4.1 Article

The long-term results of percutaneous drainage of diverticular abscess

Journal

Publisher

ROYAL COLL SURGEONS ENGLAND
DOI: 10.1308/003588408X285928

Keywords

percutaneous; drainage; diverticular abscess; stoma

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

INTRODUCTION Diverticulitis is a common condition occasionally complicated by abscess formation. Small abscesses may be managed by antibiotic therapy alone but larger collections require drainage, ideally by the percutaneous route. This minimally invasive approach is appealing but there is little information regarding the long-term follow-up of patients managed in this way. To address this question, we looked at a consecutive series of patients who underwent percutaneous drainage in our institution. PATIENTS AND METHODS A retrospective study was performed of patients undergoing percutaneous drainage of a diverticular abscess from 1999-2007. RESULTS A total of 26 abscesses were identified in 16 patients. In 69% of cases, the abscess was located in the pelvis. The mean size of the abscesses was 8.5 +/- 0.9 cm. Drainage was performed under CT (83%) or ultrasound guidance. The mean duration of drainage was 8 days. Fistula formation following drainage occurred in 38% of cases. Eight patients (mean age, 71 years) underwent subsequent surgical resection 9 days to 22 months (mean, 7 months) following initial presentation. Eight patients with significant co-morbid conditions were managed by percutaneous drainage only. The 1-year mortality was 20% and resulted from unrelated causes. The long-term stoma rate was 13%. CONCLUSIONS Percutaneous drainage can safely be performed in patients with a diverticular abscess. It can be used as a bridge before definitive surgery but also as a treatment option in its own right in high-risk surgical patients. We believe percutaneous drainage reduces the need for major surgery and reduces the risk of a permanent stoma.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available