Laparoscopic management of acute small bowel obstruction

Evaluating temporal trends and the impact of surgical subspecialisation on patient outcomes following adhesional small bowel obstruction: a multicentre cohort study

PURPOSE

Small bowel obstruction (SBO) is the most common indication for laparotomy in the UK. While general surgeons have become increasingly subspecialised in their elective practice, emergency admissions commonly remain undifferentiated. This study aimed to assess temporal trends in the management of adhesional SBO and explore the influence of subspecialisation on patient outcomes.

METHODS

Data was collected for patients admitted acutely with adhesional SBO across acute NHS trusts in Northern England between 01/01/02 and 31/12/16, including demographics, co-morbidities and procedures performed. Patients were excluded if a potentially non-adhesional cause was identified and were grouped by the responsible consultant's subspecialty. The primary outcome of interest was 30-day inpatient mortality.

RESULTS

Overall, 2818 patients were admitted with adhesional SBO during a 15-year period. There was a consistent female preponderance, but age and comorbidity increased significantly over time (both p < 0.001). In recent years, more patients were managed operatively with a trend away from delayed surgery also evident (2002-2006: 65.7% vs. 2012-2016: 42.7%, p < 0.001). Delayed surgery was associated with an increased mortality risk on multivariable regression analysis (OR: 2.46 (1.46-4.23, p = 0.001)). CT scanning was not associated with management strategy or timing of surgery (p = 0.369). There was an increased propensity for patients to be managed by gastrointestinal (colorectal and upper gastrointestinal) subspecialists over time. Length of stay (p < 0.001) and 30-day mortality (p < 0.001) both improved in recent years, with the best outcomes seen in colorectal (2.6%) and vascular subspecialists (2.4%). However, following adjustment for confounding variables, consultant subspecialty was not a predictor of mortality.

CONCLUSION

Outcomes for patients presenting with adhesional SBO have improved despite the increasing burden of age and co-morbidity. While gastrointestinal subspecialists are increasingly responsible for their care, mortality is not influenced by consultant subspecialty.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Safety Between Open and Laparoscopic Surgery for Adhesive Small Bowel Obstruction: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of a National Inpatient Database

Background: The effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery for adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO) remains unclear. We aimed to compare the outcomes and safety of open and laparoscopic surgeries for ASBO. Methods: In this retrospective study, we analyzed an inpatient database of 42 national university hospitals in Japan. Patients who underwent surgery for the first episode of ASBO between April 2013 and March 2018 were identified. Using the propensity score method, patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery were matched one-to-one with those who underwent open surgery. We investigated postoperative clinical outcomes, including morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stay (LOS), and recurrence. Results: Overall, 306 and 96 patients underwent open and laparoscopic surgery, respectively (96 propensity score-matched pairs). The incidence rates of postoperative morbidity, mortality, and recurrence were comparable between the two groups. Cox regression analysis revealed a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.020 (P = .959) for readmission due to ASBO in the laparoscopic surgery group relative to the open surgery group. Postoperative hospital stay was longer for open surgery than for laparoscopic surgery (13.0 days versus 10.0 days, P < .001). Cox regression analysis revealed that laparoscopic surgery was associated with earlier postoperative discharge compared with open surgery (HR 1.641, P = .002). Conclusions: The postoperative LOS was shorter with laparoscopic surgery than with open surgery for ASBO, but there were no differences between the procedures in other clinical outcomes. Laparoscopic surgery is suitable to treat patients with ASBO.

The use of indocyanine green fluorescence to define bowel microcirculation during laparoscopic surgery for acute small bowel obstruction

AIM

Although there is growing evidence to support the feasibility of a minimally invasive approach for acute small bowel obstruction, the inability to adequately evaluate compromised bowel segments has been cited as a major limitation. The aim of this work is to report a novel application of extemporaneous indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence to assess bowel viability where there is a concern for ischaemic damage.

METHOD

After the cause of obstruction has been identified and resolved, and where there are dubious signs of bowel ischaemia present, fluorescent selective angiography is undertaken. The segment of bowel in question is observed under both normal and fluorescent light to assess local microcirculation. The adequacy of both the arterial supply and the venous drainage is thus appraised to define bowel viability.

RESULTS

Among 71 patients who have undergone surgery for acute small bowel obstruction with a laparoscopic approach, seven received extemporaneous ICG fluorescence assessment of bowel viability. Different presentations with their relevant management are described.

CONCLUSIONS

Selective use of intraoperative fluorescent angiography may overcome some of the intrinsic limitations of laparoscopy in assessing bowel viability during surgery for acute small bowel obstruction.

Small bowel obstruction after caesarean section: Laparoscopic management. Two case reports

Introduction

Caesarean section is the most common abdominal surgery performed on women worldwide. Adhesions represent a severe complication of cesarean section and can cause different degrees of bowel obstruction.

Case reports

We report two unusual cases of small bowel obstruction treated with laparoscopic approach after caesarean section performed for gynecological pathologies. In the first one small bowel obstruction was due to volvulus caused by a severe pelvic adhesion syndrome; in the second one, occlusive picture was related to presence of multiple adhesion phenomena between the sigmoid colon and the right ovary as result of abdominal hysterectomy.

Discussion

The incidence of small bowel obstruction after caesarean section is very low and postoperative adhesions represent the main cause. Diagnosis was established by clinical signs, radiological and intraoperative findings. Laparoscopic approach can be the treatment of choice only in selected patients. In presence of dense adhesions, inability to visualize the site of obstruction, iatrogenic intestinal perforation, bowel necrosis and technical difficulties, conversion to open surgery is mandatory.

Conclusion

In selected patients with small bowel obstruction laparoscopy is a safe and feasible procedure if conservative measures fail.

