The Trends of Complicated Acute Colonic Diverticulitis—A Systematic Review of the National Administrative Databases
by
, ,
Roberto Cirocchi
1, 
Georgi Popivanov
2,*
,
Alessia Corsi
3,
Antonio Amato
4,
Riccardo Nascimbeni
5,
Rosario Cuomo
6,
Bruno Annibale
7,
Marina Konaktchieva
8 and
Gian Andrea Binda
9 1
Department of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, Hospital of Terni, University of Perugia, 05100 Terni, Italy
2
Department of Surgery, Military Medical Academy, ul. “Sv. Georgi Sofiyski” 3, 1606 Sofia, Bulgaria
3
Chirurgia Generale, Ospedale della Media Valle del Tevere, via del Buda, 06059 Todi, Italy
4
Unit of Coloproctology, Department of Surgery, Borea Hospital, 18038 Sanremo, Italy
5
Department of Molecular and Translational Medicine, University of Brescia, 25121 Brescia, Italy
6
Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Sant’Anna e San Sebastiano Hospital, 81100 Caserta, Italy
7
Department of Medical Surgery, Sciences and Translational Medicine University Sapienza, 00189 Rome, Italy
8
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Military Medical Academy, ul. “Sv. Georgi Sofiiski“ 3, 1606 Sofia, Bulgaria
9
Colorectal Surgery, BioMedical Institute, 16157 Genova, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Medicina 2019, 55(11), 744; https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina55110744
Submission received: 3 September 2019
/
Revised: 28 October 2019
/
Accepted: 12 November 2019
/
Published: 16 November 2019
(This article belongs to the Section Emergency Medicine)
Abstract
:Background and Objectives: The diverticular disease includes a broad spectrum of different “clinical situations” from diverticulosis to acute diverticulitis (AD), with a full spectrum of severity ranging from self-limiting infection to abscess or fistula formation to free perforation. The present work aimed to assess the burden of complicated diverticulitis through a comparative analysis of the hospitalizations based on the national administrative databases. Materials and Methods: A review of the international and national administrative databases concerning admissions for complicated AD was performed. Results: Ten studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. No definition of acute complicated diverticulitis was reported in any study. Complicated AD accounted for approximately 42% and 79% of the hospitalizations. The reported rates of abscess varied between 1% and 10% from all admissions for AD and 5–29% of the cases with complicated AD. An increasing temporal trend was found in one study–from 6% to 10%. The rates of diffuse peritonitis ranged from 1.6% to 10.2% of all hospitalizations and 11% and 47% of the complicated cases and were stable in the time. Conclusions: The available data precluded definitive conclusions because of the significant discrepancy between the included studies. The leading cause was the presence of heterogeneity due to coding inaccuracies in all databases, absence of ICD codes to distinguish the different type of complications, and the lack of coding data about some general conditions such as sepsis, shock, malnutrition, steroid therapy, diabetes, pulmonary, and heart failure.
1. Introduction
The diverticular disease (DD) includes a broad spectrum of different “clinical situations” from diverticulosis to diverticulitis. Diverticulosis means that diverticula is only present at the colonic level, and many patients with colonic diverticula remain asymptomatic throughout their life. Only 20% of patients develop symptoms and signs of illness [1]. If these pouches become inflamed or infected and cause severe abdominal pain and fever, the disease is referred to as acute diverticulitis (AD). AD represents 4% of abdominal pain in patients evaluated at emergency departments [2]. AD could remain uncomplicated in 75% of patients, while approximately 25% will develop complications with a broad spectrum of severity, ranging from mild self-limiting infection to bleeding, abscess, or fistula formation to free perforation [3]. Consequently, diverticulitis is subdivided into uncomplicated and complicated [1].
Some recent studies analyzed the nationwide trend in hospital admissions for complicated AD and its association with gender, age, and type of treatment, including in-hospital mortality, showing an increased rate of AD [4,5,6]. The present study aimed to ascertain the burden of complicated diverticulitis on the healthcare systems by performing a comparative analysis of the international data of the epidemiology of hospitalizations for complicated AD through a systematic review of the literature. The ascertainment of the real incidence of AD (per 100,000) was beyond our scope.
2. Materials and Methods
We performed an analysis of the international and national administrative databases concerning admissions for complicated AD. The criteria of the “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement” were applied [7].
Inclusion criteria: Non-national or regional databases were excluded. An analysis of the national databases was performed with a focus on the acute complicated diverticulitis. No language restrictions were imposed.
Exclusion criteria: Randomized trials and articles that only treated diverticulosis or uncomplicated diverticulitis alone, or with only patients undergoing emergency/emergent surgery for AD, were excluded.
