Laparoscopic versus open surgical management of small bowel obstruction: an analysis of short-term outcomes

Keys to successful laparoscopic adhesiolysis for adhesive small bowel obstruction: A scoping review

Background

Adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO) is a common acute abdominal complication. Although non-surgical treatment is the primary treatment approach, more and more studies show that surgical treatment can reduce the incidence rate. Laparoscopic adhesiolysis (LA) has many advantages of minimally invasive surgery.But not all patients with ASBO are suitable for LA.

Objective

The aim of this scoping review was to summarize the keys to successful LA by analyzing the extensive literature.

Methods

A literature search was conducted in PubMed for articles on laparoscopic treatment of ASBO published between January 2000 and February 2024. This scoping review followed the framework suggested by Arksey and O'Malley for a scoping review.

Results

By analyzing the included studies we found that LA does have many advantages and can be performed safely. However, the prerequisite is to select patients with simple adhesions whenever possible and to focus on reasonable intraoperative measures. To improve the success rate of LA, we summarized the following characteristics of patients: no contraindications related to pneumoperitoneum, few previous abdominal operations (≤2), no pregnancy, bowel dilatation < 4 cm in diameter, simple adhesions, no diffuse peritonitis, no history of abdominal radiotherapy, <24 h of ASBO, limited previous abdominal surgery (appendix, cholecystectomy), no bowel strangulation ischemia, and bowel necrosis or bowel resection required for other reasons. In addition, we also summarized reasonable intraoperative measures.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic adhesiolysis has many advantages.Specific patients can benefit from LA. This scoping review Summarized the conditions for patient screening and reasonable intraoperative measures with the aim of providing a reference for surgeons, thereby ensuring that more patients benefit from LA.

A systematic review of participant descriptors reported in studies of adhesive small bowel obstruction

AIM

Reporting of participant descriptors in studies of adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO) can help identify characteristics associated with favourable outcomes and allow comparison with other studies and real-world clinical populations. The aim was to identify the pattern of participant descriptors reported in studies assessing interventions for ASBO.

METHOD

This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021281031) and reported in line with the PRISMA checklist. Systematic searches of Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were undertaken to identify studies assessing operative and non-operative interventions for adults with ASBO. Studies were dual screened for inclusion. Descriptors were categorised into conceptual domains by the research team.

RESULTS

Searches identified 2648 studies, of which 73 were included. A total of 156 unique descriptors were identified. On average, studies reported 12 descriptors. The most frequently reported descriptors were sex, age, SBO aetiology, history of abdominal surgery, BMI and ASA classification. The highest number of descriptors in a single study was 34, compared to the lowest number of descriptors which was one. Pathway factors were the least frequently described domain. Overall, 37 descriptors were reported in just one study.

CONCLUSION

There is a lack of consistency in participant descriptors reported in studies of SBO. Furthermore, a significant proportion of the descriptors were used infrequently. This makes it challenging to assess whether study participants are representative of the wider population. Further work is required to develop a Core Descriptor Set to standardise the reporting of patient characteristics and reduce heterogeneity between studies.

Impact of delayed intervention following admission for small bowel obstruction: A contemporary analysis

Background

The optimal timing of surgical intervention for small bowel obstruction (SBO) remains debated.

Methods

All adults admitted for SBO were identified in the 2018-2019 National Inpatient Sample. Patients undergoing small bowel resection or lysis of adhesion after three days were considered part of the Delayed cohort. All others were classified as Early. Multivariable regressions were used to assess independent predictors of delayed surgical intervention as well as associations between delayed management and in-hospital mortality, major adverse events (MAE), perioperative complications, postoperative length of stay (LOS), hospitalization costs and non-home discharge.

Results

Among 28,440 patients who met study criteria, 52.0 % underwent delayed intervention. Black race (AOR 1.19, 95 % CI 1.03-1.36, ref.: White) and Medicare coverage (AOR 1.16, 95 % CI 1.01-1.33, ref.: private payer) were associated with increased odds of delayed surgical management. While delayed intervention was not significantly associated with death (AOR 1.27, 95 % CI 0.97-1.68), it was linked to greater odds of MAE (AOR 1.30, 95 % CI 1.16-1.45) and several perioperative complications. The Delayed cohort also faced an incremental increase in postoperative LOS (+1.29 days, 95 % CI 0.89-1.70) and hospitalization costs (+$11,000, 95 % CI 10,000-12,000). Moreover, delayed intervention was linked to increased odds of non-home discharge (AOR 1.64, 95 % CI 1.47-1.84).

Conclusions

Delay in surgical management following SBO is linked to inferior clinical outcomes and increased resource use. Our findings highlight the need to ensure proper timing of surgery for SBO as well as efforts to standardize these practices across all demographics of patients.

Laparoscopic adhesiolysis versus open adhesiolysis in acute adhesive small bowel obstruction

Introduction

Exploratory laparotomy is still the standard therapy for patients who need surgical intervention for adhesive small bowel obstruction (SBO). However, the use of laparoscopy in the management of adhesive SBO is still controversial. We aimed to detect the short-term outcomes between open and laparoscopic adhesiolysis for SBO.

Patients and Methods

This is a retrospective study of patients with adhesive SBO who underwent either laparoscopic or open surgery from June 2019 to July 2022 at Ain Shams University Hospitals. Intraoperative and early post-operative outcomes were compared in the two groups.

