Literature DB >> 15549630

Conversion rates in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a predictive model with, 1253 patients.

P P Tekkis1, A J Senagore, C P Delaney.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study aimed all develop a mathematical model for predicting the conversion rate for patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery.
METHOD: This descriptive single-center study used routinely collected clinical data from 1,253 patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery between November 1991 and April 2003. A two-level hierarchical regression model was used to identify patient, surgeon, and procedure-related factors associated with conversion of laparoscopic to open surgery. The model was internally validated and tested using measures of discrimination and calibration. Exclusion criteria for laparoscopic colectomy included a body mass greater than 50, lesion diameter exceeding 15 cm, and multiple prior major laparotomies (exclusive of appendectomy, hysterectomy, and cholecystectomy).
RESULTS: The average conversion rate for the study population was 10.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.3-11.7%). The independent predictors of conversion of laparoscopic to open surgery were the body mass index (odds ratio [OR], 2.1 per 10 Americans Society of Anesthesiology units increase), (ASA) grade 3 or 4, 1 or 2 (OR, 3.2, 5.8), type of resection (low rectal, left colorectal, right colonic vs small/other bowel procedures; OR, 8.82, 4.76, 2.98), presence of intraoperative abscess (OR, 3.60) or fistula (OR, 4.73), and surgeon seniority (junior vs senior staff OR, 1.56). The model offered adequate discrimination (area under receiver operator characteristic curve, 0.74) and excellent agreement (p = 0.384) between observed and model-predicted conversion rates (range of calibration, 3-32% conversion rate).
CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic conversion rates are dependent on a multitude of factors that require appropriate adjustment for case mix before comparisons are made between or within centers. The Cleveland Clinic Foundation (CCF) laparoscopic conversion rate model is a simple additive score that can be used in everyday practice to evaluate outcomes for laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15549630     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-004-8904-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  21 in total

Review 1.  Defining a learning curve for laparoscopic colorectal resections.

Authors:  C M Schlachta; J Mamazza; P A Seshadri; M Cadeddu; R Gregoire; E C Poulin
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 4.585

2.  Converted laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Authors:  P Gervaz; A Pikarsky; M Utech; M Secic; J Efron; B Belin; A Jain; S Wexner
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2001-05-11       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Case-matched comparison of clinical and financial outcome after laparoscopic or open colorectal surgery.

Authors:  Conor P Delaney; Ravi P Kiran; Anthony J Senagore; Karen Brady; Victor W Fazio
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 4.  Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors.

Authors:  F E Harrell; K L Lee; D B Mark
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1996-02-28       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Postoperative complications of laparoscopic-assisted colectomy.

Authors:  A M Lacy; J C García-Valdecasas; S Delgado; L Grande; J Fuster; J Tabet; C Ramos; J M Piqué; A Cifuentes; J Visa
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

Authors:  J A Hanley; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1982-04       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Importance of conversion for results obtained with laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Authors:  F Marusch; I Gastinger; C Schneider; H Scheidbach; J Konradt; H P Bruch; L Köhler; E Bärlehner; F Köckerling
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 4.585

8.  Is obesity a high-risk factor for laparoscopic colorectal surgery?

Authors:  A J Pikarsky; Y Saida; T Yamaguchi; S Martinez; W Chen; E G Weiss; J J Nogueras; S D Wexner
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2002-02-06       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Laparoscopic colectomy in obese and nonobese patients.

Authors:  Anthony J Senagore; Conor P Delaney; Khaled Madboulay; Karen M Brady; Victor W Fazio; C Victor W Fazio
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2003 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.452

10.  Risk-adjusted prediction of operative mortality in oesophagogastric surgery with O-POSSUM.

Authors:  P P Tekkis; P McCulloch; J D Poloniecki; D R Prytherch; N Kessaris; A C Steger
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 6.939

View more
  73 in total

1.  Enhanced recovery program following colorectal resection in the elderly patient.

Authors:  Nikhil Pawa; Paul L Cathcart; Tan H A Arulampalam; Matthew G Tutton; Roger W Motson
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Conversion in laparoscopic-assisted colectomy for right colon cancer: risk factors and clinical outcomes.

Authors:  Jimmy C M Li; Janet F Y Lee; Simon S M Ng; Raymond Y C Yiu; Sophie S F Hon; Wing Wa Leung; Ka Lau Leung
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2010-06-08       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Has laparoscopic colorectal surgery become more cost-effective over time?

Authors:  O E Aly; Z Quayyum
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2012-01-31       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Modular training in laparoscopic colorectal surgery maximizes training opportunities without clinical compromise.

Authors:  Anil Hemandas; Karen G Flashman; Jill Farrow; Daniel P O'Leary; Amjad Parvaiz
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  Impact of previous abdominal surgery on the outcome of laparoscopic colectomy: a case-matched control study.

Authors:  A Vignali; S Di Palo; P De Nardi; G Radaelli; E Orsenigo; C Staudacher
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2007-08-03       Impact factor: 3.781

6.  Considerations on the learning curve for laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a view from the bottom.

Authors:  S Leong; R A Cahill; B J Mehigan; R B Stephens
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2007-04-03       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: clinical practice guidelines of the Italian Society of Colo-Rectal Surgery.

Authors:  C A Sartori; A D'Annibale; G Cutini; C Senargiotto; D D'Antonio; A Dal Pozzo; M Fiorino; G Gagliardi; B Franzato; G Romano
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2007-05-25       Impact factor: 3.781

8.  Do elderly patients benefit from laparoscopic colorectal surgery?

Authors:  B Person; S M Cera; D R Sands; E G Weiss; A M Vernava; J J Nogueras; S D Wexner
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-05-24       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Impact of a full-time preceptor on the institutional outcome of laparoscopic colectomy.

Authors:  Alessio Pigazzi; Casandra Anderson; Pablo Mojica-Manosa; David Smith; Kathrina Hernandez; I Benjamin Paz; Joshua D I Ellenhorn
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Learning curve for robotic-assisted laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery.

Authors:  Rosa M Jiménez-Rodríguez; José Manuel Díaz-Pavón; Fernando de la Portilla de Juan; Emilio Prendes-Sillero; Hisnard Cadet Dussort; Javier Padillo
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2012-12-15       Impact factor: 2.571

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.