Longterm complications of hand-assisted versus laparoscopic 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.

High Rates of Incisional Hernia After Laparoscopic Right Colectomy With Midline Extraction Site

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery aims at reducing wound complications and improving cosmetics, among other advantages. High rates of postoperative ventral hernia (POVH) are observed after laparoscopic-assisted colectomies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a 2011 to 2016 retrospective study of all patients at Rabin Medical Center, we examined POVH prevalence after right hemicolectomy for neoplasia and correlation to specimen extraction site. We also compared laparoscopic-assisted colectomy to hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy. Included were patients who had postoperative abdominal computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging scan as part of their routine oncological follow-up to 6 months postsurgery. Patients were excluded for conversion to laparotomy, and prior abdominal surgeries after right colectomy and before follow-up computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging scan. Demographic and surgical data were collected from patient electronic records, and scans reviewed for POVH by a designated radiologist.

RESULTS

Of 370 patients, 138 (mean age 70.09 y, 58 males) were included: 54 (39.1%) were diagnosed with POVH, 42/72 (58.3%) at midline extraction site, and 12/66 (18.8%) at off-midline extraction sites (P<0.0001). Surgical site infections and patients positive for tumor metastasis were associated with higher POVH rates. Most (74%) POVHs were identified within 18 months postsurgery (P<0.0001). Body mass index, age, sex, diabetes mellitus, smoking, tumor size, lymph nodes positive for metastasis, and hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy were not associated with POVH prevalence.

CONCLUSION

High rates of radiologically diagnosed POVH were found after laparoscopic-assisted colectomy, with association to midline extraction site, surgical site infections, and positive tumor distant metastasis.

Prophylaxis of Wound Infections-antibiotics in Renal Donation (POWAR): A UK Multicentre Double Blind Placebo Controlled Randomised Trial

BACKGROUND

Postoperative infection after hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (HALDN) confers significant morbidity to a healthy patient group. Current UK guidelines cite a lack of evidence for routine antibiotic prophylaxis. This trial assessed if a single preoperative antibiotic dose could reduce post HALDN infections.

METHODS

Eligible donors were randomly and blindly allocated to preoperative single-dose intravenous co-amoxiclav or saline. The primary composite endpoint was clinical evidence of any postoperative infection at 30 days, including surgical site infection (SSI), urinary tract infection (UTI), and lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI).

FINDINGS

In all, 293 participants underwent HALDN (148 antibiotic arm and 145 placebo arm). Among them, 99% (291/293) completed follow-up. The total infection rate was 40.7% (59/145) in the placebo group and 23% (34 of 148) in the antibiotic group (P = 0.001). Superficial SSIs were 20.7% (30/145 patients) in the placebo group versus 10.1% (15/148 patients) in the antibiotic group (P = 0.012). LRTIs were 9% (13/145) in the placebo group and 3.4% (5/148) in the antibiotic group (P = 0.046). UTIs were 4.1% (6/145) in the placebo group and 3.4% (5/148) in the antibiotic group (P = 0.72).Antibiotic prophylaxis conferred a 17.7% (95% confidence interval 7.2%-28.1%), absolute risk reduction in developing postoperative infection, with 6 donors requiring treatment to prevent 1 infection.

INTERPRETATION

Single-dose preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis dramatically reduces post-HALDN infection rates, mainly impacting SSIs and LRTIs.

Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches to Colon Cancer

Colon cancer remains the most common abdominal visceral malignancy affecting both men and women in America. Open colectomy has been the standard of care for colon cancer patients the past 100 years; although highly effective, the major trauma associated with it has a significant morbidity rate and represents a large operation for patients to recover from. Minimally invasive colon surgery was developed as a new and alternative option, and surgeons aim to continue to make it simpler, more reproducible, and easier to teach and learn. We describe herein the current state of minimally invasive colorectal surgery for colon cancer and compare it with open surgery to offer insights to future directions.

Outcomes of open, laparoscopic, and hand-assisted laparoscopic surgeries in elderly patients with right colon cancers: A case-control study

An increasing proportion of patients aged more than 70 years old are suffering from colorectal cancers. This study aimed to compare the short- and long-terms outcomes between open surgery (OS) or conventional laparoscopic surgery (LS) and hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) in treatment of these elderly patients with right colon cancers.We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent right colon resections for cancers in our institution between June, 2009 and December, 2014. Short- and long-terms outcomes including surgical endpoints, postsurgical recovery data, postoperative morbidity and mortality, overall survival and disease-free survival were compared among OS, LS, and HALS groups. All data were analyzed by SPSS 22.0.Finally, 69 consecutive patients (OS = 26, LS = 24, HALS = 19) with right colon cancers were included in the analysis. Compared with OS, HALS was associated with less time to first anus exhaust (P = .013), first liquid diet (P = .045), and first soft diet (P = .036). Meanwhile, there were significant less operative time (P = .0027), blood loss (P < .001), and less time to first liquid diet (P = .009) in HALS, compared with LS. In regards to long-term outcomes, there were no significant differences in overall survival and disease-free survival among the 3 groups.Compared with OS or LS, HALS may be more favorable in the treatment of elderly right colon cancers with decreased surgical time and postoperative recovery, and comparable cancer-specific survivals.