Results

A total of 89 patients with adhesive SBO were included in our study. Fifty-one cases underwent open adhesiolysis and 38 cases underwent laparoscopic adhesiolysis. Laparoscopic adhesiolysis is associated with a remarkable decrease in the operative time (71 min vs. 107 min, P = 0.001) and blood loss (50 ml vs. 120 ml, P = 0.001) in comparison to open adhesiolysis. In addition to that, those who underwent adhesiolysis by laparoscopy had a short hospital stay (2.4 days vs. 3.8 days, P = 0.001), early recovery (time to pass flatus 1.3 days vs. 2.8 days) and less post-operative complications (surgical site infection [SSI] 2.6% vs. 19.6%, P = 0.001). Moreover, open adhesiolysis is associated with a higher rate of early post-operative mortality. In addition to that, the incidence of iatrogenic injury was higher in the open group.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic adhesiolysis is a safe and feasible approach for the management of SBO and has better short-term outcomes, especially if done by skilled surgeons in advanced laparoscopic techniques.

Diagnosis and surgical management strategy for pediatric small bowel obstruction: Experience from a single medical center

Identifying Bowel strangulation and the approach and timing of surgical intervention for pediatric SBO are still uncertain. In this study, 75 consecutive pediatric patients with surgically confirmed SBO were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided into group 1 (n = 48) and group 2 (n = 27) according to the presence of reversible or irreversible bowel ischemia, which was analyzed based on the degree of ischemia at the time of operation. The results demonstrated that the proportion of patients with no prior abdominopelvic surgery was higher, the serum albumin level was lower, and the proportion of patients in which ascites were detected by ultrasonography was higher in group 2 than that in group 1. The serum albumin level was negatively correlated with ultrasonographic findings of the fluid sonolucent area in group 2. There were significant differences in the choice of surgical approach between group 1 and group 2. A symptom duration of >48 h was associated with an increased bowel resection rate. The mean length of hospital stay was shorter in group 1 than that in group 2. In conclusion, immediate surgical intervention should be considered in patients with a symptom duration of >48 h or the presence of free ascites between dilated small bowel loops on ultrasonography. Laparoscopic exploration is recommended as first-line treatment in patients with stable status.

RISK FACTORS FOR REOPERATION, MORBIDITY, AND MORTALITY IN PATIENTS WITH SMALL BOWEL OBSTRUCTION SUBMITTED TO SURGICAL TREATMENT

ABSTRACT - BACKGROUND: Small bowel obstruction (SBO) is a frequent cause of emergency department admissions. AIM: This study aimed to determine risk factors of reoperations, postoperative adverse event, and operative mortality (OM) in patients surgically treated for SBO. METHODS: This is a retrospective study conducted between 2014 and 2017. Exclusion criteria include gastric outlet obstruction, large bowel obstruction, and incomplete clinical record. STATA version 14 was used for statistical analysis, with p-value <0.05 with 95% confidence interval considered statistically significant. RESULTS: A total of 218 patients were included, in which 61.9% were women. Notably, 88.5% of patients had previous abdominal surgery. Intestinal resection was needed in 28.4% of patients. Postoperative adverse event was present in 28.4%, reoperation was needed in 9.2% of cases, and a 90-day surgical mortality was 5.9%. Multivariate analysis determined that intestinal resection, >3 days in intensive care unit (ICU), >7 days with nasogastric tube (NGT), pain after postoperative day 3, POAE, and surgical POAE were the risk factors for reoperations, while age, C-reactive protein, intestinal resection, >3 days in ICU, and >7 days with NGT were the risk factors for POAE. OM was determined by >5 days with NGT and POAE. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative course is determined mainly for patient’s age, preoperative level of C-reactive protein, necessity of intestinal resection, clinical postoperative variables, and the presence of POAE.

Laparoscopic versus open approach for adhesive small bowel obstruction, a systematic review and meta-analysis of short term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO) is one of the most frequent causes of emergency hospital admissions and surgical treatment. Current surgical treatment of ASBO consists of open adhesiolysis. With laparoscopic procedures rising, the question arises if laparoscopy for ASBO is safe and results in better patient outcomes. Although adhesiolysis was among the first surgical procedures to be approached laparoscopically, uncertainty remains about its potential advantages over open surgery. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on the benefits and harms of laparoscopic surgery for ASBO.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted for articles published up to May 2019. Two reviewers screened all articles and did the quality assessment. Consecutively a meta-analysis was performed. To reduce selection bias, only matched studies were used in our primary analyses. All other studies were used in a sensitivity analyses. All the outcomes were measured within the 30th postoperative day. Core outcome parameters were postoperative mortality, iatrogenic bowel perforations, length of postoperative stay [days], severe postoperative complications, and early readmissions. Secondary outcomes were operative time [min], missed iatrogenic bowel perforations, time to flatus [days], and early unplanned reoperations.

RESULTS

In our meta-analysis, 14 studies (participants = 37.007) were included: 1 randomized controlled trial, 2 matched studies, and 11 unmatched studies. Results of our primary analyses show no significant differences in core outcome parameters (postoperative mortality, iatrogenic bowel perforations, length of postoperative stay, severe postoperative complications, early readmissions). In sensitivity analyses, laparoscopic surgery favored open adhesiolysis in postoperative mortality (relative risk [RR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.29-0.45), length of postoperative hospital stay (mean difference [MD], -4.19; 95% CI, -4.43 to -3.95), operative time (MD, -18.19; 95% CI, -20.98 to -15.40), time to flatus (MD, -0.98; 95% CI, -1.28 to -0.68), severe postoperative complications (RR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.46-0.56) and early unplanned reoperations (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.70-0.96).

