Literature DB >> 15793638

Is laparoscopic colectomy applicable to patients with body mass index >30? A case-matched comparative study with open colectomy.

Conor P Delaney1, Naveen Pokala, Anthony J Senagore, Sergio Casillas, Ravi P Kiran, Karen M Brady, Victor W Fazio.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The benefits of early postoperative recovery, reduced postoperative pain, pulmonary dysfunction, and hospitalization after laparoscopic colectomy may improve outcome over open colectomy in obese patients. This case-matched study compares outcomes after open and laparoscopic colectomy.
METHODS: A total of 94 laparoscopic colectomy patients with a body mass index >30 (Jan 1999-June 2003) were identified from a prospective database and matched to open colectomy cases for age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, procedure, indication, and date of surgery. Operating time, length of stay, conversion, intraoperative and postoperative complications, reoperation, 30-day readmission rate, and costs were compared. Data are presented as means +/- standard deviations, and appropriate statistical tests were used.
RESULTS: The two groups were matched for age (P = 0.06), gender (P = 1), American Society of Anesthesiologists class (P = 0.2), body mass index (P = 0.4), indication for surgery (P = 1), and procedure (P = 1). By using intention-to-treat-type analysis, there was no difference in median operating time (100 vs. 110 (mean, 123 vs. 112) minutes; P = 0.1), complications (21 vs. 24 percent; P = 0.74), readmission (17 vs. 10.6 percent; P = 0.3), reoperation rates (6.4 vs. 4.3 percent; P = 0.75), or direct costs (median, US. 3,368 dollars vs. US 3,552 dollars; mean, US 4,003 dollars vs. US 4,037 dollars; P = 0.14) between laparoscopic colectomy or open colectomy; however, the median length of stay (3 vs. 5.5 (mean, 3.8 vs. 5.8) days; P = 0.0001) was significantly shorter after laparoscopic colectomy. Twenty-eight patients required conversion for adhesions (n = 11), bleeding (n = 3), obesity-hindering vision or dissection (n = 9), large phlegmon or tumor (n = 4), and ureteric injury (n = 1). The mean operating time for conversions was 142 minutes and length of stay was 6.4 days. Compared with laparoscopically completed cases, the median length of stay (5 vs. 2 (mean, 6.4 vs. 2.8) days; P = 0.0001) and median operating times (150 vs. 95 (mean, 142 vs. 115) minutes; P = 0.02) were significantly higher in the converted group, but there was no difference in the complication (P = 0.8), readmission (P = 1), or reoperation (P = 0.7) rates. Compared with open colectomy, the operating time (P = 0.02) was significantly higher in the converted group but there were no significant differences in the length of stay (P = 0.18), complication (P = 1), readmission (P = 0.35), or reoperative (P = 1) rates.
CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic colectomy can be performed safely in obese patients, with shorter postoperative recovery than that with open colectomy. Although obesity is associated with a high conversion rate, outcome in these converted cases is comparable to the matched open cases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15793638     DOI: 10.1007/s10350-004-0941-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum        ISSN: 0012-3706            Impact factor:   4.585


  36 in total

Review 1.  Outcome of laparoscopic colorectal surgery in obese and nonobese patients: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yanming Zhou; Lupeng Wu; Xiudong Li; Xiurong Wu; Bin Li
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-10-20       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  Elective open versus laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy for diverticular disease: a meta-analysis with the Sigma trial.

Authors:  Muhammed R S Siddiqui; Muhammed S Sajid; Kamran Khatri; Elizabeth Cheek; Mirza K Baig
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  A totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy can be an effective way of performing laparoscopic gastrectomy in obese patients (body mass index≥30).

Authors:  Min Gyu Kim; Kap Choong Kim; Beom Su Kim; Tae Hwan Kim; Hee Sung Kim; Jeong Hwan Yook; Byung Sik Kim
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  Short- and long-term costs of laparoscopic colectomy are significantly less than open colectomy.

Authors:  David P Eisenberg; Jane Wey; Philip Q Bao; Melissa Saul; Andrew R Watson; Wolfgang H Schraut; Kenneth K W Lee; A James Moser; Steven J Hughes
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-02-21       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  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

6.  Laparoscopic colectomy in the obese, morbidly obese, and super morbidly obese: when does weight matter?

Authors:  Bradley J Champagne; Madhuri Nishtala; Justin T Brady; Benjamin P Crawshaw; Morris E Franklin; Conor P Delaney; Scott R Steele
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2017-07-14       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Short and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic colectomy in obese patients.

Authors:  Andrea Vignali; Paola De Nardi; Luca Ghirardelli; Saverio Di Palo; Carlo Staudacher
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-11-14       Impact factor: 5.742

8.  Single-port laparoscopic colorectal resections in obese patients are as safe and effective as conventional laparoscopy.

Authors:  Erman Aytac; Matthias Turina; Emre Gorgun; Luca Stocchi; Feza H Remzi; Meagan M Costedio
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-05-23       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Cost of practice in a tertiary/quaternary referral center: is it sustainable?

Authors:  K G Cologne; G S Hwang; A J Senagore
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2014-06-18       Impact factor: 3.781

10.  Complications in colorectal surgery: risk factors and preventive strategies.

Authors:  Philipp Kirchhoff; Pierre-Alain Clavien; Dieter Hahnloser
Journal:  Patient Saf Surg       Date:  2010-03-25
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.