INTRODUCTION: There are no previous comparative studies of total abdominal colectomy by laparoscopic methods in ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease patients requiring urgent colectomy. This study aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic colectomy in these patients compared with those undergoing conventional urgent colectomy. METHODS: Patients undergoing laparoscopic total colectomy for acute colitis were identified in a prospective registry. All patients underwent a total colectomy with creation of an end ileostomy and buried mucous fistula. No patient had fulminant disease (tachycardia, fever, marked leukocytosis, peritonitis), but all were failing to respond to medical treatment. Patients undergoing conventional total colectomy were matched for age, gender, body mass index, diagnosis, disease severity, and operative period. Median values (range) are listed. RESULTS: From 1997 to 1999, there were 19 laparoscopic and 29 matched conventional patients. There were no inadvertent colotomies or conversions in the laparoscopic group. Although there was no difference in operative blood loss in the laparoscopic group (100 (range, 50-700) ml) when compared with the conventional group (150 (range, 50-500) ml), the operative times were significantly longer in the laparoscopic group (210 (range, 150-270) vs. 120 (range, 60-180) minutes, P < 0.001). Bowel function returned more quickly in the laparoscopic group (1 (range, 1-3) vs. 2 (range, 1-4) days; P = 0.003) and the length of stay was shorter (4 (range, 3-13) vs. 6 (range, 4-24) days; P = 0.04). Complications occurred in three (16 percent) laparoscopic patients (2 wound infection and 1 ileus) and in seven (24 percent) conventional patients (3 wound infection, 3 deep venous thrombosis, 1 upper gastrointestinal bleed). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic total colectomy is feasible and safe in patients with acute nonfulminant colitis and may lead to a faster recovery than conventional resection.
INTRODUCTION: There are no previous comparative studies of total abdominal colectomy by laparoscopic methods in ulcerative colitis and Crohn's diseasepatients requiring urgent colectomy. This study aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic colectomy in these patients compared with those undergoing conventional urgent colectomy. METHODS:Patients undergoing laparoscopic total colectomy for acute colitis were identified in a prospective registry. All patients underwent a total colectomy with creation of an end ileostomy and buried mucous fistula. No patient had fulminant disease (tachycardia, fever, marked leukocytosis, peritonitis), but all were failing to respond to medical treatment. Patients undergoing conventional total colectomy were matched for age, gender, body mass index, diagnosis, disease severity, and operative period. Median values (range) are listed. RESULTS: From 1997 to 1999, there were 19 laparoscopic and 29 matched conventional patients. There were no inadvertent colotomies or conversions in the laparoscopic group. Although there was no difference in operative blood loss in the laparoscopic group (100 (range, 50-700) ml) when compared with the conventional group (150 (range, 50-500) ml), the operative times were significantly longer in the laparoscopic group (210 (range, 150-270) vs. 120 (range, 60-180) minutes, P < 0.001). Bowel function returned more quickly in the laparoscopic group (1 (range, 1-3) vs. 2 (range, 1-4) days; P = 0.003) and the length of stay was shorter (4 (range, 3-13) vs. 6 (range, 4-24) days; P = 0.04). Complications occurred in three (16 percent) laparoscopic patients (2 wound infection and 1 ileus) and in seven (24 percent) conventional patients (3 wound infection, 3 deep venous thrombosis, 1 upper gastrointestinal bleed). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic total colectomy is feasible and safe in patients with acute nonfulminant colitis and may lead to a faster recovery than conventional resection.
Authors: Jonah J Stulberg; Brad J Champagne; Zhen Fan; Mike Horan; Vincent Obias; Eric Marderstein; Harry Reynolds; Conor P Delaney Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Christopher M Schlachta; Joseph Mamazza; Roger Gregoire; Stephen E Burpee; Eric C Poulin Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Manish Chand; Muhammed R S Siddiqui; Ashish Gupta; Shahnawaz Rasheed; Paris Tekkis; Amjad Parvaiz; Alex H Mirnezami; Tahseen Qureshi Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2014-12-07 Impact factor: 5.742