The usefulness, indications, and complications of laparoscopy-assisted colectomy in comparison with those of open colectomy for colorectal carcinoma.

The technique of laparoscopy-assisted colectomy (LAC) was developed for benign and malignant diseases of the colon and rectum; however, its feasibility and the associated clinical outcome remain unclear. We reviewed 45 patients who underwent LAC (LAC group) and 62 patients who underwent traditional open surgery (Open group) for colorectal carcinoma in our hospital, and compared the clinical data between the two groups in an effort to determine whether LAC is really minimally invasive and if it enhances the quality of life. So that the backgrounds of the patients in both groups were almost the same, we only compared data of patients with colorectal carcinoma of stages 0, I, and II. The duration of surgery in the Open group was significantly shorter for all procedures except sigmoid resection, but the blood loss was not significantly different between any of the procedures except for right colectomy. The time to the first passing of flatus and restarting oral intake, length of hospital stay, and duration of epidural analgesia were significantly shorter in the LAC group. The morbidity and mortality rates in the LAC group were almost the same as those in the Open group at 29.5% and 3.3% versus 22.6% and 1.6%, respectively. However, five major complications of LAC for advanced colorectal carcinomas might be prevented by performing an open procedure. In conclusion, LAC is a safe and minimally invasive surgical technique following which we can expect a faster recovery; however, patients with advanced colorectal carcinomas must be carefully selected for this operation.