ArticleUpdates in surgery2026
Outcomes of damage control surgery in perforated sigmoid diverticulitis: a comparison before and after implementing a new treatment algorithm.
Article in Updates in surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
backgroundNon-restorative resection (NRR) is the most common procedure for perforated diverticulitis, but frequently leads to permanent stoma and morbidity related to stoma reversal. For selected patients, primary anastomosis (PRA) is another option. Damage control surgery (DCS) may be an alternative, potentially offering a greater likelihood of stoma-free discharge. We compared DCS to conventional surgical treatment in terms of stoma-free discharge and postoperative complications.
methodsThis single center trial compared patients treated before and after the introduction of a new treatment algorithm based on DCS. The prospective study group underwent surgery from 2022 to 2024, following implementation of a DCS-based treatment algorithm. The retrospective control group underwent operation from 2020 to 2022 (pre-algorithm). The primary outcome was stoma presence at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included stoma at discharge, complications, length of hospitalization, costs, and complications after stoma reversal.
resultsIn the control group, 29/30 patients (97%) underwent NRR. In the study group, 22/26 (85%) underwent DCS, among these 4/22 (18%) required conversion to NRR, and 18/22 (82%) achieved anastomosis during the second-look. Demographics, length of hospitalization, post-operative complications, and complications after stoma reversal were similar. The control group exhibited higher rates of stoma at 12 months (37% vs. 8%, P = 0.003). Multivariate analysis revealed that treatment before the algorithm was independently associated with increased stoma presence at 12 months (Hazard ratio 10.65, P = 0.013).
conclusionsDCS appears to be a safe and effective strategy, yielding significantly lower rates of stoma at 12 months compared to conventional treatment for perforated diverticulitis.
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.