Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy 1/2014

01.01.2014

Laparotomy for small-bowel obstruction: first choice or last resort for adhesiolysis? A laparoscopic approach for small-bowel obstruction reduces 30-day complications

verfasst von: Kristin N. Kelly, James C. Iannuzzi, Aaron S. Rickles, Veerabhadram Garimella, John R. T. Monson, Fergal J. Fleming

Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy | Ausgabe 1/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction

Small-bowel obstruction (SBO) requiring adhesiolysis is a frequent and costly problem in the United States with limited evidence regarding the most effective and safest surgical management. This study examines whether patients treated with laparoscopy for SBO have better 30-day surgical outcomes than their counterparts undergoing open procedures.

Methods

Patients with a diagnosis of adhesive SBO were selected from the ACS National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2005 to 2010. Cases were classified as either laparoscopic or open adhesiolysis groups using Common Procedural Terminology codes. Chi square and Student’s t test were used to compare patient and surgical characteristics with 30-day outcomes, including major complications, incisional complications, and mortality. Factors with p < 0.1 were included in the multivariable logistic regression for each outcome. A propensity score analysis for probability of being a laparoscopic case was used to address residual selection bias. A two-sided p value <0.05 was considered significant.

Results

Of the 9,619 SBO included in the analysis, 14.9 % adhesiolysis procedures were performed laparoscopically. Patients undergoing laparoscopic procedures had shorter mean operative times (77.2 vs. 94.2 min, p < 0.0001) and decreased postoperative length of stay (4.7 vs. 9.9 days, p < 0.0001). After controlling for comorbidities and surgical factors, patients having laparoscopic adhesiolysis were less likely to develop major complications [odds ratio (OR) = 0.7, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.58–0.85, p < 0.0001] and incisional complications (OR = 0.22, 95 % CI 0.15–0.33, p < 0.0001). The 30-day mortality was 1.3 % in the laparoscopic group versus 4.7 % in the open group (OR = 0.55, 95 % CI 0.33–0.85, p = 0.024).

