We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
REVIEW
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Early elective versus delayed elective surgery in acute recurrent diverticulitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
International Journal of Surgery 2017 October
OBJECTIVES: To investigate outcomes of early versus delayed surgery in patients with acute recurrent diverticulitis.
METHODS: We performed a systematic review in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement standards. We conducted a search of electronic information sources, including MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry; ClinicalTrials.gov; and ISRCTN Register, and bibliographic reference lists to identify all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies investigating outcomes of early versus delayed surgery in patients with acute recurrent diverticulitis. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa scale to assess the risk of bias of included studies. Random-effects models were applied to calculate pooled outcome data.
RESULTS: We identified three retrospective and one prospective cohort studies enrolling a total of 1046 patients. The included patients were comparable in terms of age, ASA score and Hinchey classifications (Hinchey I and II). The results of our analyses suggested that there was no difference between two groups in surgical site infection [Odds ratio (OR) 1.61, 95% CI 0.79-3.27, P = 0.19], intra-abdominal abscess (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.21-4.00, P = 0.91), anastomotic leak (OR1.27, 95% CI 0.50-3.25, P = 0.61), 30-day mortality [Risk difference (RD) 0.00 95% CI -0.01-0.01, P = 0.80], postoperative ileus (OR 1.35, 95% CI 0.50-3.66, P = 0.55), postoperative bleeding (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.32-2.69, P = 0.89), ureteric injury (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.08-5.07, P = 0.65), and overall morbidity (OR 1.42 95% CI 0.76-2.66, P = 0.27). The early surgery was associated with longer operative time [Mean Difference (MD) 12.8, 95% CI 5.08-20.53, P = 0.001] and length of stay (MD 4.41, 95% CI -0.34-8.53, P = 0.03). Among those undergoing laparoscopic surgery, conversion to open surgery was higher in the early surgery group (OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.36-5.40, P = 0.005).
CONCLUSIONS: The best available evidence suggests that there is no difference between early elective and delayed elective surgery for acute recurrent diverticulitis in terms of clinical outcomes. However, longer operative time and length of stay and higher conversion rate to open surgery associated with early elective surgery may make the delayed elective surgery more cost-effective. The best available evidence is derived from non-randomised studies; therefore, high quality randomised controlled trials are required to provide more robust basis for definite conclusions.
METHODS: We performed a systematic review in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement standards. We conducted a search of electronic information sources, including MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry; ClinicalTrials.gov; and ISRCTN Register, and bibliographic reference lists to identify all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies investigating outcomes of early versus delayed surgery in patients with acute recurrent diverticulitis. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa scale to assess the risk of bias of included studies. Random-effects models were applied to calculate pooled outcome data.
RESULTS: We identified three retrospective and one prospective cohort studies enrolling a total of 1046 patients. The included patients were comparable in terms of age, ASA score and Hinchey classifications (Hinchey I and II). The results of our analyses suggested that there was no difference between two groups in surgical site infection [Odds ratio (OR) 1.61, 95% CI 0.79-3.27, P = 0.19], intra-abdominal abscess (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.21-4.00, P = 0.91), anastomotic leak (OR1.27, 95% CI 0.50-3.25, P = 0.61), 30-day mortality [Risk difference (RD) 0.00 95% CI -0.01-0.01, P = 0.80], postoperative ileus (OR 1.35, 95% CI 0.50-3.66, P = 0.55), postoperative bleeding (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.32-2.69, P = 0.89), ureteric injury (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.08-5.07, P = 0.65), and overall morbidity (OR 1.42 95% CI 0.76-2.66, P = 0.27). The early surgery was associated with longer operative time [Mean Difference (MD) 12.8, 95% CI 5.08-20.53, P = 0.001] and length of stay (MD 4.41, 95% CI -0.34-8.53, P = 0.03). Among those undergoing laparoscopic surgery, conversion to open surgery was higher in the early surgery group (OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.36-5.40, P = 0.005).
CONCLUSIONS: The best available evidence suggests that there is no difference between early elective and delayed elective surgery for acute recurrent diverticulitis in terms of clinical outcomes. However, longer operative time and length of stay and higher conversion rate to open surgery associated with early elective surgery may make the delayed elective surgery more cost-effective. The best available evidence is derived from non-randomised studies; therefore, high quality randomised controlled trials are required to provide more robust basis for definite conclusions.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app