Laparoscopy in Acute Care Surgery: Repair of Perforated Duodenal Ulcer

INTRODUCTION

The use of laparoscopic management as a first choice for the treatment of duodenal perforation is gaining ground but is not routine in many centers. In this report, we aim to report our experience with laparoscopy as the first approach for the repair of duodenal perforation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective review of patients during our initial experience with the use of laparoscopy for the treatment of duodenal perforation between 2009 and 2013.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients underwent management of duodenal perforation. Laparoscopy was attempted initially in 76 patients (76%) and completed in 64 patients (64%). The length of hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic group (mean 2.6) than in the open group (mean 3.1) (p = 0.008). Complications developed in 14 patients (20%). There was a tendency towards fewer admissions to intensive care, less acute kidney injuries, and less acute respiratory distress syndrome in the laparoscopic group. In patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery, the chances of uneventful recovery were 4.3 times higher than in those patients who underwent open surgery (95% CI 1.3-13.5, p = 0.014).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopy in the treatment of perforated duodenal ulcer is safe and can be utilized as a routine approach for the treatment of this pathology.

A systematic review comparing laparoscopic vs open adhesiolysis in patients with adhesional small bowel obstruction

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether surgical outcomes differ between laparoscopic vs open approach for adhesiolysis in patients presenting with adhesional small bowel obstruction (ASBO).

DATA SOURCE

A systematic review of literature on published studies reporting the surgical outcomes after laparoscopic vs open adhesiolysis for ASBO was undertaken using the principles of meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Fourteen comparative studies on 38,057 patients, evaluating the surgical outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic vs open adhesiolysis for ASBO were analyzed. Laparoscopic adhesiolysis resulted in the reduced risk of morbidity (P < .00001), mortality (P < .0001), and surgical infections (P = .003). In addition, the risk of respiratory complications, cardiac complications, bowel resection, and venous thromboembolism was lower with shorter hospitalization in laparoscopic adhesiolysis group. However, statistical equivalence was seen in variables of duration of operation and iatrogenic enterotomies.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic adhesiolysis for ASBO seems to have clinically proven advantage over open approach.

Advances in laparoscopy for acute care surgery and trauma

The greatest advantages of laparoscopy when compared to open surgery include the faster recovery times, shorter hospital stays, decreased postoperative pain, earlier return to work and resumption of normal daily activity as well as cosmetic benefits. Laparoscopy today is considered the gold standard of care in the treatment of cholecystitis and appendicitis worldwide. Laparoscopy has even been adopted in colorectal surgery with good results. The technological improvements in this surgical field along with the development of modern techniques and the acquisition of specific laparoscopic skills have allowed for its utilization in operations with fully intracorporeal anastomoses. Further progress in laparoscopy has included single-incision laparoscopic surgery and natural orifice trans-luminal endoscopic surgery. Nevertheless, laparoscopy for emergency surgery is still considered challenging and is usually not recommended due to the lack of adequate experience in this area. The technical difficulties of operating in the presence of diffuse peritonitis or large purulent collections and diffuse adhesions are also given as reasons. However, the potential advantages of laparoscopy, both in terms of diagnosis and therapy, are clear. Major advantages may be observed in cases with diffuse peritonitis secondary to perforated peptic ulcers, for example, where laparoscopy allows the confirmation of the diagnosis, the identification of the position of the ulcer and a laparoscopic repair with effective peritoneal washout. Laparoscopy has also revolutionized the approach to complicated diverticulitis even when intestinal perforation is present. Many other emergency conditions can be effectively managed laparoscopically, including trauma in select hemodynamically-stable patients. We have therefore reviewed the most recent scientific literature on advances in laparoscopy for acute care surgery and trauma in order to demonstrate the current indications and outcomes associated with a laparoscopic approach to the treatment of the most common emergency surgical conditions.

Laparoscopic versus open adhesiolysis in patients with adhesive small bowel obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to evaluate whether surgical outcomes differ between laparoscopy versus the open approach for adhesive small bowel obstruction.

METHODS

PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were electronically searched from 1985 to 2010. The study pooled the effects of outcomes of a total of 334 patients enrolled into 4 retrospective comparative studies using meta-analytic methods.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic adhesiolysis was associated with a reduced overall complication rate (odds ratio = .42, .25-.70, P < .01), prolonged ileus rate (odds ratio = .28, .10-.73, P = .01) and pulmonary complication rate (odds ratio = .20, .04-.94, P = .04) compared with the open approach. No significant differences were noted for intraoperative injury to bowel rates (odds ratio = 1.93, .76-4.89, P = .17), wound infection rates (odds ratio = .44, .17-1.12, P = .08), and mortality (odds ratio = .81, .12-5.49, P = .83).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic adhesiolysis is advantageous in most of the analyzed outcomes. Laparoscopic treatment of small bowel obstruction is recommended by experienced laparoscopic surgeons in selected patients.

Laparoscopic adhesiolysis: consensus conference guidelines

AIM

Laparoscopic adhesiolysis has been demonstrated to be technically feasible in small bowel obstruction and carries advantages in terms of post-surgical course. The increasing dissemination of laparoscopic surgery in the emergency setting and the lack of concrete evidence in the literature have called for a consensus conference to draw recommendations for clinical practice.

METHODS

A literature search was used to outline the evidence, and a consensus conference was held between experts in the field. A survey of international experts added expertise to the debate. A public jury of surgeons discussed and validated the statements, and the entire process was reviewed by three external experts.

RESULTS

Recommendations concern the diagnostic evaluation, the timing of the operation, the selection of patients, the induction of the pneumoperitoneum, the removal of the cause of obstructions, the criteria for conversion, the use of adhesion-preventing agents, the need for high-technology dissection instruments and behaviour in the case of misdiagnosed hernia or the need for bowel resection.

CONCLUSION

Evidence of this kind of surgery is scanty because of the absence of randomized controlled trials. Nevertheless laparoscopic skills in emergency are widespread. The recommendations given with the consensus process might be a useful tool in the hands of surgeons.

Clinical outcomes of laparoscopic adhesiolysis for mechanical small bowel obstruction

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopy for small bowel obstruction (SBO) has increasingly been performed for the advantages minimally invasive surgery provides. However, its benefit remains unclear.

