Fractures and other chest wall abnormalities after thoracotomy for esophageal cancer: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Chest pain following a thoracotomy for esophageal cancer is frequently reported but poorly understood. This study aimed to (1) determine the prevalence of thoracotomy-related thoracic fractures on postoperative imaging and (2) compare complications, long-term pain, and quality of life in patients with versus without these fractures. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study enrolled patients with esophageal cancer who underwent a thoracotomy between 2010 and 2020 with pre- and postoperative CTs (<1 and/or >6 months). Disease-free patients were invited for questionnaires on pain and quality of life. RESULTS: Of a total of 366 patients, thoracotomy-related rib fractures were seen in 144 (39%) and thoracic transverse process fractures in 4 (2%) patients. Patients with thoracic fractures more often developed complications (89% vs. 74%, p = 0.002), especially pneumonia (51% vs. 39%, p = 0.032). Questionnaires were completed by 77 after a median of 41 (P25 -P75 28-91) months. Long-term pain was frequently (63%) reported but was not associated with thoracic fractures (p = 0.637), and neither were quality of life scores. CONCLUSIONS: Thoracic fractures are prevalent in patients following a thoracotomy for esophageal cancer. These thoracic fractures were associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications, especially pneumonia, but an association with long-term pain or reduced quality of life was not confirmed.

Surgical stabilization of rib fractures versus nonoperative treatment in patients with multiple rib fractures following cardiopulmonary resuscitation: An international, retrospective matched case-control study.

BACKGROUND: The presence of six or more rib fractures or a displaced rib fracture due to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) has been associated with longer hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS). Evidence on the effect of surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) following CPR is limited. This study aimed to evaluate outcomes after SSRF versus nonoperative management in patients with multiple rib fractures after CPR. METHODS: An international, retrospective study was performed in patients who underwent SSRF or nonoperative management for multiple rib fractures following CPR between January 1, 2012, and July 31, 2020. Patients who underwent SSRF were matched to nonoperative controls by cardiac arrest location and cause, rib fracture pattern, and age. The primary outcome was ICU LOS. RESULTS: Thirty-nine operatively treated patient were matched to 66 nonoperatively managed controls with comparable CPR-related characteristics. Patients who underwent SSRF more often had displaced rib fractures (n = 28 [72%] vs. n = 31 [47%]; p = 0.015) and a higher median number of displaced ribs (2 [P 25 -P 75 , 0-3] vs. 0 [P 25 -P 75 , 0-3]; p = 0.014). Surgical stabilization of rib fractures was performed at a median of 5 days (P 25 -P 75 , 3-8 days) after CPR. In the nonoperative group, a rib fixation specialist was consulted in 14 patients (21%). The ICU LOS was longer in the SSRF group (13 days [P 25 -P 75 , 9-23 days] vs. 9 days [P 25 -P 75 , 5-15 days]; p = 0.004). Mechanical ventilator-free days, hospital LOS, thoracic complications, and mortality were similar. CONCLUSION: Despite matching, those who underwent SSRF over nonoperative management for multiple rib fractures following CPR had more severe consequential chest wall injury and a longer ICU LOS. A benefit of SSRF on in-hospital outcomes could not be demonstrated. A low consultation rate for rib fixation in the nonoperative group indicates that the consideration to perform SSRF in this population might be associated with other nonradiographic or injury-related variables. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

