Literature DB >> 22234592

Laparoscopic restoration of intestinal continuity (the LapRICon procedure): a safe and feasible technique for restoration of transanal defecation.

Michael Lim1, Mohammed El-Haddad, Kiran Bonam, Dermot Burke.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The restoration of intestinal continuity after open abdominal surgery can be technically challenging. The authors describe their experience with the laparoscopic approach to attempted reversal for patients with an exteriorized intestine.
METHODS: A consecutive series of patients under the care of a single surgeon (D.B.) underwent laparoscopic restoration of intestinal continuity (LapRICon). All the patients first underwent exclusion of intraabdominal sepsis with computed tomography (CT) scanning and then preoperative localization of proximal and distal bowel ends via water-soluble contrast studies. Stomal sites were used for initial access, establishment of capnoperitoneum, and formation of anastomoses extracorporeally. All adhesiolysis and mobilization of bowel ends were performed intracorporeally. Pre-, intra-, and postoperative data were collected for all the patients. Return of intestinal function, overall hospital length of stay, and postoperative complications were collected. Nonparametric statistics were used to analyze the data.
RESULTS: A total of 13 patients (6 women) were followed up for 9 months (interquartile range [IQR], 5-16 months). The median age of the patients was 39 years (IQR, 28-64 years). Nine patients were categorized as American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) class 1. One patient was ASA 2, and the remaining patients were ASA 3. The median colorectal physiologic and operative severity scores for the enumeration of mortality and morbidity (CR-POSSUM) were 0.68 (IQR, 0.68-1.72). The intraoperative blood loss was minimal (median 30 ml; IQR, 20-125 ml). The median operative duration was 240 min (IQR, 180-240 min), and a median of 4 ports (IQR, 3-5 ports) were used. Enterocolonic anastomoses were fashioned in six patients, enterorectal anastomoses in two patients, and enteroentero anastomoses in three patients. A single patient had multiple anastomoses. The median time to return of intestinal function was 5 days (IQR, 3-13 days), and the overall hospital stay was 8 days (IQR, 5-24 days). Four complications (25%) (2 recurrent fistulas, 1 anastomotic leak, and 1 open conversion) occurred in this series of patients.
CONCLUSIONS: The LapRICon procedure is a feasible technique with acceptable morbidity. Several principles and techniques are described to aid the surgeon who wishes to embark on use of such a technique.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22234592     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-011-2132-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  9 in total

Review 1.  Techniques for restoring bowel continuity and function after rectal cancer surgery.

Authors:  Yik-Hong Ho
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-10-21       Impact factor: 5.742

2.  Reversal of Hartmann's procedure through the stomal side: a new even more minimal invasive technique.

Authors:  Jefrey Vermeulen; Wietske Vrijland; Guido H H Mannaerts
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-07-12       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Laparoscopically assisted reversal of Hartmann's procedure.

Authors:  M Khaikin; O Zmora; D Rosin; B Bar-Zakai; Y Goldes; M Shabtai; A Ayalon; Y Munz
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Laparoscopic restoration of intestinal continuity after Hartmann procedure.

Authors:  A M Vernava; G Liebscher; W E Longo
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc       Date:  1995-04

5.  Laparoscopic versus open restoration of intestinal continuity after Hartmann procedure.

Authors:  Isidoro Di Carlo; Adriana Toro; Oriana Pannofino; Elena Patane; Elia Pulvirenti
Journal:  Hepatogastroenterology       Date:  2010 Mar-Apr

Review 6.  Laparoscopic colostomy reversal after a Hartmann procedure: a prospective series, literature review and an argument against laparotomy as the primary approach.

Authors:  Hai Huynh; Daniel C Trottier; Claudia M Soto; Husein Moloo; Eric C Poulin; Joseph Mamazza; Robin P Boushey
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 2.089

7.  Laparoscopic versus open colostomy reversal: a comparative analysis.

Authors:  Michael J Rosen; William S Cobb; Kent W Kercher; B Todd Heniford
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 3.452

8.  Laparoscopic and open reversal of Hartmann's procedure--a comparative retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Haggi Mazeh; Alexander J Greenstein; Kristin Swedish; Scott Q Nguyen; Aaron Lipskar; Kaare J Weber; Edward H Chin; Celia M Divino
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-07-17       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Impact of previous abdominal surgery on colorectal laparoscopy results: a comparative clinical study.

Authors:  Iván Arteaga González; Antonio Martín Malagón; Eudaldo M López-Tomassetti Fernández; Javier Arranz Durán; Hermógenes Díaz Luis; Angel Carrillo Pallares
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 1.719

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.