CONCLUSION

Results of this systematic review indicate that laparoscopic surgery for ASBO is safe and feasible. Laparoscopic surgery is not associated with better or worse postoperative outcomes compared with open adhesiolysis. Future research should focus on the correct selection of those patients who are suitable for laparoscopic approach and may benefit from this approach.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic Review/Meta-analysis, Level III.

Adhesive small bowel obstruction - an update

Small bowel obstruction (SBO) accounts for 12-16% of emergency surgical admissions and 20% of emergency surgical procedures. Even with the advent of laparoscopic surgery, intra-abdominal adhesions remain a significant cause of SBO, accounting for 65% of cases. History and physical examination are essential to identify signs of bowel ischemia as this indicates a need for urgent surgical exploration. Another critical aspect of evaluation includes establishing the underlying cause for obstruction and distinguishing between adhesive and non-adhesive etiologies as adhesive SBO (ASBO) can be managed non-operatively in 70-90% of patients. A patient with a history of abdominopelvic surgery along with one or more cardinal features of obstruction should be suspected to have ASBO until proven otherwise. Triad of severe pain, pain out of proportion to the clinical findings, and presence of an abdominal scar suggest possible closed-loop obstruction. Computed tomography has higher sensitivity and specificity compared to plain films and is recommended by the Bologna guidelines. Correcting fluid and electrolyte imbalance is an initial crucial step to mitigate severe hypovolemia. Patients should proceed with surgery if symptoms of bowel compromise are present, or if symptoms do not resolve or have worsened. Surgery is indicated in patients with ischemia, strangulation, perforation, peritonitis, or failure of non-operative treatment. With advances in minimal access technology and increasing experience, laparoscopic adhesiolysis is recommended. Mechanical adhesion barriers are an effective measure to prevent adhesion formation.

Clinical factors associated with success in applying laparoscopy in the management of small bowel obstruction at a tertiary care center

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive techniques have become standard approaches for many common surgical problems. However, the routine use of laparoscopy in the management of small bowel obstruction (SBO) has yet to be fully standardized. The objective of this study was to determine clinical factors associated with success of laparoscopy in managing SBO.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted by identifying all patients admitted to a large tertiary center with a diagnosis of SBO from 2014 to 2016. The operative cases were stratified by surgical approach: laparoscopy, laparoscopy converted to open, or laparotomy. Univariable analysis compared patient demographics and comorbidities between the laparoscopic and laparoscopic converted to open group. The primary outcome was successful laparoscopic procedure in the management of SBO, defined as resolution of SBO, and no conversion from laparoscopic to open procedures. Student's t test or Pearson's χ² test were used to assess associations between factors and primary outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 227 adult patients admitted with a diagnosis of SBO received operative intervention. There were 40 successful laparoscopic cases (52.6%) and 36 failed laparoscopic cases (47.4%). With the exception of an association between success of laparoscopy and BMI, the results demonstrated no other demographic or clinical differences among the successful versus failed laparoscopic groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopy is effective in treating SBOs due to various etiologies including single band or multiple adhesions, hernias, or masses. Other than BMI, there was no single predictor of success or failure with laparoscopy. Therefore, we conclude that perhaps all patients requiring operative treatment for SBO deserve consideration for a diagnostic laparoscopy.

Population-based study of the impact of small bowel obstruction due to adhesions on short- and medium-term mortality

BACKGROUND

Small bowel obstruction due to adhesions (aSBO) is a common indication for admission to a surgical unit. Despite the prevalence of this condition, the short- and medium-term survival of this patient population has not been well described. The purpose of this study was to measure the short- and medium-term survival of patients admitted to hospital with aSBO.

METHODS

Linked administrative data were used to identify patients admitted to hospital in Ontario, Canada, for aSBO between 2005 and 2011. Patients were divided into two groups: those aged less than 65 years (younger group) and those aged 65 years and older (older group). Thirty-day, 90-day and 1-year mortality rates were estimated. One-year mortality was compared with that in the general population, adjusting for age and sex. The timing of deaths in relation to admission was assessed, as well as the proportion of patients discharged before experiencing short-term mortality.

RESULTS

There were 22 197 patients admitted to hospital for aSBO for the first time in the study interval. Mean age was 64·5 years and 52·2 per cent of the patients were women. Overall, the 30-day, 90-day and 1-year mortality rates for the cohort were 5·7 (95 per cent c.i. 5·4 to 6·0), 8·7 (8·3 to 9·0) and 13·9 (13·4 to 14·3) per cent respectively. For both groups, the 1-year risk of death was significantly greater than that of the age-matched general population. The majority of deaths (62·5 per cent) occurred within 90 days of admission, with 36·4 per cent occurring after discharge from the aSBO admission.

CONCLUSION

Patients admitted with aSBO have a high short-term mortality rate. Increased monitoring of patients in the early period after admission is advisable.