METHODS

From January 2004 to July 2011, we enrolled 28 consecutive patients who underwent a laparoscopic operation for SBO, secondary to postoperative adhesions. We compared the results of SBO patients treated laparoscopically with those of 25 patients who underwent conventional open laparotomy in a retrospective matched-pair analysis.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic treatment was completed in 25 patients (89%), including 17 laparoscopic-assisted cases. The mean procedural time was 112 minutes in the laparoscopic group and 79 minutes in the open group (P < 0.05). Patients resumed oral intake after a mean of 3 days in the laparoscopic group compared with a mean of 6.5 days in the open group (P < 0.05). The length of hospital stay was 11 and 22 days (P < 0.05), respectively, in the laparoscopic and open groups. Postoperative complications occurred in two patients in the laparoscopy group and 14 patients in the open group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic approach was effective for the management of mechanical SBO in selected patients. Furthermore, minimally invasive laparoscopic adhesiolysis is also feasible and brings the benefit of cosmetic results.

Laparoscopic management of acute small bowel obstruction: evaluating the need for resection

BACKGROUND

Acute small bowel obstruction (SBO) is a common condition encountered by the on-call emergency surgeon. The role of laparoscopy in the management of SBO continues to be defined. This modality can be limited by dilated bowel and inadequate assessment of compromised tissue. This review was undertaken to determine the reliability of laparoscopic evaluation and the subsequent need for bowel resection.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients surgically managed for acute SBO between July 2005 and September 2010 was conducted. The clinical presentation, computed tomographic findings, indications for surgery, type of intervention, need for reoperation, length of stay (LOS), and outcomes were all abstracted.

RESULTS

A total of 119 patients were surgically managed for acute SBO during this period, 63 with initial laparoscopy and 56 with an open procedure. Twenty-five (40%) of the laparoscopy patients were converted to open, leaving 38 completed laparoscopically. Of the completed group, three patients underwent bowel resection compared with 16 in the converted group (8% vs. 64%, p < 0.0001). No patients in the completed group required a subsequent procedure for bowel resection. Twenty-three (41%) patients in the open cohort required a resection. LOS was significantly reduced in the completed group (7.7 days) compared with the converted (11.0 days, p = 0.01) and open groups (11.4 days, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, 32% of acute SBOs were managed solely with laparoscopy. No patients requiring a bowel resection were missed using this method of evaluation. Laparoscopic management should be considered as safe and effective initial therapy in most cases of acute SBO.

The role of laparoscopy in the management of acute small-bowel obstruction: a review of over 2,000 cases

BACKGROUND

Adhesive small-bowel obstruction (SBO) contributes significantly to emergency surgical workload. Laparotomy remains the standard approach. Despite published reports with high success rates and low morbidity, acute SBO is still considered by many a relative contraindication to laparoscopy. Our aim was to review the available literature and define important outcomes such as feasibility, safety, iatrogenic bowel injury, and benefits to patients with acute SBO who are approached laparoscopically.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was carried out using the Medline database and the search terms "laparoscopy" or "laparoscopic approach" and "bowel obstruction." Only adult studies published in English between 1990 and 2010 were included. Studies were excluded if data specific to outcomes for laparoscopic management of acute SBO could not be extracted.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies were identified. A laparoscopic approach was attempted in 2,005 patients with acute SBO. Adhesions were the most common etiology (84.9%). Laparoscopy was completed in 1,284 cases (64%), 6.7% were lap-assisted, and 0.3% were converted to hernia repair. The overall conversion rate to midline laparotomy was 29% (580/2,005). Dense adhesions, bowel resection, unidentified pathology, and iatrogenic injury accounted for the majority of conversions. When the etiology of SBO was a single-band adhesion, the success rate was 73.4%. Morbidity was 14.8% (283/1,906) and mortality was 1.5% (29/1,951). The enterotomy rate was 6.6% (110/1,673). The majority were recognized and converted to laparotomy. Laparoscopy was associated with reduced morbidity and length of stay.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy is a feasible and effective treatment for acute SBO with acceptable morbidity. Further studies are required to determine its impact on recurrent SBO.

Best resident poster award: evaluation of anastomotic techniques for laparoscopic resection of isolated small intestine pathology

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare perioperative outcomes for intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomotic techniques for isolated laparoscopic small-intestine resection.

METHODS

A retrospective database was created for all adult patients who underwent a laparoscopic segmental small-intestine resection. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease or requiring an ileocolectomy were excluded.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic resection was performed in 52 patients (ratio of men:women, 30:22) with a mean age of 47 ± 21 years. A laparoscopic intracorporeal anastomosis was performed in 30 patients (58%), and an extracorporeal anastomosis was performed in 22 patients (42%). There was no difference in mean operating room time, estimated blood loss, perioperative complication rate, or length of stay between the 2 groups. Ten patients had a complication, and 5 patients experienced a Clavien grade II or greater complication.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic segmental small-bowel resection using either intracorporeal or extracorporeal anastomotic techniques is equally efficacious for pathology isolated to the small bowel.

Predictors of Failure of the Laparoscopic Approach for the Management of Small Bowel Obstruction

Small bowel obstruction (SBO) is a common cause of hospital admission. Our objective is to determine variables that correlate with failure of the laparoscopic approach for SBO. Twenty-three consecutive patients underwent diagnostic laparoscopy with curative intent for treatment of SBO by a single surgeon over a 3-year period. The laparoscopic approach was successful in 18 patients (78%); there were five (22%) conversions to laparotomy. The causes of obstruction included adhesive band in 16 patients; and small bowel lymphoma, metastatic esophageal cancer, small bowel gangrene, Meckel diverticulum, gallstones ileus, and incarcerated incisional hernia in two. Using the Fisher two-sided test, no significant predictor for conversion was identified using gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, previous bowel obstruction, history of adhesiolysis, abdominal distention, pelvic surgeries, chemotherapy, radiation, malignancy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, coronary artery disease, hypertension, or hypercholesterolenemia. The Wilcoxon two-sided test did not show significance for age, weight, number of previous abdominal surgeries, or small bowel diameter. The postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group compared with those who needed conversion (3 vs 9 days) with P = 0.0019. No mortality was noted in any patients. The laparoscopic is safe and feasible for the management of SBO. We believe that the laparoscopic approach should be offered to all patients with SBO unless there is an absolute contraindication to laparoscopic surgery.