Outcome after surgical stabilization of symptomatic rib fracture nonunion: a multicenter retrospective case series.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine the long-term level of pain after surgical treatment of one or more symptomatic rib fracture nonunions. Secondary aims were to evaluate the occurrence of adverse events, satisfaction, and activity resumption. The final aim was to assess the association between pain and the presence of bridging callus at the nonunified fracture. Hypothesized was that thoracic pain would diminish after surgery. METHODS: This retrospective case series included adults who underwent surgery for a symptomatic rib fracture nonunion from three hospitals. Symptomatic nonunion was defined as persistent pain associated with nonbridging callus of ≥1 rib fractures on a chest CT scan at ≥3 months after the initial injury. Patients completed questionnaires about pain, satisfaction, and activity resumption ≥3 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients (26 men, 10 women), with a median age of 55 (P25-P75 49-62) years and 169 acute rib fractures were included. Nonunion occurred in 98 (58%) fractures of which 70 (71%) were treated surgically. After a median of 11 months (P25-P75 7-21), 13 (36%) patients reported severe pain, in contrast to 26 (72%) preoperatively. Patients who underwent intercostal neurectomy or neurolysis in addition to surgical stabilization less often reported pain reduction. Twenty-six (72%) had postoperative complications, for which 12 (33%) underwent additional surgery, mostly for persistent pain. The majority (n = 27; 75%) was satisfied with their functional recovery. Of patients who had paid work pre-trauma, 65% had resumed working. CONCLUSION: Most patients reported less pain and better daily functioning after surgical stabilization of symptomatic rib fracture nonunions, although causality cannot be proven with this retrospective case series. Additional intercostal nerve treatment was not associated with pain relief. Despite surgery-related complications being common, patient satisfaction was high. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V. STUDY TYPE: Therapeutic.

Does position of the wrist during cast immobilisation in patients with distal radius fractures affect outcome?

PURPOSE: The position of the wrist during cast immobilisation following closed reduction of distal radius fractures is disputed. A systematic review was initiated to assess if there was any relation between wrist position in the cast and outcome in adult patients with non-operatively treated distal radius fractures. METHODS: A comprehensive search was performed in the bibliographic databases Medline, Embase and Wiley/Cochrane Library from inception up to 27 November 2020. Eligible studies were: randomised controlled trials, prospective and retrospective comparative cohort studies, analysing different positions of the wrist in cast-immobilisation following closed reduction. Primary outcome of the study was functional outcome measured by range of motion. Secondary outcomes were functional outcomes measured by grip strength, patient-reported outcome, radiological outcome and complications such as secondary dislocation and pain. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 2733 studies. Five trials, with 519 patients, were included in this systematic review. Range of motion and radiological outcome was significantly better in patients who were immobilised in dorsiflexion compared to palmar flexion or neutral position, although no clinical important difference was found. There were no significant differences in patient-reported outcome, pain, grip strength or complications. Due to heterogeneity of the included studies, data were unsuitable for a meta-analysis. CONCLUSION: This systematic review showed statistically significant better results in favour of cast immobilisation in dorsiflexion, although this small difference does not seem to be relevant in patients daily activities. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: Systematic review registration number: PROSPERO 2018 CRD42018085546.

Chest wall injuries due to cardiopulmonary resuscitation and the effect on in-hospital outcomes in survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess the prevalence of chest wall injuries due to cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and to compare in-hospital outcomes in patients with versus without chest wall injuries. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of all intensive care unit (ICU)-admitted patients who underwent cardiopulmonary resuscitation for OHCA between January 1, 2007, and December 2019 was performed. The primary outcome was the occurrence of chest wall injuries, as diagnosed on chest computed tomography. Chest wall injury characteristics such as rib fracture location, type, and dislocation were collected. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital outcomes and subgroup analysis of patients with good neurological recovery to identify those who could possibly benefit from the surgical stabilization of rib fractures. RESULTS: Three hundred forty-four patients were included, of which 291 (85%) sustained chest wall injury. Patients with chest wall injury had a median of 8 fractured ribs (P25-P75, 4-10 ribs), which were most often undisplaced (on chest computed tomography) (n = 1,574 [72.1%]), simple (n = 1,948 [89.2%]), and anterior (n = 1,785 [77.6%]) rib fractures of ribs 2 to 7. Eight patients (2.3%) had a flail segment, and 136 patients (39.5%) had an anterior flail segment. Patients with chest wall injury had fewer ventilator-free days (0 days [P25-P75, 0-16 days] vs. 13 days [P25-P75, 2-22 days]; p = 0.006) and a higher mortality rate (n = 102 [54.0%] vs. n = 8 [22.2%]; p < 0.001) than those without chest wall injury. For the subgroup of patients with good neurological recovery, the presence of six or more rib fractures or a single displaced rib fracture was associated with longer hospital and ICU length of stay, respectively. CONCLUSION: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation-related chest wall injuries in survivors of OHCA and especially rib fractures are common. Patients with chest wall injury had fewer ventilator-free days and a higher mortality rate. Patients with good neurological recovery might represent a subgroup of patients who could benefit from surgical stabilization of rib fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, level IV; Epidemiological, Level IV.