Sources of information: The following shows the systematic search performed on PubMed for papers published from January 1978 to June 2019: (“surgery”[Subheading] OR “surgery”[All Fields] OR “surgical procedures, operative”[MeSH Terms] OR (“surgical”[All Fields] AND “procedures”[All Fields] AND “operative”[All Fields]) OR “operative surgical procedures”[All Fields] OR “surgery”[All Fields] OR “general surgery”[MeSH Terms] OR (“general”[All Fields] AND “surgery”[All Fields]) OR “general surgery”[All Fields]) AND (“diverticulitis”[MeSH Terms] OR “diverticulitis”[All Fields]) AND (“emergencies”[MeSH Terms] OR “emergencies”[All Fields] OR “emergency”[All Fields]). Two other searches were performed on SCOPUS and WOS. Duplicates were filtered and remaining papers were screened for title and abstract. Randomized trials, articles not reporting on the complicated diverticular disease, and those reporting on only emergency surgery were excluded. Expert opinions, reviews, and case reports were also excluded. No language restrictions were applied.
A full-text analysis of the remaining papers was conducted. Only those focusing on the epidemiology of complicated diverticulitis were included in the present review. A final hand-search of references of all included articles was carried out for further relevant studies.
3. Results
The electronic search strategy identified 2259 citations (Figure 1). After the initial screening of the titles and abstracts and the removal of duplications, 26 papers remained [8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33]. After the evaluation of the full text, 16 studies were excluded [18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33] (Table A1, Appendix A). Only 10 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis [8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17]. Four of them were performed in Europe and 6 were performed in the USA. The more extensive epidemiological studies were conducted in the USA (Table 1).
No definition of acute complicated diverticulitis was reported in any study. In seven studies, the codes for the inclusion of complicated diverticulitis were made explicit: Three articles reported ICD 9 and four studies reported ICD-10 (Table 2). In the selected database articles, only Diamant [11], Hupfeld [16], and Amato [17] described the proportion of hospitalizations for complicated AD– 41.6%, 14.8%, and 79.4%, respectively. The other studies reported absolute values, but it was not possible to evaluate the relative percentage (Table 3).
Some studies performed a distinction between abscesses and peritonitis, but it was not possible to distinguish the various types of abscess (Hinchey I vs. Hinchey II) and peritonitis (Hinchey III vs. Hinchey IV). These studies used the ICD 9-CM codes, and the distinction between stage I and stage II was only possible for code 569.5 (abscess of intestine) [9,11] (Hinchey I) and 614.3 (pelvic abscess) [11] (Hinchey II), while code 567.22 (peritoneal abscess) did not permit the distinction between stage I and stage II [11].
Regarding the peritonitis, codes 567.21 (generalized acute peritonitis) and 567.0 (peritonitis in infectious diseases classified elsewhere) were included, which allowed us to highlight the presence of peritonitis, but it did not enable us to distinguish Hinchey III from Hinchey IV [11,17]. The same was the problem with code K572C in ICD-10. The other used codes were 567.9 peritonitis (peritonitis unspecified) and 614.5 (acute or unspecified pelvic peritonitis, female), and they had the same limit. In some studies, the presence of perforation was reported, but the type of complication associated with perforation (abscess, peritonitis) was not described. In these studies, the code used was 569.83 (perforation of the intestine) [9,11,17]. In the group with peritonitis, based on the percent of all hospitalizations, Amato reported a higher rate of colonic perforation (10.2%) in contrast to Ricciardi (1.5%) and Rose (3.4%) (Table 4) [9,12,17].
Differently, the rate of diverticular abscess varied between 1.2% and 10% of all hospitalizations and from 5% to 29% of the hospitalized complicated cases (Table 5). Only Ricciardi et al. reported a temporal trend of the perforation rate in 1991 (start of study: 504, 1.6%) and 2005 (end of study: 910, 1.5%) and regarding the abscess rate of the same years (1991: 1855, 5.9% and 2005: 5837, 9.6%) [9]. Similarly, only one study reported a subgroup difference in the abscess rate in purulent and fecal peritonitis—4.5% and 29%, respectively [8].
Only Rose [12] and Amato [17] reported the presence of sepsis identified with the codes 785.52, 995.90–995.92, intestinal obstruction, and fistulas with the codes 569.81, 596.1, and 619.1. On the contrary, in the ICD-10 classification, the only codes concerning the complicated AD were the code K57.2 for diverticulitis of large intestine with perforation and abscess [13,15] and the code K566 for colonic stenosis (Table 2). Hupfeld et al. included all ICD-10 diagnosis codes but did not report a subgroup analysis of these codes [16].
