Laparoscopic versus open surgery in small bowel obstruction

British Journal of Surgery, 1997

Background Randomized controlled studies of surgical procedures are difficult, but can be done to Methods The original articles that involved a randomized controlled trial including at least one acceptable standards. There are few published objective assessments of such trials. laparoscopic procedure were reviewed and evaluated with special interest in their methodology. An assessment form containing 1 1 generic questions and three additional criteria (assessment of quality of life, cost analysis and laparoscopic experience required) was used. Forty trials were retrieved including 12 on cholecystectomy, 12 on hernia repair and 12 on appendicectomy. Each trial was scored by two assessors.

Surgical Endoscopy, 2012

In January 2010, the SICE (Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery), under the auspices of the EAES, decided to revisit the clinical recommendations for the role of laparoscopy in abdominal emergencies in adults, with the primary intent being to update the 2006 EAES indications and supplement the existing guidelines on specific diseases. Methods Other Italian surgical societies were invited into the Consensus to form a panel of 12 expert surgeons. In order to get a multidisciplinary panel, other stakeholders involved in abdominal emergencies were invited along with a patient's association. In November 2010, the panel met in Rome to discuss each chapter according to the Delphi method, producing key statements with a grade of recommendations followed by commentary to explain the rationale and the level of evidence behind the statements. Thereafter, the statements were presented to the Annual Congress of the EAES in June 2011. Results A thorough literature review was necessary to assess whether the recommendations issued in 2006 are still current. In many cases new studies allowed us to better clarify some issues (such as for diverticulitis, small bowel obstruction, pancreatitis, hernias, trauma), to confirm the key role of laparoscopy (such as for cholecystitis, gynecological disorders, nonspecific abdominal pain, appendicitis), but occasionally previous strong recommendations have to be challenged after review of recent research (such as for perforated peptic ulcer).

Surgical Endoscopy, 2011

Background This study sought to know the opinions of general surgeons registered in the state of Connecticut about their use of laparoscopic lysis of adhesions (LLA) to manage adhesive small bowel obstruction (SBO) compared with open lysis of adhesions (OLA) in terms of safety, contraindications, and outcomes. Methods A questionnaire was designed to gather the opinions of general surgeons registered in Connecticut on this topic. The questionnaire was administered electronically and through the mail. Results Of the 205 general surgeons to whom the questionnaire was sent, 87 completed it (42% response). The respondents were evenly distributed throughout Connecticut. Of these respondents, 9% were university teaching hospital faculty, 55% were community teaching hospital based, and 36% were community nonteaching hospital based. The answers to the questions were expressed as percentages and differences between groups tested using Fisher's exact test, with the significance level set at a P value less than 0.05. According to their self-reports, 60% of the respondents used LLA in their practice, with 38% of this group using LLA for less than 15% of their adhesive SBO cases. Compared with surgeons out of training less than 15 years, a greater number of surgeons out of training more than 15 years considered LLA to be safer (P = 0.03) and to have better outcomes (P = 0.04) than OLA. More surgeons in academic/teaching settings considered LLA to be safe than did surgeons in nonacademic/nonteaching settings (P = 0.04), and more members of the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES)/Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons (SLS) considered LLA to be safe than nonmembers (P = 0.001). Conclusions Many surgeons do not perform LLA for reasons that differ from those in the surgical literature, which supports LLA. Surgeons recently trained or with membership in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) societies are more likely to use LLA. These data suggest that recent training and interest or membership in MIS associations influence surgeons' choice for LLA. This survey demonstrated that an opportunity exists to improve patient outcomes with education about the merits of LLA in the state of Connecticut. Keywords Adhesive small bowel obstruction Á Laparoscopic lysis of adhesions Á Open lysis of adhesions Á Small bowel obstruction

Diseases of The Colon & Rectum, 1995

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the role of laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients presenting for routine colorectal surgical procedures. METHODS: Two hundred consecutive patients were assessed for the possible use of laparoscopic surgery. The decision regarding suitability of the patient for the procedure was made by the operator. For the purpose of analysis, patients were assigned to open, converted, and laparoscopic groups. RESULTS: Ninety-five of 200 patients were considered appropriate for laparoscopic surgery, 62 (65.3 percent) being successfully completed. These completed operations included right colectomy (24/30), sigmoid colectomy (22/36), appendectomy (9/10), anterior resection (3/8), abdominoperineal resection (3/5), and left colectomy (1/2). Complications attributable to laparoscopy were infrequent (6.3 percent) and were not responsible for any deaths. Patients in the laparoscopic group required less analgesia, tolerated oral intake earlier, and were discharged from the hospital earlier than those who were converted or who had open procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic assisted surgery is safe, effective, and applicable to many of the standard colorectal procedures. Observed benefits include less postoperative pain and shorter hospital stay.