Advances in Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery has now become widely adopted for the treatment of colorectal neoplasia, with steady increases in utilization over the past 15 years. Common minimally invasive techniques include multiport laparoscopy, single-incision laparoscopy, and hand-assisted laparoscopy, with the choice of technique depending on several patient and surgeon factors. Laparoscopic colorectal surgery involves a robust learning curve, and fellowship training often lays the foundation for a high-volume laparoscopic practice. This article provides a summary of the various techniques for laparoscopic colorectal surgery, including operative steps, the approach to difficult patients, and the learning curve for proficiency.

Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Versus Standard Laparoscopic Colectomy: Are Outcomes and Operative Time Different?

BACKGROUND

HAL colectomy is a technique perceived to provide the benefits of laparoscopic surgery while improving tactile feedback and operative time. Published data are largely limited to small, single-institution studies.

METHODS

The 2012-2013 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Participant Data Use File was queried for patients undergoing elective SL or HAL colectomy. Patients underwent 1:1 propensity matching and had outcomes compared. An additional subgroup analysis was performed for patients undergoing segmental resections only.

RESULTS

13,949 patients were identified, of whom 6084 (43.6 %) underwent HAL colectomy. Patients undergoing HAL versus SL colectomy had higher rates of postoperative ileus (8.7 vs. 6.3 %, p < 0.001), wound complication (8.8 vs. 6.8 %, p = 0.006), and 30-day readmission (7.5 vs. 6.0 %, p = 0.002), without any differences in operative time (156 vs. 157 min, p = 0.713). Amongst segmental colectomies, HAL remained associated with higher rates of wound complications (8.6 vs. 6.5 %, p = 0.016), postoperative ileus (8.9 vs. 6.3 %, p < 0.001), and 30-day readmission (7.1 vs. 5.9 %, p = 0.041) with no difference in operative time between HAL and SL (145 vs. 145 min, p = 0.334).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of HAL colectomy is associated with increased risk of wound complications, postoperative ileus, and readmissions. Importantly, this technique is not associated with any decrease in operative time.

Minimally invasive surgery of rectal cancer: current evidence and options

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) of colorectal cancer has become more popular in the past two decades. Laparoscopic colectomy has been accepted as an alternative standard approach in colon cancer, with comparable oncologic outcomes and several better short-term outcomes compared to open surgery. Unlike the treatment for colon cancer, however, the minimally invasive approach in rectal cancer has not been established. In this article, we summarize the current status of MIS for rectal cancer and explore the various technical options.

Safety and Efficacy of Sodium Hyaluronate Gel and Chitosan in Preventing Postoperative Peristomal Adhesions After Defunctioning Enterostomy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trials

Peristomal adhesions complicate closure of defunctioning enterostomy. The efficacy and safety of sodium hyaluronate gel and chitosan in preventing postoperative adhesion have not been extensively studied. This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of sodium hyaluronate gel and chitosan in the prevention of postoperative peristomal adhesions.This was a prospective randomized controlled study. One hundred and fourteen patients undergoing defunctioning enterostomy were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned to receive sodium hyaluronate gel (SHG group) or chitosan (CH group) or no antiadhesion treatment (CON group) during defunctioning enterostomy. The safety outcomes included toxicities, stoma-related complications, and short-term and long-term postoperative complications. Eighty-seven (76.3%) of the 114 patients received closure of enterostomy, during which occurrence and severity of intra-abdominal adhesions were visually assessed by a blinded assessor.Incidence of adhesion appears to be lower in patients received sodium hyaluronate gel or chitosan but differences did not reach a significant level (SHG group vs CH group vs CON group: 62.1% vs 62.1% vs 82.8%, P = 0.15). Compared with the CON group, severity of postoperative adhesion was significantly decreased in the SHG and CH group (SHG group vs CH group vs CON group: 31.0% vs 27.6% vs 62.1%; P = 0.01). There was no significant difference in the occurrence of postoperative complications and other safety outcomes among the 3 groups.Sodium hyaluronate gel or chitosan smeared around the limbs of a defunctioning enterostomy was safe and effective in the prevention of postoperative peristomal adhesions.

Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Approach in Colon Surgery

BACKGROUND

This study sought to compare outcomes of patients who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) colectomy with open and laparoscopic colectomy (LP).

STUDY DESIGN

The NSQIP databases were used to examine the clinical data of patients who underwent elective colectomy during 2012-2013. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to compare the three surgical approaches.

