BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic polypectomy still remains the cornerstone of therapy for colorectal polyps and adenomas. However, if colorectal polyps are too large or not accessible for endoscopic ablation or cannot be removed without an increased risk for perforation, operative procedures are required. In such circumstances, laparoscopic resection represents a minimally invasive alternative. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 1993 and December 2004, more than 2,500 endoscopic polypectomies were performed at the Department of Surgery, University of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Germany. In patients which could not be treated by endoscopic polypectomy due to size, location, and/or risk of complications, a laparoscopic colorectal resection was performed. All data were prospectively assessed in our "colorectal resection" database. RESULTS: The database analysis revealed 58 patients with endoscopically not resectable colorectal polyps who underwent a laparoscopic colorectal resection (intend to treat). In 54 patients, the operative procedure could be finished by the laparoscopic approach (study population). The conversion rate was 6.9% (four of 58). An ileocolic resection was performed in 20 patients (37.0%), and 14 patients (25.9%) underwent an anterior rectal resection. A right colectomy was necessary in 12 patients (22.2%), and six patients (11.1%) underwent a sigmoid resection. In the remaining two patients, a left colectomy and a resection of the transverse colon were performed. Intra- and postoperative complications occurred in five patients (9.3%). Perioperative mortality was not registered. The histopathological work-up revealed benign disease in all cases. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic resection of colorectal polyps is a safe and minimally invasive technique for the management of benign colorectal tumors. Thus, the laparoscopic approach to endoscopically not resectable polyps enriches the therapeutic spectrum.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic polypectomy still remains the cornerstone of therapy for colorectal polyps and adenomas. However, if colorectal polyps are too large or not accessible for endoscopic ablation or cannot be removed without an increased risk for perforation, operative procedures are required. In such circumstances, laparoscopic resection represents a minimally invasive alternative. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 1993 and December 2004, more than 2,500 endoscopic polypectomies were performed at the Department of Surgery, University of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Germany. In patients which could not be treated by endoscopic polypectomy due to size, location, and/or risk of complications, a laparoscopic colorectal resection was performed. All data were prospectively assessed in our "colorectal resection" database. RESULTS: The database analysis revealed 58 patients with endoscopically not resectable colorectal polyps who underwent a laparoscopic colorectal resection (intend to treat). In 54 patients, the operative procedure could be finished by the laparoscopic approach (study population). The conversion rate was 6.9% (four of 58). An ileocolic resection was performed in 20 patients (37.0%), and 14 patients (25.9%) underwent an anterior rectal resection. A right colectomy was necessary in 12 patients (22.2%), and six patients (11.1%) underwent a sigmoid resection. In the remaining two patients, a left colectomy and a resection of the transverse colon were performed. Intra- and postoperative complications occurred in five patients (9.3%). Perioperative mortality was not registered. The histopathological work-up revealed benign disease in all cases. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic resection of colorectal polyps is a safe and minimally invasive technique for the management of benign colorectal tumors. Thus, the laparoscopic approach to endoscopically not resectable polyps enriches the therapeutic spectrum.
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: James Fleshman; Daniel J Sargent; Erin Green; Mehran Anvari; Steven J Stryker; Robert W Beart; Michael Hellinger; Richard Flanagan; Walter Peters; Heidi Nelson Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: A García; O Núñez; C González-Asanza; A Parera; L Menchén; C Ripoll; C Senent; E Cos; P Menchén Journal: Rev Esp Enferm Dig Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 2.086
Authors: Joon Ho Jang; Emre Balik; Daniel Kirchoff; Wouter Tromp; Anjali Kumar; Michael Grieco; Daniel L Feingold; Vesna Cekic; Linda Njoh; Richard L Whelan Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2011-11-05 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Matthew D Rutter; Amit Chattree; Jamie A Barbour; Siwan Thomas-Gibson; Pradeep Bhandari; Brian P Saunders; Andrew M Veitch; John Anderson; Bjorn J Rembacken; Maurice B Loughrey; Rupert Pullan; William V Garrett; Gethin Lewis; Sunil Dolwani Journal: Gut Date: 2015-06-23 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Won Ho Choi; Jongpil Ryuk; Hye Jin Kim; Soo Yeun Park; Jun Seok Park; Jong Gwang Kim; Gyu-Seog Choi Journal: J Korean Surg Soc Date: 2012-04-26