A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery in Patients with COPD

Purpose: This study aims to compare outcomes of laparoscopic surgery to the outcomes of open surgery in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Plethora of studies compares laparoscopic and open surgery in the general population; however, there is a paucity of existing literature examining the optimal surgical techniques in the COPD population. Materials and Methods: A propensity score-matched analysis using the 2012-2015 National Inpatient Sample (NIS) was conducted to match COPD patients undergoing the most common laparoscopic procedures to COPD patients undergoing the same procedures through an open approach. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to assess mortality and complications, and a multivariate linear regression model was used to compare the length of stay and total cost between open and laparoscopic surgery groups in COPD patients. Results: In general, open surgeries in COPD patients had worse outcomes than laparoscopic surgeries. Laparoscopic cholecystectomies were 45% less likely, colectomies were 58% less likely, and diagnostic procedures were 44% less likely to result in mortality than their open counterparts. All surgical cohorts except incisional hernia repairs had higher complication rates with an open approach. Aggregate complication rate reduction among procedures ranged between 29% and 65%. Total costs were higher in all open surgical cohorts except for appendectomies ($3,424-8,455). All open surgeries were associated with a longer length of stay, ranging from an extra day to 3 days, depending on surgery type. Conclusions: Laparoscopic surgery should not be considered a contraindication in patients with COPD. Careful consideration of surgical technique can have significant implications on patient outcomes and hospital costs in the COPD population.

Laparoscopic versus open adhesiolysis for adhesive small bowel obstruction (LASSO): an international, multicentre, randomised, open-label trial

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic adhesiolysis for adhesive small bowel obstruction is being done more frequently, it is not widely accepted due to the lack of supporting evidence of its superiority over an open approach and concerns regarding its benefits. We aimed to investigate whether laparoscopic adhesiolysis was a superior treatment for adhesive small bowel obstruction compared with an open approach in terms of length of postoperative hospital stay and morbidity.

METHODS

In this international, multicentre, parallel, open-label trial, we randomly assigned patients (1:1) aged 18-95 years who had adhesive small bowel obstruction that had not resolved with conservative management to have either open or laparoscopic adhesiolysis. The study was done in five academic university hospitals and three community (central) hospitals in two countries (Finland [n=3 academic university hospitals; n=3 community hospitals] and Italy [n=2 academic university hospitals]). We included only patients with high likelihood of a single adhesive band in the trial; additionally, patients who had an anaesthesiological contraindication, were pregnant, living in institutionalised care, or who had a hospital stay of more than 1 week before the surgical consultation were excluded from the trial. The randomisation sequence was generated using block randomisation, with randomly varied block sizes and stratified according to centre. The primary outcome was postoperative length of hospital stay assessed at time of discharge in the modified intention-to-treat population.

FINDINGS

Between July 18, 2013, and April 9, 2018, 566 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 104 patients were randomly assigned to the open surgery group (n=51) or to the laparoscopy group (n=53). Of these patients, 100 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analyses (49 in the open surgery group; 51 in the laparoscopy group). The postoperative length of hospital stay for open surgery group was on average 1·3 days longer than that in the laparoscopy group (geometric mean 5·5 days [range 2-19] vs 4·2 days [range 1 -20]; ratio of geometric means 1·31 [95% CI 1·06-1·61]; p=0·013). 21 (43%) patients in the open surgery group and 16 (31%) patients in the laparoscopy group had postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo any grade) within 30 days (odds ratio 0·61 [95% CI 0·27-1·38]; p=0·23). One patient died in each group within 30 days.

INTERPRETATION

Laparoscopic adhesiolysis provides quicker recovery in selected patients with adhesive small bowel obstruction than open adhesiolysis.

FUNDING

Vatsatautien Tutkimussäätiö Foundation, Mary and Georg Ehrnrooth's Foundation, Martti I Turunen Foundation, and governmental (Finland) competitive research funds (EVO/VTR/TYH).

Evolving Management Strategies in Patients with Adhesive Small Bowel Obstruction: a Population-Based Analysis

BACKGROUND

In patients with adhesive small bowel obstruction (aSBO), the decision to operate as well as the timing and technique of surgery have significant impacts on clinical outcomes. Trends in the management of aSBO have not been described at the population level and guideline adherence is unknown. We sought to evaluate the secular trends in the management of aSBO in a large North American population.

METHODS

We used administrative data to identify patients admitted to hospital for their first episode of aSBO over 2005-2014. We evaluated temporal trends in admission for aSBO and in management practices using Cochran-Armitage tests. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to assess trends when controlling for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Patients (40,800) were admitted with their first episode of aSBO. The mean age was 68.5 years and 55% of patients were female. The population-based rate of admission for aSBO decreased over the study period, from 39.1 to 38.1 per 100,000 persons per year. There was a significant increase in the proportion of patients who underwent surgery for aSBO (19 to 23%, p < 0.0001). Among those who underwent surgery, there were significant increases in the proportions of patients who underwent laparoscopic procedures (4 to 14%, p < 0.0001) and who underwent surgery within 1 day of admission (51 to 60%, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Between 2005 and 2014, there was a decrease in the population-based rate of aSBO, which may reflect increased utilization of minimally invasive techniques. There were significant trends towards increased operative intervention, with surgery occurring earlier and increasingly using laparoscopic approach.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for adhesional small bowel obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control studies

BACKGROUND

Small bowel obstruction (SBO) due to adhesions is a common acute surgical presentation. Laparoscopic adhesiolysis is being performed more frequently. However, the clear benefits of laparoscopic adhesiolysis (LA) compared with traditional open adhesiolysis (OA) remain uncertain. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of LA versus OA for SBO due to adhesions.

METHODS

A systemic literature review was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. A search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane Databases of all randomised controlled trials (RCT) and case-controlled studies (CCS) that compared LA with OA for SBO. Data were extracted using a standardised form and subsequently analysed.