Laparoscopy for benign colorectal diseases

The applicability of laparoscopy to many complex intraabdominal colorectal procedures continues to expand, and has been shown to be feasible and safe in experienced hands. Data are available on the elderly, rectal prolapse, diverticulitis, Hartman's takedown, small bowel obstruction, Crohn's disease, and ulcerative colitis. Clinically relevant advantages have been clearly demonstrated in selected patient populations. Laparoscopic surgery for benign colorectal disease should be considered in patients suitable for this approach to an abdominal operation.

Laparoscopic treatment of a postoperative small bowel obstruction

We describe the case report of a 25-year-old female who presented with signs and symptoms of bowel obstruction status after laparoscopic treatment of an ectopic pregnancy performed 3 weeks earlier. The patient underwent laparoscopic lysis of adhesions and reduction of small bowel obstruction. This case report presents an atypical cause of postoperative bowel obstruction and reviews the current literature regarding laparoscopic surgery as an approach for treatment.

Laparoscopic management of adhesive acute postoperative small bowel obstruction

Laparoscopic management of postoperative acute adhesive small bowel obstruction (SBO) may often have clinical advantages. This prospective study included patients with postoperative acute SBO in whom sufficient intestinal decompression was achieved using a nasoenteric ileus tube preoperatively, but pass disorder was not improved. This study describes our experience with the laparoscopic procedure for patients with adhesive acute SBO. The laparoscopic approach was undertaken in 24 of 51 patients admitted for acute postoperative SBO from July 1994 through June 2000; it was performed successfully in 20 patients (83%), and four cases were converted to open surgery (17%) because of strong adhesions. In four patients with gallstones and inguinal hernia, laparoscopic surgery (cholecystectomy, hernioplasty) was performed simultaneously. There was no mortality and low morbidity (4.1%). The group of patients treated laparoscopically had a shorter hospital stay than the conventional open group (12 versus 21 days; p < 0.05). At the median follow-up of 84 months, 21 of the 22 patients who had received laparoscopic procedure remained asymptomatic. Laparoscopic treatment was effective, involved a shorter hospital stay and has shown good long-term results for most patients with adhesive acute SBO.

Management of acute small bowel obstruction from intestinal adhesions: indications for laparoscopic surgery in a community teaching hospital

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to compare the results of laparoscopic management of acute small bowel obstruction (SBO) from abdominal adhesions to both exploratory laparotomy and secondary conversion to open surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety-three patients (mean age 61 years) with adhesion-induced SBO were divided into successful laparoscopy (66 patients [71%]), secondary conversion (24 [26%]), and primary laparotomy (three patients).

RESULTS

Patients with successful laparoscopy had more simple adhesions (57%), fewer prior operations, and lower American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class. Operative time was shortest in the laparoscopy group (74.3 +/- 4.4 min), as was the duration of both intensive care unit and hospital stay. Mortality was 6%, regardless of operative technique.

CONCLUSIONS

A trial of laparoscopic adhesiolysis by a surgeon with advanced laparoscopic skills seems advisable in the majority of patients with acute adhesive SBO, whereas patients with more extensive adhesions, higher ASA class, and more than two prior abdominal operations often require laparotomy to achieve equally satisfactory outcome.

Feasibility of laparoscopy for small bowel obstruction

BACKGROUND

Adherential pathology is the most common cause of small bowel obstruction. Laparoscopy in small bowel obstruction does not have a clear role yet; surely it doesn't always represent only a therapeutic act, but it is always a diagnostic act, which doesn't interfere with abdominal wall integrity.

METHODS

We performed a review without any language restrictions considering international literature indexed from 1980 to 2007 in Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library. We analyzed the reference lists of the key manuscripts. We also added a review based on international non-indexed sources.

RESULTS

The feasibility of diagnostic laparoscopy is high (60-100%), while that of therapeutic laparoscopy is low (40-88%). The frequency of laparotomic conversions is variable ranging from 0 to 52%, depending on patient selection and surgical skill. The first cause of laparotomic conversion is a difficult exposition and treatment of band adhesions. The incidence of laparotomic conversions is major in patients with anterior peritoneal band adhesions. Other main causes for laparotomic conversion are the presence of bowel necrosis and accidental enterotomies. The predictive factors for successful laparoscopic adhesiolysis are: number of previous laparotomies

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic adhesiolysis in small bowel obstruction is feasible but can be convenient only if performed by skilled surgeons in selected patients. The laparoscopic adhesiolysis for small bowel obstruction is satisfactorily carried out when early indicated in patients with a low number of laparotomies resulting in a short hospital stay and a lower postoperative morbidity. Although a higher small bowel obstruction recurrence remains the major postoperative risk of the laparoscopic management of these patients.

Collapse

Key Words Collapse

MESH Headings Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Eriberto Farinella Department of General and Emergency Surgery, St Maria Hospital, Terni, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
Roberto Cirocchi Department of General and Emergency Surgery, St Maria Hospital, Terni, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
Francesco La Mura Department of General and Emergency Surgery, St Maria Hospital, Terni, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
Umberto Morelli Department of General and Emergency Surgery, St Maria Hospital, Terni, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
Lorenzo Cattorini Department of General and Emergency Surgery, St Maria Hospital, Terni, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
Pamela Delmonaco Department of General and Emergency Surgery, St Maria Hospital, Terni, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
Carla Migliaccio Department of General and Emergency Surgery, St Maria Hospital, Terni, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
Angelo A De Sol Department of General and Emergency Surgery, St Maria Hospital, Terni, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
Luca Cozzaglio Department of Surgical Oncology, IRCCS Istituto Clinico Humanitas, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
Francesco Sciannameo Department of General and Emergency Surgery, St Maria Hospital, Terni, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy

Collapse

Emergency laparoscopy for acute abdominal conditions: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Currently, emergency laparoscopic surgery for acute abdominal conditions has become the favored surgical approach; therefore, we investigated the diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic efficacy of laparoscopy in acute abdominal pain in Saudi Arabian patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this prospective study, 176 patients with acute abdominal pain (113 patients with pain localized to the right iliac region [group A] and 63 patients with generalized abdominal pain [group B] underwent emergency laparoscopy between January 2002 and December 2006. We evaluated the initial clinical diagnosis, the laparoscopic diagnosis, and the outcome in these two groups of patients.

