BACKGROUND/ PURPOSE: Laparoscopic gastric bypass for relief of gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is feasible and safe. However, comparative data to confirm the benefits of the laparoscopic approach remain scarce. METHODS: Between 1998 and 2003, 26 patients underwent 15 laparoscopic (surgeon A) and 12 open (surgeon B) gastrojejunostomies (GJs) for GOO. The indications for surgery included malignant (n = 17) and benign (n = 10) diseases. RESULTS: There were no conversions to open surgery in the laparoscopic group, and no operative mortality occurred in either group. The groups were comparable for age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score, frequencies of previous abdominal surgery and of malignant or benign disease, and type of GJ fashioned. There were no differences between the laparoscopic and open groups with regard to the operating time (median, 90 vs 111 min; P = 0.113), and patients receiving intraoperative blood transfusion. However, laparoscopic surgery was associated with significantly shorter durations of postoperative intravenous hydration (60 vs 234 h; P = 0.001), opiate analgesia (49 vs 128 h; P = 0.025), and hospital stay (3 vs 15 days; P = 0.005). Operative morbidity occurred more frequently following open surgery (33% vs 13%; P = 0.219). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic GJ for the relief of GOO is associated with a smoother and more rapid postoperative recovery and shorter hospital stay compared with open surgery. In experienced hands, the laparoscopic approach to GJ should become the new gold standard.
BACKGROUND/ PURPOSE: Laparoscopic gastric bypass for relief of gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is feasible and safe. However, comparative data to confirm the benefits of the laparoscopic approach remain scarce. METHODS: Between 1998 and 2003, 26 patients underwent 15 laparoscopic (surgeon A) and 12 open (surgeon B) gastrojejunostomies (GJs) for GOO. The indications for surgery included malignant (n = 17) and benign (n = 10) diseases. RESULTS: There were no conversions to open surgery in the laparoscopic group, and no operative mortality occurred in either group. The groups were comparable for age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score, frequencies of previous abdominal surgery and of malignant or benign disease, and type of GJ fashioned. There were no differences between the laparoscopic and open groups with regard to the operating time (median, 90 vs 111 min; P = 0.113), and patients receiving intraoperative blood transfusion. However, laparoscopic surgery was associated with significantly shorter durations of postoperative intravenous hydration (60 vs 234 h; P = 0.001), opiate analgesia (49 vs 128 h; P = 0.025), and hospital stay (3 vs 15 days; P = 0.005). Operative morbidity occurred more frequently following open surgery (33% vs 13%; P = 0.219). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic GJ for the relief of GOO is associated with a smoother and more rapid postoperative recovery and shorter hospital stay compared with open surgery. In experienced hands, the laparoscopic approach to GJ should become the new gold standard.
Authors: Martin Poulsen; Mauro Trezza; Ghayyath H Atimash; Lars T Sorensen; Finn Kallehave; Ulla Hemmingsen; Lars N Jorgensen Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2009-04-28 Impact factor: 3.452