ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Traditionally, perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis was treated with resection and colostomy (Hartmann's procedure), with inherent complications and risk of a permanent stoma. The DILALA (DIverticulitis - LAparoscopic LAvage versus resection (Hartmann's procedure) for acute diverticulitis with peritonitis) and other randomized trials found laparoscopic lavage to be a feasible and safe alternative. The medium-term follow-up results of DILALA are reported here. METHODS: Patients were randomized during surgery after being diagnosed with Hinchey grade III perforated diverticulitis at diagnostic laparoscopy. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with one or more secondary operations from 0 to 24 months after the index procedure in the laparoscopic lavage versus Hartmann's procedure groups. The trial was registered as ISRCTN82208287. RESULTS: Forty-three patients were randomized to laparoscopic lavage and 40 to Hartmann's procedure. Patients in the lavage group had a 45 per cent reduced risk of undergoing one or more operations within 24 months (relative risk 0·55, 95 per cent c.i. 0·36 to 0·84; P = 0·012) and had fewer operations (ratio 0·51, 95 per cent c.i. 0·31 to 0·87; P = 0·024) compared with those in the Hartmann's group. No difference was found in mean number of readmissions (1·37 versus 1·50; P = 0·221) or mortality between patients randomized to laparoscopic lavage or Hartmann's procedure. Three patients in the lavage group and nine in the Hartmann's group had a colostomy at 24 months. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic lavage is a better option for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis than open resection and colostomy.
Subject(s)
Colon/surgery , Diverticulitis, Colonic/surgery , Intestinal Perforation/surgery , Laparoscopy/methods , Peritoneal Lavage/methods , Peritonitis/therapy , Adult , Aged , Diverticulitis, Colonic/complications , Feasibility Studies , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Intestinal Perforation/complications , Length of Stay/trends , Male , Middle Aged , Peritonitis/etiology , Prospective Studies , Rupture, Spontaneous , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Open surgery with resection and colostomy (Hartmann's procedure) has been the standard treatment for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis. In recent years laparoscopic lavage has emerged as an alternative, with potential benefits for patients with purulent peritonitis, Hinchey grade III. The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopic lavage and Hartmann's procedure with health economic evaluation within the framework of the DILALA (DIverticulitis - LAparoscopic LAvage versus resection (Hartmann's procedure) for acute diverticulitis with peritonitis) trial. METHODS: Clinical effectiveness and resource use were derived from the DILALA trial and unit costs from Swedish sources. Costs were analysed from the perspective of the healthcare sector. The study period was divided into short-term analysis (base-case A), within 12 months, and long-term analysis (base-case B), from inclusion in the trial throughout the patient's expected life. RESULTS: The study included 43 patients who underwent laparoscopic lavage and 40 who had Hartmann's procedure in Denmark and Sweden during 2010-2014. In base-case A, the difference in mean cost per patient between laparoscopic lavage and Hartmann's procedure was -8983 (95 per cent c.i. -16 232 to -1735). The mean(s.d.) costs per patient in base-case B were 25 703(27 544) and 45 498(38 928) for laparoscopic lavage and Hartmann's procedure respectively, resulting in a difference of -19 794 (95 per cent c.i. -34 657 to -4931). The results were robust as demonstrated in sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: The significant cost reduction in this study, together with results of safety and efficacy from RCTs, support the routine use of laparoscopic lavage as treatment for complicated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis.