4. Discussion
Nowadays, the colonic diverticular disease has a high impact on the resources of the National Health Service. Due to the increasing prevalence of this condition, the incidence of diverticular disease is increasing over time in both Western and Asian countries [34,35].
Currently, there is little information on the epidemiology of complicated AD, with most data deriving from the American health system, which significantly differs from the European systems, which are health national or mutual insurance. In Italy, the health system used is Beveridge-type, and the only studies reported in the literature using this system were carried out in England and Denmark. However, these studies were very few because they were carried out in only some regions or hospitals. We performed an analysis of the international and national administrative databases concerning admissions for complicated AD to update the epidemiology data.
The first obstacle in this regard is the lack of uniform definition for complicated AD in literature and everyday clinical practice. The most common was the presence of “diverticulitis with phlegmon, abscess, fistula, stricture or peritonitis” [36]. Many classifications of the complicated AD—clinical, radiological, or mixed—have been proposed in the literature [37].
In 1978, the first classification, proposed by Hinchey, categorized the patients into pericolic abscess or phlegmon confined to the mesentery of the colon (stage I), pelvic, intraabdominal, or retroperitoneal abscess resulting from a local perforation of a pericolic abscess (stage II), generalized purulent peritonitis resulting from rupture of pericolic/pelvic abscess into the peritoneal cavity (stage III), and generalized fecal peritonitis resulting from the free perforation of a diverticulum (stage IV) [38,39]. Successively, Wasvary et al. modified the Hinchey classification and suggested a difference between limited pericolic inflammation or phlegmon (stage Ia) and a confined pericolic abscess (stage Ib) [40]. In the same year, the consensus statement of the European Association of Endoscopic Surgeons (EAES) reported the new clinical classification of AD: Symptomatic disease, recurrent symptomatic illness, and complicated disease. Complicated AD included hemorrhage, fistula, phlegmon, abscess, purulent and fecal peritonitis, perforation, small bowel obstruction due to post-inflammatory adhesions, and stricture [41].
We made a large selection of studies according to the cited exclusion criteria and inclusion criteria to provide an objective analysis. We included only the databases focusing on the complicated AD and analyzed the coding systems (ICD 9-CM and ICD-10). In most of the included studies, it was not possible to derive the percentage of hospitalization for complicated AD because of the heterogeneity of the coding system. It is not possible to distinguish Hinchey III from Hinchey IV, while Hinchey I with code 569.5 was differentiated from Hinchey II with code 614.3, but the code 567.22 instead did not allow distinction (peritoneal abscess) in ICD-9-CM.
The Nationwide inpatient sample (NIS) data from 1998–2005 revealed a significant increase, with 26% of the hospitalizations for AD in the USA. The rate of surgery, however, decreased from 17.4% to 14.4% on the background of stable rate of colostomy (56%) and limited use of percutaneous drainage (1.4% to 2.5%) [5]. In another NIS survey encompassing the period 1991–2005, Ricciardi et al. demonstrated that the rate of admissions for AD was only 0.6% of all entries with increase of the ratio of the discharged diverticulitis from 5.1/1000 hospitalized patients in 1991 to 7.6/1000 in 2005. The rate of perforating disease remained stable (1.6% and 1.5% of all AD), whereas an increase from 5.9% to 9.6% for abscess was noted [9]. Extending the investigated period to 2008 (also NIS survey), Diamant et al. reported an 8% rate of abscesses and a similar rate of 1.6% perforating AD [11]. Based on the data of the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development Patient discharge database (PDD), Rose et al. also demonstrated an 8% abscess rate (27% of the complicated AD) and a 3.4% rate for peritonitis (11.5% of all AD admissions) for the period 1995–2009 [12].
In contrast to the abovementioned US studies, Amato et al. reported a significantly lower abscess rate (1.2%) and a higher rate of perforating AD—10.2% of all AD admissions and 41.6% of the complicated AD [17].
The somewhat confusing and inconclusive data represent a significant limitation of the present study and stems from the constraints of the included studies. The principal limit was the absence of ICD codes that permit to distinguish some different type of complications (Hinchey I vs. Hinchey II or Hinchey III vs. Hinchey IV) and often the lack of coding data about some general conditions such as sepsis, shock, malnutrition, steroid therapy, diabetes, and pulmonary and/or heart failure. Last, it should be noted that no uniform definition for complicated AD was used in the included studies. Additionally, the exact rate of the complicated AD admissions remains unknown because of the different healthcare systems and, particularly, the increasing trend for outpatient treatment of the uncomplicated and even selected complicated cases, which influences the denominator [42].