RESULTS

We sampled a total of 21,090 patients who underwent colectomy. Of these, 7480 (35.5 %) had open colectomy (OC), 8751 (41.5 %) had a laparoscopic colectomy, 2860 (13.6 %) had a HAL colectomy, and 1999 (9.5 %) had an open procedure converted from LC or HAL. Multivariate regression analysis revealed HAL colectomy had a similar mortality (AOR 0.53, P = 0.07) and a lower morbidity (AOR 0.37, P < 0.01) compared to OC. LC had lower mortality (AOR 0.58, P = 0.02) and morbidity (AOR 0.43, P < 0.01) compared to OC. Mortality of patients who underwent HAL was not significantly different from LC (AOR 0.90, P = 0.79); however, morbidity of such patients was significantly higher than for patients who underwent LC (AOR 1.29, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

HAL colectomy is a safe approach with significant advantages compared to open colectomy. Although the morbidity of patients who underwent HAL is higher than patients who underwent LC, the morbidity rate is still lower than OC.

Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Approach in Colon Surgery

BACKGROUND

This study sought to compare outcomes of patients who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) colectomy with open and laparoscopic colectomy (LP).

STUDY DESIGN

The NSQIP databases were used to examine the clinical data of patients who underwent elective colectomy during 2012-2013. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to compare the three surgical approaches.

RESULTS

We sampled a total of 21,090 patients who underwent colectomy. Of these, 7480 (35.5 %) had open colectomy (OC), 8751 (41.5 %) had a laparoscopic colectomy, 2860 (13.6 %) had a HAL colectomy, and 1999 (9.5 %) had an open procedure converted from LC or HAL. Multivariate regression analysis revealed HAL colectomy had a similar mortality (AOR 0.53, P = 0.07) and a lower morbidity (AOR 0.37, P < 0.01) compared to OC. LC had lower mortality (AOR 0.58, P = 0.02) and morbidity (AOR 0.43, P < 0.01) compared to OC. Mortality of patients who underwent HAL was not significantly different from LC (AOR 0.90, P = 0.79); however, morbidity of such patients was significantly higher than for patients who underwent LC (AOR 1.29, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

HAL colectomy is a safe approach with significant advantages compared to open colectomy. Although the morbidity of patients who underwent HAL is higher than patients who underwent LC, the morbidity rate is still lower than OC.

Endowrist versus wrist: a case-controlled study comparing robotic versus hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) remains a technically challenging procedure. This study aims to compare the surgical outcomes of the robotic-assisted laparoscopic (RAL) versus hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) techniques in performing TME for patients with rectal cancers.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients who underwent RAL TME for rectal cancers was performed. These cases were matched for age, sex, and stage of malignancy with patients who underwent HAL TME. Data collected included age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists scores, comorbid conditions, types of surgical resections and operative times, perioperative complications, length of hospital stays, and histopathologic outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

From August 2008 to August 2011, 19 patients, with a median age of 62 (range, 47 to 92) years underwent RAL TME. Eight (42.1%) patients received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The median docking and operative times were 10 (range, 3 to 34) and 390 (range, 289 to 771) minutes, respectively. There was 1 (5.3%) conversion to open surgery. The grade of mesorectal excision was histopathologically reported as complete in all 19 cases. Positive circumferential margin was reported in 1 (5.3%) patient.Comparing the 2 groups, more patients in the RAL group received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (8 vs. 3; P=0.048). The operative times were longer in the RAL group (390 vs. 225 min; P<0.001). A higher proportion of patients in the HAL group required conversion to open surgery (5 vs. 1; P=0.180) and developed perioperative morbidities (3 vs. 7; P=0.269). The median length of hospitalization was comparable between both groups (RAL: 7 vs. HAL: 6 d; P=0.476).The procedural cost was significantly higher in the RAL group (US$12,460 vs. US$8560; P<0.001), whereas the nonprocedural cost remained comparable between the 2 groups (RAL: US$4470 vs. HAL: US$4500; P=0.729).

CONCLUSIONS

RAL TME is associated with lower conversion and morbidity rates compared with HAL TME. The longer operating times and higher procedural costs are current limitations to its widespread adoption.

Multi-layered intra-abdominal adhesion prophylaxis following laparoscopic colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Small bowel obstruction secondary to intra-abdominal adhesions is a frequent postoperative complication. Less invasive surgery carries a lower risk of postoperative adhesions, but adhesions may still occur after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. We present here some of our methods of adhesion prophylaxis for laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

METHODS

The 167 patients who underwent laparoscopic colorectal surgery at our center from 2007 to 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. To prevent postoperative intra-abdominal adhesions, anti-adhesion barriers were placed using the half-overlap method. The rate of postoperative small bowel obstruction was compared among three groups: patients who received no adhesion prophylaxis (Group NP), patients who received single-layered adhesion prophylaxis adjacent to the incision (Group SP), and patients who received three layers of adhesion prophylaxis at different depths (Group MLP).

