The New England Journal of Medicine
e-mail icon  FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |    Advanced Search
Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe
 
Correction to Ferzoco et al., N Engl J Med 338(21):1521-1526 May 21, 1998.

Correspondence
PreviousPrevious
Volume 339:1081-1083 October 8, 1998 Number 15
NextNext

Acute Diverticulitis

 

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited

More Information
-Related Article
 by Ferzoco, L.B.
-Related Article
 by Ferzoco, L.B.
-PubMed Citation
To the Editor: I was disappointed that Ferzoco et al. (May 21 issue)1 in their fine review of diverticulitis did not emphasize more strongly that it is mandatory to do further diagnostic testing in many patients rather than to rely solely on clinical findings. Fleischner and Ming2 could not find evidence of inflammation in 25 percent of specimens from patients who underwent resection for diverticulitis; Morson3 reported that inflammation was absent in 33 percent of patients. Presumably, these patients represented the sickest patients, because they underwent surgery.

In many patients, the distinction between inflammatory diverticulitis and muscle-spasm diverticulosis can be made only with the use of either computed tomographic (CT) scanning or barium enema. The hypothesis of Ferzoco et al. that "insufflation can actually dislodge an obstructing fecalith and result in perforation" is totally unproved.4 Many patients who present with a clinical diagnosis of diverticulitis, without confirmation with either CT scanning or barium enema, have diverticulosis, not diverticulitis, and they will get better rapidly. Patients with inflammation should be treated with antibiotics, whereas those with spasm should be treated with antispasmodic agents.


Murray L. Janower, M.D.
Saint Vincent Hospital
Worcester, MA 01604-4593

References

  1. Ferzoco LB, Raptopoulos V, Silen W. Acute diverticulitis. N Engl J Med 1998;338:1521-1526. [Free Full Text]
  2. Fleischner FG, Ming S-C. Revised concepts on diverticular disease of the colon. II. So-called diverticulitis: diverticular sigmoiditis and perisigmoiditis: diverticular abscess, fistula, and frank peritonitis. Radiology 1965;84:599-609. [Medline]
  3. Morson BC. The muscle abnormality in diverticular disease of the sigmoid colon. Br J Radiol 1963;36:385-392. 
  4. Dreyfuss JR, Janower ML. Radiology of the colon. 2nd ed. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1980.

 
To the Editor: In their thorough review of diverticulitis, Ferzoco et al. included an abdominal CT scan showing left-sided diverticular disease (Figure 1 of the article) in a patient with a three-day history of right-lower-quadrant pain and fever. Is this an example of a "reverse" Rovsing's sign?


Robert Baevsky, M.D.
Baystate Medical Center
Springfield, MA 01199


 
To the Editor: In their review of acute diverticulitis, Ferzoco et al. recommend a combination of ciprofloxacin and metronidazole administered on an outpatient basis as the oral broad-spectrum antibiotic regimen for a patient with a mild first attack of diverticulitis. However, an alternative combination consisting of trimethoprim–sulfamethoxazole and metronidazole may be a more prudent option for this indication.1 Controlled trials have not been conducted to compare these regimens. Ciprofloxacin is far more expensive and without proven additional benefit. Uncontrolled evidence in the form of case reports indicates that the combination of ciprofloxacin and metronidazole may result in an unfavorable drug interaction.2 The combination of trimethoprim–sulfamethoxazole and metronidazole provides adequate coverage against major colonic pathogens (anaerobes, gram-negative bacilli, and gram-positive coliforms).3 . . .


Aijaz Ahmed, M.D.
Stanford University School of Medicine
Stanford, CA 94305

References

  1. Freeman SR, McNally PR. Diverticulitis. Med Clin North Am 1993;77:1149-1167. [Medline]
  2. Semel JD, Allen N. Seizures in patients simultaneously receiving theophylline and imipenem or ciprofloxacin or metronidazole. South Med J 1991;84:465-468. [CrossRef][Medline]
  3. Gorbach SL. Intraabdominal infections. Clin Infect Dis 1993;17:961-965. [Medline]

 
To the Editor: Ferzoco et al. state that morphine sulfate should be avoided in patients with acute diverticulitis and that if narcotics are required, meperidine is the more appropriate choice. The reference Ferzoco et al. cite as the basis for their recommendation for avoiding morphine is 30 years old and gives no supporting data.1 Clinical-practice guidelines for acute pain management recommend morphine sulfate as the standard opioid agent and advise that meperidine should be reserved for patients with demonstrated allergy or intolerance of other opiates.2 Meperidine should not be routinely used for pain because the accumulation of its toxic metabolite normeperidine results in hyperexcitability of the central nervous system (the risk of which is increased with renal impairment or repeated dosing), the duration of action of meperidine is only two to three hours and is shorter than that of morphine, and there is a tendency to prescribe subtherapeutic doses, resulting in poor pain control.3 Meperidine continues to be used, not because data have shown its efficacy, but because of tradition and by habit.


