OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy (HALC) and open colectomy (OC) for patients with slow transit constipation (STC). METHODS: Data of patients with STC who underwent total colectomy from January 2008 to December 2012 were retrospectively reviewed after clinical evaluation and an exclusion of secondary causes. These patients were further divided into the HALC and OC groups. Patients' outcomes, including intraoperative and postoperative data on their recovery and complications were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 68 patients with STC were finally enrolled in the study, including 32 in the HALC group and 36 in the OC group. The baseline characteristics did not significantly differ between the two groups. Compared with the OC group, patients in the HALC group had a shorter length of incision, a longer operative time and less blood loss volume. There was no conversion to OC for patients undergoing HALC and no intraoperative complications in both groups. Furthermore, after operation, patients in HALC group experienced less pain (3.4 ± 0.7 vs 4.8 ± 1.0), earlier first passage of flatus (58.3 ± 6.3 h vs 73.4 ± 13.0 h), shorter length of postoperative hospital stay (8.8 ± 1.2 days vs 11.3 ± 1.7 days) but higher medical cost (RMB 33 979 ± 3 135 vs RMB 29 828 ± 3 216). The overall postoperative complications and the satisfaction in defecation were comparable in the two groups. CONCLUSION: HALC is a safe, minimally invasive and effective surgical alternative for treating STC, which is comparable to OC.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy (HALC) and open colectomy (OC) for patients with slow transit constipation (STC). METHODS: Data of patients with STC who underwent total colectomy from January 2008 to December 2012 were retrospectively reviewed after clinical evaluation and an exclusion of secondary causes. These patients were further divided into the HALC and OC groups. Patients' outcomes, including intraoperative and postoperative data on their recovery and complications were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 68 patients with STC were finally enrolled in the study, including 32 in the HALC group and 36 in the OC group. The baseline characteristics did not significantly differ between the two groups. Compared with the OC group, patients in the HALC group had a shorter length of incision, a longer operative time and less blood loss volume. There was no conversion to OC for patients undergoing HALC and no intraoperative complications in both groups. Furthermore, after operation, patients in HALC group experienced less pain (3.4 ± 0.7 vs 4.8 ± 1.0), earlier first passage of flatus (58.3 ± 6.3 h vs 73.4 ± 13.0 h), shorter length of postoperative hospital stay (8.8 ± 1.2 days vs 11.3 ± 1.7 days) but higher medical cost (RMB 33 979 ± 3 135 vs RMB 29 828 ± 3 216). The overall postoperative complications and the satisfaction in defecation were comparable in the two groups. CONCLUSION:HALC is a safe, minimally invasive and effective surgical alternative for treating STC, which is comparable to OC.