RESULTS

The rate of postoperative ileus was significantly different among the three groups, at 9.7 % (6/62) in Group NP, 5.0 % (1/19) in Group SP, and 0 % (0/86) in Group MLP).

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective analysis found that placement of multi-layered anti-adhesion barriers using the half-overlap method provided the most effective prophylaxis. Prospective clinical trials are needed to further evaluate these methods of anti-adhesion prophylaxis.

The influence of obesity on short- and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer: a case-matched study of 152 patients

BACKGROUND

Despite the increasing prevalence of obesity and colonic diseases, the impact of obesity on short-term and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgery still remains unclear.

STUDY DESIGN

Seventy-six consecutive obese patients with body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m(2) who underwent laparoscopic colectomy were matched with 76 nonobese patients with BMI <30 kg/m(2). Perioperative parameters and oncologic outcomes were analyzed in the two groups.

RESULTS

Obesity was associated with greater operative time (obese vs nonobese, 182 ± 59 vs 157 ± 55 min, P = .0084) and multivariate analysis identified BMI (hazard ratio 2.11, 95% confidence interval 0.64-3.56, P = .0049) as an independent predicting factor for operative time together with cancer location (hazard ratio 28.6, 95% confidence interval 14.62-42.51, P < .0001). Obesity had no adverse influence on overall morbidity (25 vs 21%, P = .563), however, or postoperative duration of stay (median 6.0 vs 5.5 days, P = .22). Furthermore, the rate of conversion to open procedure was similar between the two groups (9 vs 9%, P > .99). Regarding oncologic outcomes, there was no statistical difference in overall and disease-free survival between the two groups (5-year overall survival rate 86 vs 89%, P = .72, 5-year disease survival rate 70 vs 77%, P = .70).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic colonic resection, when performed for selected patients, appears to be a safe and reasonable option in obese patients with colon cancer resulting in similar short-term and oncologic outcomes as nonobese patients.

Clinical outcomes of 103 hand-assisted laparoscopic surgeries for left-sided colon and rectal cancer: single institutional review

Purpose

The laparoscopic colectomy is avoided principally because of its technical difficulty, steep learning curve, and increased operative time. Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) is an alternative technique that addresses these problems while preserving the short-term benefits of a laparoscopic colectomy. Our study was aimed to describe the characteristics of patients admitted due to left-sided colon and rectal cancer for HALS.

Methods

A prospectively maintained database was used to identify patients who underwent HALS at the Institute of Oncology, Vilnius University, from July 1, 2009, to October 1, 2012.

Results

One hundred-three HALS colorectal resections were performed. The patients' mean age was 64 ± 13.4 years. There were 46 male and 57 female patients. The body mass index was 27.3 ± 5.8 kg/m². Forty-three patients (41.8%) had experienced prior abdominal surgery. The mean HALS time was 105 minutes (range, 55-85 minutes). The conversion rate was 2.7% (3/103). The median of return of gastrointestinal function was 2.5 days (range, 2.2-4.5 days). The median length of hospital stay was 9 days. The postoperative complication and mortality rates were 10.7% and 0.97%, respectively. Four incisional hernias (3.9%) were seen at a mean follow-up of 7.0 ± 3.4 months. None of the patients had a trocar or a hand-port site recurrence.

Conclusion

A HALS colorectal resection is a safe and effective technique, and it provides all the benefits of minimally invasive surgery.

Short and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic colectomy in obese patients

AIM: To investigate the impact of laparoscopic colectomy on short and long-term outcomes in obese patients with colorectal diseases.

METHODS: A total of 98 obese (body mass index > 30 kg/m²) patients who underwent laparoscopic (LPS) right or left colectomy over a 10 year period were identified from a prospective institutionally approved database and manually matched to obese patients who underwent open colectomy. Controls were selected to match for body mass index, site of primary disease, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and year of surgery (± 3 year). The parameters analyzed included age, gender, comorbid conditions, American Society of Anaesthesiologists class, diagnosis, procedure, and duration of operation, operative blood loss, and amount of homologous blood transfused. Conversion rate, intra and postoperative complications as were as reoperation rate, 30 d and long-term morbidity rate were also analyzed. For continuous variables, the Student’s t test was used for normally distributed data the Mann-Whitney U test for non-normally distributed data. The Pearson’s χ² tests, or the Fisher exact test as appropriate, were used for proportions.

