Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 363

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Primary Anastomosis or Hartmann's Procedure for Patients With Diverticular Peritonitis? A Systematic Review

Salem, Leon, Flum, David R.·2004·Diseases of the Colon & Rectum

Abstract

PURPOSE: This systematic literature review was designed to summarize and compare the reported outcomes of one-stage and two-stage operations for the treatment of perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis. METHODS: This review identified 98 published studies (1957-2003) dealing with the surgical management of perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis, either with primary resection and anastomosis or with the Hartmann's procedure. Aggregated results of adverse outcomes were calculated but statistical comparisons were not appropriate because of data and design heterogeneity. RESULTS: Operative mortality data from patients with diverticular peritonitis undergoing Hartmann's procedure (n = 1,051) were derived from 54 studies. Considering the Hartmann's procedure and its reversal procedures together, the mortality rate was 19.6 percent (18.8 percent for the Hartmann's procedure and 0.8 percent for its reversal), the wound infection rate was 29.1 percent (24.2 percent for the Hartmann's procedure and 4.9 percent for its reversal), and stoma complications and anastomotic leaks (in the reversal operation) occurred in 10.3 and 4.3 percent, respectively. Of 569 reported cases of primary anastomosis from 50 studies, the aggregated mortality rate was 9.9 (range, 0-75) percent with an anastomotic leak rate of 13.9 (range, 0-60) percent and a wound infection rate of 9.6 (range, 0-26) percent. CONCLUSIONS: Reported mortality and morbidity in patients with diverticular peritonitis who underwent primary anastomosis were not higher than those in patients undergoing Hartmann's procedure were. This suggests that primary anastomosis is a safe operative alternative in certain patients with peritonitis. Despite inclusion of only patients with peritonitis in this analysis, selection bias may have been a limitation and a prospective, randomized trial is recommended.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10350-004-0701-1

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 363

Metadata

Authors
Salem, L., & Flum, D. R.
Venue
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum
Published
2004-11
Volume
47
Issue
11
Pages
1953-1964
ISSN
0012-3706 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2086254700
Cited by
363
References
0
FWCI
2.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Primary Anastomosis or Hartmann's Procedure for Patients With Diverticular Peritonitis? A Systematic Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10350-004-0701-1
The paper
Salem, L., & Flum, D. R. (2004). Primary Anastomosis or Hartmann's Procedure for Patients With Diverticular Peritonitis? A Systematic Review. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-004-0701-1

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.