RESULTS

There were no RCT. Data from 18 CCS on 38,927 patients (LA = 5,729 and OA = 33,389) were analysed. A meta-analysis showed that LA for SBO has decreased overall mortality (LA = 1.6% vs. OA = 4.9%, p < 0.001) and morbidity (LA = 11.2% vs. OA = 30.9%, p < 0.001). Similarly, the incidences of specific complications are significantly lower in the LA group. There are significantly lower reoperation rate (LA = 4.5% vs. OA = 6.5%, p = 0.017), shorter average operating time (LA = 89 min vs. OA = 104 min, p < 0.001) and a shorter length of stay (LOS) (LA = 6.7 days vs. OA = 11.6 days, p < 0.001) in the LA group. In the CCS, there is likely to be a selection bias favouring less complex adhesions in the LA group that may contribute to the better outcomes in this group.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there is a probable selection bias, these results suggest that LA for SBO in selected patients has a reduced mortality, morbidity, reoperation rate, average operating time and LOS compared with OA. LA should be considered in appropriately selected patients with acute SBO due to adhesions.

Safety and Indications of Laparoscopic Surgery for Postoperative Small-bowel Obstruction: A Single-center Study of 121 Patients

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery for the treatment of small-bowel obstruction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study group comprised 121 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery for small-bowel obstruction.

RESULTS

Previous operations were open surgery in 107 patients and laparoscopic surgery in 14. On univariate analysis, 4 risk factors were related to conversion to open surgery: radiotherapy (P=0.0002), previous episode of intestinal obstruction (P=0.0064), bleeding volume of ≥50 mL (P=0.0059), and the presence or absence of previous bowel resection (P=0.0269). On multivariate analysis, only radiotherapy was an independent risk factor for conversion to open surgery (odds ratio, 5.5141; P=0.0091).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery can be safely performed in patients with postoperative small-bowel obstruction and is considered an effective treatment with a low rate of recurrent bowel obstruction.

A simple predictor of post-operative complications after open surgical adhesiolysis for small bowel obstruction

BACKGROUND

Small bowel obstruction is common and often requires surgical management. Simple preoperative models are lacking to predict post-operative complications after surgical management of adhesive small bowel obstruction.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from 15,036 patients who underwent open lysis of adhesions for small bowel obstruction from 2005 to 2013 using the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Predictors of post-operative complications were identified using logistic regression. Predictive models were compared using areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROC).

RESULTS

A three-parameter model was constructed, termed FAS: Functional status, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, and prior Sepsis. FAS predicted post-operative complications with odds ratio (OR) 1.11, 95% CI (1.10, 1.12), P < 0.001 and AUROC of 0.69, 95% CI (0.67, 0.70).

CONCLUSIONS

FAS predicts post-operative complications after open lysis of adhesions using three readily available clinical parameters.

Laparoscopy in small bowel obstruction - current status - review

Introduction

Acute small bowel obstruction (SBO) is an urgent medical condition. Its diagnosis is based mainly on a clinical examination followed by confirmatory simple routine radiological examinations such as plain X-ray of the abdominal cavity or computed tomography (CT). However, a real surgical challenge is not a decision whether to perform a surgery, but a decision when and how to perform it.

Aim

To determine the place of laparoscopy in contemporary management of acute SBO based on the current literature.

Material and methods

A review of the literature based on the Medline database and including mainly the period of 2013–2017 was performed.

Conclusions

With regard to SBO, laparoscopy is a technique showing its advantages resulting from a minimally invasive approach. However, SBO is still a condition where the use of laparoscopy is limited mainly to selected cases such as SBO caused by single adhesions or foreign bodies. A basic limitation of using this technique is advanced and complicated SBO and lack of sufficient technical skills of the surgeon.

A Systematic Review of the Clinical Presentation, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Small Bowel Obstruction

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This study aimed to systematically review small bowel obstruction (SBO), focusing on recent changes in diagnosis/therapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

SBO incidence is about 350,000/annum in the USA. Etiologies include adhesions (65%), hernias (10%), neoplasms (5%), Crohn's disease (5%), and other (15%). Bowel dilatation occurs proximal to obstruction primarily from swallowed air and secondarily from intraluminal fluid accumulation. Dilatation increases mural tension, decreases mucosal perfusion, causes bacterial proliferation, and decreases mural tensile strength that increases bowel perforation risks. Classical clinical tetrad is abdominal pain, nausea and emesis, abdominal distention, and constipation-to-obstipation. Physical exam may reveal restlessness, acute illness, and signs of dehydration and sepsis, including tachycardia, pyrexia, dry mucous membranes, hypotension/orthostasis, abdominal distention, and hypoactive bowel sounds. Severe direct tenderness, involuntary guarding, abdominal rigidity, and rebound tenderness suggest advanced SBO, as do marked leukocytosis, neutrophilia, bandemia, and lactic acidosis. Differential diagnosis includes postoperative ileus, narcotic bowel, colonic pseudo-obstruction, mesenteric ischemia, and large bowel obstruction. Medical resuscitation includes intravenous hydration, correcting electrolyte abnormalities, intravenous antibiotics, nil per os, and nasoenteral suction. Abdominal CT with oral and intravenous gastrografin contrast is highly sensitive and specific in detecting/characterizing SBO. SBO usually resolves with medical therapy but requires surgery, preferentially by laparoscopy, for unremitting total obstruction, bowel perforation, severe ischemia, or clinical deterioration with medical therapy. Overall mortality is 10% but increases to 30% with bowel necrosis/perforation. Key point in SBO is early diagnosis, emphasizing abdominal CT; aggressive medical therapy including rehydration, antibiotics, and nil per os; and surgery for failed medical therapy.

