Constantinides Vasilis A, Tekkis Paris P, Athanasiou Thanos, Aziz Omer, Purkayastha Sanjay, Remzi Feza H, Fazio Victor W, Aydin Nail, Darzi Ara, Senapati Asha
Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, Department of Surgical Oncology and Technology, St. Mary's Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Dis Colon Rectum. 2006 Jul;49(7):966-81. doi: 10.1007/s10350-006-0547-9.
This study compares primary resection with anastomosis and Hartmann's procedure in an adult population with acute colonic diverticulitis.
Comparative studies published between 1984 and 2004 of primary resection with anastomosis vs. Hartmann's procedure were included. The primary end point was postoperative mortality. Secondary end points included surgical and medical morbidity, operative time, and length of postoperative hospitalization. Random effects model was used and sensitivity analysis was performed.
Fifteen studies, including 963 patients (57 percent primary resection with anastomoses, 43 percent Hartmann's procedures), were analyzed. Overall mortality was significantly reduced with primary resection and anastomosis (4.9 vs. 15.1 percent; odds ratio = 0.41). Subgroup analysis of trials matched for emergency operations showed significantly decreased mortality with primary resection and anastomosis (7.4 vs. 15.6 percent; odds ratio = 0.44). No significant difference in mortality was observed in trials matched for severity of peritonitis Hinchey > 2 (14.1 vs. 14.4 percent; odds ratio = 0.85). Sensitivity analysis did not reveal significant heterogeneity between the studies for the primary outcome.
Patients selected for primary resection and anastomosis have a lower mortality than those treated by Hartmann's procedure in the emergency setting and comparable mortality under conditions of generalized peritonitis (Hinchey > 2). The retrospective nature of the included studies allows for a considerable degree of selection bias that limits robust and clinically sound conclusions. This analysis highlights the need for high-quality randomized trials comparing the two techniques.
本研究比较了成年急性结肠憩室炎患者行一期切除吻合术与哈特曼手术的效果。
纳入1984年至2004年间发表的关于一期切除吻合术与哈特曼手术的比较研究。主要终点是术后死亡率。次要终点包括手术和医疗并发症、手术时间及术后住院时间。采用随机效应模型并进行敏感性分析。
分析了15项研究,共963例患者(57%行一期切除吻合术,43%行哈特曼手术)。一期切除吻合术组的总体死亡率显著降低(4.9%对15.1%;优势比=0.41)。对急诊手术匹配的试验进行亚组分析显示,一期切除吻合术组的死亡率显著降低(7.4%对15.6%;优势比=0.44)。在腹膜炎Hinchey分级>2的匹配试验中,未观察到死亡率有显著差异(14.1%对14.4%;优势比=0.85)。敏感性分析未显示各研究在主要结局方面存在显著异质性。
在急诊情况下,选择一期切除吻合术的患者死亡率低于接受哈特曼手术的患者;在弥漫性腹膜炎(Hinchey分级>2)情况下,两者死亡率相当。纳入研究的回顾性性质导致存在相当程度的选择偏倚,限制了得出有力且临床可靠结论。该分析强调了开展高质量随机试验比较这两种技术的必要性。