Acute Abdominal Emergencies — Part 3: Small Bowel Obstruction, Large Bowel Obstruction & Diverticulitis
Comprehensive guide to adhesive small bowel obstruction with CT findings, conservative management, water-soluble contrast challenge, and surgical indications; large bowel obstruction including volvulus and Ogilvie syndrome; and diverticulitis with Hinchey classification, DIABOLO trial evidence, and surgical decision-making.
6. Small Bowel Obstruction
6.1 Epidemiology and Etiology
Small bowel obstruction (SBO) accounts for approximately 15% of all emergency department visits for abdominal pain and is responsible for approximately 300,000 hospitalizations annually in the United States. SBO is the most common indication for emergency abdominal surgery.1 2
Etiology by Frequency:
| Cause | Frequency | Key Features |
|---|---|---|
| Adhesions (postoperative) | 60–75% | Most common cause overall; risk increases with number of prior abdominal operations. Highest risk after colorectal surgery, gynecologic surgery, and appendectomy |
| Hernias (inguinal, incisional, femoral, internal) | 10–20% | Second most common cause; always examine inguinal regions and surgical scars. Femoral hernias have highest strangulation risk |
| Malignancy | 5–10% | Primary small bowel tumors (carcinoid, lymphoma, adenocarcinoma) or extrinsic compression from metastatic disease (ovarian, colon) |
| Crohn disease | 5% | Stricturing disease; may present with partial obstruction |
| Other | <5% | Gallstone ileus, intussusception (adult — evaluate for lead point/malignancy), radiation enteritis, foreign body, bezoar, Meckel diverticulum |
6.2 Diagnosis
Clinical Presentation
The classic presentation includes:
- Colicky abdominal pain — intermittent, cramping, periumbilical
- Nausea and vomiting — earlier and more profuse with proximal (jejunal) obstruction; may be bilious or feculent (late finding)
- Abdominal distension — more prominent with distal (ileal) obstruction
- Obstipation — inability to pass flatus or stool (complete obstruction); some patients with partial SBO may continue to pass flatus
Physical Examination:
- Distension (may be absent in proximal/high obstruction)
- High-pitched, hyperactive bowel sounds (early); absent bowel sounds (late)
- Localized tenderness may indicate strangulation
- Examine ALL hernial orifices — groin (inguinal, femoral), umbilical, incisional sites
- Peritoneal signs (guarding, rebound, rigidity) suggest strangulation or perforation
CT Abdomen/Pelvis with IV Contrast
CT is the imaging modality of choice for suspected SBO and should be obtained in virtually all patients with suspected bowel obstruction.1 2
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Sensitivity for SBO | 90–96% |
| Specificity for SBO | 93–96% |
| Sensitivity for strangulation | 83–90% |
| Specificity for strangulation | 90–95% |
Key CT Findings:
| Finding | Significance |
|---|---|
| Dilated small bowel (>3 cm diameter) with decompressed distal bowel | Confirms obstruction; transition point identified |
| Transition point | Abrupt caliber change between dilated proximal and decompressed distal bowel — identifies site and often cause of obstruction |
| “Small bowel feces sign” | Particulate material in dilated small bowel proximal to the transition point; indicates prolonged obstruction |
| Closed-loop obstruction | C-shaped or U-shaped dilated bowel loop with two adjacent transition points converging toward the same point; associated with volvulus or adhesive band. HIGH RISK for strangulation — requires urgent surgical consultation |
| Whirl sign | Twisting/swirling of mesenteric vessels and bowel — indicates volvulus |
| Mesenteric haziness/fluid | Free fluid and mesenteric edema around affected loops suggest compromised bowel |
| Wall thickening/enhancement | Thickened, edematous bowel wall; may show “target sign” on contrast CT |
| Decreased/absent wall enhancement | CRITICAL: Indicates ischemic bowel — absent mucosal enhancement on IV contrast CT is the most specific sign of strangulation/non-viable bowel |
| Pneumatosis intestinalis | Gas within the bowel wall — indicates bowel wall ischemia/necrosis |
| Portal venous gas | Gas in the portal venous system — late and ominous sign of bowel necrosis |