Impact of Race on the Surgical Management of Adhesive Small Bowel Obstruction

BACKGROUND

Small bowel obstruction (SBO) represents roughly 15% of admissions by general surgeons. Management of SBO relies heavily on provider judgment, including decisions on how long to try nonsurgical management and whether to use a laparoscopic or open approach when surgery is needed. Given the subjective nature of these decisions, it is unknown if patient race influences management of SBO.

STUDY DESIGN

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was used to identify patients who underwent adhesiolysis or small bowel resection for adhesive SBO between 2010 and 2015 (n = 13,896). Adjusted logistic regression models incorporating patient comorbidity, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, and emergency status were used to analyze odds of receiving surgery after 5 days from hospital admission (Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma guidelines) and of undergoing an open operation.

RESULTS

Patients who waited more than 5 days for a procedure had greater adjusted odds of postoperative complication (odds ratio [OR] 1.56 95% CI 1.37 to 1.79) compared with those waiting 5 days or less. Similarly, open procedures had higher odds of complication compared with laparoscopic (OR 2.31 95% CI 2.00 to 2.68). Regression analysis demonstrated that black patients were significantly more likely than white patients to wait more than 5 days for surgery (OR 1.31 95% CI [1.13-1.53]) and undergo open surgery (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.36 to 1.79). There was no statistical difference for Hispanics patients waiting more than 5 days (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.31) or receiving open surgery (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.01) compared with white patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical decisions regarding SBO management differ based on patient race. Future studies focusing on the surgical decision-making process and the influence of bias are needed.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Adhesiolysis for Small Bowel Obstruction: A Single-Center Retrospective Case-Control Study

AIM

This study is to investigate the short-term outcomes of small bowel obstruction (SBO) patients undergoing laparoscopic versus open adhesiolysis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 202 patients with SBO were enrolled in this study. The patients underwent either laparoscopic (n=101) or open adhesiolysis (n=101). The primary end point was 30-day overall complications and secondary outcomes included major complications such as superficial and deep wound infections, mortality, postoperative length of stay, and operative time.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference in the demographic parameters between laparoscopic and open adhesiolysis populations. The mean operative time for laparoscopic adhesiolysis was significantly less than open adhesiolysis (70±34.2 vs. 101±50.2, P=0.01). Statistically significant differences in flatus day (3.5±1.2 vs. 4.5±1.8, P=0.035) and postoperative hospital stay (6.4±2.1 vs. 7.2±2.9, P=0.041) were identified in favor of laparoscopic group, whereas the medical expenses for both groups were not different (31012.0±3412.9 vs. 30029.0±3100.9, P>0.05). The overall complications for open and laparoscopic group were 19.8% and 9.9%, respectively (P=0.048). The important factors that led to a significantly lower overall complications rate in laparoscopic group might result from the lower wound (9.9% vs. 2.0%, P=0.017) and infectious (10.9% vs. 3.0%, P=0.027) complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The laparoscopic approach for SBO is feasible because of its fewer complications and hospital stay.

A retrospective study of laparoscopic surgery for small bowel obstruction

Background

Open laparotomy is widely accepted as the standard surgical treatment for small bowel obstruction (SBO). However, laparoscopic surgery has recently become a treatment option. There is no consensus on the appropriate settings for the laparoscopic treatment of SBO. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for SBO.

Patients and methods

From January 2012 to May 2016, 48 consecutive patients underwent surgical treatment for SBO in our department. We retrospectively reviewed these cases and compared the features and the outcomes between laparoscopic and open surgery.

Results

Thirty-four and 14 patients underwent open surgery and laparoscopic surgery, respectively. Four of the laparoscopic cases (28.6%) were converted to open surgery. Laparoscopic surgery tended to be associated with a shorter operative time than open surgery (p = 0.066). The first postoperative oral intake was significantly earlier in patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery (p = 0.044). The duration of hospitalization after surgery and the rates of postoperative complications did not differ to a statistically significant extent. Laparoscopic treatment was accomplished in 7 out of 8 cases (87.5%) with SBO due to band occlusion.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic surgery for SBO is less invasive than open surgery and is equally feasible in selected patients. SBO due to band occlusion may be a preferable indication for laparoscopic surgery. In order to confirm the safety of laparoscopic treatment, and to clarify the appropriate settings for laparoscopic surgery for SBO, it will be necessary to perform further studies in a larger population and with a long follow-up period.

•

Surgical treatment for small bowel obstruction in 48 patients were retrospectively reviewed.

•

Laparoscopic surgery was performed in 14 patients, and 4 cases were converted to open surgery.

•

Laparoscopic surgery is less invasive than open surgery and is equally feasible in selected patients.

•

Band occlusion may be a preferable indication to laparoscopic surgery.

Laparoscopic vs. open surgery for the treatment of iatrogenic colonoscopic perforations: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Iatrogenic colonoscopy perforations (ICP) are a rare but severe complication of diagnostic and therapeutic colonoscopies. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to investigate the operative and post-operative outcomes of laparoscopy vs. open surgery performed for the management of ICP.

