P Y Tan1, J H Stephens, N A Rieger, P J Hewett. 1. Colorectal Unit, Division of Surgery, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, 28 Woodville Road, Woodville South, SA, 5011, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Conversion to an open procedure during laparoscopically assisted colorectal resection may be necessary because of technical, patient, or pathologic factors. Recent literature has indicated that converted patients may have poorer outcomes than those undergoing open or completed laparoscopically assisted procedure. This study aimed to audit the authors' experience with laparoscopically assisted colectomy and to assess the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing conversion. METHODS: All laparoscopic right hemicolectomies or anterior resections performed at seven South Australian hospitals from 1997 to 2006 were reviewed. Data pertaining to patient sex, age, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score, pathology, operative outcomes including operating time, conversion, reason for conversion, length of hospital stay, and intra- and postoperative complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Laparoscopic anterior resection had a higher rate of open conversion than laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (18.7% vs 10.4%; p = 0.028). In the right hemicolectomy group, none of the investigated risk factors for conversion were statistically significant, and the morbidity rates for the two groups were similar. The median hospital stay was significantly longer in the anterior resection group (p < 0.001), and the wound morbidity rate was higher in the converted group (12.8% vs 3.0%; p = 0.022). Age older than 75 years and a high ASA status were independent risk factors for conversion in anterior resection. CONCLUSIONS: Conversion of laparoscopic anterior resection to open procedure is associated with higher wound morbidity and a longer hospital stay. The authors recommend that surgeons carefully consider the selection of patients 75 years of age or older and high ASA status for laparoscopic anterior resection.
BACKGROUND: Conversion to an open procedure during laparoscopically assisted colorectal resection may be necessary because of technical, patient, or pathologic factors. Recent literature has indicated that converted patients may have poorer outcomes than those undergoing open or completed laparoscopically assisted procedure. This study aimed to audit the authors' experience with laparoscopically assisted colectomy and to assess the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing conversion. METHODS: All laparoscopic right hemicolectomies or anterior resections performed at seven South Australian hospitals from 1997 to 2006 were reviewed. Data pertaining to patient sex, age, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score, pathology, operative outcomes including operating time, conversion, reason for conversion, length of hospital stay, and intra- and postoperative complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Laparoscopic anterior resection had a higher rate of open conversion than laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (18.7% vs 10.4%; p = 0.028). In the right hemicolectomy group, none of the investigated risk factors for conversion were statistically significant, and the morbidity rates for the two groups were similar. The median hospital stay was significantly longer in the anterior resection group (p < 0.001), and the wound morbidity rate was higher in the converted group (12.8% vs 3.0%; p = 0.022). Age older than 75 years and a high ASA status were independent risk factors for conversion in anterior resection. CONCLUSIONS: Conversion of laparoscopic anterior resection to open procedure is associated with higher wound morbidity and a longer hospital stay. The authors recommend that surgeons carefully consider the selection of patients 75 years of age or older and high ASA status for laparoscopic anterior resection.
Authors: Selim Dinçler; Michael T Koller; Johann Steurer; Lucas M Bachmann; Daniel Christen; Peter Buchmann Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Pierre J Guillou; Philip Quirke; Helen Thorpe; Joanne Walker; David G Jayne; Adrian M H Smith; Richard M Heath; Julia M Brown Journal: Lancet Date: 2005 May 14-20 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Heidi Nelson; Daniel J Sargent; H Sam Wieand; James Fleshman; Mehran Anvari; Steven J Stryker; Robert W Beart; Michael Hellinger; Richard Flanagan; Walter Peters; David Ota Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-05-13 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: H Scheidbach; C Schneider; O Hügel; H Scheuerlein; E Bärlehner; J Konradt; C Wittekind; F Köckerling Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2003-03-14 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Diego I Ramos-Valadez; Chirag B Patel; Madhu Ragupathi; Malak B Bokhari; T Bartley Pickron; Eric M Haas Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2011-03-29 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Hossein Masoomi; Zhobin Moghadamyeghaneh; Steven Mills; Joseph C Carmichael; Alessio Pigazzi; Michael J Stamos Journal: World J Surg Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Wah Siew Tan; Min Hoe Chew; Irene Ai Ling Lim; Kheng Hong Ng; Choong Leong Tang; Kong Weng Eu Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2011-12-03 Impact factor: 2.571