SynthesisInternational journal of colorectal disease2021
The role of damage control surgery in the treatment of perforated colonic diverticulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International journal of colorectal disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- The surgical management of perforated diverticulitis Hinchey III: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Pooled it
- Damage control surgery and open abdomen in Hinchey III-IV acute diverticulitis: current practice from a nationwide Italian survey.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Re: Outcomes of damage control surgery in perforated sigmoid diverticulitis: a comparison before and after implementing a new treatment algorithm.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Outcomes of damage control surgery in perforated sigmoid diverticulitis: a comparison before and after implementing a new treatment algorithm.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Trends, hotspots, and thematic evolution in damage control surgery research: a global bibliometric assessment.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Review
- Emergency colorectal cancer in old and very elderly patients: a narrative review.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- The application of a new type of intestinal diversion devices in Beagle dogs with intestinal transection injury and hemorrhagic shock.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Surgical approach to intraabdominal sepsis: a damage control approach can reduce stoma rates.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Role of Damage Control Surgery in Perforated Diverticulitis Management: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Acute Left-Side Colonic Diverticulitis: A Historical Cohort Study on the Optimization of Non-Operative Management Outcomes and Anastomosis Rate After Sigmoid Resection.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Increased use of damage control laparotomy for emergency small bowel or colon surgery: does it affect patient outcomes?European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025Article
- Evaluation of laparoscopic peritoneal lavage for perforated diverticulitis: a national registry-based study.The British journal of surgery · 2024Observational
- Is damage control surgery useful in the treatment of colorectal perforation? A single-center case-control study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2023Article
- Current Aspects on the Management of Perforated Acute Diverticulitis: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2022Review
- State-of-the-art surgery for sigmoid diverticulitis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2022Article
- Conservative Management of Complicated Colonic Diverticulitis in Early and Late Elderly.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Article
- Rate of stoma formation following damage-control surgery for severe intra-abdominal sepsis: a single-centre consecutive case series.BJS open · 2021Article
- Update on the management of sigmoid diverticulitis.World journal of gastroenterology · 2021Review
- Lessons Learned in 11 Years of Experience With Open Abdomen Treatment With Negative-Pressure Therapy for Various Abdominal Emergencies.Frontiers in surgery · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 11 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDamage control surgery (DCS) is the classic approach to manage severe trauma and has recently also been considered an appropriate approach to the treatment of critically ill patients with severe intra-abdominal sepsis. The purpose of the present review is to evaluate the outcomes following DCS for Hinchey II-IV complicated acute diverticulitis (CAD).
methodsA comprehensive systematic search was undertaken to identify all randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies, irrespectively of their size, publication status, and language. Adults who have undergone DCS for CAD Hinchey II, III, or IV were included in this review. DCS is compared with the immediate and definitive surgical treatment in the form of HP, colonic resection, and primary anastomosis (RPA) with or without covering stoma or laparoscopic lavage. We searched the following electronic databases: PubMed MEDLINE, Scopus, and ISI Web of Knowledge. The protocol of this systematic review and meta-analysis was published on Prospero (CRD42020144953).
resultsNine studies with 318 patients, undergoing DCS, were included. The presence of septic shock at the presentation in the emergency department was heterogeneous, and the weighted mean rate of septic shock across the studies was shown to be 35.1% [95% CI 8.4 to 78.6%]. The majority of the patients had Hinchey III (68.3%) disease. The remainder had either Hinchey IV (28.9%) or Hinchey II (2.8%). Phase I is similarly described in most of the studies as lavage, limited resection with closed blind colonic ends. In a few studies, resection and anastomosis (9.1%) or suture of the perforation site (0.9%) were performed in phase I of DCS. In those patients who underwent DCS, the most common method of temporary abdominal closure (TAC) was the negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) (97.8%). The RPA was performed in 62.1% [95% CI 40.8 to 83.3%] and the 22.7% [95% CI 15.1 to 30.3%]: 12.8% during phase I and 87.2% during phase III. A covering ileostomy was performed in 6.9% [95% CI 1.5 to 12.2%]. In patients with RPA, the overall leak was 7.3% [95% CI 4.3 to 10.4%] and the major anastomotic leaks were 4.7% [95% CI 2.0 to 7.4%]; the rate of postoperative mortality was estimated to be 9.2% [95% CI 6.0 to 12.4%].
conclusionsThe present meta-analysis revealed an approximately 62.1% weighted rate of achieving GI continuity with the DCS approach to generalized peritonitis in Hinchey III and IV with major leaks of 4.7% and overall mortality of 9.2%. Despite the promising results, we are aware of the limitations related to the significant heterogeneity of inclusion criteria. Importantly, the low rate of reported septic shock may point toward selection bias. Further studies are needed to evaluate the clinical advantages and cost-effectiveness of the DCS approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.