RESULTS

In group A, a definitive diagnosis was established at laparoscopy in 89% of patients, and it was therapeutic in 81.4% of the patients, and in 9 patients (8%) a conversion to laparotomy was necessary a to manage their condition. In group B, the diagnosis was accurate in 87% of patients, and it was therapeutic in 79.4% of the patients, and in 5 patients (8%) a conversion to laparotomy was necessary. There was no mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The emergency laparoscopy is a diagnostic and therapeutic option in the majority of acute abdominal pain conditions.

Laparoscopic treatment for small bowel obstruction: report of a case

An unusual case of small bowel obstruction in a patient with "virgin abdomen" was successfully diagnosed and the localized pathology was elucidated by a computed tomography scan, and the case was successfully treated by laparoscopy.

The laparoscopic approach in abdominal emergencies: has the attitude changed? : A single-center review of a 15-year experience

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy has been practiced more and more in the management of abdominal emergencies. The aim of the present work was to illustrate retrospectively the results of a case-control 5-year experience of laparoscopic versus open surgery for abdominal emergencies carried out at our institution, especially with regard to whether our attitude toward use of this procedure has changed as compared with the beginning of our laparoscopic emergency experience (1991-2002).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2002 to January 2007 a total of 670 patients underwent emergent and/or urgent laparoscopy (small bowel obstruction, 17; gastroduodenal ulcer disease, 16; biliary disease, 118; pelvic disease and non-specific abdominal pain (NSAP), 512; colonic perforations, 7) at the hands of a surgical team trained in laparoscopy

RESULTS

The conversion rate was 0.15%. Major complications ranged as high as 1.9% with no postoperative mortality. A definitive diagnosis was accomplished in 98.3% of the cases, and all such patients were treated successfully by laparoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

We believe that laparoscopy is not an alternative to physical examination/good clinical judgment or to conventional noninvasive diagnostic methods in treating the patient with symptoms of an acute abdomen. However it must be considered an effective option in treating patients in whom these methods fail and as a challenging alternative to open surgery in the management algorithm for abdominal emergencies.

Adhesion-related small bowel obstruction

Postoperative adhesions are the commonest cause of small bowel obstruction (SBO), a frequent surgical emergency. Adhesion obstruction is potentially lethal and a crucial aspect in management is to differentiate whether there is actual, or impending, small bowel ischaemia and therefore a need for emergency surgery. There are no completely accurate imaging or haematological techniques to exclude the requirement for surgery. Modern computerized tomography (CT) has been a significant advance in noninvasive assessment of SBO and may demonstrate the cause of the obstruction and suggest the presence of bowel ischaemia. It is important to note that adhesions may not be the cause of SBO in a patient who has had abdominal surgery. Recurrent cancer, an obstructive colon lesion in the presence of an incompetent ileocaecal valve, an occult hernia, small bowel arterial or venous ischaemia, amongst others may be the cause and CT may elucidate some of these causes and help plan management. Increasing utilization of laparoscopic surgery may reduce the extent and incidence of adhesions and laparoscopic adhesiolysis, in experienced hands, may be successful in managing acute obstruction or alternatively as a planned procedure when the obstruction has resolved. Adhesive SBO remains a common surgical emergency and there is no substitute for repeated examination by a surgeon, capable of performing a laparotomy, in the optimal management of these complex patients.

Laparoscopic approach to acute small bowel obstruction: review of 1061 cases

BACKGROUND

Acute small bowel obstruction has previously been considered a relative contraindication for laparoscopic management. As experience with laparoscopy grows, more surgeons are attempting laparoscopic management for this indication. The purpose of this study is to define the outcome of laparoscopy for acute small bowel obstruction through an analysis of published cases.

METHODS

A literature search of the Medline database was performed using the key words laparoscopy and bowel obstruction. Further articles were identified from the reference lists of retrieved literature. Only English language studies were reviewed. We excluded studies that included patients with chronic abdominal pain, chronic recurrent small bowel obstruction, or gastric or colonic obstruction, when the data specific to acute small bowel obstruction could not be extracted. Data was analyzed based on an intention to treat.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies from between 1994 and 2005 were identified. Laparoscopy was attempted in 1061 patients with acute small bowel obstruction. The most common etiologies of obstruction included adhesions (83.2%), abdominal wall hernia (3.1%), malignancy (2.9%), internal hernia (1.9%), and bezoars (0.8%). Laparoscopic treatment was possible in 705 cases with a conversion rate to open surgery of 33.5%. Causes of conversion were dense adhesions (27.7%), the need for bowel resection (23.1%), unidentified etiology (13.0%), iatrogenic injury (10.2%), malignancy (7.4%), inadequate visualization (4.2%), hernia (3.2%), and other causes (11.1%). Morbidity was 15.5% (152/981) and mortality was 1.5% (16/1046). There were 45 reported recognized intraoperative enterotomies (6.5%), but less than half resulted in conversion. There were, however, nine missed perforations, including one trocar injury, often resulting in significant morbidity. Early recurrence (defined as recurrence within 30 days of surgery) occurred in 2.1% (22/1046).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy is an effective procedure for the treatment of acute small bowel obstruction with acceptable risk of morbidity and early recurrence.

Laparoscopic lysis of adhesions

BACKGROUND

Intra-abdominal adhesions constitute between 49% and 74% of the causes of small bowel obstruction. Traditionally, laparotomy and open adhesiolysis have been the treatment for patients who have failed conservative measures or when clinical and physiologic derangements suggest toxemia and/or ischemia. With the increased popularity of laparoscopy, recent promising reports indicate the feasibility and potential superiority of the minimally invasive approach to the adhesion-encased abdomen.