BMC Surgery, 2019

Background: Appendicitis in elderly patients is associated with increased risk of postoperative complications. The choice between laparoscopy and open appendectomy remains controversial in treating elderly patients with appendicitis. Methods: Comprehensive search of literature of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials was done in January 2019. Studies compared laparoscopy and open appendectomy for elderly patients with appendicitis were screened and selected. Postoperative mortality, complications, wound infection, intra-abdominal abscess and operating time, length of hospital stay were extracted and analyzed. The Review Manage 5.3 was used for data analysis. Results: Twelve studies with 126,237 patients in laparoscopy group and 213,201 patients in open group. Postoperative mortality was significantly lower following laparoscopy (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.39). Postoperative complication and wound infection were reduced following laparoscopy ((OR, 0.65 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.67; OR,0.27, 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.32). Intra-abdominal abscess was similar between LA and OA (OR,0.44;95% CI, 0.19 to 1.03). Duration of surgery was longer following laparoscopy and length of hospital stay was shorter following laparoscopy (MD, 7.25, 95% CI, 3.13 to 11.36; MD,-2.72, 95% CI,-3.31 to − 2.13). Conclusions: Not only laparoscopy is safe and feasible, but also it is related with decreased rates of mortality, postoperative morbidity and shorter hospitalization.

Colorectal Disease, 2003

Objective To evaluate the current place of laparoscopy in the management of colorectal disease.

Surgical Clinics of North America, 2005

Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore, 2005

Current evidence shows that laparoscopic bowel surgery is associated with a lower incidence of postoperative ileus, lower postoperative pulmonary and wound complication rates, shorter hospital stays and a quicker return to activity than open surgery. This paper aims to report our early experience with laparoscopic-assisted colorectal procedures in our Centre for Advanced Laparoscopic Surgery and the important lessons we have learnt from this. All laparoscopic-assisted colon and rectal surgical (LAC) procedures performed between January 2000 and December 2003 were reviewed. Clinical and operative records of these patients were reviewed. Data retrieved included patient demographics, selected intraoperative parameters, and postoperative outcomes. In order to provide a comparable reference, an equal number of matched open procedures over the same period were accrued and similarly analysed. All patients were managed on a standard carepath. All data were entered into a database and analys...

Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 1998

The use of laparoscopy in the treatment of acute small bowel obstruction (SBO) faces inherent obstacles, including dilated loops of bowel, a limited working space, and postoperative adhesions. The objective of this study was to outline the efficacy of laparoscopic management of SBO in children. Methods: With Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, children who presented with a diagnosis of SBO and underwent management via a laparoscopic approach at our institution from January 2001 to December 2008 were retrospectively reviewed. Medical records were reviewed for age, weight, etiology of obstruction, radiographic findings, need for conversion, number of operations, length of stay, and postoperative complications. Statistical analyses of data comparison between those patients who were managed utilizing a laparoscopic approach and those in whom the laparoscopic approach was converted to a laparotomy were performed using a Chi-squared or a two-tailed Student's t-test with significance reported for P < 0.05. Results: Thirty-four patients underwent laparoscopic management of SBO. Mean age was 8.1 AE 5.9 years with a mean weight of 32.8 AE 24.6 kg. Sixty-seven percent were male. A preoperative computed tomography scan was obtained in 21 patients (62%). Eleven cases (32%) required conversion to laparotomy. The most common reason for conversion to the open approach was poor working space (45.4%) followed by intestinal volvulus (27.2%), inability to identify source of obstruction (18.2%), and enterotomy (9%). The most common cause of SBO was postoperative adhesions (73.5%), followed by Meckel's diverticulum (8.8%), volvulus (8.8%), and other (8.8%). Postoperative complications occurred in 5 patients (14.7%). One patient died within 30 days of exploration due to intestinal ischemia secondary to midgut volvulus and subsequent septic shock. Five patients (14.7%) had a recurrent SBO with a mean time to recurrence of 2.6 AE 2.1 months. There were no significant differences in demographic or preoperative variables between patients who were successfully managed with laparoscopy alone versus those patients in whom conversion to laparotomy was necessary. In patients who required conversion, the laparoscopic evaluation did aid in identifying the etiology and allowed for a directed surgical approach when appropriate. Conclusions: Laparoscopy for the management of SBO in children is safe and can be therapeutic in the majority of patients. We recommend that consideration for initial exploration in children with SBO be carried out via the laparoscopic approach, with an understanding that conversion to an open approach may be necessary to complete the operation.

