Open or laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a retrospective comparative study. Gastroenterol Nurs. 2013;36:37-41. [PMID: 23364364 DOI: 10.1097/SGA.0b013e318280f867]

Giant lipoma in the Retzius space resected under laparoscopy: A case report

Lipoma is a common type of benign soft tissue tumor that can occur in the shoulders, neck and back, in addition to other body parts. The Retzius space is a small anatomical space between the pubic symphysis and the bladder located extraperitoneally and filled with loose fatty connective tissue. Giant lipomas are rare in the Retzius space. A 61-year-old Chinese male arrived at Beijing Yanhua Hospital (Beijing, China) due to frequent urination, and CT scan images of the lower abdomen observed a large pelvic mass and left inguinal hernia. Preoperative clinical manifestations and auxiliary examination suggested that the tumor originated from the urinary bladder wall. The maximum tumor diameter was ~25 cm and abdominal pressure was increased. Therefore, laparoscopic pelvic tumor resection combined with inguinal hernia repair was attempted. Intraoperatively, the tumor was found to originate from the Retzius space and the postoperative pathological diagnosis was lipoma. The present case report may serve as a reference for minimally invasive treatment of this type of rare disease in future.

Postoperative Discomfort Among Laparotomy Patients from a Selected Hospital at Mangaluru: An Observational Study

Background Factors causing postoperative discomfort after laparotomy are numerous and must be explored in depth. The postoperative distress may significantly affect the patient's state of well-being. Hence, the present study aims to assess the factors contributing to discomfort after laparotomy.

Aim The aim was to assess and compare the discomfort between open and laparoscopic abdominal surgery.

Objectives of the Study

1. To analyze the causes of patient's discomfort after abdominal surgery.

2. To compare the discomfort between open and laparoscopic abdominal surgery.

3. To determine the association between pain and selected variables among open and laparoscopic abdominal surgery.

Materials and Methods An exploratory approach with a prospective observational design was adopted for this study. Using the purposive sampling technique, 100 patients were selected to open and 100 to laparoscopic abdominal surgery groups. Data were collected using demographic and clinical proforma and standardized postoperative discomfort inventory 6 and 24 hours after the surgery. The assessment focused on the study variables such as symptoms after the surgery and the factors contributing to the postoperative discomfort.

Statistical Analysis The collected data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics using the SPSS software version 20.

Results Among 200 participants, most of the open (68%) and laparoscopic abdominal surgeries (42%) belong to 25 to 35 years of age. Also, 54% and 13% were diabetic in open and laparoscopic abdominal surgery groups, respectively. Most samples (56% in open and 68% in laparoscopic surgery) stayed 5 and 10 hours in postoperative ICU. In open and laparoscopic abdominal surgeries, pain is the primary (100%) cause of postoperative discomfort after 6 hours of surgery. Movement restriction is also the reason for significant discomfort both in open (98%) and laparoscopic (100%) abdominal surgeries.

In contrast, pain (99% and 100%), movement restriction (92% and 95%), and abdominal distention (61% and 34%) were the major problems contributing to the patient's discomfort after 24 hours of both open and laparoscopic surgeries too. There was a significant difference in causes of patient discomfort between open and laparoscopic abdominal surgery after 6 hours (P < 0.05), except for discomfort related to IV drip (P = 0.852), constipation (P = 0.2), and chills (P = 0.6).

Conclusion Even though pain is the major distressing factor both in open and laparoscopic surgeries, the current study highlights a few other factors that affect postoperative recovery. Nurses' attention to such distressing factors will fasten patients' recovery and quality of life after abdominal surgery.

A meta-analysis of short-term outcome of laparoscopic surgery versus conventional open surgery on colorectal carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this article is to study the superiority and safety of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal carcinoma.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Laparoscopy in rectal cancer is still not recommended as the treatment of choice by National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Laparoscopic rectal surgery is more complex and technically demanding, especially for mid and low rectal cancer.