METHODS

The purpose of this study was to assess the outcome of laparoscopic adhesiolysis and to provide technical tips that help in the success of this technique.

RESULTS

The most important predictive factor of adhesion formation is a history of previous abdominal surgery ranging from 67%-93% in the literature. Conversely, 31% of scars from previous surgery have been free of adhesions, whereas up to 10% of patients without any prior surgical scars will have spontaneous adhesions of the bowel or omentum. Most intestinal obstructions follow open lower abdominopelvic surgeries such as colectomy, appendectomy, and hysterectomy. The most common complications associated with adhesions are small bowel obstruction (SBO) and chronic pain syndrome. The treatment of uncomplicated SBO is generally conservative, especially with incomplete obstruction and the absence of systemic toxemia, ischemia, or strangulation. When conservative treatment fails, surgical options include conventional open or minimally invasive approaches; the latter have become increasing more popular for lysis of adhesions and the treatment of SBO. Generally, 63% of the length of a laparotomy incision is involved in adhesion formation to the abdominal wall. Furthermore, the incidence of ventral hernia after a laparotomy ranges between 11% and 20% versus the 0.02%-2.4% incidence of port site herniation. Additional benefits of the minimally invasive approaches include a decreased incidence of wound infection and postoperative pneumonia and a more rapid return of bowel function resulting in a shorter hospital stay. In long-term follow up, the success rate of laparoscopic lysis of adhesions remains between 46% and 87%. Operative times for laparoscopy range from 58 to 108 minutes; conversion rates range from 6.7% to 43%; and the incidence of intraoperative enterotomy ranges from 3% to 17.6%. The length of hospitalization is 4-6 days in most series.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic lysis of adhesions seems to be safe in the hands of well-trained laparoscopic surgeons. This technique should be mastered by the advanced laparoscopic surgeon not only for its usefulness in the pathologies discussed here but also for adhesions commonly encountered during other laparoscopic procedures.

Abdominal emergencies: diagnostic and therapeutic laparoscopy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy has been practiced in the management of emergencies resulting from inflammatory conditions, lumenal obstruction, perforation, vascular occlusion, and trauma. This article identifies and discusses controversial areas in the field, in particular surrounding the efficacy, cost effectiveness, and perceived advantages of laparoscopy in the evaluation and treatment of patients with acute abdominal conditions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Review and commentary on pertinent articles in the English language literature are presented.

RESULTS

Prospective randomized trials have been reported in the treatment of some disorders, but a lack of recommendations that are evidence-based has hindered more widespread usage of laparoscopy in an emergency setting. In addition, concerns have been raised that the creation of capnoperitoneum in the patient with established peritonitis may be detrimental with respect to potentiation of bacteremia and severe sepsis, and experimental studies have yielded conflicting data in this regard.

CONCLUSION

As such issues are resolved, utilization of laparoscopy is likely to increase substantially as expertise is acquired. A minimal-access approach carries less morbidity and may offer other practical advantages in terms of surgical technique and application. When surgical intervention is appropriate, laparoscopy is now preferred for acute biliary disease. Female patients of reproductive age with acute appendicitis may benefit, particularly if there is preoperative diagnostic uncertainty. Selected cases of intestinal obstruction and visceral perforation presenting soon after symptom onset and in whom shock is absent may also be amenable to laparoscopic repair. Its use in the treatment of most trauma patients and patients with generalized peritonitis or hemodynamic instability is not recommended at present.

Peritonitis: laparoscopic approach

Background

Laparoscopy has became as the preferred surgical approach to a number of different diseases because it allows a correct diagnosis and treatment at the same time. In abdominal emergencies, both components of treatment – exploration to identify the causative pathology and performance of an appropriate operation – can often be accomplished via laparoscopy. There is still a debate of peritonitis as a contraindication to this kind of approach. Aim of the present work is to illustrate retrospectively the results of a case-control experience of laparoscopic vs. open surgery for abdominal peritonitis emergencies carried out at our institution.

Methods

From January 1992 and January 2002 a total of 935 patients (mean age 42.3 ± 17.2 years) underwent emergent and/or urgent surgery. Among them, 602 (64.3%) were operated on laparoscopically (of whom 112 -18.7% – with peritonitis), according to the presence of a surgical team trained in laparoscopy. Patients with a history of malignancy, more than two previous major abdominal surgeries or massive bowel distension were not treated Laparoscopically. Peritonitis was not considered contraindication to Laparoscopy.

Results

The conversion rate was 23.2% in patients with peritonitis and was mainly due to the presence of dense intra-abdominal adhesions. Major complications ranged as high as 5.3% with a postoperative mortality of 1.7%. A definitive diagnosis was accomplished in 85.7% (96 pat.) of cases, and 90.6% (87) of these patients were treated successfully by Laparoscopy.

Conclusion

Even if limited by its retrospective feature, the present experience let us to consider the Laparoscopic approach to abdominal peritonitis emergencies a safe and effective as conventional surgery, with a higher diagnostic yield and allows for lesser trauma and a more rapid postoperative recovery. Such features make Laparoscopy a challenging alternative to open surgery in the management algorithm for abdominal peritonitis emergencies.

Laparoscopy for abdominal emergencies

BACKGROUND

Emergency laparoscopic exploration can be used to identify the causative pathology of acute abdominal pain. Laparoscopic surgery also allows treatment of many intraabdominal disorders. This report was prepared to describe the effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery compared to laparotomy or nonoperative treatment.

METHODS

A panel of European experts in abdominal and gynecological surgery was assembled and participated in a consensus conference using Delphi methods. The aim was to develop evidence-based recommendations for the most common diseases that may cause acute abdominal pain.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Laparoscopic surgery was found to be clearly superior for patients with a presumable diagnosis of perforated peptic ulcer, acute cholecystitis, appendicitis, or pelvic inflammatory disease. In the emergency setting, laparoscopy is of unclear or limited value if adhesive bowel obstruction, acute diverticulitis, nonbiliary pancreatitis, hernia incarceration, or mesenteric ischemia are suspected. In stable patients with acute abdominal pain, noninvasive diagnostics should be fully exhausted before considering explorative surgery. However, diagnostic laparoscopy may be useful if no diagnosis can be found by conventional diagnostics. More clinical data are needed on the use of laparoscopy after blunt or penetrating trauma of the abdomen.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to diagnostic and therapeutic advantages, laparoscopic surgery is useful for the majority of conditions underlying acute abdominal pain, but noninvasive diagnostic aids should be exhausted first. Depending on symptom severity, laparoscopy should be advocated if routine diagnostic procedures have failed to yield results.

Laparoscopic management of acute small bowel obstruction

BACKGROUND

As minimally invasive surgery gains ground, it is entering realms previously considered to be relative contraindications for laparoscopy. We reviewed our experience with the laparoscopic approach to the management of small bowel obstruction (SBO).

METHODS

From December 1997 to November 2002, 65 patients underwent laparoscopic treatment for SBO. The operating surgeon attempted to identify a transitional point between distended and collapsed bowel and then address the obstruction at that point.

RESULTS

Postoperative adhesions were the cause of the obstruction in 44 patients. Tumor was identified in five cases, hernia in four, bezoar in three, intussusception in three, acute appendicitis and pseudoobstruction in two cases each, and terminal ileitis in one case. The diagnostic accuracy of laparoscopy was 96.9%. Thirty-four patients (52%) were treated by laparoscopy alone. Thirteen patients (20%) required a small target incision for segmental resection. Eighteen operations were converted to formal laparotomy. The mean laparoscopy time was 40 min (range, 25-160). Patients resumed oral intake in 1-3 days. The complication rate was 6.4%. There were two deaths, but none related to laparoscopy. The mean hospital stay was 4.2 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopy is a useful minimally invasive technique for the management of acute SBO. It is an excellent diagnostic tool and, in most cases, a therapeutic surgical approach in patients with SBO. However, a significant number of patients will require conversion.

Laparoscopic adhesiolysis for small bowel obstruction

BACKGROUND

Historically, laparotomy and open adhesiolysis have been the treatment for patients requiring surgery for small bowel obstruction. Laparoscopic adhesiolysis has not gained wide acceptance. The indications and outcomes of laparoscopic adhesiolysis for small bowel obstruction are not well established. The purpose of this paper is to review the literature on laparoscopic adhesiolysis for small bowel obstruction and to discuss patient selection, surgical technique, and outcomes.

DATA SOURCES

Medline search from 1980 to 2002.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic adhesiolysis has been shown to be safe and feasible in experienced hands. For selected patients, laparoscopic adhesiolysis offers the advantages of decreased length of stay, faster return to full activity, and decreased morbidity. Patient selection and surgical judgment appear to be the most important factors for a successful outcome.

Laparoscopic approach to postoperative adhesive obstruction

BACKGROUND

Some authors have assessed the feasibility of laparoscopy in the treatment of postoperative adhesive obstruction, but conclusions about its effectiveness are related to different selection criteria used for surgery. This paper reports on our experience in laparoscopic adhesiolysis and analyses the results on the basis of the selection criteria used.

METHODS

From January 1993 to December 2001, 65 patients were submitted to laparoscopic adhesiolysis for small bowel obstruction according to specific selection criteria. Of the 65 patients, 40 were admitted for acute obstruction and 25 for chronic or recurrent transit disturbances. Correlation between historical and clinical data and the results of surgical treatment were statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

The procedure was completed by laparoscopy in 52 patients (conversion rate: 20%). Mean postoperative stay was 4.4 days with a 12.3% morbidity and no mortality. Recurrence rate was 15.4%; a single correlation was found between recurrence and age.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic adhesiolysis in the treatment of small bowel obstructions seems to be effective; further studies are required to define selection criteria for surgery and confirm real advantages in terms of recurrences.

Laparoscopic diagnosis and treatment of intestinal obstruction

BACKGROUND

Intestinal obstruction is a common reason for general surgical referral. The traditional approach has been conservative management, followed by laparotomy if conservative measures are unsuccessful. However, with the advent of minimally invasive surgery, the need for laparotomy for this common problem is being challenged.

METHODS

From May 1991 to April 2001, 167 patients underwent laparoscopy for diagnosis and/or treatment of intestinal obstruction. Average patient age was 62 years (range, 21-98). The site of obstruction was the stomach in seven patients, small bowel in 116 patients, and colon in 44 patients.

RESULTS

Laparoscopy successfully diagnosed the site of obstruction in all patients. In addition, 154 patients (92.2%) were successfully treated laparoscopically without conversion to laparotomy. Both intraoperative and postoperative complication rates were low (3.5 and 18.6%, respectively) and compared favorably with those of published reports.

CONCLUSIONS

Intestinal obstruction can be approached safely and effectively by laparoscopy with the intent not only to correctly diagnose the patient but also to render treatment.

Laparoscopic Lysis of Adhesions

The surgical treatment of small bowel obstruction is evolving. Laparoscopic exploration and adhesiolysis is increasingly being utilized. We conducted a retrospective chart review of all patients who were operated on and discharged with the diagnosis of adhesiolysis for small bowel obstruction (SBO) from July 1999 to October 2000 at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. There were a total of 75 patients. Patients were grouped based on the type of operation: laparoscopic (lap), open, and converted. Thirty-four patients were attempted laparoscopically, 11 of those requiring conversion to open. Fifty-two patients were treated with a laparotomy. Complications contributing to morbidity were significantly lower in the lap group ( P < 0.01). There was no difference in morbidity between the converted and open groups. There were fewer pneumonias and wound infections in the lap group when compared to the open group, although it did not reach statistical difference. The reduction of post-op ileus in the lap group was statistically significant ( P < 0.01). Statistically significant differences between the lap and open groups were also found in estimated blood loss (EBL) ( P < 0.004), length of stay (LOS) ( P < 0.01), bowel resection ( P < 0.01) and op-time ( P < 0.003). Laparoscopic release of adhesions is a viable option in the surgical management of small bowel obstruction. A prospective randomized trial comparing both surgical techniques is needed to further validate the laparoscopic approach to small bowel obstruction.