| Free air (pneumoperitoneum) | Indicates perforation — emergent surgery |
Plain Radiographs
Plain abdominal radiographs have limited sensitivity (approximately 50–70%) and are largely superseded by CT. When obtained:
- Dilated small bowel loops (>3 cm) with air-fluid levels on upright film
- “String of pearls” sign — small pockets of air trapped between valvulae conniventes in a fluid-filled loop
- Paucity of colonic gas (complete obstruction)
- Normal radiographs do NOT exclude SBO (up to 20% of confirmed SBO cases have normal or non-specific plain film findings)
6.3 Management of Adhesive Small Bowel Obstruction
Initial Management (All Patients)
All patients with SBO should receive the following initial management simultaneously with the diagnostic workup:1 2
- NPO (nil per os)
- IV fluid resuscitation — patients with SBO may have significant volume depletion from vomiting, third-spacing, and reduced oral intake. Isotonic crystalloid (LR or NS) with electrolyte monitoring and repletion
- Nasogastric tube (NGT) decompression — for patients with persistent vomiting, significant distension, or complete obstruction. NGT reduces aspiration risk, relieves symptoms, and may facilitate resolution
- Electrolyte monitoring and correction — hypokalemia, hyponatremia, hypochloremic metabolic alkalosis from vomiting are common
- Foley catheter — monitor urine output for adequacy of resuscitation
- Serial abdominal examinations — every 4–8 hours to monitor for signs of clinical deterioration (increasing tenderness, peritoneal signs, fever, tachycardia)
Indications for Urgent/Emergent Surgery
The following findings mandate operative intervention without a trial of conservative management:1 2 3
| Finding | Significance |
|---|---|
| Peritonitis (generalized guarding, rigidity, rebound) | Indicates perforation or transmural necrosis |
| Signs of strangulation — fever, tachycardia, localized tenderness, leukocytosis, elevated lactate, metabolic acidosis | Ischemic bowel requires emergent exploration |
| CT findings of strangulation — absent wall enhancement, pneumatosis intestinalis, portal venous gas, mesenteric haziness with free fluid | Non-viable bowel — delay increases mortality |
| Closed-loop obstruction on CT | High risk for strangulation even if currently viable — urgent surgery recommended |
| Incarcerated/strangulated hernia | Cannot be reduced; requires emergent repair |
| Free air (pneumoperitoneum) | Perforation — emergent laparotomy |
| Clinical deterioration during conservative management | Worsening pain, new peritoneal signs, hemodynamic instability, rising lactate |
Conservative Management — Trial of Non-Operative Management
For patients with adhesive SBO without signs of strangulation, closed-loop obstruction, or peritonitis, a trial of conservative (non-operative) management is appropriate.1 2
Protocol:
- NPO, IV fluids, NGT decompression, serial examinations (as above)
- Duration of conservative trial: 24–72 hours. Most patients who will resolve with conservative management do so within 24–48 hours. Evidence suggests that conservative management beyond 72 hours without resolution is associated with increased complications
- Partial SBO (passing some flatus, air in colon on imaging) has a higher spontaneous resolution rate (~65–80%) compared to complete SBO (~20–40%)
Criteria for successful conservative management:
- Resolution of pain
- Passage of flatus and/or stool
- Decrease in NGT output (<200 mL/8 hours)
- Tolerance of oral intake
- Resolution of distension
Water-Soluble Contrast Challenge (Gastrografin)
The water-soluble contrast challenge (using Gastrografin/diatrizoate meglumine) serves a dual diagnostic and therapeutic purpose in adhesive SBO.1 2 4
Protocol:
- Administer 50–100 mL of Gastrografin through the NGT (clamp NGT for 2 hours after administration)
- Obtain an abdominal X-ray at 8–24 hours (historically at 24 hours; more recent evidence supports earlier imaging at 8 hours)
- Assess whether contrast has reached the cecum/colon
Interpretation:
| Finding | Significance | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Contrast in colon/cecum by 8–24 hours | Predicts resolution with conservative management (sensitivity 96%, specificity 98%) | Continue conservative management; initiate oral diet |
