Recent trends in the prevalence and distribution of colonic diverticula in Japan evaluated using computed tomography colonography

Table 1 Characteristics of the participants

	Diverticula positive (n = 568)	Diverticulum negative (n = 613)	P value
Age: Median (range)	64 (27-91)	60 (23-84)	< 0.001
Sex, n (%): Male:female	346 (29.3):222 (18.8)	323 (27.3):290 (24.6)	0.004
Age group, n (%): Male:female
≤ 40 (n = 108)	27 (25.0):1 (0.9)	56 (51.9):24 (22.2)	0.004
41-50 (n = 165)	42 (25.5):19 (11.5)	56 (33.9):48 (29.1)	0.058
51-60 (n = 268)	80 (29.9):50 (18.7)	67 (25.0):71 (26.5)	0.033
61-70 (n = 327)	97 (29.7):80 (24.5)	88 (26.9):62 (19.0)	0.485
≥ 71 (n = 313)	100 (31.9):72 (23.0)	56 (17.9):85 (27.2)	0.001

Characteristics of the 1181 participants analyzed in this study. The prevalence of diverticulosis according to age group and the relationship between diverticulosis and sex were analyzed.

Table 2 Relationship between sex and location of diverticia

Segment	n (%)	Male:Female
Ileum	13 (1.1)	9:4
Appendix	6 (0.5)	5:1
Cecum	258 (21.8)	153:105
Ascending colon	431 (36.5)	266:165
Transverse colon	124 (10.5)	78:46
Descending colon	149 (12.6)	102:47
Sigmoid colon	200 (16.9)	129:71
Rectosigmoid colon	4 (0.3)	1:3

The distribution of diverticula and the relationship between sex and location of diverticula were analyzed. When there was overlap in segments of the diverticula in one participant, all segments were evaluated in duplicate. The percentages of all participants are also listed.

Table 3 Sex and grade of diverticula in each segment and age group, n (%)

	Age group (yr)
	≤ 40 (n = 108)	41-50 (n = 165)	51-60 (n = 268)	61-70 (n = 327)	≥ 71 (n = 313)
Sex
Male	83(76.9)	98(59.4)	147 (54.9)	185 (56.6)	156 (49.8)
Female	25 (23.1)	67 (40.6)	121 (45.1)	142 (43.4)	157 (50.2)
Grade of diverticula in segment
Ileum
Rare	0	2 (1.2)	2 (0.7)	5 (1.5)	4 (1.3)
Multiple	0	0	0	0	0
Severe	0	0	0	0	0
Appendix
Rare	0	0	1 (0.4)	4 (1.2)	1 (0.3)
Multiple	0	0	0	0	0
Severe	0	0	0	0	0
Cecum
Rare	10 (9.3)	21 (12.7)	48 (17.9)	77 (23.5)	75 (24.0)
Multiple	0	3 (1.8)	9 (3.4)	7 (2.1)	4 (1.3)
Severe	0	0	1 (0.4)	3 (0.9)	0
Ascending colon
Rare	12 (11.1)	35 (21.2)	60 (22.3)	81 (24.8)	77 (24.6)
Multiple	4 (3.7)	8 (4.8)	30 (11.2)	34 (10.4)	49 (15.7)
Severe	1 (0.9)	1 (0.6)	11 (4.1)	15 (4.6)	13 (4.2)
Transverse colon
Rare	5 (4.6)	8 (4.8)	25 (9.3)	29 (8.9)	30 (9.6)
Multiple	0	0	4 (1.5)	12 (3.7)	9 (2.9)
Severe	0	1 (0.6)	0	1 (0.3)	0
Descending colon
Rare	4 (3.7)	6 (3.6)	25 (9.3)	30 (9.2)	32 (10.2)
Multiple	0	2 (1.2)	8 (3.0)	14 (4.3)	14 (4.5)
Severe	0	1 (0.6)	0	5 (1.5)	8 (2.6)
Sigmoid colon
Rare	7 (6.5)	7 (4.2)	29 (10.8)	31 (9.5)	34 (10.9)
Multiple	0	0	10 (3.7)	20 (6.1)	27 (8.6)
Severe	0	2 (1.2)	3 (1.1)	11 (3.4)	19 (6.1)
Rectosigmoid colon
Rare	0	0	1 (0.4)	0	2 (0.6)
Multiple	0	0	0	0	1 (0.3)
Severe	0	0	0	0	0

In each colonic segment, the prevalence and the number of diverticula increased with age. Diverticula identified in the appendix, terminal ileum, and rectosigmoid colon were also evaluated. Rare: 1-5 diverticula; Multiple: 6-20 diverticula; Severe: ≥ 21 diverticula.

Table 4 Length of the large intestine by states of diverticula

	Median (cm)	Range (cm)
Diverticula negative in any segment	157.2	104.9-259.3
Diverticula positive in any segment	154.7	103.9-246.6
Multiple in cecum to ascending colon	154.5	114.9-246.6
Severe in cecum to ascending colon	151.6	119.6-198.4
Multiple in sigmoid colon	149.9	113.5-195.6
Severe in sigmoid colon	145.1	115.0-192.0

The large intestine of participants with multiple and severe diverticula in the sigmoid colon was significantly shorter than that of the participants with no diverticula (P < 0.001).