RESULTS: Conversion to open surgery was necessary in 13 of 98 patients (13.3%). In the LPS group, operative time was 29 min longer and blood loss was 78 mL lower when compared to open colectomy (P = 0.03, P = 0.0001, respectively). Overall morbidity, anastomotic leak and readmission rate did not significantly differ between the two groups. A trend toward a reduction of wound complications was observed in the LPS when compared to open group (P = 0.09). In the LPS group, an earlier recovery of bowel function (P = 0.001) and a shorter length of stay (P = 0.03) were observed. After a median follow-up of 62 (range 12-132) mo 23 patients in the LPS group and 38 in the open group experienced long-term complications (LPS vs open, P = 0.03). Incisional hernia resulted to be the most frequent long-term complication with a significantly higher occurrence in the open group when compared to the laparoscopic one (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic colectomy in obese patients is safe, does not jeopardize postoperative complications and resulted in lower incidence of long-term complications when compared with open cases.

Small bowel obstruction after hand-assisted laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy for cancer

Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) was introduced as a bridge towards totally laparoscopic procedures. Some concerns are raised regarding its long-term complications such as incisional hernia and adhesive small bowel obstruction. A woman was admitted with colicky central abdominal pain, distension and vomiting. She had a hand-assisted laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy for cancer 6 years earlier. Clinical examination revealed a well-healed periumbilical scar with no evidence of incisional hernia. The abdomen was distended with exaggerated bowel sounds. A CT scan showed dilated loops of small bowel with a transitional zone and distally collapsed bowel. A diagnostic laparoscopy revealed a twisted segment of small bowel that was adherent to the anterior abdominal wall at the hand-port closure site. This segment was released laparoscopically without the need for a resection. Adhesive small bowel obstruction to the hand-port site closure may occur years after HALS and can simply be relieved by laparoscopic exploration.

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery for obese patients: decreased conversions with the hand-assisted technique

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery benefits obese patients but technical difficulties associated with suboptimal exposure and access in these subjects may prompt conversion to open surgery. Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) confers advantages over standard laparoscopy (LAP) by facilitating tactile feedback, assisted dissection, and retraction. These benefits could be particularly valuable in obese patients, allowing completion of difficult laparoscopic procedures in this subgroup. Our aim was to compare intra-operative and post-operative outcomes of HALS and LAP approaches in obese patients undergoing colorectal resection at our institution.

METHODS

A retrospective study of a prospectively maintained laparoscopic colorectal surgery database was performed. HALS and LAP cases performed in obese patients (body mass index (BMI) >30) were identified and compared for the following outcomes: operative time, intra-operative complications, rate of conversion to open, blood loss, length of stay, post-operative morbidity, and mortality. Outcomes for the converted patients were included on an intention-to-treat basis for all primary analyses. A secondary analysis of nonconverted and converted cases was also performed.

RESULTS

Over a 5-year period, 496 obese patients underwent laparoscopic colorectal resection; 86 HALS and 410 LAP cases. The two groups were comparable in terms of age, gender, BMI, and indications for surgery. Conversion to open surgery was less often necessary in HALS compared to LAP cases (3.5 % vs. 12.7 %, p = 0.014). The LAP group had a significantly smaller incision length for specimen extraction (HALS (7.0 ± 1.3 cm) vs. LAP (5.7 ± 2.1 cm), p < 0.001). Length of stay, operative time, morbidity, and mortality rates were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

In obese patients who require colectomy, the HALS approach increases the likelihood of a successful minimally invasive operation. At the cost of a clinically negligible increase in incision length, HALS may save a high-risk group conversion to formal laparotomy and the adverse outcomes related to this.

Single-incision laparoscopic colectomy versus conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy: a meta-analysis of comparative studies

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) to conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy (MLC).

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is a minimally invasive technique being recently applied to colorectal surgery. A number of studies comparing SILC to conventional MLC have recently been published.

METHODS

A literature search of PubMed and MEDLINE databases for studies comparing SILC to conventional MLC was conducted. The primary outcome measures for meta-analysis were postoperative complications, length of stay, and operative time. Secondary outcome measures were incision length, estimated blood loss, and number of lymph nodes harvested.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies comparing 467 patients undergoing SILC to 539 patients undergoing conventional MLC were reviewed and the data pooled for analysis. Patients undergoing SILC had a shorter length of stay (pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) = -0.68; 95 % CI = -1.20 to -0.16; p = 0.0099), shorter incision length (pooled WMD = -1.37; 95 % CI = -2.74 to 0.000199; p = 0.05), less estimated blood loss (pooled WMD = -20.25; 95 % CI = -39.25 to -1.24; p = 0.037), and more lymph nodes harvested (pooled WMD = 1.75; 95 % CI = 0.12 to 3.38; p = 0.035), while there was no significant difference in the number of postoperative complications (pooled odds ratio = 0.83; 95 % CI = 0.57 to 1.20; p = 0.33) or operative time (pooled WMD = 5.06; 95 % CI = -2.91 to 13.03; p = 0.21).

CONCLUSION

SILC appears to have comparable results to conventional MLC in the hands of experienced surgeons. Prospective randomized trials are necessary to define the relative benefits of one procedure over the other.

Laparoscopic colorectal resection in the obese patient

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery is an accepted alternative to conventional open resection in the surgical approach of both benign and malignant diseases of the colon and rectum. Well-described benefits of laparoscopic surgery include accelerated recovery of bowel function, decreased post-operative pain and shorter hospital stay; these advantages could be particularly beneficial to high-risk patient groups, such as obese patients. At present, data regarding the application of the laparoscopic approach to colorectal resection in the obese is equivocal. We evaluate the available evidence to support laparoscopic colorectal resection in the obese patient population.

Incidence and prevention of ventral incisional hernia

OBJECTIVE

Ventral incisional hernia is a common complication of abdominal surgery. The incidence ranges from 2% to 20% and varies greatly from one series to another. The goal of this study was to determine the incidence, risk factors, and preventive measures for ventral incisional hernia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An analysis of the surgical literature was performed using the search engines EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and PubMed with the keywords: abdominal hernia, wound dehiscence, incisional hernia, incidence, trocar site hernia, and hernia prevention.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of incisional hernia after laparotomy was 9.9%. The incidence was significantly higher for midline incisions compared with transverse incisions (11% vs. 4.7%; P=0.006). In contrast, the incidence of ventral hernia was only 0.7% after laparoscopy. A compilation of all the studies comparing laparotomy to laparoscopy showed a significantly higher incidence of incisional hernia after laparotomy (P=0.001). Independent risk factors for incisional hernia included age and infectious complications. Only two meta-analyses were able to show a significant decrease in risk-related to the use of non absorbable or slowly absorbable suture material. No difference in incisional hernia risk was shown with different suture techniques (11.1% for running suture, 9.8% for interrupted sutures: NS).

CONCLUSION

A review of the literature shows that only the choice of incisional approach (transverse incision or laparotomy vs. midline laparotomy) allows a significant decrease in the incidence of ventral incisional hernia.

Incisional Hernia Risk after Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery

Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) bridges traditional open surgery and pure laparoscopy. The HALS technique provides the necessary site for organ retrieval, reduces operative time, and realizes the postoperative benefits of laparoscopic techniques. Although the reported rates of incisional hernia should be theoretically low, we sought to determine our incidence of hernia after HALS procedures. A retrospective review of all HALS procedures was performed from July 2006 to June 2011. All patients who developed postoperative incisional hernias at the hand port site were confirmed by imaging or examination findings. Patient factors were reviewed to determine any predictors of hernia formation. Over the 5 years, 405 patients undergoing HALS procedures were evaluated: colectomy (264), nephrectomy (107), splenectomy/pancreatectomy (18), and ostomy reversal (10). The overall incidence of incisional hernia was 10.6 per cent. There were three perioperative wound dehiscences. The mean body mass index was significantly higher in the hernia group versus the no hernia cohort (32.1 vs 29.2 kg/m2; P = 0.001). The hernia group also had a higher incidence of renal disease (18.6 vs 7.2%; P = 0.018). Mean time to hernia formation was 11.4 months (range, 1 to 57 months). Follow-up was greater than 12 months in 188 (46%) of patients, in which the rate of incisional hernia was 17 per cent. The rate of incisional hernia formation after hand-assisted laparoscopic procedures is higher than the reported literature. Because the mean time to hernia development is approximately 1 year, it is important to follow these patients to this end point to determine the true incidence of incisional hernia after hand-assisted laparoscopy.

Single-incision laparoscopic colectomy versus conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy: a meta-analysis of comparative studies

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) to conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy (MLC).

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is a minimally invasive technique being recently applied to colorectal surgery. A number of studies comparing SILC to conventional MLC have recently been published.

METHODS

A literature search of PubMed and MEDLINE databases for studies comparing SILC to conventional MLC was conducted. The primary outcome measures for meta-analysis were postoperative complications, length of stay, and operative time. Secondary outcome measures were incision length, estimated blood loss, and number of lymph nodes harvested.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies comparing 467 patients undergoing SILC to 539 patients undergoing conventional MLC were reviewed and the data pooled for analysis. Patients undergoing SILC had a shorter length of stay (pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) = -0.68; 95 % CI = -1.20 to -0.16; p = 0.0099), shorter incision length (pooled WMD = -1.37; 95 % CI = -2.74 to 0.000199; p = 0.05), less estimated blood loss (pooled WMD = -20.25; 95 % CI = -39.25 to -1.24; p = 0.037), and more lymph nodes harvested (pooled WMD = 1.75; 95 % CI = 0.12 to 3.38; p = 0.035), while there was no significant difference in the number of postoperative complications (pooled odds ratio = 0.83; 95 % CI = 0.57 to 1.20; p = 0.33) or operative time (pooled WMD = 5.06; 95 % CI = -2.91 to 13.03; p = 0.21).

CONCLUSION

SILC appears to have comparable results to conventional MLC in the hands of experienced surgeons. Prospective randomized trials are necessary to define the relative benefits of one procedure over the other.

Prevention of postoperative peritoneal adhesions: a review of the literature

BACKGROUND

postoperative adhesions are a significant health problem with major implications on quality of life and health care expenses. The purpose of this review was to investigate the efficacy of preventative techniques and adhesion barriers and identify those patients who are most likely to benefit from these strategies.

METHODS

the National Library of Medicine, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were used to identify articles related to postoperative adhesions.

RESULTS

ileal pouch-anal anastomosis, open colectomy, and open gynecologic procedures are associated with the highest risk of adhesive small-bowel obstruction (class I evidence). Based on expert opinion (class III evidence) intraoperative preventative principles, such as meticulous hemostasis, avoiding excessive tissue dissection and ischemia, and reducing remaining surgical material have been published. Laparoscopic techniques, with the exception of appendicitis, result in fewer adhesions than open techniques (class I evidence). Available bioabsorbable barriers, such as hyaluronic acid/carboxymethylcellulose and icodextrin 4% solution, have been shown to reduce adhesions (class I evidence).

CONCLUSIONS

postoperative adhesions are a significant health problem with major implications on quality of life and health care. General intraoperative preventative techniques, laparoscopic techniques, and the use of bioabsorbable mechanical barriers in the appropriate cases reduce the incidence and severity of peritoneal adhesions.

Is there a role for bowel preparation and oral or parenteral antibiotics in infection control in contemporary colon surgery?

The numbers of unanswered questions are many. Can intraoperative application, such as topical antimicrobial use in pulsed lavage, reduce the microbial burden on the wound interface before closure? Can closed suction drains within the closed surgical incision reduce infection rates, especially in patients with a large body mass index? What is the role of delayed primary closure or secondary closure in the wound where obvious contamination has occurred, or in the circumstance of emergent colonic resection where considerable contamination is encountered from preexistent perforation? Should immediate negative-pressure wound dressings be applied in the open contaminated wound? These and many other questions still confront the surgeon in the challenge of the surgical wound in major colorectal surgery.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery: initial experience of a single surgeon

BACKGROUND/AIM

As totally laparoscopic colorectal surgery is considered challenging and technically demanding with a long steep learning curve, we adopted hand-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery as a bridge to totally laparoscopic assisted colorectal surgery. This prospective study aims to highlight the initial experience of a single surgeon with this technique.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective analysis of the first 25 cases of hand-assisted laparoscopic colorectal resections which were performed by a single surgeon over a 15-month period. There were 15 males and 10 females with a mean age of 55.5 (range 20-82) years.

RESULTS

The indication in majority of cases was cancer (76%). The procedures consisted of 18 (72%) various colectomies and 7 (28%) anterior resections. The operative time ranged between 110-400 (mean 180) min. There was one conversion (4%) and the mean operative blood loss was 80 (range 60-165) ml. The number of lymph nodes retrieved in the cancer cases was 5-31 (mean 15) nodes. The mean length of hospital stay was five (range 3-10) days. The total number of short-term complications was six (24%) and there was one death due to anastomatic leak and multiorgan failure. Long-term complications after a maximum follow up of 30 months were two incisional hernias at the hand port site, but none of the patients developed adhesive small bowel obstruction or late anastomotic stricture. Currently all our colorectal procedures are conducted laparoscopically.

CONCLUSION

Hand-assisted laparoscopic colorectal procedures are easy to learn as a good bridge to master totally laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Letter 1: Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open left colonic resection (Br J Surg 2010; 97: 1180-1186)

The Editors welcome topical correspondence from readers relating to articles published in the Journal. Responses should be sent electronically via the BJS website (www.bjs.co.uk). All letters will be reviewed and, if approved, appear on the website. A selection of these will be edited and published in the Journal. Letters must be no more than 250 words in length.

Controversy of hand-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery

Laparoscopically assisted colorectal procedures are time-consuming and technically demanding and hence have a long steep learning curve. In the technical demand, surgeons need to handle a long mobile organ, the colon, and have to operate on multiple abdominal quadrants, most of the time with the need to secure multiple mesenteric vessels. Therefore, a new surgical innovation called hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) was introduced in the mid 1990s as a useful alternative to totally laparoscopic procedures. This hybrid operation allows the surgeon to introduce the non-dominant hand into the abdominal cavity through a special hand port while maintaining the pneumoperitoneum. A hand in the abdomen can restore the tactile sensation which is usually lacking in laparoscopic procedures. It also improves the eye-to-hand coordination, allows the hand to be used for blunt dissection or retraction and also permits rapid control of unexpected bleeding. All of those factors can contribute tremendously to reducing the operative time. Moreover, this procedure is also considered as a hybrid procedure that combines the advantages of both minimally invasive and conventional open surgery. Nevertheless, the exact role of HALS in colorectal surgery has not been well defined during the advanced totally laparoscopic procedures. This article reviews the current status of hand-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery as a minimally invasive procedure in the era of laparoscopic surgery.