| No contrast in colon at 24 hours | Predicts failure of conservative management (PPV 90–100% for need for surgery) | Proceed to surgical intervention |
Therapeutic Effect:
Gastrografin is a hyperosmolar, water-soluble contrast agent that:
- Draws fluid into the bowel lumen (osmotic gradient) — 1,900 mOsm/L
- Reduces bowel wall edema
- Stimulates peristalsis
- Multiple meta-analyses have demonstrated that Gastrografin reduces the need for surgery (NNT approximately 5–7) and reduces hospital stay by 1–2 days, though it does NOT reduce mortality or complication rates when surgery is needed4
Contraindications to Gastrografin challenge:
- Signs of strangulation or peritonitis
- Suspected or confirmed perforation (Gastrografin is water-soluble and safe in this regard, unlike barium; however, if perforation is present, operative management is indicated)
- Complete obstruction with clear surgical indication
- Allergy to iodinated contrast
6.4 Surgical Management of SBO
When operative intervention is indicated:
- Laparoscopic approach is preferred when feasible (single adhesive band, prior laparoscopic surgery, limited adhesions expected). Benefits include shorter hospital stay, less wound complications, and faster recovery
- Open laparotomy is indicated for dense adhesions, multiple prior operations, hemodynamic instability, or when laparoscopy is technically not feasible
- Adhesiolysis: Lysis of adhesions to relieve obstruction
- Bowel resection: Required for non-viable bowel (absent peristalsis, absent mesenteric pulsation, dark discoloration that does not improve with warm saline and time). Primary anastomosis is generally performed; diversion may be needed in hemodynamically unstable patients or when bowel viability is questionable
- Assessment of bowel viability: In addition to visual inspection, intraoperative assessment may include Doppler interrogation of mesenteric vessels, fluorescein/indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging, or Wood lamp examination after IV fluorescein injection
7. Large Bowel Obstruction
7.1 Etiology
Large bowel obstruction (LBO) accounts for approximately 25% of all mechanical bowel obstructions.5
| Cause | Frequency | Key Features |
|---|---|---|
| Colorectal malignancy | 50–60% | Most common cause; left-sided colon cancers (splenic flexure to rectum) more likely to present with obstruction due to narrower lumen and solid stool |
| Volvulus | 10–15% | Sigmoid volvulus (75–80% of colonic volvulus); cecal volvulus (15–20%); transverse colon volvulus (rare) |
| Diverticular disease | 10% | Stricture from chronic/recurrent diverticulitis |
| Extrinsic compression | 5–10% | Pelvic malignancy, adhesions, endometriosis |
| Other | <5% | Fecal impaction, intussusception, foreign body, radiation stricture |
7.2 Diagnosis
Clinical Presentation
- Progressive abdominal distension (more pronounced than in SBO)
- Constipation progressing to obstipation
- Crampy abdominal pain (may be less severe than SBO)
- Late: nausea/vomiting (may be feculent)
- Competent ileocecal valve: Closed-loop obstruction; cecal distension is the most dangerous concern — cecal diameter >12 cm carries significant risk of perforation
- Incompetent ileocecal valve: Decompression into small bowel occurs; less risk of perforation but may mimic SBO clinically
CT Findings
CT abdomen/pelvis with IV contrast (rectal contrast may be considered but is not mandatory):
- Dilated colon proximal to the obstruction (>6 cm; cecum >9 cm concerning, >12 cm high perforation risk)
- Decompressed distal colon/rectum
- Transition point identifying the site and likely cause
- “Bird beak” or “whirl” sign in volvulus
- Colonic mass/apple-core lesion in malignancy
- Assess for signs of ischemia (pneumatosis, absent wall enhancement, portal venous gas)
7.3 Sigmoid Volvulus
Sigmoid volvulus results from rotation of the sigmoid colon around its mesenteric axis, causing closed-loop obstruction. It is more common in elderly, institutionalized, and neuropsychiatric patients, and is associated with chronic constipation, high-fiber diet, and a long redundant sigmoid colon.5 6
Diagnosis:
- Plain radiograph: Classic “coffee bean” or “bent inner tube” sign — massively dilated sigmoid loop pointing toward the right upper quadrant; loss of haustrations; “northern exposure” sign. Diagnostic in approximately 60% of cases
- CT: “Whirl sign” (twisted mesentery and vessels at the base of the volvulus); “bird beak” sign (tapering of the bowel at the point of torsion); massively dilated sigmoid. More sensitive and specific than plain films
Management:
| Clinical Scenario | Management | Details |
|---|---|---|
| No signs of ischemia or perforation | Endoscopic decompression (rigid or flexible sigmoidoscopy) | Success rate 70–90%. Insert rectal tube after decompression and leave in place for 24–48 hours to prevent early recurrence. Bowel prep and semi-elective sigmoid resection during the same admission is recommended due to recurrence rate of 40–70% |
| Signs of ischemia, gangrene, or perforation | Emergent surgical exploration | Do NOT attempt endoscopic decompression. Resection of the affected sigmoid; Hartmann procedure (end colostomy + rectal stump) is the standard for gangrenous/perforated sigmoid volvulus |
| Recurrence prevention | Elective sigmoid resection (sigmoidectomy) | Recommended after successful decompression during the index admission or shortly thereafter. Primary anastomosis is standard when performed electively |
Endoscopic Decompression Technique:
- Rigid or flexible sigmoidoscopy without bowel preparation
- Advance the endoscope through the twisted segment — sudden rush of gas and liquid stool confirms successful decompression
- Examine the mucosa for signs of ischemia (dusky, necrotic mucosa) — if gangrene is suspected, abort endoscopy and proceed to surgery
- Place a rectal tube through the decompressed segment, secure with tape
- Irrigate and leave tube to gravity drainage for 24–48 hours
7.4 Cecal Volvulus
Cecal volvulus results from axial twisting of the cecum, ascending colon, and terminal ileum. Unlike sigmoid volvulus, it typically occurs in younger patients (40s–50s) and requires a mobile cecum (insufficient fixation to the retroperitoneum).5 6
Types:
- Axial torsion (true volvulus, ~70%): Rotation around the long axis of the cecal mesentery
- Cecal bascule (~30%): Anterior and superior folding of the cecum without axial rotation
Diagnosis:
- Plain radiograph: Dilated, gas-filled cecum displaced to the left upper quadrant or mid-abdomen (“kidney bean” shape)
- CT: Whirl sign at the base, dilated cecum in ectopic position, decompressed ascending colon
Management:
- Endoscopic decompression is generally NOT recommended for cecal volvulus (low success rate <30%, high recurrence)
- Surgical management is the standard of care:
- Viable cecum: Right hemicolectomy with primary ileocolic anastomosis (preferred) OR cecopexy (suture fixation of the cecum to the retroperitoneum — higher recurrence rate but considered in high-risk patients)
- Gangrenous or perforated cecum: Right hemicolectomy; primary anastomosis vs ileostomy depending on patient stability and contamination
7.5 Ogilvie Syndrome (Acute Colonic Pseudo-Obstruction)
Ogilvie syndrome is a functional, non-mechanical dilation of the colon (primarily the cecum and right colon) occurring most commonly in hospitalized, elderly, or post-surgical patients. It results from an imbalance of autonomic innervation (sympathetic overactivity/parasympathetic suppression).5 7
Risk Factors: Recent surgery (especially orthopedic, cardiac), critical illness, electrolyte abnormalities (hypokalemia, hypomagnesemia, hypocalcemia), opioids, anticholinergics, neurological disease, spinal cord injury
Diagnosis:
- Massive colonic distension on imaging WITHOUT a mechanical obstructing lesion
- CT (or water-soluble contrast enema) to exclude mechanical obstruction is essential before treatment
- Cecal diameter is the key measurement — perforation risk increases significantly when cecal diameter exceeds 12 cm or when distension has been present for >3–4 days
Management — Stepwise Approach:
| Step | Intervention | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Step 1: Conservative | Supportive care | NPO, NGT decompression, rectal tube, correct electrolytes (K+, Mg2+, Ca2+), discontinue offending medications (opioids, anticholinergics), mobilize patient, position changes (knee-chest, prone). Serial abdominal X-rays to monitor cecal diameter |