METHODS

A literature search was carried out on Medline, EMBASE, and Scopus databases from January 1990 to June 2016. Clinical studies comparing the outcomes of laparoscopic and open surgical procedures for the treatment for ICP were retrieved and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 6 retrospective studies were selected, including 161 patients with ICP who underwent surgery. Laparoscopy was used in 55% of the patients, with a conversion rate of 10%. The meta-analysis shows that the laparoscopic approach was associated with significantly fewer post-operative complications compared to open surgery (18.2% vs. 53.5% respectively; Relative risk, RR: 0.32 [95%CI: 0.19-0.54; p < 0.0001; I² = 0%]) and shorter hospital stay (mean difference -5.35 days [95%CI: -6.94 to -3.76; p < 0.00001; I² = 0%]). No differences between the two surgical approaches were observed for postoperative mortality, need of re-intervention, and operative time.

CONCLUSION

The present study highlights the outcomes of the surgical management of an endoscopic complication that is not yet considered in clinical guidelines. Based on the current available literature, the laparoscopic approach appears to provide better outcomes in terms of postoperative complications and length of hospital stay than open surgery in the case of ICP surgical repair. However, the creation of large prospective registries of patients with ICP would be a step forward in addressing the lack of evidence concerning the surgical treatment of this endoscopic complication.

Will laparoscopic lysis of adhesions become the standard of care? Evaluating trends and outcomes in laparoscopic management of small-bowel obstruction using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Database

Small-bowel obstruction (SBO) is a common disorder and constitutes a significant healthcare burden. Laparoscopic lysis of adhesions (LLOA) for SBO is predicted to decrease complications, shorten hospital stay, and cut healthcare costs compared with the open lysis of adhesions (OLOA); however, large comparison studies are lacking. We evaluated the nationwide adoption of LLOA and compared outcomes with OLOA. We retrospectively analyzed data from 9920 OLOA and 3269 LLOA cases from 2005 to 2013 using the American College of Surgeons prospective National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data set. Annual trends were evaluated using linear regression. Surgery outcomes were compared using two-sample t tests or Mann-Whitney tests. Post-surgical complications were compared using multivariable logistic regression adjusting for comorbidities. The proportion of SBO cases treated by LLOA increased nationwide by 1.6 percent per year (R ² 0.87), from 17.2 % in 2006 to 28.7 % in 2013. Patients undergoing OLOA had longer operations (66 vs 60 min, P < 0.001), longer hospital stay (8.9 vs 4.2 days, P < 0.001), and higher post-surgical complication rates (adjusted odds ratio 2.73 95 % CI 2.36-3.15, P < 0.001) when compared to LLOA. Despite the lack of prospective randomized trials comparing LLOA to OLOA, we found progressive nationwide adoption of LLOA for SBO treatment. Our large retrospective analysis demonstrated clinical benefit and reduced resource utilization for LLOA.

Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery for Acute Adhesive Small-Bowel Obstruction: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The laparoscopic approach has been increasingly used to treat adhesive small-bowel obstruction. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of a laparoscopic versus an open approach for adhesive small-bowel obstruction.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Data were retrospectively collected on patients who had surgery for adhesive small-bowel obstruction at a single academic center between January 2010 and December 2012. Patients with a contraindication for the laparoscopic approach were excluded. A propensity score was used to match patients in the laparoscopic and open surgery groups based on their preoperative parameters.

RESULTS

A total of 25 patients underwent laparoscopic adhesiolysis and 67 patients open adhesiolysis. The open adhesiolysis group had more suspected bowel strangulations and more previous abdominal surgeries than the laparoscopic adhesiolysis group. Severe complication rate (Clavien-Dindo 3 or higher) was 0% in the laparoscopic adhesiolysis group versus 14% in the open adhesiolysis group ( p = 0.052). Twenty-five propensity score-matched patients from the open adhesiolysis group were similar to laparoscopic adhesiolysis group patients with regard to their preoperative parameters. Length of hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic adhesiolysis group compared to the propensity score-matched open adhesiolysis group (6.0 vs 10.0 days, p = 0.037), but no differences were found in severe complications between the laparoscopic adhesiolysis and propensity score-matched open adhesiolysis groups (0% vs 4%, p = 0.31).

CONCLUSION

Patients selected to be operated by the open approach had higher preoperative morbidity than the ones selected for the laparoscopic approach. After matching for this disparity, the laparoscopic approach was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay without differences in complications. The laparoscopic approach may be a preferable approach in selected patients.

Laparoscopy for bowel obstruction--a contradiction? Results of a multi-institutional survey in Germany

PURPOSE

The purpose of the present study was to investigate on the acceptance and frequency of laparoscopic surgery for the management of acute and chronic bowel obstruction in a general patient population in German hospitals.

METHODS

To receive an authoritative opinion on laparoscopic treatment of bowel obstruction in Germany, a cross-sectional online study was conducted. We designed an online-based survey, supported by the German College of Surgeons (Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgen, BDC) to get multi-institutional-based data from various level providers of patient care.

RESULTS

Between January and February 2014, we received completed questionnaires from 235 individuals (16.7 %). The participating surgeons were a representative sample of German hospitals with regard to hospital size, level of center size, and localization. A total of 74.9 % (n = 176) of all responders stated to use laparoscopy as the initial step of exploration in expected bowel obstruction. This procedure was highly statistically associated with the frequency of overall laparoscopic interventions and laparoscopic experience. The overall conversion rate was reported to be 29.4 %.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey, investigating on the use of laparoscopic exploration or interventions in bowel obstruction, was able to show that by now, a majority of the responding surgeons accept laparoscopy as an initial step for exploration of the abdomen in the case of bowel obstruction. Laparoscopy was considered to be at least comparable to open surgery in an emergency setting. Furthermore, data analysis demonstrated generally accepted advantages and disadvantages of the laparoscopic approach. Indications for or against laparoscopy are made after careful consideration in each individual case.