METHODS

A computer-based online research of retrospective or prospective studies addressing laparoscopic surgery versus conventional open surgery for colorectal carcinoma published in the last 11 years was performed in electronic database (Wangfang Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Medical Current Contents, Pubmed, Medline, Ovid, Elsevier, ISI Web of Knowledge, Cohrane Database of Systematic Reviews). Selective trials were analyzed by the Review Manager 5.2 software.

RESULTS

A total of 9 clinical trials, involving a total of 4747 patients, were identified. A meta-analysis showed that operating time was not significantly different between the 2 groups [WMD = 0.46, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): -55.68 to 56.60, P = .99], intraoperative blood loss in laparoscopic surgery group was less than conventional open surgery group (WMD = -64.66, 95% CI: -87.31 to 42.01, P < .01); No significant difference in the number of lymph node retrieved from postoperative pathologic specimens was found between the 2 groups (WMD = -0.75, 95% CI: -1.72 to 0.23, P = .14); Postoperative time to flatus in laparoscopic surgery group was earlier than that in open surgery significantly (WMD = -1.22, 95% CI: -1.53 to -0.91, P < .01). The cases of postoperative complications were significantly different between the 2 groups, which showed that the cases of laparoscopic surgery group were less than those of open surgery group [odds ratio (OR) = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.52∼0.72, P < .01]; Moreover, hospital stay of laparoscopic surgery group was shorter than that of open surgery that showed significant difference (WMD = -2.38, 95% CI:-3.30 to -1.46, P < .01).

CONCLUSION

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery are superior than conventional open surgery that include more safety and feasibility, and is expected to be a standardization operation method for colorectal carcinoma.

Postoperative pain documentation in a hospital setting: A topical review

Background and aims

Nursing documentation supports continuity of care and provides important means of communication among clinicians. The aim of this topical review was to evaluate the published empirical studies on postoperative pain documentation in a hospital setting.

Methods

The review was conducted through a systematic search of electronic databases: Web of Science, PubMed/Medline, CINAHL, Embase, Ovid/Medline, Scopus and Cochrane Library. Ten studies were included. Study designs, documented postoperative pain information, quality of pain documentation, reported quality of postoperative pain management and documentation, and suggestions for future research and practice improvements were extracted from the studies.

Results

The most commonly used study design was a descriptive retrospective patient record review. The most commonly reported types of information were pain assessment, use of pain assessment tools, useof pain management interventions, reassessment, types of analgesics used, demographic information and pain intensity. All ten studies reported that the quality of postoperative pain documentation does not meet acceptable standards and that there is a need for improvement. The studies found that organization of regular pain management education for nurses is important for the future.

Conclusions

Postoperative pain documentation needs to beimproved. Regular educational programmes and development of monitoring systems for systematic evaluation of pain documentation are needed. Guidelines and recommendations should be based on the latest research evidence, and systematically implemented into practice.

Implications

Comprehensive auditing tools for evaluation of pain documentation can make quality assessment easier and coherent. Specific and clear documentation guidelines are needed and existing guidelines should be better implemented into practice. There is a need to increase nurses’ knowledge of postoperative pain management, assessment and documentation. Studies evaluating effectiveness of high quality pain documentation are required.

Open versus Laparoscopic Surgery: Does the Surgical Technique Influence Pain Outcome? Results from an International Registry

Postoperative pain management relevant for specific surgical procedures is debated. The importance of evaluating pain with consideration given to type of surgery and the patient's perspective has been emphasized. In this prospective cohort study, we analysed outcome data from 607 patients in the international PAIN OUT registry for assessment and comparison of postoperative pain outcome within the 24 first hours after laparoscopic and open colonic surgery. Patients from the laparoscopic group scored minimum pain at a higher level than the open group (P = 0.012). Apart from minimum pain, no other significant differences in patient reported outcomes were observed. Maximum pain scores >3 were reported from 77% (laparoscopic) and 68% (open) patients (mean ≥ 5 in both groups). Pain interference with mobilization was reported by 87–93% of patients. Both groups scored high levels of patient satisfaction. In the open group, a higher frequency of patients received a combination of general and regional anaesthesia, which had an impact of the minimum pain score. Our results from registry data indicate that surgical technique does not influence the quality of postoperative pain management during the first postoperative day if adequate analgesia is given.

