ClinicalTrials.gg
Status unknownNCT04829032Updated Apr 2, 2021

GOODBYE HARTMANN TRIAL: 100 YEARS OF HARTMANN'S PROCEDURE

An observational study in Emergencies, Colon Disease and Colo-rectal Cancer, sponsored by Parma University Hospital. Status unknown at 1 site in Italy. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2021-04-02.

Primary conditionnone(registry's first term: Emergencies)No conditionIs this wrong?Emergencies describes something many studies share rather than a condition a study is about. The study names no condition we can place it under, so it is not compared with other studies by condition.

Sponsored by Parma University Hospital · Observational

The sponsor has not verified this record recently (last verified Mar 2021), so the status shown — last known as Recruiting — may be out of date.
Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
500
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Hartmann's procedure was described for the first time in 1921 as an alternative to abdominoperineal resection for the treatment of upper rectal tumours.

Although Hartmann's procedure fell out of favour for rectal cancer after the introduction of restorative procedures, it remained the most common procedure in emergency setting for many years. Nowadays Hartmann's procedure is a useful procedure in selected cases e.g. severely ill patients with a high risk of anastomotic failure. However, restoring intestinal continuity for Hartmann patients is often associated with high morbidity, and about 70% will live with a permanent colostomy. Hartmann procedure' is a rapid and simple surgical technique intended to decrease perioperative morbidity and mortality. This technique is often performed by young surgeons Indeed, end colostomy may be necessary in situations where restoration of continuity is risky, either because of unfavorable local conditions or because a more definitive resection must be aborted due to hemodynamic instability. In the last decade the Hartmann's procedure has been revalued in many studies. In diverticular disease the results of DIVA arm of the LADIES trial showed that more patients in the primary anastomosis group were stoma free compared with patients in the Hartmann's procedure group. Other studies have observed no differences in major postoperative complications or postoperative mortality between patients undergoing primary anastomosis versus Hartmann's procedure.

Hartmann's procedure reversals were associated with a higher risk of serious postoperative complications than were stoma reversals after primary anastomosis with ileostomy.

Despite the growing evidence in favour of primary anastomosis and its inclusion as a valid treatment option for perforated diverticulitis or perforated sigmoid colon in recent clinical practice guidelines, some surgeons have been hesitant to undertake anastomosis in the setting of purulent or faecal contamination and continue to choose Hartmann's procedure to eliminate concerns about anastomotic leakage.

Read the detailed description

Left-sided surgical acute colonic diseases (perforated diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis, colon perforation, large bowel obstruction, colon cancer perforation or obstruction, ischemic colitis, abdominal trauma) are still a life-threatening condition requiring urgent surgical intervention.

Despite several published randomized trials, showing that primary anastomosis with or without protective ileostomy is feasible and randomized trials for laparoscopic lavage with conflicting results, the Hartmann's procedure, described for the first time in 1921 as an alternative to abdominoperineal resection for the treatment of upper rectal tumours, is still performed in many hospitals worldwide. It remained the most common procedure for acute diverticulitis and colonic perforation in emergency setting for many years. Hartmann's procedure is safe for severely ill patients; however, restoring intestinal continuity for such patients is often associated with high morbidity leaving a great percentage of patients with (up to 50%) with a permanent stoma.

Hartmann procedure' is a rapid and simple surgical technique intended to decrease perioperative morbidity and mortality. This technique is often performed by young surgeons Indeed, end- colostomy may be necessary in situations where restoration of continuity is risky, either because of unfavourable local conditions (Hinchey IV peritonitis) or because a more definitive resection must be aborted due to hemodynamic instability. Although anastomosis at the time of surgery is an alternative approach to Hartmann's procedure, there have been concerns about the safety of this approach.

In the last decade the Hartmann's procedure has been revalued and the results of different studies [DIVA arm of the LADIES trial; DIVERTI study; Halim et Al] showed that more patients in the primary anastomosis group were stoma free compared with patients in the Hartmann's procedure group.

Several studies have observed no differences in major postoperative complications or postoperative mortality between patients undergoing primary anastomosis versus Hartmann's procedure. Hartmann's procedure reversals were associated with a higher risk of serious postoperative complications than were stoma reversals after protected primary anastomosis. The management of colorectal cancer emergencies is challenging. WSES guidelines recommend in case of perforation resection with anastomosis, with or without ileostomy. Hartmann's procedure should be preferred to simple colostomy, since colostomy appears to be associated with longer overall hospital stay and need for multiple operations, without a reduction in perioperative morbidity in patients with colorectal cancer obstruction. Resection with primary anastomosis should be preferred for uncomplicated malignant left-sided large bowel obstruction in absence of other risk factors. Patients with high surgical risk are better managed with Hartmann's procedure Despite the growing evidence in favour of primary anastomosis and its inclusion as a valid treatment option for perforated diverticulitis or perforated sigmoid colon cancer in recent clinical practice guidelines, surgeons have been reluctant to perform anastomosis. Moreover, the postoperative course of the septic patient is unpredictable and it very hard to estimate it intraoperatively.

In the setting of purulent or fecal contamination most surgeons choose Hartmann's procedure to eliminate also legal concerns about anastomotic leakage. It's important to note that most of these procedures are performed off normal working hours when maybe best colorectal expertise is lacking for decision making regarding anastomosis.