Laparoscopic versus open surgical management of small bowel obstruction: an analysis of clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Laparotomy is the standard surgical approach for treatment of small bowel obstruction (SBO). Laparoscopic management could be beneficial in terms of less complications and shorter hospital stay. As the minimal invasive approach is gaining more acceptances in the treatment of SBO, there is an increased need of studies to analyze outcomes. The aim of the present study was to compare the short-term clinical outcomes of laparoscopy versus laparotomy in the surgical management of non-bariatric, non-malignant SBO.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients treated for SBO during 2010-2015 was made by a comprehensive search of medical records. A matched-pair review was performed on patients managed surgically for non-bariatric, non-malignant SBO at Danderyd University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. Completed laparoscopic surgeries were matched against patients treated with open surgery.

RESULTS

Laparoscopy for SBO was initiated in 71 patients. Conversion to open surgery was performed in 42 %. Results from the matched-pair analysis showed that post-operative length of stay was reduced by 60 % (P < 0.001) in the laparoscopic cohort. Additionally, less major complications were reported and duration of surgery was reduced by 50 % (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic management is a safe and feasible alternative to laparotomy. Hospital length of stay was significantly shorter and morbidity rate acceptable.

Small bowel obstruction: A practical step-by-step evidence-based approach to evaluation, decision making, and management

The initial goal of evaluating a patient with SBO is to immediately identify strangulation and need for urgent operative intervention, concurrent with rapid resuscitation. This relies on a combination of traditional clinical signs and CT findings. In patients without signs of strangulation, a protocol for administration of Gastrografin immediately in the emergency department efficiently sorts patients into those who will resolve their obstructions and those who will fail nonoperative management.Furthermore, because of the unique ability of Gastrografin to draw water into the bowel lumen, it expedites resolution of partial obstructions, shortening time to removal of nasogastric tube liberalization of diet, and discharge from the hospital. Implementation of such a protocol is a complex, multidisciplinary, and time-consuming endeavor. As such, we cannot over emphasize the importance of clear, open communication with everyone involved.If surgical management is warranted, we encourage an initial laparoscopic approach with open access. Even if this results in immediate conversion to laparotomy after assessment of the intra-abdominal status, we encourage this approach with a goal of 30% conversion rate or higher. This will attest that patients will have been given the highest likelihood of a successful laparoscopic LOA.

Single-Incision Laparoscopic Surgery for Undiagnosed Small Bowel Obstruction in a Patient without a History of Abdominal Surgery

We herein report a 66-year-old female patient who developed an undiagnosed small bowel obstruction without a history of prior abdominal surgery and was successfully treated by single-incision laparoscopic surgery. A small bowel obstruction with unknown cause typically requires some sort of surgical treatment in parallel with a definitive diagnosis. Although open abdominal surgery has been generally performed for the treatment of small bowel obstructions, laparoscopic surgery for small bowel obstructions has been increasing in popularity due to its less invasiveness, including fewer postoperative complications and a shorter hospital stay. As a much less invasive therapeutic strategy, we have performed single-incision laparoscopic surgery for the treatment of an undiagnosed small bowel obstruction. We were able to make a definitive diagnosis after sufficient intra-abdominal inspection and to perform enterotomy through a small umbilical incision. Single-incision laparoscopic surgery appears to be comparable to conventional laparoscopic surgery and provides improved cosmesis, although it is an optional strategy only applicable to selected patients.

Laparoscopic versus open surgical management of adhesive small bowel obstruction: a comparison of outcomes

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic management of adhesive small bowel obstruction (SBO) has become an established technique within the domain of acute care surgery. As minimally invasive management of SBO becomes more widely accepted, there is increased need for reporting of outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To compare outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for adhesive SBO.

METHODS

Patients undergoing surgery for adhesive SBO at our institution between 2005 and 2013 were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was overall complication rate, while secondary outcomes included operative time, gastrointestinal (GI) function, and postoperative length of stay (LOS). Univariable analysis compared laparoscopic (including conversions) and open groups with regard to patient baseline and perioperative characteristics as well as outcomes of interest. Multivariable analysis was performed comparing the endpoint of overall complications between groups. Sensitivity analysis excluding patients who underwent bowel resection was performed to assess effect on outcomes. Factors associated with laparoscopic success, as well as impact of conversion to open on postoperative outcomes, are reported.

RESULTS

A cohort of 269 patients with adhesive SBO was identified: 186 patients (69.1%) underwent open surgery, 83 (30.9%) were managed laparoscopically. Within the laparoscopy group, 32 (38.6%) underwent conversion to open. Operative time was similar between groups (P = 0.506), while laparoscopy was associated with quicker recovery of GI function indicated by removal of nasogastric tube (P = 0.031) and passage of flatus (P = 0.005). Postoperative LOS was shorter (5 vs. 7 days, P = 0.031) with laparoscopy. The overall complication rate was significantly lower in the laparoscopic group (27.7 vs. 43.6%, P = 0.014), with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) for overall complications of 0.37 (P = 0.002). Following exclusion of bowel resections, secondary outcomes continued to favor laparoscopy, while reduction in overall complications trended toward significance, OR 0.47 (P = 0.050).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgical management of adhesive SBO was associated quicker GI recovery, shorter LOS, and reduced overall complications compared to open surgery.