We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Review
Systematic Review
Out-Patient Management of Mild or Uncomplicated Diverticulitis: A Systematic Review.
Digestive Surgery 2017
BACKGROUND: Management of diverticular disease has undergone a paradigm shift, with movement towards a less invasive management strategy. In keeping with this, outpatient management of uncomplicated diverticulitis (UD) has been advocated in several studies, but concerns still remain regarding the safety of this practice.
AIM: To assess outcomes of out-patient management of acute UD.
METHODS: A comprehensive search for published studies using the search terms 'uncomplicated diverticulitis', 'mild diverticulitis' and 'out-patient' was performed. The primary outcomes were failure of medical treatment. Secondary outcomes were recurrence rate at follow up and medical cost savings.
RESULTS: The search yielded 192 publications. Of these, 10 studies met the inclusion criteria including 1 randomized controlled trial, 6 clinical controlled trials and 3 case series. There was no difference in failure rates of medical treatment (6.5 vs. 4.6%, p = 0.32) or in recurrence rates (13.0 vs. 12.1%, p = 0.81) between those receiving ambulatory care and in-patient care for UD. Ambulatory treatment is associated with an estimated daily cost savings of between 600 and 1,900 euros per patient treated. Meta-analysis of data was not possible due to heterogeneity in study designs and inclusion criteria.
CONCLUSION: Ambulatory management of acute UD is reasonable in selected patients.
AIM: To assess outcomes of out-patient management of acute UD.
METHODS: A comprehensive search for published studies using the search terms 'uncomplicated diverticulitis', 'mild diverticulitis' and 'out-patient' was performed. The primary outcomes were failure of medical treatment. Secondary outcomes were recurrence rate at follow up and medical cost savings.
RESULTS: The search yielded 192 publications. Of these, 10 studies met the inclusion criteria including 1 randomized controlled trial, 6 clinical controlled trials and 3 case series. There was no difference in failure rates of medical treatment (6.5 vs. 4.6%, p = 0.32) or in recurrence rates (13.0 vs. 12.1%, p = 0.81) between those receiving ambulatory care and in-patient care for UD. Ambulatory treatment is associated with an estimated daily cost savings of between 600 and 1,900 euros per patient treated. Meta-analysis of data was not possible due to heterogeneity in study designs and inclusion criteria.
CONCLUSION: Ambulatory management of acute UD is reasonable in selected patients.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app