| Step 2: Neostigmine | Pharmacologic decompression | Neostigmine 2 mg IV over 3–5 minutes. Patient must be on continuous telemetry monitoring (risk of bradycardia). Atropine 0.5 mg IV must be at bedside. Success rate: 80–90% initial decompression. May repeat once if initial dose fails. Contraindicated in mechanical obstruction, recent MI, asthma, bradycardia (HR <60), renal failure (use with caution) |
| Step 3: Colonoscopic decompression | Endoscopic | If neostigmine fails; success rate ~70–80%. Place a decompression tube if possible. Perforation risk ~2–3% |
| Step 4: Surgery | Operative | For failure of all conservative/minimally invasive measures, or if perforation/ischemia develops. Cecostomy tube or, if ischemia/perforation, resection with diversion |
8. Acute Diverticulitis
8.1 Epidemiology
Diverticulitis is the most common complication of colonic diverticulosis, occurring in approximately 4% to 5% of patients with diverticulosis. It results from microperforation of a diverticulum, leading to pericolic inflammation, abscess formation, or free perforation. Left-sided (sigmoid) diverticulitis predominates in Western populations; right-sided diverticulitis is more common in Asian populations.8 9
8.2 Diagnosis
CT Abdomen/Pelvis with IV Contrast
CT is the gold standard for diagnosing acute diverticulitis and assessing the presence and extent of complications.8
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Sensitivity | 94–99% |
| Specificity | 96–99% |
CT Findings:
| Finding | Significance |
|---|---|
| Pericolic fat stranding | Hallmark of acute diverticulitis; most sensitive CT finding |
| Colonic wall thickening | Thickened sigmoid (or affected segment) wall, typically >4 mm |
| Diverticula | Confirm the presence of diverticular disease |
| Pericolic abscess | Walled-off fluid collection — Hinchey I or II |
| Distant abscess (pelvic) | Hinchey II — may require percutaneous drainage |
| Free air (pneumoperitoneum) | Extraluminal gas — perforation; may be contained (small pericolic air is common in uncomplicated diverticulitis) vs free (peritonitis) |
| Free fluid | Purulent or fecal peritonitis if diffuse |
| Fistula | Communication with bladder (colovesical — most common), vagina (colovaginal), or skin |
8.3 Hinchey Classification
The Hinchey classification is the standard system for grading the severity of complicated diverticulitis and guides surgical decision-making.8 9 10
| Hinchey Stage | Description | CT Findings | Management |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stage 0 | Mild clinical diverticulitis | Diverticula with or without colonic wall thickening | Outpatient management (see below) |
| Stage Ia | Confined pericolic inflammation or phlegmon | Pericolic fat stranding, wall thickening, small amount of pericolic air; no abscess | IV antibiotics if admitted; may manage outpatient if mild symptoms |
| Stage Ib | Pericolic abscess (≤4 cm) | Small, contained pericolic abscess | IV antibiotics; small abscesses (<3–4 cm) typically respond to antibiotics alone without drainage |
| Stage II | Pelvic, distant, or retroperitoneal abscess (>4 cm) | Larger abscess remote from the affected colon; pelvic abscess | IV antibiotics + percutaneous CT-guided drainage for abscesses ≥3–4 cm |
| Stage III | Generalized purulent peritonitis | Free pelvic or generalized intraperitoneal fluid without fecal material; may have contained perforation | Emergent surgical exploration — peritoneal lavage (controversial) or resection (see surgical options below) |
| Stage IV | Generalized fecal peritonitis | Free perforation with fecal contamination of the peritoneal cavity | Emergent surgical exploration — resection mandatory; Hartmann procedure is standard |
8.4 Management of Uncomplicated Diverticulitis
Antibiotics vs No Antibiotics
Traditionally, all patients with acute diverticulitis received antibiotic therapy. However, landmark randomized controlled trials have challenged this practice for uncomplicated diverticulitis.8 11
DIABOLO Trial (2017) — Key Findings:
| Parameter | Observational (No Antibiotics) | Antibiotics |
|---|---|---|
| Study design | Multicenter, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial; 528 patients with CT-confirmed uncomplicated diverticulitis | |
