Primary resection anastomosis versus Hartmann's procedure in Hinchey III and IV diverticulitis

30Citations
Citations of this article
84Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Introduction: Surgical management of Hinchey III and IV diverticulitis utilizes either Hartmann's procedure (HP) or primary resection anastomosis (PRA) with or without fecal diversion. The aim of this meta-analysis is to determine which of the two procedures has a more favorable outcome. Methods: A systematic review of the existing literature was performed using the PRISMA guidelines. A meta-analysis was carried out using a Mantel-Haenszel, random effects model, and forest plots were generated. The Newcastle-Ottawa and Jadad scoring tools were used to assess the included studies. Results: A total of 25 studies involving 3546 patients were included in this study. The overall mortality in the HP group was 10.8% across the observational studies and 9.4% in the randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The mortality rate in the PRA group was lower than that in the HP group, at 8.2% in the observational studies and 4.3% in the RCTs. A comparison of PRA vs HP demonstrated a 40% lower mortality rate in the PRA group than in the HP (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.38-0.95, p = 0.03) when analyzing the observational studies. However, meta-analysis of the three RCTs did not demonstrate any difference in mortality, (OR 0.44 (95% CI 0.14-1.34, p = 0.15). Wound infection rates between the two groups were comparable (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.20-2.78, p = 0.67). Conclusion: Analysis of observational studies suggests that PRA may be associated with a lower overall mortality. There were no differences in wound infection rates. Based on the current evidence, both surgical strategies appear to be acceptable.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Halim, H., Askari, A., Nunn, R., & Hollingshead, J. (2019). Primary resection anastomosis versus Hartmann’s procedure in Hinchey III and IV diverticulitis. World Journal of Emergency Surgery, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13017-019-0251-4

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free