Duration of Cast Immobilization in Distal Radial Fractures: A Systematic Review.

Objective The duration of immobilization in distal radial fractures is disputed in the current literature. There are still no long-term superior outcomes of operative treatment in comparison to nonoperative treatment. A systematic review was initiated to assess the clinical controversy on the duration of the immobilization period for nonoperatively treated distal radial fractures. Materials and Methods A comprehensive search was performed in the PubMed, Embase, and Wiley/Cochrane Library databases and a manual reference check of the identified systematic reviews and meta-analyses was executed. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials that compared two periods of immobilization, with reported functional, patient-reported, and radiological outcomes. Two reviewers independently agreed on eligibility, and assessed methodological quality and extracted outcome data. Results The initial search yielded 3.384 studies. Twelve trials, with 1063 patients, were included in this systematic review. Grip strength and patient-reported outcome were better in patients treated by a shorter period of immobilization. There was no difference in pain, range of motion, or radiological outcome between different periods of immobilization. Owing to heterogeneity of studies, data were unsuitable for pooling. Conclusion Included studies showed that there might be a preference for a shorter period of immobilization in nonoperatively treated distal radius fractures. Therefore, shortening the period of immobilization in distal radial fractures to a maximum of three weeks should be considered. Future research should include homogeneous groups of patients to draw valid conclusions on the appropriate period of immobilization for nonoperatively treated distal radial fractures. Level of Evidence This is a Level II study. Systematic Review Registration Number PROSPERO 2018 CRD42018085524.

Early fixation versus conservative therapy of multiple, simple rib fractures (FixCon): protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

Background: Multiple rib fractures are common injuries in both the young and elderly. Rib fractures account for 10% of all trauma admissions and are seen in up to 39% of patients after thoracic trauma. With morbidity and mortality rates increasing with the number of rib fractures as well as poor quality of life at long-term follow-up, multiple rib fractures pose a serious health hazard. Operative fixation of flail chest is beneficial over nonoperative treatment regarding, among others, pneumonia and both intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay. With no high-quality evidence on the effects of multiple simple rib fracture treatment, the optimal treatment modality remains unknown. This study sets out to investigate outcome of operative fixation versus nonoperative treatment of multiple simple rib fractures. Methods: The proposed study is a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Patients will be eligible if they have three or more multiple simple rib fractures of which at least one is dislocated over one shaft width or with unbearable pain (visual analog scale (VAS) or numeric rating scale (NRS) > 6). Patients in the intervention group will be treated with open reduction and internal fixation. Pre- and postoperative care equals treatment in the control group. The control group will receive nonoperative treatment, consisting of pain management, bronchodilator inhalers, oxygen support or mechanical ventilation if needed, and pulmonary physical therapy. The primary outcome measure will be occurrence of pneumonia within 30 days after trauma. Secondary outcome measures are the need and duration of mechanical ventilation, thoracic pain and analgesics use, (recovery of) pulmonary function, hospital and ICU length of stay, thoracic injury-related and surgery-related complications and mortality, secondary interventions, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness comprising health care consumption and productivity loss. Follow-up visits will be standardized and daily during hospital admission, at 14 days and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Discussion: With favorable results in flail chest patients, operative treatment may also be beneficial in patients with multiple simple rib fractures. The FixCon trial will be the first study to compare clinical, functional, and economic outcome between operative fixation and nonoperative treatment for multiple simple rib fractures. Trial registration: www.trialregister.nl, NTR7248. Registered May 31, 2018.

