Background:The aim of the present study is to present the three years follow-up a randomised controlled trial that compared Hartmann's Procedure (HP) with sigmoidectomy with primary anastomosis (with or without defunctioning ileostomy) (PA) in a randomised design to determine the optimal treatment strategy for perforated diverticulitis with purulent or fecal peritonitis. Methods: Data were prospectively gathered for the first 12 months after randomization and retrospectively collected up to 36 months. The primary long-term endpoint was stoma free rate 36 months after the index procedure. Secondary outcomes were patients with a stoma at 36 months, percentage of stoma reversals, related reinterventions, parastomal/incisional hernia rates, total in hospital days including all readmissions regardless their relation to the intervention, overall morbidity and mortality. Results: Three years follow-up was completed in 119 of the originally 130 included patients, with 57 (48%) in the PA-group and 62 (52%) patients in the HP-group. 36 months stoma free rate was significantly better for patients undergoing PA compared with HP (PA 92% vs HP 81%, hazard ratio 2.326 [95% CI 1.538-3.517]; log-rank p < 0⋅0001). Stoma reversal rates did not significantly differ (PA 31/40(78%) versus HP 45/61(74%), p = 0.814). Overall cumulative morbidity (PA 21/57(36%) versus HP 30/62(48%), p = 0.266) and mortality (PA 6/57(11%) versus HP 7/62 (11%), p = 1.000) did not differ between groups. However, more parastomal hernias occurred in the HP-group (HP 10/62(16%) vs PA 1/57(2%), p = 0.009) and the mean total in hospital days after three years follow-up was significantly lower in the PA-group compared to the HP-group (PA 14 days (IQR 9.5-22.5) versus HP 17 days (IQR 12.5-27.5)), p = 0.025). Conclusion: Long-term results showed that in haemodynamically stable, immunocompetent patients primary anastomosis is superior to Hartmann's procedure as treatment for perforated diverticulitis with respect to longterm stoma free rate, overall hospitalization and parastomal hernias.

Background This study aimed to compare laparoscopic lavage and sigmoidectomy as treatment for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis during a 36 month follow-up of the LOLA trial. Methods Within the LOLA arm of the international, multicentre LADIES trial, patients with perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis were randomised between laparoscopic lavage and sigmoidectomy. Outcomes were collected up to 36 months. The primary outcome of the present study was cumulative morbidity and mortality. Secondary outcomes included reoperations (including stoma reversals), stoma rates, and sigmoidectomy rates in the lavage group. Results Long-term follow-up was recorded in 77 of the 88 originally included patients, 39 were randomised to sigmoidectomy (51%) and 38 to laparoscopic lavage (49%). After 36 months, overall cumulative morbidity (sigmoidectomy 28/39 (72%) versus lavage 32/38 (84%), p = 0·272) and mortality (sigmoidectomy 7/39 (18%) versus lavage 6/38 (16%), p = 1·000) did not differ. The number of patients who underwent a reoperation was significantly lower for lavage compared to sigmoidectomy (sigmoidectomy 27/39 (69%) versus lavage 17/38 (45%), p = 0·039). After 36 months, patients alive with stoma in situ was lower in the lavage group (proportion calculated from the Kaplan–Meier life table, sigmoidectomy 17% vs lavage 11%, log-rank p = 0·0268). Eventually, 17 of 38 (45%) patients allocated to lavage underwent sigmoidectomy. Conclusion Long-term outcomes showed that laparoscopic lavage was associated with less patients who underwent reoperations and lower stoma rates in patients alive after 36 months compared to sigmoidectomy. No differences were found in terms of cumulative morbidity or mortality. Patient selection should be improved to reduce risk for short-term complications after which lavage could still be a valuable treatment option. Graphical abstract

No abstract

The authors report on a newly developed data base program for strabismus patients. All relevant preoperative and postoperative information regarding visual sensory data, motility, squinting angle in nine fields of gaze and head position are easily entered into the data base. The program flows easily through data collection. Its use does not require special computer skills. Depending on monitor size, data for each patient is compressed into three or four screens totaling 120 entry fields, 67 of which refer to preoperative and postoperative squint angle. Entry fields flow in a logical manner. Storing capacity is increased by a factor of up to 40 with 28 drop down fields, totaling 271 available entry fields per patient. To enhance easy access of data, no abbreviations have been used.

No abstract