Short-term outcomes between laparoscopy-assisted and open colorectomy for colorectal cancer in elderly patients: A case-matched control study

With the increase in life expectancy, surgical intervention for colorectal cancer (CRC) is more frequently performed in elderly patients. This retrospective study was designed to compare short-term outcomes between laparoscopy-assisted colorectomy (LC) and open colorectomy (OC) in elderly patients with CRC. A total of 89 CRC patients aged ≥75 years undergoing LC were matched with 89 counterparts undergoing OC. The matching criteria included general information and preoperative status. The operative data and short-term postoperative outcomes were compared. Following analysis, patients in the LC and OC groups were comparable for the matching criteria. Compared with the OC group, the operative time was longer (P=0.046), but the estimated blood loss (P<0.001) and intraoperative transfusion (P=0.042) were less in the LC group. As regards short-term postoperative outcomes, the duration of postoperative hospital stay was shorter (P=0.001) and the incidence of wound complications was lower (P=0.044) with LC. The overall complication, other complications, reoperation and mortality rates were comparable between the two groups. In conclusion, considering the operative variables and short-term outcomes, LC is a safe procedure and appears to be superior to OC for elderly patients with CRC.

Risk factors for postoperative complications of laparoscopic-assisted surgery for colorectal cancer

AIM: To explore the risk factors for postoperative complications of laparoscopic-assisted surgery for colorectal cancer.

METHODS: Eighty-six patients who underwent laparoscopic assisted surgery for colorectal cancer were analyzed retrospectively. The factors potentially related to postoperative complications were analyzed by univariate analysis and multivariate Logistic linear regression analysis.

RESULTS: Of the 86 patients, 16 (18.60%) developed complications. Univariate analysis revealed that age, body mass index (BMI), gestational diabetes mellitus and preoperative nutritional status were main factors affecting the development of complications (P = 0.018, 0.019, 0.017, 0.013), while sex, operation time, tumor size and Duke stage had no significant impact on the development of complications (P > 0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that age, BMI and gestational diabetes mellitus were independent risk factors [odds ratio (OR) = 5.385, 6.751, 5.006; confidence interval: 1.776-16.322, 1.983-22.985, 1.186-21.120].

CONCLUSION: The rate of postoperative complications of laparoscopy aided surgery for colorectal cancer is high. Age, BMI, gestational diabetes mellitus and preoperative nutritional status are main factors affecting the development of complications, and age, BMI and gestational diabetes mellitus are independent risk factors.

Comparison of the clinical outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted versus open surgery for colorectal cancer

The present study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted surgery versus open surgery for colorectal cancer and investigate the oncological safety and potential advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic-assisted surgery for colorectal cancer. The medical records from a total of 160 patients who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer between January 2009 and January 2013 at The Second Hospital of Dalian Medical University (Dalian, China) were retrospectively analyzed. The patients who underwent laparoscopic-assisted surgery showed significant advantages due to the minimally invasive nature of the surgery compared with those who underwent open surgery, namely, less blood loss (P=0.002), shorter time to flatus (P<0.001), bowel movement (P=0.009) and liquid diet intake (P=0.015), earlier ambulation time (P=0.006), smaller length of incision (P<0.001) and a shorter post-operative hospital stay (P=0.007). However, laparoscopic-assisted surgery for colorectal cancer resulted in a longer operative time (P=0.015) and higher surgery expenditure (P=0.003) and total hospitalization costs (P<0.001) compared with open surgery. There were no statistically significant differences between the intraoperative and post-operative complications. There were no differences in the local recurrence (P=0.699) or distant metastasis (P=0.699) rates. In addition, no differences were found in overall survival (P=0.894) and disease-free survival (P=0.701). These findings indicated that laparoscopic-assisted surgery for colorectal cancer had the clear advantages of a minimally invasive surgery and relative disadvantages, including a longer surgery time and higher cost, and exhibited similar rates of recurrence and survival compared with open surgery.