Selective nonoperative management of penetrating thoracic injury.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic penetrating injury is a cause for up to one-fifth of all non-natural deaths. The aim of this study was to determine the success of selective nonoperative management (SNOM) of patients presenting with a penetrating thoracic injury (PTI). METHODS: This was a prospective study of patients with PTI who presented to a level 1 Trauma Center between April 2012 and August 2012. RESULTS: A total of 248 patients were included in the study, with 5.7% (n=14) requiring immediate emergency surgery. Overall, five of these 248 patients died, resulting in a mortality rate of 2.0%. Primarily 221 patients (89.1%) were managed with SNOM, of whom 15 (6.8%) failed conservative management. Failure of SNOM was primarily caused by complications of chest tube drainage (n=12) (e.g. retained clot, empyema) and delayed development of cardiac tamponade (n=3). The survival rate in the SNOM group was 100%. CONCLUSION: PTI has a low in-hospital mortality rate. Only 16.5% (41/248) of the patients presenting with PTI will need surgical treatment. The other patients are safe to be treated conservatively according to a protocolized SNOM approach for PTI without any additional mortality. Conservative treatment of patients who were selected for this nonoperative treatment strategy with repeated clinical reassessment was successful in 93.2%.

Effect of Antibiotic Prophylaxis on Surgical Site Infections Following Removal of Orthopedic Implants Used for Treatment of Foot, Ankle, and Lower Leg Fractures: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Following clean (class I, not contaminated) surgical procedures, the rate of surgical site infection (SSI) should be less than approximately 2%. However, an infection rate of 12.2% has been reported following removal of orthopedic implants used for treatment of fractures below the knee. Objective: To evaluate the effect of a single dose of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis on the incidence of SSIs following removal of orthopedic implants used for treatment of fractures below the knee. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, double-blind, randomized clinical trial including 500 patients aged 18 to 75 years with previous surgical treatment for fractures below the knee who were undergoing removal of orthopedic implants from 19 hospitals (17 teaching and 2 academic) in the Netherlands (November 2014-September 2016), with a follow-up of 6 months (final follow-up, March 28, 2017). Exclusion criteria were an active infection or fistula, antibiotic treatment, reimplantation of osteosynthesis material in the same session, allergy for cephalosporins, known kidney disease, immunosuppressant use, or pregnancy. Interventions: A single preoperative intravenous dose of 1000 mg of cefazolin (cefazolin group, n = 228) or sodium chloride (0.9%; saline group, n = 242). Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was SSI within 30 days as measured by the criteria from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Secondary outcome measures were functional outcome, health-related quality of life, and patient satisfaction. Results: Among 477 randomized patients (mean age, 44 years [SD, 15]; women, 274 [57%]; median time from orthopedic implant placement, 11 months [interquartile range, 7-16]), 470 patients completed the study. Sixty-six patients developed an SSI (14.0%): 30 patients (13.2%) in the cefazolin group vs 36 in the saline group (14.9%) (absolute risk difference, -1.7 [95% CI, -8.0 to 4.6], P = .60). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients undergoing surgery for removal of orthopedic implants used for treatment of fractures below the knee, a single preoperative dose of intravenous cefazolin compared with saline did not reduce the risk of surgical site infection within 30 days following implant removal. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02225821.

Trauma surgery by general surgeons: Still an option for proximal femoral fractures?