International Journal of Life Sciences, Biotechnology and Pharma Research, 2022

Background and Objective: In the last 20 years, laparoscopic surgery for appendicitis has been introduced as a good alternative to open surgery. We aim to examine up to what extent laparoscopic surgery is practicable instead of open surgery in our setup. We examine the effect of shifting to laparoscopy surgery, comparing laparoscopic surgery to open surgery with quality indicators such as length of post operative stay, operating time, post operative pain, morbidity and follow up of each method during the period 2021 to 2022. Materials and method: All adult patients presenting with appendicitis requiring operation were identified and randomised into two groups. One group underwent open surgery and the other one laparoscopic surgery for appendicitis. The time of surgery, duration of post operative stay, morbidity, mortality and VAS pain score were noted. Result: A total of 90 patients underwent appendectomy either by open method or by laparoscopic method. Conclusion: The standard surgical procedure for appendicitis can be easily done by laparoscopic surgery at the same time, the operating time was significantly more, the duration of stay is a bit less and has got lesser post operative complications on comparing with open surgery. Keywords: Appendicitis, length of stay, laparoscopy and cohort studies This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

Diseases of the Colon & Rectum, 2014

Surgical Endoscopy, 1995

In order to help determine the risks and benefits, we retrospectively analyzed the results of our first 114 laparoscopically assisted bowel procedures. Procedures performed consisted of partial colectomy (85), total or subtotal abdominal colectomy (8), total proctocolectomy with J-pouch ileal reservoir (I 1), and diverting procedures (10). Forty-nine procedures were for malignancy. The rate of conversion to laparotomy was 13.2%. Oral feedings were resumed in 2.4 days (range 1-5), and bowel function returned in 3.8 days (range 2-8). The average length of stay was 4.2 days for partial colectomy and 6 days for total, subtotal, and proctocolectomy. The mean return to normal activity for all groups was 16.7 days (10.8 days for partial colectomy). There were no deaths. Major morbidity (6%) consisted of abscess (3), anastomotic leak (2), and hemorrhage (1). Mean operative costs analyzed for the initial 37 patients were higher for laparoscopic colectomies when compared to traditional colectomies; however, the mean total hospital costs were less for the laparoscopic procedures. These data suggest that the laparoscopic approach to colorectal resection is an acceptable alternative to laparotomy for a variety of disease processes, allowing patients an early return to normal activity.

Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques, 2011

Objective This review aimed to determine the role of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) in abdominal and pelvic operations. Data sources The Medline, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases were systematically searched until October 2009 using “single-incision laparoscopic surgery” and related terms as keywords. References from retrieved articles were reviewed to broaden the search Study selection The study included case reports, case series, and empirical studies that reported SILS in abdominal and pelvic operations. Data extraction Number of patients, type of instruments, operative time, blood loss, conversion rate, length of hospital stay, length of follow-up evaluation, and complications were extracted from the reviewed items Data synthesis The review included 102 studies classified as level 4 evidence. Most of these studies investigated SILS in cholecystectomy (n = 34), appendectomy (n = 24), and nephrectomy (n = 17). For these procedures, operative time, hospital stay, and complications were comparable with those of conventional laparoscopy. Conversion to conventional laparoscopy was seldom performed in cholecystectomy (range, 0–24%) and more frequent in appendectomy (range, 0–41%) and nephrectomy (range, 0–33%). Conclusion The potential benefits of SILS include superior cosmesis and possibly shorter operative time, lower costs, and a shortened time to full physical recovery. Careful case selection and a low threshold of conversion to conventional laparoscopic surgery are essential. Multicenter, randomized, prospective studies are needed to compare short- and long-term outcome measures against those of conventional laparoscopic surgery.