Conclusions

Laparoscopic adhesiolysis requires a specific skill set and may not be appropriate in all patients. Notwithstanding this, the laparoscopic approach demonstrates a benefit in 30-day morbidity and mortality even after controlling for preoperative patient characteristics. Given these findings in more than 9,000 patients and consistent rates of SBO requiring surgical intervention in the United States, increasing the use of laparoscopy could be a feasible way of to decrease costs and improving outcomes in this population.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Sikirica V, Bapat B, Candrilli SD, Davis KL, Wilson M, Johns A (2011) The inpatient burden of abdominal and gynecological adhesiolysis in the US. BMC Surg 11:13PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Sikirica V, Bapat B, Candrilli SD, Davis KL, Wilson M, Johns A (2011) The inpatient burden of abdominal and gynecological adhesiolysis in the US. BMC Surg 11:13PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Scott FI, Osterman MT, Mahmoud NN, Lewis JD (2012) Secular trends in small-bowel obstruction and adhesiolysis in the United States: 1988–2007. Am J Surg 204(3):315–320PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Scott FI, Osterman MT, Mahmoud NN, Lewis JD (2012) Secular trends in small-bowel obstruction and adhesiolysis in the United States: 1988–2007. Am J Surg 204(3):315–320PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Fevang BT, Fevang J, Lie SA, Soreide O, Svanes K, Viste A (2004) Long-term prognosis after operation for adhesive small bowel obstruction. Ann Surg 240(2):193–201PubMedCrossRef Fevang BT, Fevang J, Lie SA, Soreide O, Svanes K, Viste A (2004) Long-term prognosis after operation for adhesive small bowel obstruction. Ann Surg 240(2):193–201PubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Duron JJ, Silva NJ, Du Montcel ST et al (2006) Adhesive postoperative small bowel obstruction: incidence and risk factors of recurrence after surgical treatment—a multicenter prospective study. Ann Surg 244(5):750–757PubMedCrossRef Duron JJ, Silva NJ, Du Montcel ST et al (2006) Adhesive postoperative small bowel obstruction: incidence and risk factors of recurrence after surgical treatment—a multicenter prospective study. Ann Surg 244(5):750–757PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Suter M, Zermatten P, Halkic N, Martinet O, Bettschart V (2000) Laparoscopic management of mechanical small bowel obstruction: Are there predictors of success or failure? Surg Endosc 14(5):478–483PubMedCrossRef Suter M, Zermatten P, Halkic N, Martinet O, Bettschart V (2000) Laparoscopic management of mechanical small bowel obstruction: Are there predictors of success or failure? Surg Endosc 14(5):478–483PubMedCrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Borzellino G, Tasselli S, Zerman G, Pedrazzani C, Manzoni G (2004) Laparoscopic approach to postoperative adhesive obstruction. Surg Endosc 18(4):686–690PubMedCrossRef Borzellino G, Tasselli S, Zerman G, Pedrazzani C, Manzoni G (2004) Laparoscopic approach to postoperative adhesive obstruction. Surg Endosc 18(4):686–690PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Khaikin M, Schneidereit N, Cera S et al (2007) Laparoscopic vs. open surgery for acute adhesive small-bowel obstruction: patients’ outcome and cost-effectiveness. Surg Endosc 21(5):742–746PubMedCrossRef Khaikin M, Schneidereit N, Cera S et al (2007) Laparoscopic vs. open surgery for acute adhesive small-bowel obstruction: patients’ outcome and cost-effectiveness. Surg Endosc 21(5):742–746PubMedCrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Angenete E, Jacobsson A, Gellerstedt M, Haglind E (2012) Effect of laparoscopy on the risk of small-bowel obstruction: a population-based register study. Arch Surg (Chicago, IL 1960) 147(4):359–365CrossRef Angenete E, Jacobsson A, Gellerstedt M, Haglind E (2012) Effect of laparoscopy on the risk of small-bowel obstruction: a population-based register study. Arch Surg (Chicago, IL 1960) 147(4):359–365CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Williams SB, Greenspon J, Young HA, Orkin BA (2005) Small bowel obstruction: conservative vs. surgical management. Dis Colon Rectum 48(6):1140–1146PubMedCrossRef Williams SB, Greenspon J, Young HA, Orkin BA (2005) Small bowel obstruction: conservative vs. surgical management. Dis Colon Rectum 48(6):1140–1146PubMedCrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Franklin ME Jr, Gonzalez JJ Jr, Miter DB, Glass JL, Paulson D (2004) Laparoscopic diagnosis and treatment of intestinal obstruction. Surg Endosc 18(1):26–30PubMedCrossRef Franklin ME Jr, Gonzalez JJ Jr, Miter DB, Glass JL, Paulson D (2004) Laparoscopic diagnosis and treatment of intestinal obstruction. Surg Endosc 18(1):26–30PubMedCrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Kirshtein B, Roy-Shapira A, Lantsberg L, Avinoach E, Mizrahi S (2005) Laparoscopic management of acute small bowel obstruction. Surg Endosc 19(4):464–467PubMedCrossRef Kirshtein B, Roy-Shapira A, Lantsberg L, Avinoach E, Mizrahi S (2005) Laparoscopic management of acute small bowel obstruction. Surg Endosc 19(4):464–467PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Lujan HJ, Oren A, Plasencia G et al (2006) Laparoscopic management as the initial treatment of acute small bowel obstruction. JSLS 10(4):466–472PubMedCentralPubMed Lujan HJ, Oren A, Plasencia G et al (2006) Laparoscopic management as the initial treatment of acute small bowel obstruction. JSLS 10(4):466–472PubMedCentralPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Szomstein S, Lo Menzo E, Simpfendorfer C, Zundel