 studies with 1,946,461 subjects were included in the quantitative synthesis. The risk of emergency surgery and postoperative mortality after emergency surgery was significantly higher in immunocompromised patients than in immunocompetent patients with diverticulitis (risk ratio [RR], 1.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.31-2.38 and RR, 3.05; 95% CI, 1.70-5.45, respectively). Overall risk of complications associated with diverticulitis was non-significantly higher in immunocompromised than in immunocompetent patients (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.95-1.63). Overall mortality irrespective of surgery was significantly higher in immunocompromised than in immunocompetent patients with diverticulitis (RR, 3.65; 95% CI, 1.73-7.69). By contrast, postoperative mortality after elective surgery was not significantly different between immunocompromised and immunocompetent patients with diverticulitis. In subgroup analysis, the risk of emergency surgery and recurrence was significantly higher in immunocompromised patients with complicated diverticulitis, whereas no significant difference was shown in mild disease.
CONCLUSIONS
Immunocompromised patients with diverticulitis should be given the best medical treatment with multidisciplinary approach because they had increased risks of surgery, postoperative morbidity, and mortality than immunocompetent patients.
PubMed: 37248174
DOI: 10.5217/ir.2023.00005