[Diverticular disease - clinical patterns and treatment]

Abstract

Diverticulosis, diverticular disease and diverticulitis have come into focus again because new aspects concerning diagnosis, risk factors and treatment arose only recently which prompted a new Guideline released by the DGVS and DGAV summarising the current evidence. Along with the guideline's essentials for medical practice a diagnosis of diverticulitis is considered unsatisfactory unless a cross-sectional imaging method (either ultrasonography [US] or computed tomography [CT] ) has proven that the clinical findings and inflammation (CRP considered superior to WBC and temperature) are due to diverticular inflammation. For reasons of practicability and considering relevant legislation for radiation exposure protection, US is the primary - and usually effectual - diagnostic method of choice as it is equipotent to CT. While US offers better resolution and enables precise imaging exactly at the location of pain as well as reiterative application, the latter implies advantages in the case of a deep abscess or diverticulitis in difficult locations (e. g. the small pelvis). Clinical evidence and laboratory and imaging findings allow for distinguishing a large number of differential diagnoses and also form the basis of a new classification (classification of diverticular disease, CDD) which comprises all forms of diverticular disease, from diverticulosis to bleeding and to the different facettes of diverticulitis. This classification -which should be applied in any patient with the diagnosis of diverticular disease- is independent of specific diagnostic preferences and applicable both to conservative and operative treatment options. While the number of recurrent episodes is no longer a significant indicator for surgery in diverticulitis, severity and / or complications determine treatment options along with the patients preferences. According to first data, conservative treatment may waive antibiotics under certain circumstances, however they are indispensible in complicated disease or patients bearing risk factors. Spasmoanalgetics and supportive fluid supply are individually necessary, and avoidance of potentially aggravating medications (e. g. NSAIDS) appears advisable, but many suggestions (nil by mouth, bed rest, laxatives) come along without an adaequate body of evidence. Similarly medical advice concerning prevention and secondary prophylaxis relies mainly on epidemiological plausibility. Because minor perforations (CDD type 2 a) as well as recurrent episodes of uncomplicated diverticulitis and even some abscesses > 1 cm (CDD type 2 b) respond favourably to medical treatment, the timely indication for surgery in these cases requires precise classification along with a close surveillance in trustful cooperation between the gastroenterologist and the surgeon.