Hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy: the learning curve is for operative speed, not for quality

Impact of surgeon and hospital factors on length of stay after colorectal surgery systematic review

Background

Although length of stay (LOS) after colorectal surgery (CRS) is associated with worse patient and system level outcomes, the impact of surgeon and hospital-level factors on LOS after CRS has not been well investigated. The aim of this study was to synthesize the evidence for the impact of surgeon and hospital-level factors on LOS after CRS.

Methods

A comprehensive database search was conducted using terms related to LOS and CRS. Studies were included if they reported the effect of surgeon or hospital factors on LOS after elective CRS. The evidence for the effect of each surgeon and hospital factor on LOS was synthesized using vote counting by direction of effect, taking risk of bias into consideration.

Results

A total of 13 946 unique titles and abstracts were screened, and 69 studies met the inclusion criteria. All studies were retrospective and assessed a total of eight factors. Surgeon factors such as increasing surgeon volume, colorectal surgical specialty, and progression along a learning curve were significantly associated with decreased LOS (effect seen in 87.5 per cent, 100 per cent, and 93.3 per cent of studies respectively). In contrast, hospital factors such as hospital volume and teaching hospital status were not significantly associated with LOS.

Conclusion

Provider-related factors were found to be significantly associated with LOS after elective CRS. In particular, surgeon-related factors related to experience specifically impacted LOS, whereas hospital-related factors did not. Understanding the mechanisms underlying these relationships may allow for tailoring of interventions to reduce LOS.

Hand Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: Surgical and Oncological Outcomes from a Single Tertiary Referral Centre

The aim of this study was to report overall experience, perioperative and long-term survival results in a single tertiary referral center in Lithuania with hand assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) for colorectal cancer. A prospectively maintained database included 467 patients who underwent HALS for left-sided colon and rectal cancer, from April 2006 to October 2016. All those operations were performed by three consultant surgeons and nine surgical residents, in all cases assisted by one of the same consultant surgeons. There were 230 (49.25%) females, with an average age of 64 ± 9.7 years (range, 26–91 years). The procedures performed included 170 (36.4%) anterior rectal resections with partial mesorectal excision, 160 (34.26%) sigmoid colectomies, 81 (17.35%) left hemicolectomies, 45 (9.64%) low anterior rectal resections with total mesorectal excision, and 11 (2.25%) other procedures. Stage I colorectal cancer was found in 140 (29.98%) patients, 139 (29.76%) stage II, 152 (32.55%) stage III and 36 (7.71%) stage IV. There were five conversions to open surgery (1.1%). The mean postoperative hospital stay was 6.9 ± 3.4 days (range, 1–30 days). In total, 33 (7.06%) patients developed postoperative complications. The most common complications were small bowel obstruction (n = 6), anastomotic leakage (n = 5), intraabdominal abscess (n = 4) and dysuria (n = 4). There were two postoperative deaths (0.43%). Overall, 5-year survival for all TNM stages was 85.7%, 93.2% for stage I, 88.5% for stage II and 76.3% for stage III. Hand assisted colorectal surgery for left-sided colon and rectal cancer in a single tertiary referral center was feasible and safe, having all the advantages of minimally invasive surgery, with good perioperative parameters, adequate oncological quality and excellent survival.

Reverse rolling-mat type lymph node dissection is the key step to solve the operative difficulties in hand-assisted laparoscopic D2 radical gastrectomy

Background

We have improved and named a new reverse rolling-mat type lymph node dissection, which effectively solves the dilemma faced by the traditional lymph node dissection in hand-assisted laparoscopic D2 radical gastrectomy through the optimization of the surgical procedure. However, the relevant clinical data are still scarce. The study aims to compare the clinical effects of two surgical procedure and explore the safety and feasibility of “reverse procedure”.

Study design

The clinicopathological data of 195 patients who underwent hand-assisted D2 radical total gastrectomy (HALTG) in our hospital from January 2011 to September 2017 were collected. A retrospective case–control study was used to compare the clinical outcomes of the two patterns of lymph node dissection. Among them, 89 patients underwent “cabbage type” lymph node dissection and 106 patients underwent the “reverse procedure” lymph node dissection.