| Primary outcome (time to recovery) | Median 14 days | Median 14 days (no difference) |
| Complicated diverticulitis at follow-up | 3.8% | 2.6% (no significant difference) |
| Recurrent diverticulitis | 3.4% | 3.0% (no significant difference) |
| Readmission rate | No significant difference | No significant difference |
| Sigmoidectomy rate | No significant difference | No significant difference |
Current Recommendations for Uncomplicated Diverticulitis:
| Feature | Details |
|---|---|
| Outpatient management criteria | Immunocompetent, tolerating oral intake, no significant comorbidities, reliable follow-up, no signs of complicated disease on CT |
| Antibiotics | Selective use — antibiotics may be withheld in selected immunocompetent patients with mild, uncomplicated diverticulitis (CT-confirmed, no abscess, no significant comorbidities). If antibiotics are used: oral regimen (ciprofloxacin 500mg PO BID + metronidazole 500mg PO TID OR amoxicillin-clavulanate 875/125mg PO BID OR trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole DS PO BID + metronidazole 500mg PO TID) for 7–10 days |
| Diet | Advance as tolerated; no need for clear liquid diet first |
| Pain control | Acetaminophen preferred; avoid NSAIDs (associated with increased perforation risk in diverticular disease); avoid opioids when possible |
| Follow-up | Clinical reassessment at 2–3 days; if worsening, obtain repeat imaging and consider admission. Colonoscopy 6–8 weeks after resolution to exclude underlying malignancy (particularly in patients >50, first episode, or atypical presentation) |
Admission Criteria
- Inability to tolerate oral intake
- Significant comorbidities (diabetes, immunosuppression, renal failure)
- Failed outpatient management
- Signs of complicated diverticulitis (abscess, peritonitis, obstruction)
- Unreliable social situation or follow-up
Inpatient Antibiotic Regimens
| Regimen | Dosing |
|---|---|
| Piperacillin-tazobactam | 4.5g IV q6-8h |
| Ceftriaxone + metronidazole | Ceftriaxone 1-2g IV q24h + metronidazole 500mg IV q8h |
| Ertapenem | 1g IV q24h (for severe or healthcare-associated infections) |
| Ciprofloxacin + metronidazole | Ciprofloxacin 400mg IV q12h + metronidazole 500mg IV q8h (if beta-lactam allergy) |
8.5 Management of Complicated Diverticulitis
Abscess (Hinchey Ib/II)
| Abscess Size | Management |
|---|---|
| <3–4 cm | IV antibiotics alone; most will resolve. Serial imaging to confirm resolution |
| ≥3–4 cm | Percutaneous CT-guided drainage + IV antibiotics. Drain remains until output <10–20 mL/day and follow-up imaging confirms resolution. Success rate: 70–90% |
| Multiloculated or inaccessible | May require surgical drainage or resection if percutaneous drainage fails |
Perforation with Peritonitis (Hinchey III/IV)
Patients with generalized peritonitis require emergent surgical intervention after appropriate resuscitation.8 9 10
Surgical Options:
| Procedure | Indication | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Hartmann procedure | Traditional standard for Hinchey III/IV | Resection of the affected sigmoid colon with end colostomy and closure of the rectal stump. Colostomy reversal is a second operation (performed in ~50–70% of patients; remainder have a permanent stoma due to comorbidities or patient preference). Historically considered the safest option in the septic, hemodynamically unstable patient |
| Primary resection with anastomosis (PRA) | Increasingly favored for Hinchey III (purulent peritonitis) | Resection of the affected segment with primary colorectal anastomosis, with or without a diverting loop ileostomy. Multiple studies including the LADIES and DIVA trials demonstrate lower stoma rates with PRA+diverting ileostomy compared to Hartmann procedure, without increased morbidity or mortality. Ileostomy reversal is simpler and more frequently performed than colostomy reversal |
| Laparoscopic lavage | Controversial; role is limited | Peritoneal lavage and drainage without resection. The SCANDIV, LOLA, and LADIES (LOLA arm) trials showed higher rates of reoperation and failure with lavage compared to resection. Not recommended for Hinchey IV. May have a limited role in selected Hinchey III patients, but evidence does not support its routine use |