5. Conclusions
In general, the reported rates of abscess varied between 1–10% from all admissions for AD and 5–29% of the complicated AD. The diffuse peritonitis accounted for 1.6–10% of all hospitalizations and 11–47% of the complicated cases.
However, the available data precluded the definitive conclusions because of the significant discrepancy between the included studies. The main reason was the presence of coding inaccuracies in all databases and the absence of ICD codes that permitted us to distinguish some different types of complications (Hinchey I vs. Hinchey II or Hinchey III vs. Hinchey IV). Last, it should be noted that no uniform definition for complicated AD was used in the included studies. Nevertheless, the presented results and issues could be a starting point for future studies. Two suggestions could be made and discussed at future meetings. The first is the subdivision of the codes for purulent and feculent peritonitis in ICD-10. The second is the use of a strict definition of complicated AD and broader application of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) classification of AD, mainly because it is Computed tomography (CT)-based and allows staging even in the absence of operation in contrast to Hinchey [43].
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, R.C., G.A.B.; Investigation, M.K., A.C., R.C., A.A.; Methodology, R.C., G.A.B., R.N., R.C.; Project administration, R.C., G.P., A.C., R.C.; Resources, R.C., R.N., A.A., M.K., B.A., G.P.; Supervision, R.C., G.A.B., A.C., B.A.; Visualization, B.A., R.N., A.A., M.K.; Writing-original draft preparation, R.C., G.P., A.A., B.A., M.K.; Writing-review & editing, R.C., G.A.B., G.P., M.K.
Funding
No funding was used in the preparation of this manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Appendix A
Table A1.
The list of the excluded studies.
| Author and Year of Publication | Reason for the Exclusion |
|---|---|
| Cammarota 2018 | There is overlapping with Amato 2019 |
| Lee 2018 | The authors compared the BMI, computed tomographic estimations of abdominal fat content, age, and sex |
| Dean 2018 | The authors identified only patients ≤50 with a diagnosis of diverticulitis in the NSQIP database |
| Cirocchi 2018 | The authors performed an anaòysis of surgical strategies in elderly patients |
| Mennini 2017 | The authors reported an economic analysis of diverticular disease |
| Tan 2016 | The authors performed an analysis of the predictors of acute diverticulitis severity |
| Jamal Talabani 2016 | The authors performed an evaluation for risk factors for admission for acute colonic diverticulitis |
| Bharucha 2015 | The authors performed a population-based analysis of acute diverticulitis |
| Schneider 2015 | The authors performed an analysis of emergency department presentation, admission, and surgical intervention for colonic diverticulitis in the United States, but they do not report any data about the complicated diverticulitis |
| Jamal Talabani 2014 | The authors performed a hospital analysis of patients with acute diverticulitis |
| Kim 2012 | The authors reported an analysis of the clinical factors for predicting severe diverticulitis in Korea |
| Sorser 2009 | The authors performed an analysis of the association between obesity and complicated diverticular disease |
| Andeweg 2008 | The authors evaluated the incidence and risk factors of recurrence after surgery for acute diverticulitis |
| Papagrigoriadis 2004 | The authors performed an analysis about clinical and cost analysis of inpatient and outpatient investigations, treatment and hospitalization |
| Kang 2003 | The authors do not report any data about the complicated diverticular disease |
| McConnell | The authors performed a hospital analysis of patients with acute diverticulitis |
References
- Sopeña, F.; Lanas, A. Management of colonic diverticular disease with poorly absorbed antibiotics and other therapies. Ther. Adv. Gastroenterol. 2011, 4, 365–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sebbane, M.; Dumont, R.; Jreige, R.; Eledjam, J.J. Epidemiology of acute abdominal pain in adults in the emergency department setting. In CT of the Acute Abdomen; Taourel, P., Ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; pp. 3–13. [Google Scholar]
- Fingerhut, A.; Veyrie, N. Complicated diverticular disease: The changing paradigm for treatment. Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões 2012, 39, 322–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Binda, G.A.; Mataloni, F.; Bruzzone, M.; Carabotti, M.; Cirocchi, R.; Nascimbeni, R.; Gambassi, G.; Amato, A.; Vettoretto, N.; Pinnarelli, L.; et al. Trends in hospital admission for acute diverticulitis in Italy from 2008 to 2015. Tech. Coloproctol. 2018, 22, 597–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Etzioni, D.A.; Mack, T.M.; Beart, R.W.; Kaiser, A.M. Diverticulitis in the United States: 1998–2005: Changing patterns of disease and treatment. Ann. Surg. 2009, 249, 210–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kozak, L.J.; DeFrances, C.J.; Hall, M.J. National hospital discharge survey: 2004 annual summary with detailed diagnosis and procedure data. Vital Health Stat Ser. 13 2006, 162, 1–209. [Google Scholar]
- Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G.; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009, 6, 1000097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Morris, C.R.; Harvey, I.M.; Stebbings, W.S.L.; Hart, A.R. Incidence of perforated diverticulitis and risk factors for death in a UK population. Br. J. Surg. 2008, 95, 876–881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ricciardi, R.; Baxter, N.N.; Read, T.E.; Marcello, P.W.; Hall, J.; Roberts, P.L. Is the decline in the surgical treatment for diverticulitis associated with an increase in complicated diverticulitis? Dis. Colon Rectum 2009, 52, 1558–1563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Masoomi, H.; Buchberg, B.S.; Magno, C.; Mills, S.D.; Stamos, M.J. Trends in diverticulitis management in the United States from 2002 to 2007. Arch. Surg. 2011, 146, 400–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Diamant, M.J.; Coward, S.; Buie, W.D.; MacLean, A.; Dixon, E.; Ball, C.G.; Schaffer, S.; Kaplan, G.G. Hospital volume and other risk factors for in-hospital mortality among diverticulitis patients: A nationwide analysis. Can. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2015, 29, 193–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rose, J.; Parina, R.P.; Faiz, O.; Chang, D.C.; Talamini, M.A. Long-term outcomes after initial presentation of diverticulitis. Ann. Surg. 2015, 262, 1046–1053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hong, M.K.Y.; Tomlin, A.M.; Hayes, I.P.; Skandarajah, A.R. Operative intervention rates for acute diverticulitis: A multicentre state-wide study. ANZ J. Surg. 2015, 734–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lamm, R.; Mathews, S.N.; Yang, J.; Kang, L.; Telem, D.; Pryor, A.D.; Talamini, M.; Genua, J. 20-year trends in the management of diverticulitis across New York state: An analysis of 265,724 patients. J. Gastrointest. Surg. 2017, 21, 78–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hong, M.K.Y.; Skandarajah, A.R.; Higgins, R.D.; Faiz, O.D.; Hayes, I.P. International variation in emergency operation rates for acute diverticulitis: Insights into healthcare value. World J. Surg. 2017, 41, 2121–2127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hupfeld, L.; Pommergaard, H.C.; Burcharth, J.; Rosenberg, J. Emergency admissions for complicated colonic diverticulitis are increasing: A nationwide register-based cohort study. Int. J. Colorectal Dis. 2018, 33, 879–886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Amato, A.; Nascimbeni, R.; Annibale, B.; Cirocchi, R.; Carabotti, M.; Gambassi, G.; Cuomo, R.; Binda, G.A. Complicated diverticulitis in Italy: Trends in patterns of disease and treatment. Tech. Colorectal Surg. 2018, 22, 597–604. [Google Scholar]
- Cammarota, S.; Cargiolli, M.; Andreozzi, P.; Toraldo, B.; Citarella, A.; Flacco, M.E.; Binda, G.A.; Annibale, B.; Manzoli, L.; Cuomo, R. Increasing trend in admission rates andcosts for acute diverticulitis during 2005–2015: Real-life data from the Abruzzo Region. Ther. Adv. Gastroenterol. 2018, 11, 1756284818791502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, T.H.; Setty, P.T.; Parthasarathy, G.; Bailey, K.R.; Wood-Wentz, C.M.; Fletcher, J.G. Aging, obesity, and the incidence of diverticulitis: A population-based study. Mayo Clin. Proc. 2018, 93, 1256–1265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dean, M.; Kessler, H.; Gorgun, E. Surgical outcomes for diverticulitis in young patients: Results from the NSQIP database. Surg. Endosc. 2018, 32, 4953–4956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cirocchi, R.; Nascimbeni, R.; Binda, G.A.; Vettoretto, N.; Cuomo, R.; Gambassi, G.; Amato, A.; Annibale, B. Surgical treatment of acute complicated diverticulitis in the elderly. Minerva. Chir. 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mennini, F.S.; Sciattella, P.; Marcellusi, A.; Toraldo, B.; Koch, M. Economic burden of diverticular disease: An observational analysis based on real world data from an Italian region. Dig. Liver Dis. 2017, 49, 1003–1008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tan, J.P.; Barazanchi, A.W.; Singh, P.P.; Hill, A.G.; Maccormick, A.D. Predictors of acute diverticulitis severity: A systematic review. Int. J. Surg. 2016, 26, 43–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jamal Talabani, A.; Lydersen, S.; Ness-Jensen, E.; Endreseth, B.H.; Edna, T.H. Risk factors of admission for acute colonic diverticulitis in a population-based cohort study: The North Trondelag Health Study, Norway. World J. Gastroenterol. 2016, 22, 10663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bharucha, A.E.; Parthasarathy, G.; Ditah, I.; Fletcher, J.G.; Ewelukwa, O.; Pendlimari, R.; Yawn, B.P.; Melton, L.J.; Schleck, C.; Zinsmeister, A.R. Temporal trends in the incidence and natural history of diverticulitis: A population-based study. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 2015, 110, 1589–1596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jamal Talabani, A.; Lydersen, S.; Endreseth, B.H.; Edna, T.H. Major increase inadmission-and incidence rates of acute colonic diverticulitis. Int. J. Colorectal Dis. 2014, 29, 937–945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kim, S.Y.; Oh, T.H.; Seo, J.Y.; Jeon, T.J.; Seo, D.D.; Shin, W.C.; Choi, W.C.; Jeong, M.J. The clinical factors for predicting severe diverticulitis in Korea: A comparison with Western countries. Gut Liver 2012, 6, 78–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sorser, S.A.; Hazan, T.B.; Piper, M.; Maas, L.C. Obesity and complicated diverticular disease: Is there an association? South. Med. J. 2009, 102, 350–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andeweg, C.; Peters, J.; Bleichrodt, R.; van Goor, H. Incidence and risk factors of recurrence after surgery for pathology-proven diverticular disease. World J. Surg. 2008, 32, 1501–1506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Papagrigoriadis, S.; Debrah, S.; Koreli, A.; Husain, A. Impact of diverticular disease on hospital costs and activity. Colorectal Dis. 2004, 6, 81–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kang, J.Y.; Hoare, J.; Tinto, A.; Subramanian, S.; Ellis, C.; Majeed, A.; Melville, D.; Maxwell, J.D. Diverticular disease of the colon-on the rise: A study of hospital admissions in England between 1989/1990 and 1999/2000. Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. 2003, 17, 1189–1195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McConnell, E.J.; Tessier, D.J.; Wolff, B.G. Population-based incidence of complicated diverticular disease of the sigmoid colon based on gender and age. Dis. Colon Rectum 2003, 46, 1110–1114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sandler, R.S.; Everhart, J.E.; Donowitz, M.; Adams, E.; Cronin, K.; Goodman, C.; Gemmen, E.; Shah, S.; Avdic, A.; Rubin, R. The burden of selected digestive diseases in the United States. Gastroenterology 2002, 122, 1500–1511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wheat, C.L.; Strate, L.L. Trends in hospitalization for diverticulitis and diverticular bleeding in the United States from 2000 to 2010. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2016, 14, 96–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Yamamichi, N.; Shimamoto, T.; Takahashi, Y.; Sakaguchi, Y.; Kakimoto, H.; Matsuda, R.; Kataoka, Y.; Saito, I.; Tsuji, Y.; Yakabi, S.; et al. Trend and risk factors of diverticulosis in Japan: Age, gender, and lifestyle/metabolic-related factors may cooperatively affect on the colorectal diverticula formation. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, 0123688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Moore, F.; Moore, E.; Burlew, C.; Coimbra, R.; McIntryre, R.C.; Davis, J.W.; Sperry, J.; Biffl, W.L. Western Association critical decisions in trauma: Management of complicated diverticulitis. J. Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2012, 73, 1365–1371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarteli, M.; Catena, F.; Ansaloni, L.; Coccolini, F.; Griffits, E.A.; Abu-Zidan, F.M.; Di Saverio, S.; Ulrich, J.; Kluger, Y.; Ben-Ishay, O.; et al. WSES guidelines for the management of acute left sided colonic diverticulitis in the emergency setting. World J. Emerg. Surg. 2016, 11, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Klarenbeek, B.R.; de Korte, N.; Van der Peet, D.L.; Cuesta, M.A. Review of current classifications for diverticular disease and a translation into clinical practice. Int. J. Colorectal Dis. 2012, 27, 207–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Andersen, J.C.; Bundgaard, L.; Elbrønd, H.; Laurberg, S.; Walker, L.R.; Støvring, J. Danish national guidelines for treatment of diverticular disease. Dan. Med. J. 2012, 59, C4453. [Google Scholar]
- Wasvary, H.; Turfah, F.; Kadro, O.; Beauregard, W. Same hospitalization resection for acute diverticulitis. Am. Surg. 1999, 65, 632–635. [Google Scholar]
- Kohler, L.; Sauerland, S.; Neugebauer, E. Diagnosis and treatment of diverticular disease: Results of a consensus development conference. The Scientific Committee of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery. Surg. Endosc. 1999, 13, 430–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cirocchi, R.; Randolph, J.; Binda, G.; Gioia, S.; Henry, B.; Tomaszewski, K.; Allegritti, M.; Arezzo, A.; Marzaioli, R.; Ruscelli, P. Is the outpatient management of acute diverticulitis safe and effective? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Tech. Coloproctol. 2019, 23, 87–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sartelli, M.; Moore, F.; Ansaloni, L.; Di Saverio, S.; Coccolini, F.; Griffiths, E.; Coimbra, R.; Agresta, F.; Sakakushev, B.; Ordoñez, C.A.; et al. A proposal for a CT driven classification of the left colon acute diverticulitis. World J. Emerg. Surg. 2015, 10, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Figure 1.