Results

There were no significant differences between the two groups of patients in terms of gender, age, tumor location, incision length, postoperative hospitalization duration, pathological classification, recent complications, long-term recurrence and metastasis. The operation time of “cabbage type” group was shorter than that of “reverse procedure” group (178.35 ± 31.52 min vs 191.25 ± 32.77 min; P = 0.006). While, in the “reverse procedure” group, intraoperative blood loss was less (249.4 ± 143.12 vs 213.58 ± 101.43; P = 0.049), and there were more numbers of lymph nodes dissected (18.04 ± 7.00 vs 32.25 ± 14.23; P < 0.001).

Conclusion

The pattern of reverse rolling-mat type lymph node dissection in HALTG perform well in terms of safety and feasibility.

Comparison of Short-Term Outcomes Between Hand-assisted Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy and Laparoscopy-assisted Distal Gastrectomy in Gastric Cancer

Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery is considered to provide the benefits of laparoscopic surgery in various diseases. However, limited information is available regarding the feasibility of hand-assisted laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (HALDG)-a subset of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery-as a gastric cancer treatment. This study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of HALDG compared with laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG). Consecutive patients who underwent HALDG (n=58) or LADG (n=90) for stage I gastric cancer between 2005 and 2016 were eligible. Operative time was significantly shorter and blood loss was significantly higher in HALDG than in LADG (P<0.001, both). Postoperative aminotransferase levels were significantly lower in HALDG than in LADG (P<0.001). There was no significant difference in perioperative complications, a number of analgesics, postoperative C-reactive protein levels, and 3-year relapse-free and overall survival rates between the groups. This study suggests that HALDG is a safe and feasible approach and could become an effective option for stage I gastric cancer treatment.

Feasibility of hand-assisted laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal surface malignancy

BACKGROUND

In light of the modern surgical trend towards minimally invasive surgery, we aim to assess the feasibility of hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in peritoneal surface malignancy (PSM).

METHODS

Patients with PSM secondary to colorectal cancer or pseudomyxoma peritonei with peritoneal cancer index (PCI) of ≤ 10 were considered for HAL CRS and HIPEC. One patient had PCI of 15 but based on the disease distribution laparoscopic-assisted CRS and HIPEC was thought to be feasible, thus was also included. These patients were compared to matched controls who underwent open CRS and HIPEC for similar pathologies. Matching was performed on age and PCI to reflect a comparable complexity of the operation, and tumor grade for comparable risk of disease recurrence.

RESULTS

Eleven patients were included in each group. In both groups, mean PCI was 4.1, mean age was 58.5 years, and 81.8% were well-moderately differentiated tumors. Complete cytoreduction was achieved in all patients. Upon comparison, HAL patients had significantly less blood loss and 3-day shorter hospitalization. No difference was demonstrated in operative time, number of visceral resections, and rate of omentectomy/peritonectomy. Also, no difference was detected in morbidities and 30-day readmission rates. No intraperitoneal recurrences have been reported in the HAL group after a median follow-up of 11 months.

CONCLUSION

HAL CRS and HIPEC is a feasible procedure and can be considered for PSM with low PCI. It offers very acceptable and comparable short-term outcomes to the conventional open approach.

Colorectal surgeons should be open to modern surgical technologies for challenging cases

Today, colorectal surgeons globally are practicing in an exciting era where surgical technologies are constantly emerging. Most of these cutting-edge technologies are readily available in Australia and New Zealand at present. Thus the 'modern surgeon' should always be defined by this open-minded attitude towards these new and emerging surgical technologies. This review article highlights current modalities that we have been using in our north-Brisbane public and private hospitals for cases predicted to be technically challenging using minimally invasive approaches for most of them. We examined the current evidence regarding the following modalities and critiqued their use in clinical practice: lighted ureteric stents, minimally invasive surgery approaches of laparoscopy and robotic surgery, pressure barrier insufflation devices, 3D camera systems, hand-assist device ports and indocyanine green dye fluorescence angiography. The objective of this review paper is to alert colorectal surgeons to new surgical technologies available to them, to encourage colorectal surgeons' familiarization with these many technologies, and to support evidence-based consideration for the clinical use of such. These technologies should be supplemental aides to the safe, oncologically adequate and efficient operation that they already routinely perform.