INTRODUCTION: Surgery for proximal femoral fractures in the Netherlands is performed by trauma surgeons, general surgeons and orthopaedic surgeons. The aim of this study was to assess whether there is a difference in outcome for patients with proximal femoral fractures operated by trauma surgeons versus general surgeons. Secondly, the relation between hospital and surgeon volume and postoperative complications was explored. METHODS: Patients of 18 years and older were included if operated for a proximal femoral fracture by a trauma surgeon or a general surgeon in two academic, eight teaching and two non-teaching hospitals in the Netherlands from January 2010 until December 2013. The combined endpoint was defined as reoperation or surgical site infection. Multivariate analysis was used to adjust for patient and fracture characteristics and hospital and surgeon volume. Categories for hospital volume were>170/year (high volume), 96-170/year (medium volume) and <96/year (low volume). RESULTS: In 4552 included patients 2382 (52.3%) had surgery by a trauma surgeon. Postoperative complications occurred in 276 (11.6%) patients operated by a trauma surgeon and in 258 (11.9%) operated by a general surgeon (p=0.751). When considering confounders in a multivariate analysis, surgery by trauma surgeons was associated with less postoperative complications (OR 0.746; 95%CI 0.580-0.958; p=0.022). Surgery in high volume hospitals was also associated with less complications (OR 0.997; 95%CI 0.995-0.999; p=0.012). Surgeon volume was not associated with complications (OR 1.008; 95%CI 0.997-1.018; p=0.175). CONCLUSION: Surgery by trauma surgeons and high hospital volume are associated with less reoperations and surgical site infections for patients with proximal femoral fractures.

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage or sigmoidectomy for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis: a multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: Case series suggest that laparoscopic peritoneal lavage might be a promising alternative to sigmoidectomy in patients with perforated diverticulitis. We aimed to assess the superiority of laparoscopic lavage compared with sigmoidectomy in patients with purulent perforated diverticulitis, with respect to overall long-term morbidity and mortality. METHODS: We did a multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, open-label trial in 34 teaching hospitals and eight academic hospitals in Belgium, Italy, and the Netherlands (the Ladies trial). The Ladies trial is split into two groups: the LOLA group comparing laparoscopic lavage with sigmoidectomy and the DIVA group comparing Hartmann's procedure with sigmoidectomy plus primary anastomosis. The DIVA section of this trial is still underway but here we report the results of the LOLA section. Patients with purulent perforated diverticulitis were enrolled for LOLA, excluding patients with faecal peritonitis, aged older than 85 years, with high-dose steroid use (≥20 mg daily), and haemodynamic instability. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1:1; stratified by age [<60 years vs ≥60 years]) using secure online computer randomisation to laparoscopic lavage, Hartmann's procedure, or primary anastomosis in a parallel design after diagnostic laparoscopy. Patients were analysed according to a modified intention-to-treat principle and were followed up after the index operation at least once in the outpatient setting and after sigmoidoscopy and stoma reversal, according to local protocols. The primary endpoint was a composite endpoint of major morbidity and mortality within 12 months. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01317485. FINDINGS: Between July 1, 2010, and Feb 22, 2013, 90 patients were randomly assigned in the LOLA section of the Ladies trial when the study was terminated by the data and safety monitoring board because of an increased event rate in the lavage group. Two patients were excluded for protocol violations. The primary endpoint occurred in 30 (67%) of 45 patients in the lavage group and 25 (60%) of 42 patients in the sigmoidectomy group (odds ratio 1·28, 95% CI 0·54-3·03, p=0·58). By 12 months, four patients had died after lavage and six patients had died after sigmoidectomy (p=0·43). INTERPRETATION: Laparoscopic lavage is not superior to sigmoidectomy for the treatment of purulent perforated diverticulitis. FUNDING: Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development.

Management of penetrating injuries of the upper extremities.