Laparoscopic compared with conventional treatment of acute adhesive small bowel obstruction

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopy may be associated with fewer intra-abdominal adhesions and quicker recovery of bowel function, it remains unclear whether patients with acute small bowel obstruction (SBO) might benefit from laparoscopic techniques.

METHOD

The results of patients with acute SBO treated laparoscopically (LAP; n = 52) and conventionally (CONV; n = 52) were compared in a retrospective matched-pair analysis. Conversions were included in the laparoscopic group.

RESULTS

Complete laparoscopic treatment was performed in 25 patients (48.1 per cent). Major intraoperative complications occurred in 15 patients in the LAP group and eight in the CONV group (P = 0.156). Intraoperative perforations were more frequent in patients who had undergone more than one previous laparotomy (P = 0.066). Postoperative complications occurred in ten patients (19.2 per cent) in the LAP group and in 21 patients (40.4 per cent) who had conventional surgery (P = 0.032). Bowel movements started 3.5 days after operation in the LAP group and 4.4 days after conventional operation (P = 0.001). The length of hospital stay was 11.3 and 18.1 days respectively (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic treatment of acute SBO was feasible in about half of these patients. Postoperative recovery was improved after laparoscopic procedures but the risk of intraoperative complications increased. A laparoscopic approach seems justified in a subset of patients.

[Strangulated obturator hernia: a report of 17 cases]

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

To assess clinical, therapeutic and diagnostic findings of strangulated obturator hernias.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

Retrospective study of 17 patients (16 women, 1 man; average age: 81.7 years), all treated in the same service, for strangulated obturator hernia. The studied criteria were: clinical characteristics (general status, obstruction, sign of Romberg-Howship), morphologic exams, mean delay for surgical treatment, and occurrence of postoperative complications.

RESULTS

The clinical examination revealed small bowel obstruction in 94% of the patients (n = 16) and incomplete obstruction in 1 patient; 23.5% of the patients presented a sign of Romberg-Howship. A major slimming was observed in 82% of the cases. A computed tomography, performed in 3 patients, showed the presence of air in the under-pubic channel. Preoperative diagnosis of obturator hernia was suspected in 23.5% of the cases. Surgical treatment was performed after a mean delay of 5.3 d. The mortality and morbidity rates were respectively 35 and 18%.

CONCLUSION

Due to the low specificity of clinical examination, preoperative diagnosis of obturator hernia remains difficult. Computed tomography can be of great help for the diagnosis. Any therapeutic delay increasing mortality rate, surgery is mandatory in case of small bowel obstruction in order to make the diagnosis and the treatment of such rare pathology.

Enteroclysis-guided laparoscopic adhesiolysis in recurrent adhesive small bowel obstructions

The aim of this study was to point out the efficiency of enteroclysis assay in localization of intraabdominal adhesions that impede small bowel transit in patients with recurrent adhesive small bowel obstruction who underwent laparoscopic partial adhesiolysis. Between January 1998 and June 2001, 15 selected patients with recurrent adhesive small bowel obstructions were treated successfully by medical means and evaluated with enteroclysis to define the pathologic adhesive site that impeded bowel transit. If the results of enteroclysis were indicative, they underwent laparoscopic partial adhesiolysis. The mean duration of the laparoscopic procedure was 99 minutes. In one patient conversion to laparotomy occurred because of excessive adhesions, and in another patient a small bowel injury occurred and enterorrhaphy was performed laparoscopically. Mean postoperative hospital stay was 4 days. During a mean follow-up of 17.2 months (range, 6-39), there was no delayed morbidity or recurrence. Identification of the small bowel site of recurrent obstruction with enteroclysis permits limited laparoscopic adhesiolysis. This approach may be a rational alternative to not only open procedures but also complete laparoscopic adhesiolysis without enteroclysis.

Laparoscopic treatment of acute small bowel obstruction: a multicentre retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery is thought to promote early recovery and quicker return to bowel function. The objective was to evaluate the rate and predictive factors of success, the causes of failure, the morbidity, and mortality during and after hospitalization, as well as to determine whether laparoscopic treatment of acute small bowel obstruction offers the same benefits as for other laparoscopic procedures.

METHODS

The records of 308 patients with acute small bowel obstruction treated laparoscopically in 35 centres between 1 October 1988 and 30 September 1996 were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

Treatment was implemented completely by laparoscopy ('success' group) in 168 patients (54.6%). Conversion to laparotomy ('failure' group) was required in 140 patients (45.4%; during the same operation in 126 patients and after a median delay of 4 days (range: 1-12 days) in 14 patients). There were significantly more successes in patients with a history of one or two surgical interventions than in those with more than two (56% vs 37%; P < 0.05). There were significantly more successes in patients who had undergone appendectomy only (67/94; 71%) than in patients who (i) had no antecedent surgery (52%; P < 0.05), or (ii) underwent other surgery (33%; P < 0.001). The rate of success was significantly higher (P < 0.001) in patients operated on early (< 24 h) and in patients with bands (54%), than in those with adhesions (31%) or with other causes of obstruction (15%). The median duration of postoperative ileus was significantly shorter in the 'success' group than in the 'failure' group (2 days vs 4 days; P < 0.001). The median duration of postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the 'success' group than in the 'failure' group (4 days vs 10 days; P < 0.001). Fewer immediate wound complications were sustained in the 'success' group than in the 'failure' group (1.2% vs 10.7%; P < 0.001). The total number of immediate or delayed complications and particularly the number of recurrent obstructions after hospitalization as well as the number of deaths did not differ significantly between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Successful laparoscopic treatment of small bowel obstruction can be expected in patients who are seen early, and who have had one or two previous interventions (particularly appendectomy, especially if bands are found).