Literature DB >> 8831541

Intraoperative laparoscopic complications. Are we getting better?

F Agachan1, J S Joo, E G Weiss, S D Wexner.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess various intraoperative and postoperative complications associated with laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Specifically, the impact of surgical experience and procedure type on complications was analyzed.
METHODS: All patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery were analyzed by age, sex, surgical indications, procedure performed, procedure length, intraoperative and postoperative complications, incidence and causes for conversion, duration of postoperative ileus, and length of hospital stay. Patients were classified for type of procedure and chronologically into four consecutive groups. Procedures were also categorized into four different groups: GI, total abdominal colectomies; GII, segmental resections; GIII, diverting procedures; GIV, others (abdominoperineal resection, Hartmann's creation or closure, anterior resection, and rectopexy).
RESULTS: Between August 1991 and October 1995, 167 patients of a mean age of 49.6 (15-88) years underwent laparoscopic colorectal procedures. All procedures were electively performed. Common indications for surgery included inflammatory disease in 70 (42 percent), neoplasia in 56 (33 percent), functional bowel disorders in 30 (18 percent), and other forms of colorectal disorders in 11 (7 percent) patients. The most significant variable affecting intraoperative laparoscopic complication rate was surgical experience measured as the time interval during which surgery was performed (P = 0.02). Total complication rate decreased from 29 percent during the first period to 11 percent by the second period (P < 0.04) and 7 percent during the third period (P < 0.005). Thus, the learning curve appeared to have required more than 50 cases to achieve. Moreover, even after performance of 94 (1991-1993) procedures in GI and GIV, these procedures were associated with higher complication rates than were those procedures in GII and GIII (P = 0.04).
CONCLUSION: Surgical experience and case selection are the most critical variables by which the surgeon can decrease the intraoperative laparoscopic complication rate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8831541     DOI: 10.1007/bf02053800

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum        ISSN: 0012-3706            Impact factor:   4.585


  20 in total

1.  Converted laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Authors:  P Gervaz; A Pikarsky; M Utech; M Secic; J Efron; B Belin; A Jain; S Wexner
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2001-05-11       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  What is the definition of "conversion" in laparoscopic colorectal surgery?

Authors:  Sherief Shawki; Badma Bashankaev; Paula Denoya; Christina Seo; Eric G Weiss; Steven D Wexner
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-03-06       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Multidimensional analysis of the learning curve for laparoscopic colorectal surgery: lessons from 1,000 cases of laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Authors:  In Ja Park; Gyu-Seog Choi; Kyoung-Hoon Lim; Byung-Mo Kang; Soo-Han Jun
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-12-31       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Influence of learning curve on short-term results after laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer.

Authors:  Masaaki Ito; Masanori Sugito; Akihiro Kobayashi; Yusuke Nishizawa; Yoshiyuki Tsunoda; Norio Saito
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-04-10       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Evaluation of the learning curve in laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer.

Authors:  Hajime Kayano; Junji Okuda; Keitaro Tanaka; Keisaku Kondo; Nobuhiko Tanigawa
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-04-22       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Converted laparoscopic colectomy: what are the consequences?

Authors:  A Belizon; C T Sardinha; M E Sher
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-05-12       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 7.  Robotic versus laparoscopic versus open colorectal surgery: towards defining criteria to the right choice.

Authors:  Matthew Zelhart; Andreas M Kaiser
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-08-15       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Is obesity a high-risk factor for laparoscopic colorectal surgery?

Authors:  A J Pikarsky; Y Saida; T Yamaguchi; S Martinez; W Chen; E G Weiss; J J Nogueras; S D Wexner
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2002-02-06       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Effect of types of resection and manipulation on trocar site contamination after laparoscopic colectomy: An experimental study in rats with intraluminal radiotracer application.

Authors:  Ayfer Kamali Polat; Oktay Yapici; Zafer Malazgirt; Tarik Basoglu
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Multidimensional analysis of the learning curve for laparoscopic resection in rectal cancer.

Authors:  In Ja Park; Gyu-Seog Choi; Kyoung Hoon Lim; Byung Mo Kang; Soo Han Jun
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2008-10-22       Impact factor: 3.452

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.