ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Surgical approach to intraabdominal sepsis: a damage control approach can reduce stoma rates.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn patients with perforated diverticulitis and/or intraabdominal sepsis (IAS), the best surgical strategy remains controversial. While open, non-restorative Hartmann's procedure represents the procedure of choice in many centers, ostomy-sparing and minimally invasive techniques have been increasingly utilized due to short- and long-term benefits, including a reduced stoma rate. This dynamic manuscript illustrates strategic and technical considerations of the standardized institutional staged or damage control approach to IAS. TECHNIQUE: The institutional strategy to IAS is demonstrated through an emergency procedure for perforated Hinchey IV diverticulitis in a 70-year-old woman developing an acute abdomen. After a diagnostic laparoscopy, stercoral peritonitis was confirmed and the patient underwent laparotomy. A two-stage approach (stage 1: damage control with resection of the perforated sigmoid, abdominal lavage, vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) - stage 2 (36-48 h later and during daytime): primary colorectal anastomosis and abdominal closure) was performed. While laparoscopic exploration represents the standard approach in hemodynamically stable patients, the staged procedure (resection and sepsis control) helped refine the definite strategy (goal of reconstruction and no ostomy) in a clinically improved patient during the second step. The patient recovered well during the critical therapeutic window, allowing to perform primary anastomosis and a stoma-free discharge. DISCUSSION: Clinical condition during surgery, surgeon expertise, and comorbidities are key determinants to decide whether to proceed to primary anastomosis in the case of IAS. An institutional series of our group revealed feasibility and safety of the staged approach, with 65% stoma-free patients at discharge. A standardized algorithm based on intraoperative hemodynamic parameters intends to guide surgical decision-making during staged procedures to seek optimized conditions allowing to proceed to primary anastomosis.
conclusionA staged approach according to a predefined decisional framework may help decrease the need for ostomy creation in patients with IAS.
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.