Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 11/2008

01.11.2008 | ssat quickshot presentation

Laparoscopic-assisted vs. Open Colectomy for Cancer: Comparison of Short-term Outcomes from 121 Hospitals

verfasst von: Karl Y. Bilimoria, David J. Bentrem, Ryan P. Merkow, Heidi Nelson, Edward Wang, Clifford Y. Ko, Nathaniel J. Soper

Erschienen in: Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery | Ausgabe 11/2008

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

Overall postoperative morbidity and mortality after laparoscopic-assisted colectomy (LAC) and open colectomy (OC) have been shown to be generally comparable; however, differences in the occurrence of specific complications are unknown. The objective of this study was to determine whether certain complications occurred more frequently after LAC vs. OC for colon cancer.

Methods

Using the American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Project’s (ACS-NSQIP) participant-use file, patients were identified who underwent colectomy for cancer at 121 participating hospitals in 2005–2006. Multiple logistic regression models including propensity scores were developed to assess the risk-adjusted association between surgical approach (LAC vs. OC) and 30-day outcomes. Patients were excluded if they underwent emergent procedures, were ASA class 5, or had metastatic disease.

Results

Of the 3,059 patients who underwent elective colectomy for cancer, 837 (27.4%) underwent LAC and 2,222 (72.6%) underwent OC. There were no significant differences in age, comorbidities, ASA class, or body mass index (BMI) between patients undergoing LAC vs. OC. Patients undergoing LAC had a lower likelihood of developing any adverse event compared to OC (14.6% vs. 21.7%; OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.51–0.81, P < 0.0001), specifically surgical site infections, urinary tract infections, and pneumonias. Mean length of stay was significantly shorter after LAC vs. OC (6.2 vs. 8.7 days, P < 0.0001). There were no differences between LAC and OC in the reoperation rate (5.5% vs. 5.8%, P = 0.79) or 30-day mortality (1.4% vs. 1.8%, P = 0.53).

Conclusions

Laparoscopic-assisted colectomy was associated with lower morbidity compared to OC in select patients, specifically for infectious complications.
Literatur
1.
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Prystowsky JB, Bordage G, Feinglass JM. Patient outcomes for segmental colon resection according to surgeon’s training, certification, and experience. Surgery. 2002;132(4):663–670. Discussion 670–672. doi:10.1067/msy.2002.127550.PubMedCrossRef Prystowsky JB, Bordage G, Feinglass JM. Patient outcomes for segmental colon resection according to surgeon’s training, certification, and experience. Surgery. 2002;132(4):663–670. Discussion 670–672. doi:10.​1067/​msy.​2002.​127550.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Cooperman AM, Katz V, Zimmon D, Botero G. Laparoscopic colon resection: a case report. J Laparoendosc Surg. 1991;1(4):221–224.PubMed Cooperman AM, Katz V, Zimmon D, Botero G. Laparoscopic colon resection: a case report. J Laparoendosc Surg. 1991;1(4):221–224.PubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Jacobs M, Verdeja JC, Goldstein HS. Minimally invasive colon resection (laparoscopic colectomy). Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1991;1(3):144–150.PubMed Jacobs M, Verdeja JC, Goldstein HS. Minimally invasive colon resection (laparoscopic colectomy). Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1991;1(3):144–150.PubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H et al. Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;365(9472):1718–1726. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66545-2.PubMedCrossRef Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H et al. Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;365(9472):1718–1726. doi:10.​1016/​S0140-6736(05)66545-2.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Milsom JW, Bohm B, Hammerhofer KA et al. A prospective, randomized trial comparing laparoscopic versus conventional techniques in colorectal cancer surgery: a preliminary report. J Am Coll Surg. 1998;187(1):46–54. Discussion 54–55. doi:10.1016/S1072-7515(98)00132-X.PubMedCrossRef Milsom JW, Bohm B, Hammerhofer KA et al. A prospective, randomized trial comparing laparoscopic versus conventional techniques in colorectal cancer surgery: a preliminary report. J Am Coll Surg. 1998;187(1):46–54. Discussion 54–55. doi:10.​1016/​S1072-7515(98)00132-X.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Curet MJ, Putrakul K, Pitcher DE et al. Laparoscopically assisted colon resection for colon carcinoma: perioperative results and long-term outcome. Surg Endosc. 2000;14(11):1062–1066. doi:10.1007/s004640000092.PubMedCrossRef Curet MJ, Putrakul K, Pitcher DE et al. Laparoscopically assisted colon resection for colon carcinoma: perioperative results and long-term outcome. Surg Endosc. 2000;14(11):1062–1066. doi:10.​1007/​s004640000092.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat CPT 2006. Current Procedural Terminology. Chicago: American Medical Association, 2005. CPT 2006. Current Procedural Terminology. Chicago: American Medical Association, 2005.
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Hosmer J, Lemeshow S. Applied Logistic Regression. New York: Wiley, 1999. Hosmer J, Lemeshow S. Applied Logistic Regression. New York: Wiley, 1999.
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Department of Health and Human Services. The International Classification of Diseases. 9th revised. clinical modification: ICD-9-CM. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1998. Department of Health and Human Services. The International Classification of Diseases. 9th revised. clinical modification: ICD-9-CM. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1998.
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Steele SR, Brown TA, Rush RM, Martin MJ. Laparoscopic vs open colectomy for colon cancer: results from a large nationwide population-based analysis. J Gastrointest Surg 2007;12:583–591.PubMedCrossRef Steele SR, Brown TA, Rush RM, Martin MJ. Laparoscopic vs open colectomy for colon cancer: results from a large nationwide population-based analysis. J Gastrointest Surg 2007;12:583–591.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Bilimoria K, Bentrem D, Nelson H, et al. Laparoscopic-Assisted Colectomy for Cancer: Utilization and Outcomes in the United States. Arch Surg. 2008; In press. Bilimoria K, Bentrem D, Nelson H, et al. Laparoscopic-Assisted Colectomy for Cancer: Utilization and Outcomes in the United States. Arch Surg. 2008; In press.
Metadaten
Titel
Laparoscopic-assisted vs. Open Colectomy for Cancer: Comparison of Short-term Outcomes from 121 Hospitals
verfasst von
Karl Y. Bilimoria
David J. Bentrem
Ryan P. Merkow
Heidi Nelson
Edward Wang
Clifford Y. Ko
Nathaniel J. Soper
Publikationsdatum
01.11.2008
Verlag
Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery / Ausgabe 11/2008
Print ISSN: 1091-255X
Elektronische ISSN: 1873-4626
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-008-0568-x

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 11/2008

Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 11/2008 Zur Ausgabe

Update Chirurgie

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

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

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“

Radiusfraktur BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Webinar 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“

Appendizitis BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

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.