N, Rosenthal RJ (2006) Laparoscopic lysis of adhesions. World J Surg 30(4):535–540PubMedCrossRef Szomstein S, Lo Menzo E, Simpfendorfer C, Zundel N, Rosenthal RJ (2006) Laparoscopic lysis of adhesions. World J Surg 30(4):535–540PubMedCrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Zerey M, Sechrist CW, Kercher KW, Sing RF, Matthews BD, Heniford BT (2007) Laparoscopic management of adhesive small bowel obstruction. Am Surg 73(8):773–778 discussion 778–779PubMed Zerey M, Sechrist CW, Kercher KW, Sing RF, Matthews BD, Heniford BT (2007) Laparoscopic management of adhesive small bowel obstruction. Am Surg 73(8):773–778 discussion 778–779PubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Dindo D, Schafer M, Muller MK, Clavien PA, Hahnloser D (2010) Laparoscopy for small bowel obstruction: the reason for conversion matters. Surg Endosc 24(4):792–797 Dindo D, Schafer M, Muller MK, Clavien PA, Hahnloser D (2010) Laparoscopy for small bowel obstruction: the reason for conversion matters. Surg Endosc 24(4):792–797
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Grafen FC, Neuhaus V, Schob O, Turina M (2010) Management of acute small bowel obstruction from intestinal adhesions: indications for laparoscopic surgery in a community teaching hospital. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg 395(1):57–63CrossRef Grafen FC, Neuhaus V, Schob O, Turina M (2010) Management of acute small bowel obstruction from intestinal adhesions: indications for laparoscopic surgery in a community teaching hospital. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg 395(1):57–63CrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Tierris I, Mavrantonis C, Stratoulias C, Panousis G, Mpetsou A, Kalochristianakis N (2011) Laparoscopy for acute small bowel obstruction: indication or contraindication? Surg Endosc 25(2):531–535PubMedCrossRef Tierris I, Mavrantonis C, Stratoulias C, Panousis G, Mpetsou A, Kalochristianakis N (2011) Laparoscopy for acute small bowel obstruction: indication or contraindication? Surg Endosc 25(2):531–535PubMedCrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat O’Connor DB, Winter DC (2012) The role of laparoscopy in the management of acute small-bowel obstruction: a review of over 2,000 cases. Surg Endosc 26(1):12–17PubMedCrossRef O’Connor DB, Winter DC (2012) The role of laparoscopy in the management of acute small-bowel obstruction: a review of over 2,000 cases. Surg Endosc 26(1):12–17PubMedCrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Cirocchi R, Abraha I, Farinella E, Montedori A, Sciannameo F (2010) Laparoscopic versus open surgery in small bowel obstruction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD007511 Cirocchi R, Abraha I, Farinella E, Montedori A, Sciannameo F (2010) Laparoscopic versus open surgery in small bowel obstruction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. doi:10.​1002/​14651858.​CD007511
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Fleming FJ, Francone TD, Kim MJ, Gunzler D, Messing S, Monson JR (2011) A laparoscopic approach does reduce short-term complications in patients undergoing ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Dis Colon Rectum 54(2):176–182PubMedCrossRef Fleming FJ, Francone TD, Kim MJ, Gunzler D, Messing S, Monson JR (2011) A laparoscopic approach does reduce short-term complications in patients undergoing ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Dis Colon Rectum 54(2):176–182PubMedCrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Hart A, Stegman M (2007) ICD-9-CM Expert. Ingenix, USA Hart A, Stegman M (2007) ICD-9-CM Expert. Ingenix, USA
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Gabbert W, Kachur K, Canter K (2010) Current procedural coding expert 2011. Ingenix, USA Gabbert W, Kachur K, Canter K (2010) Current procedural coding expert 2011. Ingenix, USA
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Wullstein C, Gross E (2003) Laparoscopic compared with conventional treatment of acute adhesive small bowel obstruction. Br J Surg 90(9):1147–1151PubMedCrossRef Wullstein C, Gross E (2003) Laparoscopic compared with conventional treatment of acute adhesive small bowel obstruction. Br J Surg 90(9):1147–1151PubMedCrossRef
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Mancini GJ, Petroski GF, Lin WC, Sporn E, Miedema BW, Thaler K (2008) Nationwide impact of laparoscopic lysis of adhesions in the management of intestinal obstruction in the US. J Am Coll Surg 207(4):520–526PubMedCrossRef Mancini GJ, Petroski GF, Lin WC, Sporn E, Miedema BW, Thaler K (2008) Nationwide impact of laparoscopic lysis of adhesions in the management of intestinal obstruction in the US. J Am Coll Surg 207(4):520–526PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Laparotomy for small-bowel obstruction: first choice or last resort for adhesiolysis? A laparoscopic approach for small-bowel obstruction reduces 30-day complications
verfasst von
Kristin N. Kelly
James C. Iannuzzi
Aaron S. Rickles
Veerabhadram Garimella
John R. T. Monson
Fergal J. Fleming
Publikationsdatum
01.01.2014
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Surgical Endoscopy / Ausgabe 1/2014
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3162-6

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2014

Surgical Endoscopy 1/2014 Zur Ausgabe

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

CME: 2 Punkte

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht, PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske Das Webinar S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“ beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.