PURPOSE: To evaluate laparoscopic versus open subtotal colectomy (STC) in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) requiring urgent or emergent operative intervention. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of 90 patients with medically refractory UC who underwent STC with end ileostomy at The Mount Sinai Medical Center from 2002 to 2007. Patients with toxic megacolon were excluded. Univariate analysis was conducted by unpaired Student t-test and chi-square test. Results are presented as mean +/- 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: Ninety patients underwent STC, 29 by laparoscopic and 61 by open approach. In patients undergoing laparoscopic versus open STC, intraoperative blood loss was decreased (130.4 +/- 38.4 vs. 201.4 +/- 43.2 ml, p < 0.05) and operative time prolonged (216.4 +/- 20.2 vs. 169.9 +/- 14.4 min, p < 0.01). In the absence of postoperative complication, hospital length of stay (4.5 +/- 0.7 vs. 6 +/- 1.3 days, p < 0.001) was shorter in laparoscopic versus open group. No mortalities occurred. Overall morbidity, 30-day readmission, and reoperation were equivalent regardless of operative approach. Wound complications were absent in the laparoscopic group compared with 21.4% in the open group (p < 0.01). Follow-up at a mean of 36 months demonstrated no difference in restoration of gastrointestinal continuity. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic STC confers the benefits of improved cosmesis, reduced intraoperative blood loss, negligible wound complications, and shorter hospital stay. Laparoscopy is a feasible and safe alternative to open STC in patients with UC refractory to medical therapy requiring urgent or emergent operation.
PURPOSE: To evaluate laparoscopic versus open subtotal colectomy (STC) in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) requiring urgent or emergent operative intervention. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of 90 patients with medically refractory UC who underwent STC with end ileostomy at The Mount Sinai Medical Center from 2002 to 2007. Patients with toxic megacolon were excluded. Univariate analysis was conducted by unpaired Student t-test and chi-square test. Results are presented as mean +/- 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: Ninety patients underwent STC, 29 by laparoscopic and 61 by open approach. In patients undergoing laparoscopic versus open STC, intraoperative blood loss was decreased (130.4 +/- 38.4 vs. 201.4 +/- 43.2 ml, p < 0.05) and operative time prolonged (216.4 +/- 20.2 vs. 169.9 +/- 14.4 min, p < 0.01). In the absence of postoperative complication, hospital length of stay (4.5 +/- 0.7 vs. 6 +/- 1.3 days, p < 0.001) was shorter in laparoscopic versus open group. No mortalities occurred. Overall morbidity, 30-day readmission, and reoperation were equivalent regardless of operative approach. Wound complications were absent in the laparoscopic group compared with 21.4% in the open group (p < 0.01). Follow-up at a mean of 36 months demonstrated no difference in restoration of gastrointestinal continuity. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic STC confers the benefits of improved cosmesis, reduced intraoperative blood loss, negligible wound complications, and shorter hospital stay. Laparoscopy is a feasible and safe alternative to open STC in patients with UC refractory to medical therapy requiring urgent or emergent operation.
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: Marlin W Causey; Doug Stoddard; Eric K Johnson; Justin A Maykel; Matthew J Martin; David Rivadeneira; Scott R Steele Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2012-09-07 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: G Pellino; D S Keller; G M Sampietro; I Angriman; M Carvello; V Celentano; F Colombo; F Di Candido; S Laureti; G Luglio; G Poggioli; M Rottoli; S Scaringi; G Sciaudone; G Sica; L Sofo; S Leone; S Danese; A Spinelli; G Delaini; F Selvaggi Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2020-03-14 Impact factor: 3.781