BACKGROUND: Routine surgical exploration after penetrating upper extremity trauma (PUET) to exclude arterial injury leads to a large number of negative explorations and iatrogenic injuries. Selective non-operative management (SNOM) is gaining in favor for patients with PUET. The present study was undertaken to assess the validity of SNOM in PUET and to present a practical management algorithm. METHODS: All consecutive patients presenting to a tertiary referral center following PUET were included in this prospective observational cohort study. Patients were managed along Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS©) guidelines, and based on clinical manifestations, either underwent emergency surgery or were treated conservatively with or without additional diagnostic investigations. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) was indicated by a preset protocol based on the physical examination. RESULTS: During the four-month study period, 161 patients with PUET were admitted. Sixteen (9.9%) patients underwent emergency surgery, revealing 14 vascular injuries. Another 8 (5.0%) patients underwent vascular exploration following CTA. The remaining patients (n=137) were managed non-operatively for vascular matters. Eighteen (11.2%) patients required semi-elective surgical intervention for fractures or nerve injuries. During the follow- up, no missed vascular injuries were detected. CONCLUSION: Neither routine exploration nor routine CTA is indicated after PUET. Stable patients should undergo additional investigation based on clinical findings only. SNOM is a feasible and safe strategy after PUET.

"The Practical Perforator Flap": the sural artery flap for lower extremity soft tissue reconstruction in wounds of war.

BACKGROUND: Sural artery perforator flaps have been described for use as both local flaps and in free tissue transfer. We present the use of this flap for compound soft tissue defects of the lower limb in civilian casualties of armed conflict in Afghanistan. METHODS/RESULTS: Detailed description of the management of blast and high-velocity projectile wounds of the lower extremity with the use of local sural perforator flaps and a review of literature. CONCLUSIONS: Sural artery perforator flaps may be harvested to cover complex lower limb defects. The use of this technique is not limited to centers with complex surgical armamentarium per se, but is feasible for surgeons with good understanding of the local anatomy.

Treatment of penetrating trauma of the extremities: ten years' experience at a Dutch level 1 trauma center.

BACKGROUND: A selective non-operative management (SNOM) has found to be an adequate and safe strategy to assess and treat patients suffering from penetrating trauma of the extremities (PTE). With this SNOM comes a strategy in which adjuvant investigations or interventions are not routinely performed, but based on physical examination only. METHODS: All subsequent patients presented with PTE at a Dutch level I trauma center from October 2000 to June 2011 were included in this study. In-hospital and long-term outcome was analysed in the light of assessment of these patients according to the SNOM protocol. RESULTS: A total of 668 patients (88.2% male; 33.8% gunshot wounds) with PTE presented at the Emergency Department of a level 1 traumacenter, of whom 156 were admitted for surgical treatment or observation. Overall, 22 (14%) patients that were admitted underwent exploration of the extremity for vascular injury. After conservative observation, two (1.5%) patients needed an intervention to treat (late onset) vascular complications. Other long-term extremity related complications were loss of function or other deformity (n = 9) due to missed nerve injury, including 2 patients with peroneal nerve injury caused by delayed compartment syndrome treatment. CONCLUSION: A SNOM protocol for initial assessment and treatment of PTE is feasible and safe. Clinical examination of the injured extremity is a reliable diagnostic 'tool' for excluding vascular injury. Repeated assessments for nerve injuries are important as these are the ones that are frequently missed and result in long-term disability. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II / III, retrospective prognostic observational cohort study Key words Penetrating trauma, extremity, vascular injury, complications.

The ladies trial: laparoscopic peritoneal lavage or resection for purulent peritonitis and Hartmann's procedure or resection with primary anastomosis for purulent or faecal peritonitis in perforated diverticulitis (NTR2037).