Primary study objective:

  1. To evaluate the role of Hartmann's procedure in emergency setting for left-sided colonic acute surgical disease (perforated diverticulitis with purulent or fecal peritonitis; colon cancer perforation-occlusion; ischemic colitis; abdominal trauma) and the type of surgery commonly performed in different level of care hospitals.
  2. To investigate which factors contribute in the choice of Hartmann's procedure instead of colon resection with primary anastomosis (Hospital characteristics, surgeon experience, time of surgery, age of patients, comorbidities, etc ) Study design: International multicenter prospective cohort study. Study population: Adult patients with left-sided colonic acute surgical disease who need surgery in an emergency setting (perforated diverticulitis with purulent or fecal peritonitis; colon cancer perforation-occlusion; ischemic colitis; abdominal trauma).
02

Conditions studied

  • Emergencies
  • Colon Disease
  • Colo-rectal Cancer
  • Volvulus Colon
  • Intussusception
  • Diverticulitis
  • Foreign Bodies
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Parma University Hospital is the lead sponsor of 3 studies on the registry; 1 is open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Probability sample

Study population

All consecutive adult patients with left-sided colonic disease who have been operated in urgent-emergency setting between March -May 2021 will be prospectively analyzed and evaluated time of surgery, patient's characteristic, hospital's characteristics. All patients who have been operated in urgent-emergency setting for left-sided colonic disease are suitable for inclusion.

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Aged 18 years or older;
  • Patients admitted in Emergency setting for left-sided colonic disease (perforated diverticulitis with purulent or fecal peritonitis; large bowel perforation-obstruction; colon cancer perforation-obstruction; ischemic colitis; abdominal trauma).
  • Patients who underwent urgent or emergency surgery for left-sided colonic disease (perforated diverticulitis with purulent or fecal peritonitis; large bowel perforationobstruction; colon cancer perforation-obstruction; ischemic colitis; abdominal trauma).

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Aged 17 or younger.
  • Elective surgery.
  • Non-surgical treatment.
  • Patients with personal history of colorectal cancer treated surgically.
  • Patients with stoma.
  • Unstable patients who benefited of damage control procedures.
05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
500 participants (estimated)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Hartmann's procedure

    Evaluate the role of Hartmann's procedure in emergency setting for left-sided acute surgical colonic disease (perforated diverticulitis with purulent or fecal peritonitis; colon cancer perforation-obstruction; ischemic colitis; abdominal trauma).

    Procedure: Hartmann's procedure

  • Colonic resection with primary anastomosis

    Evaluate the role of colonic resection with primary anastomosis in emergency setting for left-sided acute surgical colonic disease (perforated diverticulitis with purulent or fecal peritonitis; colon cancer perforation-obstruction; ischemic colitis; abdominal trauma).

Interventions

  • ProcedureHartmann's procedure

    Hartmann's procedure

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Number of Hartmann's procedure vs colic resection with primary anastomosis performed in 3-months in urgent or emergency setting for left-sided acute colonic diseases.

    * Etiology: perforated diverticulitis; perforated colonic cancer; large bowel perforation- obstruction; colon cancer perforation-obstruction; colon ischemia; abdominal trauma. * Treatment: Hartmann's procedure, colonic resection with primary anastomosis with or without diverting stoma, stoma without colic resection.

    Time frame: 3 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. Risk factors that contribute in the choice of Hartmann's procedure instead of colon resection with primary anastomosis

    - Hospital Characteristics: hospital type (academic, non-academic teaching, categorical, secondary hospital, tertiary hospital, level 4- trauma center); annual volume of emergency surgical procedures; annual volume of left-sided colonic disease; types of diagnostic and treatment modalities that are available in the hospital. * Surgeon experience (surgeon in training: less than 50 colorectal resections performed; less than 5 resections per year in the last 5 years; Trained surgeon: more than 50 colorectal resections performed; more than 10 resections per year in the last 5 years) * Time of surgery: weekdays, weekend, public holidays, night shift (day: 8am- 8pm; night: 8pm-8am)

    Time frame: 3 months

  2. The number of patients treated with Hartmann's procedure with a permanent stoma after one year.

    1 year follow up to evaluate the number of patients treated with Hartmann's procedure have a permanent stoma after one year.

    Time frame: 1 year

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • Mario Giuffrida
    Parma, Italia 43125, Italy
    Recruiting
08

References and documents

Study documents

PDFs hosted by the registry, ClinicalTrials.gov.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reached

Started Mar 2021 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for May 2021, 2 months after the start.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Mar 22, 2021
First posted
Apr 2, 2021
StartActual
Mar 1, 2021
Primary completionEst.
May 31, 2021
CompletionEst.
May 31, 2022
Last update
Apr 2, 2021
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Apr 2, 2021, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04829032
Lead sponsor
Parma University Hospital
Collaborators
Fausto Catena, Gennaro Perrone
Responsible party
Mario Giuffrida (MD- General Surgery Resident, Parma University Hospital) — Principal investigator
First posted
Apr 2, 2021
Start date
Mar 1, 2021
Primary completion
May 31, 2021 (estimated)
Completion
May 31, 2022 (estimated)
Last update
Apr 2, 2021

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is status unknown, as verified in Mar 2021. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion