Douglas M Overbey1,2, Michelle L Cowan1,2, Patrick W Hosokawa3, Brandon C Chapman1, Jon D Vogel4. 1. Department of Surgery, University of Colorado, 12631 E 17th Ave, C302, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA. 2. Department of Surgery, VA Eastern Colorado HealthCare System, Denver, CO, USA. 3. Adult and Child Consortium for Health Outcomes Research and Delivery Science (ACCORDS), Aurora, CO, USA. 4. Department of Surgery, University of Colorado, 12631 E 17th Ave, C302, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA. Jon.Vogel@ucdenver.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP)-based evidence indicates that laparoscopic (LAP) colectomy results in improved outcomes compared to hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) colectomy in the general population. Previous comparative studies demonstrated that the HAL technique offers distinct advantages for obese patients. The aim of this study was to perform comparative analyses of HAL and LAP colectomy and low anterior resection (LAR) in obese patients. METHODS: The ACS-NSQIP public use file and targeted colectomy dataset, 2012-2014, were utilized for patients undergoing colectomy and LAR. Only obese patients (BMI > 30) and laparoscopic or hand-assisted operations were included. Patient, operation, and outcome variables were compared in two separate cohorts: colectomy and LAR. Bivariate analysis compared the approaches, followed by multivariable regression. RESULTS: Of 9610 obese patients included, HAL and LAP colectomy were performed in 3126 and 3793 patients and LAR in 1431 and 1260 patients, respectively. In comparison to LAP colectomy, HAL colectomy patients had increased comorbidities including class 2 and 3 obesity. HAL colectomy was associated with higher overall morbidity (20 vs. 16%, p < 0.001), infectious complications (10.2 vs. 7.7%, p < 0.001), anastomotic leaks (3.0 vs. 2.2%, p = 0.03), and ileus (11 vs. 8%, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis indicated that overall morbidity (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.11-1.44), infectious complications (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.14-1.59), and ileus (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.12-1.57) were each increased in the HAL colectomy cohort but not different for HAL and LAP LAR. CONCLUSIONS: In comparison to LAP colectomy, the HAL technique is used more often in obese patients with an increased operative risk profile. While inherent bias and unmeasured variables limit the analysis, the available data indicate that the HAL technique is associated with increased perioperative morbidity. Alternatively, HAL and LAP LAR are performed in obese patients with a similar risk profile and result in similar postoperative outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Recent American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP)-based evidence indicates that laparoscopic (LAP) colectomy results in improved outcomes compared to hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) colectomy in the general population. Previous comparative studies demonstrated that the HAL technique offers distinct advantages for obesepatients. The aim of this study was to perform comparative analyses of HAL and LAP colectomy and low anterior resection (LAR) in obesepatients. METHODS: The ACS-NSQIP public use file and targeted colectomy dataset, 2012-2014, were utilized for patients undergoing colectomy and LAR. Only obesepatients (BMI > 30) and laparoscopic or hand-assisted operations were included. Patient, operation, and outcome variables were compared in two separate cohorts: colectomy and LAR. Bivariate analysis compared the approaches, followed by multivariable regression. RESULTS: Of 9610 obesepatients included, HAL and LAP colectomy were performed in 3126 and 3793 patients and LAR in 1431 and 1260 patients, respectively. In comparison to LAP colectomy, HAL colectomy patients had increased comorbidities including class 2 and 3 obesity. HAL colectomy was associated with higher overall morbidity (20 vs. 16%, p < 0.001), infectious complications (10.2 vs. 7.7%, p < 0.001), anastomotic leaks (3.0 vs. 2.2%, p = 0.03), and ileus (11 vs. 8%, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis indicated that overall morbidity (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.11-1.44), infectious complications (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.14-1.59), and ileus (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.12-1.57) were each increased in the HAL colectomy cohort but not different for HAL and LAP LAR. CONCLUSIONS: In comparison to LAP colectomy, the HAL technique is used more often in obesepatients with an increased operative risk profile. While inherent bias and unmeasured variables limit the analysis, the available data indicate that the HAL technique is associated with increased perioperative morbidity. Alternatively, HAL and LAP LAR are performed in obesepatients with a similar risk profile and result in similar postoperative outcomes.
Authors: Husein Moloo; Fatima Haggar; Doug Coyle; Brian Hutton; Suleena Duhaime; Joseph Mamazza; Eric C Poulin; Robin P Boushey; Jeremy Grimshaw Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2010-10-06
Authors: Jon D Vogel; Lei Lian; Matthew F Kalady; Luiz Felipe de Campos-Lobato; Patricia C Alves-Ferreira; Feza H Remzi Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2011-02-04 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Robert R Cima; Rajesh Pendlimari; Stefan D Holubar; Jirawat Pattana-Arun; David W Larson; Eric J Dozois; Bruce G Wolff; John H Pemberton Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: E M Targarona; E Gracia; J Garriga; C Martínez-Bru; M Cortés; R Boluda; L Lerma; M Trías Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2001-10-13 Impact factor: 4.584
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: Imran Hassan; Y Nancy You; Robert R Cima; David W Larson; Eric J Dozois; S A Barnes; John H Pemberton Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Andrea Carolina Quiroga-Centeno; Kihara Alejandra Jerez-Torra; Pedro Antonio Martin-Mojica; Sergio Andrés Castañeda-Alfonso; María Emma Castillo-Sánchez; Oscar Fernando Calvo-Corredor; Sergio Alejandro Gómez-Ochoa Journal: World J Surg Date: 2020-05 Impact factor: 3.352