| Damage control surgery | Hemodynamically unstable patients with severe sepsis | Abbreviated resection, temporary abdominal closure, ICU resuscitation, planned return to OR within 24–48 hours for definitive management |
8.6 Indications for Elective Sigmoid Resection After Diverticulitis
The traditional recommendation for elective sigmoidectomy after 2 episodes of uncomplicated diverticulitis has been largely abandoned. Current evidence-based recommendations:8 9
| Scenario | Recommendation |
|---|---|
| After 1 or more episodes of uncomplicated diverticulitis | Elective surgery is NOT routinely recommended based on the number of episodes alone. Decision should be individualized based on quality of life, frequency of episodes, and patient preference |
| After complicated diverticulitis (abscess requiring drainage) | Elective sigmoid resection is recommended to prevent recurrence (recurrence rate after percutaneously drained abscess is approximately 25–40% without surgery) |
| Fistula (colovesical, colovaginal) | Elective resection with fistula takedown |
| Stricture causing symptomatic obstruction | Elective resection (after excluding malignancy with colonoscopy or biopsy) |
| Immunocompromised patients | Lower threshold for elective resection due to higher rates of complicated disease and perforation |
| Persistent symptoms | Chronic smoldering diverticulitis with persistent pain, incomplete resolution |
References
Ten Broek RPG, Krielen P, Di Saverio S, et al. “Bologna guidelines for diagnosis and management of adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO): 2017 update of the evidence-based guidelines from the World Society of Emergency Surgery ASBO working group.” World J Emerg Surg. 2018;13:24. DOI: 10.1186/s13017-018-0185-2 ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
Maung AA, Johnson DC, Piper GL, et al. “Evaluation and management of small-bowel obstruction: an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma practice management guideline.” J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2012;73(5 Suppl 4):S362-S369. DOI: 10.1097/TA.0b013e31827019de ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
Zielinski MD, Eiken PW, Bannon MP, et al. “Small bowel obstruction — who needs an operation? A multivariate prediction model.” World J Surg. 2010;34(5):910-919. DOI: 10.1007/s00268-010-0479-3 ↩︎
Defined Committee of the World Society of Emergency Surgery. “Gastrografin in adhesive small bowel obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.” World J Emerg Surg. 2017;12:33. DOI: 10.1186/s13017-017-0144-3 ↩︎ ↩︎
Vogel JD, Feingold DL, Stewart DB, et al. “Clinical Practice Guidelines for Colon Volvulus and Acute Colonic Pseudo-Obstruction.” Dis Colon Rectum. 2016;59(7):589-600. DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000602 ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
Halabi WJ, Jafari MD, Kang CY, et al. “Colonic volvulus in the United States: trends, outcomes, and predictors of mortality.” Ann Surg. 2014;259(2):293-301. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31828c88ac ↩︎ ↩︎
Valle RG, Godoy FL. “Neostigmine for acute colonic pseudo-obstruction: a meta-analysis.” Ann Med Surg. 2014;3(3):60-64. DOI: 10.1016/j.amsu.2014.04.002 ↩︎
Sartelli M, Weber DG, Kluger Y, et al. “2020 update of the WSES guidelines for the management of acute colonic diverticulitis in the emergency setting.” World J Emerg Surg. 2020;15(1):32. DOI: 10.1186/s13017-020-00313-4 ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
Hall J, Hardiman K, Lee S, et al. “The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Treatment of Left-Sided Colonic Diverticulitis.” Dis Colon Rectum. 2020;63(6):728-747. DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001679 ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
Hinchey EJ, Schaal PGH, Richards GK. “Treatment of perforated diverticular disease of the colon.” Adv Surg. 1978;12:85-109. PMID: 735943 ↩︎ ↩︎
Daniels L, Unlu C, de Korte N, et al. “Randomized clinical trial of observational versus antibiotic treatment for a first episode of CT-proven uncomplicated acute diverticulitis.” Br J Surg. 2017;104(1):52-61. DOI: 10.1002/bjs.10309 ↩︎