Liao X, Li X, Cheng J, Zhang Y, Ding K, Li X. Extraperitoneal colostomy after laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection using a cannula for tunnel creation through a trocar port.
Surg Endosc 2021;
36:3178-3182. [PMID:
34160698 DOI:
10.1007/s00464-021-08621-9]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2021] [Accepted: 06/14/2021] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Extraperitoneal colostomy (EPC) after laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (APR) remains a challenge for surgeons. This study aims to summarize our laparoscopic EPC method and assess its effects versus a transperitoneal colostomy (TPC) for patients with rectal tumors.
METHODS
A total of 133 patients with rectal cancer treated with laparoscopic APR between May 2009 and May 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. The clinical data, including demographics, comorbidities, tumor stage, colostomy duration, and complications were compared between the EPC group and the TPC group.
RESULTS
The EPC group included 83 patients whose extraperitoneal tunnels were created using a cannula through a trocar port, and the TPC group included 50 patients whose stomata were formed traditionally. There were no differences in colostomy time [(23.1 ± 6) min vs. (21.4 ± 4) min, P = 0.078], number of parastomal dermatitis patients (5 vs. 2, P = 0.916), or number of stomal stenoses (1 vs. 1, P = 0.715) between the EPC and TPC groups. No cases of parastomal hernia developed in the EPC group, whereas 4 patients were diagnosed with a parastomal hernia; the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P = 0.036).
CONCLUSIONS
Laparoscopic EPC have a lower incidence of parastomal hernia than TPC. It is easy and inexpensive to create an extraperitoneal tunnel using a cannula through a trocar port.
Collapse