Sigmoid resection with primary anastomosis and ileostomy versus laparoscopic lavage in purulent peritonitis from perforated diverticulitis: outcome analysis in a prospective cohort of 40 consecutive patients.

Abstract

This prospective study aimed to compare outcomes after laparoscopic peritoneal lavage (LPL) and sigmoid resection with primary colorectal anastomosis (RPA). From June 2010 to June 2015, 40 patients presenting with Hinchey III peritonitis from perforated diverticulitis underwent LPL or RPA. Patients with Hinchey II or IV peritonitis and patients who underwent an upfront Hartmann procedure were excluded. Primary endpoint was overall 30-day or in-hospital postoperative morbidity after surgical treatment of peritonitis. Twenty-five patients underwent RPA and 15 LPL. Overall postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were not significantly different after RPA and LPL (40 vs 67%, p=0.19; 4 vs 6.7%, p=1, respectively). Intra-abdominal morbidity and reoperation rates were significantly higher after LPL compared to RPA (53 vs 12%, p<0.01; 40 vs 4%, p=0.02, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that LPL (p=0.028, HR=18.936, CI 95%=1.369-261.886) was associated with an increased risk of postoperative intra-abdominal septic morbidity. Among 6 patients who underwent reoperation after LPL, 4 had a Hartmann procedure. All surviving patients who had a procedure requiring stoma creation underwent stoma reversal after a median delay of 92days after LPL and 72days after RPA (p=0.07). LPL for perforated diverticulitis is associated with a high risk of inadequate intra-abdominal sepsis control requiring a Hartmann procedure in up to 25% of patients. RPA appears to be safer and more effective. It may represent the best option in this context.