PRISMA flowchart of literature search.
Table 1.
Characteristics of the included studies.
| Study | Years of the Research | Nation | N. of Patients | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Morris [8] 2008 | 1995–2000 | The counties of Norfolk and Suffolk, UK | 202 (only perforated diverticulitis) | ||
| Ricciardi [9] 2009 | 1991–2005 | USA | 685,390 | ||
| Masoomi [10] 2011 | 2002–2007 | USA | 1,073,397 | ||
| Diamant [11] 2015 | 1993–2008 | United States | 822,865 | ||
| Rose [12] 2015 | 1995–2009 | USA | 210,268 | ||
| Hong [13] 2015 | 2009–2013 | Australia | 2829 | ||
| Lamm [14] 2016 | 1995–2014 | USA | 265,724 | ||
| Hong [15] 2017 | 2008–2014 | USA, England, Australia | USA | England | Australia |
| 5332 | 6647 | 3171 | |||
| Hupfeld [16] 2018 | 2000–2012 | Denmark | 44,160 | ||
| Amato [17] 2019 | 2008–2015 | Italy | 41,622 | ||
Table 2.
The diagnosis coding system used in the included studies.
| Study | General Codes for AD | Codes for Complicated AD | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Morris [8] 2008 | NR | ICD-10: | ||
| ||||
| Ricciardi [9] 2009 | ICD-9-CM: 562.11 and 562.13 (diverticulitis with and without mention of hemorrhage) | ICD-9-CM | ||
| ||||
| Masoomi [10] 2011 | ICD-9-CM: 562.11 and 562.13 (diverticulitis with and without mention of hemorrhage) | NR | ||
| Diamant [11] 2015 | ICD-9-CM:562.11 and 562.13 (diverticulitis with and without mention of hemorrhage) | ICD-9-CM: | ||
| ||||
| Rose [12] 2015 | ICD-9-CM: 562.11 and 562.13 (diverticulitis with and without mention of hemorrhage) | NR | ||
| Hong [13] 2015 | NR | ICD-10-AM: | ||
| ||||
| Lamm [14] 2016 | ICD-9-CM: 562.11 and 562.13 (diverticulitis with and without mention of hemorrhage) | NR | ||
| Hong [15] 2017 | NR | USA | England ICD-10 | Australia ICD-10-AM |
| K57.2 | K57.2 | |||
| Hupfeld [16] 2018 | ICD-10 uncomplicated AD: | ICD-10: | ||
|
| |||
| Amato [17] 2019 | ICD-9-CM: 562.11 and 562.13 (diverticulitis with and without mention of hemorrhage) | ICD-9-CM: | ||
| ||||
Table 3.
Patients hospitalized for complicated acute diverticulitis (AD).
| Study | Number or Percentage | Total Patients | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Morrison [8] 2008 (in 5 years) | 202 | NR | ||||
| Ricciardi [9] 2009 (in 14 years) | NR | 685,390 | ||||
| Masoomi [10] 2011 (in 5 years) | 840,157 | 1,073,397 | ||||
| Diamant [11] 2015 (in 15 years) | 79.4% | 822,865 | ||||
| Rose [12] 2015 (in 14 years) | 61,064 | 210,268 | ||||
| Hong [13] 2015 (in 4 years) | 724 | 2829 | ||||
| Lamm [14] 2016 (in 19 years) | NR | 265,724 | ||||
| Hong [15] 2017 (in 6 years) | USA | England | Australia | USA | England | Australia |
| 1729 | 1677 | 771 | 5332 | 6647 | 3171 | |
| Hupfeld [16] 2018 | 485 patients (12.98%) (in 2000) vs. 692 patients (14.83%) (in 2012) | 44,160 | ||||
| Amato [17] 2019 | 41.62% | 174,436 | ||||
Table 4.