BACKGROUND: Recently, excellent results are reported on laparoscopic lavage in patients with purulent perforated diverticulitis as an alternative for sigmoidectomy and ostomy.The objective of this study is to determine whether LaparOscopic LAvage and drainage is a safe and effective treatment for patients with purulent peritonitis (LOLA-arm) and to determine the optimal resectional strategy in patients with a purulent or faecal peritonitis (DIVA-arm: perforated DIVerticulitis: sigmoidresection with or without Anastomosis). METHODS/DESIGN: In this multicentre randomised trial all patients with perforated diverticulitis are included. Upon laparoscopy, patients with purulent peritonitis are treated with laparoscopic lavage and drainage, Hartmann's procedure or sigmoidectomy with primary anastomosis in a ratio of 2:1:1 (LOLA-arm). Patients with faecal peritonitis will be randomised 1:1 between Hartmann's procedure and resection with primary anastomosis (DIVA-arm). The primary combined endpoint of the LOLA-arm is major morbidity and mortality. A sample size of 132:66:66 patients will be able to detect a difference in the primary endpoint from 25% in resectional groups compared to 10% in the laparoscopic lavage group (two sided alpha = 5%, power = 90%). Endpoint of the DIVA-arm is stoma free survival one year after initial surgery. In this arm 212 patients are needed to significantly demonstrate a difference of 30% (log rank test two sided alpha = 5% and power = 90%) in favour of the patients with resection with primary anastomosis. Secondary endpoints for both arms are the number of days alive and outside the hospital, health related quality of life, health care utilisation and associated costs. DISCUSSION: The Ladies trial is a nationwide multicentre randomised trial on perforated diverticulitis that will provide evidence on the merits of laparoscopic lavage and drainage for purulent generalised peritonitis and on the optimal resectional strategy for both purulent and faecal generalised peritonitis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Nederlands Trial Register NTR2037.

Avoiding or reversing Hartmann's procedure provides improved quality of life after perforated diverticulitis.

INTRODUCTION: The existing literature regarding acute perforated diverticulitis only reports about short-term outcome; long-term following outcomes have not been assessed before. The aim of this study was to assess long-term quality of life (QOL) after emergency surgery for perforated diverticulitis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Validated QOL questionnaires (EQ-VAS, EQ-5D index, QLQ-C30, and QLQ-CR38) were sent to all eligible patients who had undergone emergency surgery for perforated diverticulitis in five teaching hospitals between 1990 and 2005. Differences were compared between patients that had undergone Hartmann's procedure (HP) or resection with primary anastomosis (PA) and also compared to a sex- and age-matched sample of healthy subjects. RESULTS: Of a total of 340 patients, only 150 patients (44%) were found still alive in July 2007 (median follow-up 71 months). The response rate was 87%. In patients with PA, QOL was similar to the general population, whereas QOL after HP was significantly lower. The presence of a stoma was found to be an independent factor related to worse QOL. The deterioration in QOL was mainly due to problems in physical function and body image. CONCLUSIONS: Survivors after perforated diverticulitis had a worse QOL than the general population, which was mainly due to the presence of an end colostomy. QOL may improve if these stomas are reversed or not be performed in the first place.

Treatment of perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis: past, present, and future.

BACKGROUND: The supposed optimal treatment of perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis has changed several times during the last century, but at present is still unclear. METHODS/RESULTS: The first cases of complicated perforated diverticulitis of the colon were reported in the beginning of the twentieth century. At that time the first therapeutic guidelines were postulated in which an initial nonresectional procedure was provided to be the safest plan of management. After many years in which resection had become standard practice, today, one century later, again (laparoscopic) nonresectional surgery is presented as a safe and promising alternative in treatment of complicated perforated diverticulitis. The question rises what had happened to close the circle? CONCLUSIONS: This paper includes a historic summary of changing patterns in surgical strategies in perforated diverticulitis complicated by generalized peritonitis.