Sue Coppinger Warren, M.D.
Kanawha Hospice Care
Charleston, WV 25314

References

  1. Painter NS. Diverticular disease of the colon. BMJ 1968;3:475-479.
  2. Acute pain management: operative or medical procedures and trauma. Clinical practice guideline no. 1. Rockville, Md.: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, February 1992. (AHCPR publication no. 92-0032.)
  3. Marks RM, Sachar EJ. Undertreatment of medical inpatients with narcotic analgesics. Ann Intern Med 1973;78:173-181.

 
The authors reply:

To the Editor: Dr. Janower indicates that the distinction between "inflammatory" diverticulitis and "muscle-spasm diverticulosis" can only be made by CT scanning or barium enema. Yet, false negative CT scans are reported in 2 to 21 percent of cases.1,2 In addition, the correlation between the estimated presence or absence of inflammation on contrast enema by experienced radiologists and subsequent pathological findings is poor.3 Thus, it is reasonable to treat clinically presumptive mild acute diverticulitis with antibiotics without the imaging studies if mild fever and leukocytosis are present. In the absence of the latter, most authorities believe that antispasmodic drugs are of dubious value. Although Dr. Janower implies that perforation of the colon by insufflation or enema is hypothetical, Goligher has reported three cases of perforation after enema.4 Since the complication is so devastating, safety is the best policy.

We thank Dr. Baevsky for calling our attention to an error in the legend to Figure 1, which should have read "left-sided lower abdominal pain." We regret the error.

We agree with Dr. Ahmed that oral trimethoprim–sulfamethoxazole and metronidazole are a perfectly adequate alternative to ciprofloxacin and metronidazole in the treatment of a first attack of mild acute diverticulitis.

Dr. Warren is concerned about the age of the reference we used to support the statement that morphine sulfate increases colonic spasm and hypersegmentation. The hard data showing increases in intracolonic pressure and distention of the diverticula in response to morphine actually appeared in an article published four years before the one we cited.5 Since meperidine decreases colonic spasms and since these aged studies5 are the only ones on the effects of analgesics on the colonic pressure, we should not assume a priori that the results of an older study are necessarily invalid. One of the articles cited by Dr. Warren in support of her position is 25 years old. The worst complication in a patient with diverticulitis is extension of the perforation, and hence, the slightly shorter duration of the action of meperidine is acceptable, especially since the pain of acute diverticulitis is usually very well controlled by these means. Rigid adherence to practice protocols without consideration of the disease process is not always the best policy.


W. Silen, M.D.
L.B. Ferzoco, M.D.
V. Raptopoulos, M.D.
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Boston, MA 02215

References

  1. Johnson CD, Baker ME, Rice RP, Silverman P, Thompson WM. Diagnosis of acute colonic diverticulitis: a comparison of barium enema and CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1987;148:541-546. [Free Full Text]
  2. Balthazar EJ, Megibow A, Schinella RA, Gordon R. Limitations in the CT diagnosis of acute diverticulitis: comparison of CT, contrast enema, and pathologic findings in 16 patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1990;154:281-285. [Free Full Text]
  3. Parks TG, Connell AM, Gough AD, Cole JO. Limitations of radiology in the differentiation of diverticulitis and diverticulosis of the colon. BMJ 1970;2:136-138.
  4. Goligher JC. Surgery of the anus, rectum, and colon. 3rd ed. London: Bailliere Tindall, 1975:1093.
  5. Painter NS, Truelove SC. The intraluminal pressure patterns in diverticulosis of the colon. Gut 1964;5:201-207.

 


 

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited

More Information
-Related Article
 by Ferzoco, L.B.
-Related Article
 by Ferzoco, L.B.
-PubMed Citation

This article has been cited by other articles:



HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org

Comments and questions? Please contact us.

The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.