The rate of generalized purulent or fecal peritonitis in patients with complicated AD.
| Study | N of Peritonitis | N of Hospitalizations for Complicated AD | % Hospitalizations for Complicated AD | N of Admissions for AD | % Hospitalizations for AD | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Morris [8] 2008 | 96 * (III) | 202 | 47.5% | NR | NR | ||||
| 38 † (IV) | 202 | 18.8% | NR | NR | |||||
| Ricciardi [9] 2009 | 504 ‡ | NR | NR | 685,390 | 1.6% | ||||
| 910 § | NR | NR | 1.5% | ||||||
| Masoomi [10] 2011 | NR | 840,157 | NR | 1,073,397 | NR | ||||
| Diamant [11] 2015 | NR | NR | NR | 822,865 | 1.6% ‖ | ||||
| Rose [12] 2015 | 7044 | 61,064 | 11.5% | 210.268 | 3.4% | ||||
| Hong [13] 2015 | NR | 724 | NR | 2,829 | NR | ||||
| Lamm [14] 2016 | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | ||||
| Hong [15] 2017 | NR | USA | England | Australia | NR | USA | England | Australia | NR |
| 1729 | 1677 | 771 | 5332 | 6647 | 3171 | ||||
| Hupfeld [16] 2018 | NR | NR | NR | 44,160 | NR | ||||
| Amato [17] 2019 | 17.811 | 41,622 | 42.79% | 174,436 | 10.21% | ||||
* Perforation with diffuse purulent peritonitis, † Perforation with diffuse fecal peritonitis, ‡ 1991, § 2005, ‖ Hinchey III–IV.
Table 5.
Abscess in patients with complicated AD.
| Study | N of Abscess | N of Hospitalizations for Complicated AD | % Hospitalizations for Complicated AD | N of Admissions for AD | % Hospitalizations for AD | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Morris [8] 2008 | 9 * | 202 | 4.5% | NR | NR | ||||
| 59 † | 202 | 29.2% | NR | NR | |||||
| Ricciardi [9] 2009 | 1855 ‡ | NR | NR | 685,390 | 5.9% | ||||
| 5837 § | NR | NR | 9.6% | ||||||
| Masoom [10] 2011 | NR | 840,157 | NR | 1,073,397 | NR | ||||
| Diamant [11] 2015 | NR | NR | NR | 822,865 | 8.1% ‖ | ||||
| Rose [12] 2015 | 16,613 | 61,064 | 27.2% | 210,268 | 7.9% | ||||
| Hong [13] 2015 | NR | 724 | NR | 2829 | NR | ||||
| Lamm [14] 2016 | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | ||||
| Hong [15] 2017 | NR | USA | England | Australia | NR | USA | England | Australia | NR |
| 1729 | 1677 | 771 | 5332 | 6647 | 3171 | ||||
| Hupfeld [16] 2018 | NR | NR | NR | 44,160 | NR | ||||
| Amato [17] 2019 | 2143 | 41,622 | 5.15% | 174,436 | 1.23% | ||||
* Perforation with pericolic abscess, † Perforation with intra-abdominal/pelvic abscess, ‡ 1991, § 2005, ‖ Hinchey I–II.
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
MDPI and ACS Style
Cirocchi, R.; Popivanov, G.; Corsi, A.; Amato, A.; Nascimbeni, R.; Cuomo, R.; Annibale, B.; Konaktchieva, M.; Binda, G.A. The Trends of Complicated Acute Colonic Diverticulitis—A Systematic Review of the National Administrative Databases. Medicina 2019, 55, 744. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina55110744
AMA Style
Cirocchi R, Popivanov G, Corsi A, Amato A, Nascimbeni R, Cuomo R, Annibale B, Konaktchieva M, Binda GA. The Trends of Complicated Acute Colonic Diverticulitis—A Systematic Review of the National Administrative Databases. Medicina. 2019; 55(11):744. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina55110744
Chicago/Turabian StyleCirocchi, Roberto, Georgi Popivanov, Alessia Corsi, Antonio Amato, Riccardo Nascimbeni, Rosario Cuomo, Bruno Annibale, Marina Konaktchieva, and Gian Andrea Binda. 2019. "The Trends of Complicated Acute Colonic Diverticulitis—A Systematic Review of the National Administrative Databases" Medicina 55, no. 11: 744. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina55110744
