IMPORTANCE National guidelines on interval resection for prevention of recurrence after complicated diverticulitis are inconsistent. Although US and German guidelines favor interval colonic resection to prevent a perceived high risk of recurrence, UK guidelines do not.OBJECTIVES To investigate patient management and outcomes after an index inpatient episode of nonoperatively managed complicated diverticulitis in Switzerland and Scotland and determine whether interval resection was associated with the rate of disease-specific emergency surgery or death in either country.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis secondary analysis of anonymized complete national inpatient data sets included all patients with an inpatient episode of successfully nonoperatively managed complicated diverticulitis in Switzerland and Scotland from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2015. The 2 countries have contrasting health care systems: Switzerland is insurance funded, while Scotland is state funded. Statistical analysis was conducted from February 1, 2018, to October 17, 2019.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary end point defined a priori before the analysis was adverse outcome, defined as any disease-specific emergency surgical intervention or inpatient death after the initial successful nonsurgical inpatient management of an episode of complicated diverticulitis, including complications from interval elective surgery.
RESULTSThe study cohort comprised 13 861 inpatients in Switzerland (6967 women) and 5129 inpatients in Scotland (2804 women) with an index episode of complicated acute diverticulitis managed nonoperatively. The primary end point was observed in 698 Swiss patients (5.0%) and 255 Scottish patients (5.0%) (odds ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.81-1.19). Elective interval colonic resection was undertaken in 3280 Swiss patients (23.7%; median follow-up, 53 months [interquartile range, 24-90 months]) and 231 Scottish patients (4.5%; median follow-up, 57 months [interquartile range, 27-91 months]). Death after urgent readmission for recurrent diverticulitis occurred in 104 patients (0.8%) in Switzerland and 65 patients (1.3%) in Scotland. None of the investigated confounders had a significant association with the outcome apart from comorbidity.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This study found no difference in the rate of adverse outcome (emergency surgery and/or inpatient death) despite a 5-fold difference in interval resection rates.
This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
Background: Identifying patients likely to have improved renal function after percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty and stenting (PTRA) for renal artery stenosis (RAS) is challenging. The purpose of this study was to use a comprehensive multimarker assessment to identify those patients who would benefit most from correction of RAS.
Methods:In 127 patients with RAS and decreased renal function and/or hypertension referred for PTRA, quantification of hemodynamic cardiac stress using B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP), renal function using estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), parenchymal renal damage using resistance index (RI), and systemic inflammation using C-reactive protein (CRP) were performed before intervention.Results: Predefined renal function improvement (increase in eGFR ≥10%) at 6 months occurred in 37% of Conclusions: Quantification of renal function, but not any other pathophysiologic signal, provides at least moderate accuracy in the identification of patients with RAS in whom PTRA will improve renal function.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.