BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the short- and medium-term results obtained by totally laparoscopic right colectomy (TL) with those obtained by laparoscopically assisted right colectomy (LAC) for the treatment of right colon cancer. METHODS: A retrospective study compared two nonstatistically different groups (50 TL and 50 LAC cases) managed for nonmetastatic malignant tumors. The study outcomes included operative time, length of minilaparotomy, intraoperative complications, postoperative pain, time to resumption of the gastrointestinal functions, permanence of abdominal drain, analgesic therapy duration, postoperative complications, hospitalization time, number of harvested lymph nodes, and distant metastases onset. RESULTS: The mean operative times were 78 ± 25 min (TL group) and 92 ± 22 min (LAC group) (p < 0.05). The findings showed a lower postoperative pain level associated with a reduction in analgesic consumption (p > 0.05) and earlier restoration of digestive function in the TL group than in the LAC group. The mean hospital stays were approximately 5 days (TL) and 7 days (LAC) (p < 0.05). No complications occurred either intra- or postoperatively, and similarly, the TL group experienced no mortality. In comparison, the LAC group had a 30% complication rate (p < 0.05). The complications included one case of intraoperative small bowel lesion, three cases of postoperative respiratory infections, three cases of anastomotic leakage, two cases of intestinal occlusion, three cases of minilaparotomy infection, one case of postoperative femoral neurosis, one case of postoperative heart attack, and one case of postoperative pancreatitis. The mortality rate was 0%. Neither group had a recurrence of the neoplastic disease during a 4-year follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: The findings seem to demonstrate that TL right colectomy is feasible and safe, yielding results comparable with those of the open approach but offering improved postoperative patient comfort. The limits of this retrospective comparative study do not allow definitive conclusions to be drawn despite the encouraging data for the next prospective randomized studies.
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the short- and medium-term results obtained by totally laparoscopic right colectomy (TL) with those obtained by laparoscopically assisted right colectomy (LAC) for the treatment of right colon cancer. METHODS: A retrospective study compared two nonstatistically different groups (50 TL and 50 LAC cases) managed for nonmetastatic malignant tumors. The study outcomes included operative time, length of minilaparotomy, intraoperative complications, postoperative pain, time to resumption of the gastrointestinal functions, permanence of abdominal drain, analgesic therapy duration, postoperative complications, hospitalization time, number of harvested lymph nodes, and distant metastases onset. RESULTS: The mean operative times were 78 ± 25 min (TL group) and 92 ± 22 min (LAC group) (p < 0.05). The findings showed a lower postoperative pain level associated with a reduction in analgesic consumption (p > 0.05) and earlier restoration of digestive function in the TL group than in the LAC group. The mean hospital stays were approximately 5 days (TL) and 7 days (LAC) (p < 0.05). No complications occurred either intra- or postoperatively, and similarly, the TL group experienced no mortality. In comparison, the LAC group had a 30% complication rate (p < 0.05). The complications included one case of intraoperative small bowel lesion, three cases of postoperative respiratory infections, three cases of anastomotic leakage, two cases of intestinal occlusion, three cases of minilaparotomy infection, one case of postoperative femoral neurosis, one case of postoperative heart attack, and one case of postoperative pancreatitis. The mortality rate was 0%. Neither group had a recurrence of the neoplastic disease during a 4-year follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: The findings seem to demonstrate that TL right colectomy is feasible and safe, yielding results comparable with those of the open approach but offering improved postoperative patient comfort. The limits of this retrospective comparative study do not allow definitive conclusions to be drawn despite the encouraging data for the next prospective randomized studies.
Authors: Mark Buunen; Ruben Veldkamp; Wim C J Hop; Esther Kuhry; Johannes Jeekel; Eva Haglind; Lars Påhlman; Miguel A Cuesta; Simon Msika; Mario Morino; Antonio Lacy; Hendrik J Bonjer Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2008-12-13 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: L Casciola; G Ceccarelli; L Di Zitti; R Valeri; R Bellochi; A Bartoli; F Barbieri; A Spaziani; M D'Ajello Journal: Minerva Chir Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 1.000
Authors: Mark H Hanna; Grace S Hwang; Michael J Phelan; Thanh-Lan Bui; Joseph C Carmichael; Steven D Mills; Michael J Stamos; Alessio Pigazzi Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2015-12-29 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Marco Milone; Ugo Elmore; Enrico Di Salvo; Paolo Delrio; Luigi Bucci; Giuseppe Paolo Ferulano; Carmine Napolitano; Maria Rachele Angiolini; Umberto Bracale; Marco Clemente; Michele D'ambra; Gaetano Luglio; Mario Musella; Ugo Pace; Riccardo Rosati; Francesco Milone Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2014-11-21 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Ashley S Vergis; Sarah N Steigerwald; Faizal D Bhojani; Paul A Sullivan; Krista M Hardy Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 2.089