Incidence trends and predictors for cost and average lengths of stay in colorectal cancer surgery

AIM: To evaluate the changing trends and outcomes of colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery performed at a large single institution in Taiwan.

METHODS: This study retrospectively analyzed 778 patients who received colorectal cancer surgery at E-Da Hospital in Taiwan from 2004 to 2009. These patients were from health examination, inpatient or emergency settings. The following attributes were analyzed in patients who had undergone CRC surgical procedures: gender, age, source, surgical type, tumor number, tumor size, number of lymph node metastasis, pathologic differentiation, chemotherapy, distant metastases, tumor site, tumor stage, average hospitalization cost and average lengths of stay (ALOS). The odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals were calculated to assess the relative rate of change. Regression models were employed to predict average hospitalization cost and ALOS.

RESULTS: The study sample included 458 (58.87%) males and 320 (41.13%) females with a mean age of 64.53 years (standard deviation, 12.33 years; range, 28-86 years). The principal patient source came from inpatient and emergency room (96.02%). The principal tumor sites were noted at the sigmoid colon (35.73%) and rectum (30.46%). Most patients exhibited a tumor stage of 2 (37.28%) or 3 (34.19%). The number of new CRC surgeries performed per 100000 persons was 12.21 in 2004 and gradually increased to 17.89 in 2009, representing a change of 46.52%. During the same period, the average hospitalization cost and ALOS decreased from $5303 to $4062 and from 19.7 to 14.4 d, respectively. The following factors were associated with considerably decreased hospital resource utilization: age, source, surgical type, tumor size, tumor site, and tumor stage.

CONCLUSION: These results can be generalized to patient populations elsewhere in Taiwan and to other countries with similar patient profiles.

Cost savings for elective laparoscopic resection compared with open resection for colorectal cancer in a region of high uptake

BACKGROUND

Previous cost analyses of laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer (CRC) reported slightly higher or similar costs to those of open resection. These analyses were based on randomised controlled trials when the laparoscopic approach was newly adopted. This study compared costs for laparoscopic versus open resection in a region of high uptake where adoption is mature.

METHODS

Hospital cost data were obtained for elective resections for CRC that occurred between June 2009 and June 2011 in public hospitals in Queensland, Australia. The primary outcome was total cost and secondary outcomes were length-of-stay, operating time, and ICU admission. Multivariate least-squares regression was used to adjust for potential confounders: age, sex, comorbidities, procedure, and hospital volume.

RESULTS

The crude mean cost for laparoscopic resection was euro 20,036 compared with that for open resection of euro 22,780 (difference = euro 2,744). Patients who underwent laparoscopic resection (744/1,397; 53 %) were slightly younger and had fewer comorbidities (decreasing costs) but more had rectal surgery (increasing costs). The adjusted mean cost for laparoscopic resection was euro 20,396 compared with euro 22,442 for open resection (difference = euro 2,054). Compared with open resection, when adjusted for potential confounders, laparoscopic resection resulted in similar operating time (216 vs. 214 min), shorter length-of-stay (difference = -1.1 days, 95 % CI -1.9, -0.3), and shorter admission to ICU (difference = -7.3 h, 95 % CI -11.9, -2.7).

CONCLUSIONS

This non-randomised study in a region of high uptake found a similar operating time and lower cost for laparoscopic resection for CRC compared with those of open resection due to a shorter length-of-stay and shorter time in ICU. Laparoscopic resection for CRC saves money when the procedure is widely adopted and surgeons are experienced in the technique.