[Hospital mortality after emergency surgery for perforated diverticulitis]. / Ziekenhuissterfte na een spoedoperatie vanwege geperforeerde diverticulitis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess which factors predict in-hospital mortality after emergency surgery for acute perforated diverticulitis. DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective study. METHOD: From 1995-2005 a total of 291 patients underwent surgery to treat perforated diverticulitis in five teaching hospitals in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. The relation to postoperative mortality of patient-related risk factors such as age, gender and classification according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA); disease severity factors such as Hinchey score and Mannheim peritonitis index (MPI); surgery-related risk factors, such as type of surgery, e.g. Hartmann's procedure (HP) or resection with primary anastomosis; surgeon, and time of operation were evaluated using multivariate analysis. RESULTS: The total postoperative in-hospital mortality was 29%. HP was performed 211 times and primary anastomosis was performed 75 times. HP was significantly more frequently performed in patients with higher values of age, ASA, Hinchey and MPI (all: p < 0.01). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that age, ASA classification, Hinchey score, MPI and the absence of a specialist gastrointestinal surgeon during surgery, were important prognostic factors of mortality. Surgical technique was not related to postoperative mortality (adjusted odds ratio for mortality (HP versus primary anastomosis): 1.3; 95% CI: 0.6-2.9; p = 0.54). CONCLUSION: The type of surgery did not appear to be a risk factor for high postoperative mortality. As well as patient-related risk factors, including age, ASA and severity of disease scores, such as Hinchey score and MPI, the absence of a specialist gastrointestinal surgeon during surgery was found to be a factor associated with high mortality risk.

Reversal of Hartmann's procedure through the stomal side: a new even more minimal invasive technique.

BACKGROUND: Several minimal invasive, mainly laparoscopic-assisted, techniques for reversal of Hartmann's procedure (HP) have been published. The purpose of this pilot study was to assess a minimal invasive procedure through the stomal site that may compare favorably with open or laparoscopic-assisted procedures in terms of operative time, hospital stay and postoperative complications. METHODS: HP reversal through the stomal side was attempted in 13 consecutive patients. Lysis of intra-abdominal adhesions was done manually through an incision at the formal stoma side, without direct vision between thumb and index finger. The rectal stump was identified intra-abdominally using a transanal rigid club. A manually controlled stapled end-to-end colorectal anastomosis was created. RESULTS: Mean duration of operation was 81 min (range 58-109 min); mean hospital stay was 4.2 days (range 2-7 days). In two patients the procedure was converted because of strong adhesions in the lower pelvic cavity around the rectal stump that could not be lysed manually safely. No complications occurred in the patients in whom reversal was completely done through the stomal site. CONCLUSIONS: In our opinion, restoration of intestinal continuity through the stomal side after HP is a feasible operation, without need for additional incisions. In the hands of a specialist gastrointestinal surgeon this technique can be attempted in all patients, as conversion to a laparoscopic-assisted or an open procedure can be performed when necessary.

Outcome after emergency surgery for acute perforated diverticulitis in 200 cases.

BACKGROUND: Mortality and morbidity rates of acute perforated diverticulitis remain high. The ideal treatment is still controversial. The object of this study was to compare patients with perforated diverticulitis treated either by resection with primary anastomosis (PA) or Hartmann's procedure (HP). METHODS: A multicenter study was carried out on 200 consecutive patients with acute perforated diverticulitis who were presented in the surgical units of four affiliated teaching hospitals in Rotterdam, The Netherlands, between 1995 and 2005. Mortality and morbidity were compared in relation to type of surgery, ASA classification, age, gender, Mannheim Peritonitis Index (MPI), Hinchey score, surgeon's experience, and the time of operation. RESULTS: There was a tendency for more severely affected patients (Hinchey, MPI, ASA and age) to undergo HP. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed no significant difference in mortality between HP and PA. After HP, more patients needed one or more reinterventions to treat postoperative complications compared to PA. Besides, HP resulted in a longer total hospital and intensive care unit stay. Specialist colorectal surgeons performed significantly more frequently a PA instead of a HP and had fewer postoperative complications than general surgeons. The time of operation did not influence the choice of surgical procedure. CONCLUSION: Selected patients with perforated diverticulitis can be managed well by PA, as it does not seem to be inferior to HP in terms of severe postoperative complications that need surgical or radiological reintervention and mortality. This decision should be made while taking into account the patient's concomitant diseases, response on preoperative resuscitation and the availability of a surgeon experienced in colorectal surgery.