The incidence and risk factors of post-laparotomy adhesive small bowel obstruction

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this review was to assess the incidence and risk factors for adhesive small bowel obstruction (SBO) following laparotomy.

METHODS

The PubMed database was systematically reviewed to identify studies in the English literature delineating the incidence of adhesive SBO and reporting risk factors for the development of this morbidity.

RESULTS

A total of 446,331 abdominal operations were eligible for inclusion in this analysis. The overall incidence of SBO was 4.6%. The risk of SBO was highly influenced by the type of procedure, with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis being associated with the highest incidence of SBO (1,018 out of 5,268 cases or 19.3%), followed by open colectomy (11,491 out of 121,085 cases or 9.5%). Gynecological procedures were associated with an overall incidence of 11.1% (4,297 out of 38,751 cases) and ranged from 23.9% in open adnexal surgery, to 0.1% after cesarean section. The technique of the procedure (open vs. laparoscopic) also played a major role in the development of adhesive SBO. The incidence was 7.1% in open cholecystectomies vs. 0.2% in laparoscopic; 15.6% in open total abdominal hysterectomies vs. 0.0% in laparoscopic; and 23.9% in open adnexal operations vs. 0.0% in laparoscopic. There was no difference in SBO following laparoscopic or open appendectomies (1.4% vs. 1.3%). Separate closure of the peritoneum, spillage and retention of gallstones during cholecystectomy, and the use of starched gloves all increase the risk for adhesion formation. There is not enough evidence regarding the role of age, gender, and presence of cancer in adhesion formation.

CONCLUSION

Adhesion-related morbidity comprises a significant burden on healthcare resources and prevention is of major importance, especially in high-risk patients. Preventive techniques and special barriers should be considered in high-risk cases.

Laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal carcinoma: Complications and management in 132 consecutive patients

AIM: To analyze the clinical manifestations and risk factors of complications in laparoscopic low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer patients.

METHODS: A series of 132 consecutive patients who received laparoscopic LAR for rectal cancer in our center were included. The etiology, diagnosis, treatment and prevention of rectal cancer were studied among the patients with surgery-related complications using both univariate and multivariate regression analysis.

RESULTS: No conversion to open surgery was observed and 5 cases converted to hand-assisted laparoscopic operation. The overall morbidity rate was 20.5%. Complications occurred during the operation in 7 patients (5.3%), within 30 postoperative days in 24 patients (18.2%), and within 3 mo in 2 patients (1.5%). The most significant complications were anastomotic leakage (9.1%) and anastomotic hemorrhage (5.3%). Size and location of tumor, pathological staging and preoperative nutrition were significant factors associated with LAR complications, while gender, age and pathological type showed no relevance. Binary logistics regression showed that the size and location of tumor, and pathological staging were independent factors of laparoscopic LAR. All the complications were treated during their onset of clinical manifestations by interventional or conservative therapy.

CONCLUSION: Anastomotic leakage is a major complication in laparoscopic LAR. The complications may be associated with tumor size and site, and pathological stage. Interventional therapies are of value in the management of laparoscopic LAR complications.

Incisional hernia, midline versus low transverse incision: what is the ideal incision for specimen extraction and hand-assisted laparoscopy?

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery is associated with smaller surgical incisions than those of traditional midline laparotomy. However, most colorectal resections and all hand-assisted procedures require an incision either for specimen retrieval or insertion of the hand-assist device. The ideal site of this incision has not been evaluated with respect to the incidence of incisional hernia. This study compares the rates of incisional hernia associated with a standard midline laparotomy, a midline incision of reduced length, and a Pfannenstiel incision.

METHODS

From March 2004 to July 2007, 512 consecutive patients were identified from a prospectively maintained database according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Patients were divided into three groups depending on the type of incision (open, midline, and Pfannenstiel). Demographic variables, rate of incisional hernia, and risk factors for hernia were compared among the groups.

RESULTS

There were 142, 231, and 139 patients in the open, midline, and Pfannenstiel groups, respectively. All three groups were comparable with respect to age, gender, steroid use, diabetes, number of patients with malignancy, and duration of follow-up. The Pfannenstiel group had a higher mean BMI (p = 0.015) and the open group had a higher rate of wound infection (28.2%) compared to the other groups. Incidence of incisional hernia was similar for the open and midline groups (19.7 and 16%, p = 0.36). At a mean follow-up of 17.5 months, not a single patient with a Pfannenstiel incision developed an incisional hernia (p < 0.001). BMI (p = 0.019), follow-up (p < 0.001), and Pfannenstiel incision (p < 0.001) were found to be predictors (protectors) of incisional hernia on multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

A Pfannenstiel incision is associated with the lowest rate of incisional hernia and should be the incision of choice for hand assistance and specimen extraction in minimally invasive colorectal resections wherever applicable.