Does nasogastric tube decompression get used less often with laparoscopic and hand-assisted compared with open colectomy?

Hand-assisted versus straight laparoscopy for colorectal surgery - a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) is an alternative to straight laparoscopy (LAP) in colorectal surgery. Many studies have compared the two in terms of efficacy, complications, and outcomes. This meta-analysis aims to uncover if there are any significant differences in conversion rates, operative times, body mass index (BMI), incision lengths, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and length of stay.

METHODS

Comprehensive searches were performed on databases from their respective inceptions to 16 December 2021, with a manual search performed through Scopus. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, and case series involving more than 10 patients were included.

RESULTS

A total of 47 studies were found fitting the inclusion criteria, with 5 RCTs, 41 cohort studies, and 1 case series. Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery was associated with lower conversion rates (odds ratio [OR] 0.41, 95%CI 0.28-0.60, p < 0.00001), shorter operative times (Mean Difference [MD] - 8.32 min, 95%CI - 14.05- - 2.59, p = 0.004), and higher BMI (MD 0.79, 95%CI 0.46-1.13, p < 0.00001), but it was also associated with longer incision lengths (MD 2.19 cm, 95%CI 1.66-2.73 cm, p < 0.00001), and higher postoperative complication rates (OR 1.15, 95%CI 1.06-1.24, p = 0.0004). Length of stay was not different in HALS as compared to Lap (MD 0.16 days, 95%CI - 0.06-0.38 days, p = 0.16, and intraoperative complications were the same between both techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

Hand-assisted laparoscopy is a suitable alternative to straight laparoscopy with benefits and risks. While there are many cohort studies comparing HALS and LAP, more RCTs would be needed for a better quality of evidence.

Risk factors for prolonged postoperative ileus after laparoscopic sphincter-saving total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: an analysis of 428 consecutive patients

BACKGROUND

Prolonged postoperative ileus (PPOI) is a common complication after colorectal resection but data regarding PPOI risk factors after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery is lacking. This study aimed to identify risk factors for PPOI after laparoscopic sphincter-saving total mesorectal excision (TME) for cancer.

METHODS

All patients who underwent a laparoscopic sphincter-saving TME for cancer from 2005 to 2014 were identified from our prospective database. PPOI was defined as abdominal distension, nausea, and/or vomiting, requiring a nasogastric tube insertion, during the postoperative period.

RESULTS

Among 428 consecutive patients, 65 patients (15%) presented with POI. In multivariate analysis, male gender (Odds Ratio (OR) 2.3 [1.1-4.5]; p = 0.026, age >70 years (OR: 2.0 [1.1-4.0]; p = 0.037)], conversion to open approach (OR 4.9 [1.5-15.4]; p = 0.007), and intra-abdominal surgical site infection (OR 3.8 [1.9-7.5]; p < 0.001) were identified as independent risk factor for PPOI. PPOI risk was 5% in patients without any risk factor but raised to 11, 28, and 54% in patients with 1, 2, or ≥3 risk factors, respectively (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

PPOI is observed in 15% of the patients after laparoscopic sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. We identified four independent factors for PPOI in multivariate analysis: male, gender, age >70, conversion to open approach, and intra-abdominal surgical site infection, leading to the construction of a simple and pragmatic predictive score. This score might help the surgeon to assess patient at risk of PPOI.

Postoperative ileus: in search of an international consensus on definition, diagnosis, and treatment

PURPOSE

Postoperative ileus (POI) is a frequent complication after abdominal surgery; nonetheless, it remains poorly defined. Our aim was to achieve an international consensus among leading colorectal surgeons on definition, prevention, and treatment of POI.

METHODS

Thirty-five experts from five continents participated in a three-round Delphi process. Round 1 contained open-ended questions on POI and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Round 2 included closed-ended questions. Round 3 measured agreement on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined when items were rated as agree or strongly agree by at least 70 % of the experts.

RESULTS

Experts reached following consensus: POI is a temporary inhibition (86 %) of gastrointestinal motility after surgical intervention due to non-mechanical causes (89 %) and prevents sufficient oral intake (96 %). Abdominal distension/tenderness are the most relevant clinical signs (71 %). Nasogastric tube placement is not mandatory (78 %) but can be removed without previous clamping (81 %)/gastrointestinal contrast study (100 %). Preventive measures are recommended to decrease the risk of POI (96 %): narcotic sparing analgesia (89 %) and fluid optimization (74 %). Treatment of POI should include stimulation of ambulation (96 %) and stop of opioids (74 %). Total parenteral nutrition is recommended from the 7th day without sufficient oral intake (81 %). There was no consensus on the ranking of POI's symptoms, on the imaging modality of choice for the diagnosis of POI, neither on the difference between POI and PONV.

CONCLUSIONS

This Delphi study achieved consensus on the definition, relevant clinical signs, prevention, treatment, and supportive care of POI. Areas of non-consensus were identified (necessity and modality of radiologic imaging to establish the diagnosis, difference between POI and PONV), giving opportunity for further research.