Hand-assisted Laparoscopy: Expensive but Considerable Step Between Laparoscopic and Open Colectomy

PURPOSE

Hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy (HALC) and laparoscopic-assisted colectomy (LAC) have been shown to have comparable short-term outcomes while there are limited data regarding costs. The aim of our study was to compare the short-term outcomes and costs of HALC and LAC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In total, 46 patients who underwent HALC or LAC for benign or malignant disease between January 2011 and December 2014 at our institution were included in the study. Patients were randomized into HALC or LAC group. Patients' demographics and characteristics, operative details, short-term outcomes, and costs were evaluated.

RESULTS

There were 25 patients in LAC group and 21 patients in HALC group. Patient's demographics and characteristics and short-term outcomes were comparable between the LAC and HALC groups. Conversion rate was significantly lower in the HALC group (4.7% vs. 28%, P=0.03) while surgical costs ($1706.83±203.70 vs. $1304.93±305.67, P=0.038) and total costs ($2427.18±254.27 vs. $2044.03±215.22, P=0.021) were significantly higher in HALC group.

CONCLUSIONS

HALC is associated with increased surgical and total hospital costs, and decreased rate of conversion. Although it is more expensive, HALC may be helpful by providing a step between LAC and open surgery before considering conversion.

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.

Is there anything we can modify among factors associated with morbidity following elective laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for diverticulitis?

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for diverticulitis is widely accepted, using either endolinear staplers or traditional linear staplers under direct vision through the extraction site to transect the rectum. The aim of this study was to assess modifiable factors affecting perioperative morbidity after elective laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for diverticulitis.

METHODS

Potential associations between perioperative morbidity and demographic, disease-related, and treatment-related factors were assessed on all consecutive patients included in a prospectively collected database undergoing elective laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for diverticulitis between 1992 and 2013. Rectal transection with a linear stapler under direct vision through the extraction site was considered compatible with laparoscopic technique.

RESULTS

There were two deaths out of 1059 patients (0.19 %). Conversion rate was 13.1 %, overall morbidity 28 %, and anastomotic leak 3.7 %. Independent factors associated with morbidity in an intent-to-treat analysis were ASA 3 (OR 1.53, p = 0.006), conversion (OR 1.71, p = 0.015), and rectal transection without endolinear stapling (traditional linear stapler: OR 1.75, p = 0.003; surgical knife: OR 2.09, p = 0.002). The same factors along with complicated diverticulitis (OR 1.56, p = 0.013) were independently associated with overall morbidity among laparoscopically completed cases. BMI ≥ 35 (OR 2.3, p = 0.017), complicated diverticulitis (OR 2.37, p = 0.002), and rectal transection with a traditional linear stapler (OR 2.19, p = 0.018) were independently associated with abdomino-pelvic infections, both in an intent-to-treat analysis and among laparoscopically completed cases. The number of endolinear stapler firings was not associated with morbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

Most factors associated with morbidity of laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for diverticulitis cannot be easily modified. With the limitation of a retrospective analysis, modifiable factors to minimize morbidity are laparoscopic completion and endolinear stapling.

Adoption of Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery: It Was Quite a Journey

The adoption of laparoscopic colorectal surgery has been a slow but steady progress. The first adopters rapidly expanded the application of the technology to all colorectal pathology. Issues related to extraction and port site recurrence of cancer delayed widespread adoption until incontrovertible data from well-powered prospective randomized studies confirmed equipoise with open surgery. Since that time, the data has consistently demonstrated patient-care benefits related to reductions in both short- and long-term complications historically associated with open colectomy. The potential for further improvement related to single-port access, robotic assistance, and natural orifice access for both the surgery and/or extraction will await the test of time. However, it is clear now that laparoscopic colorectal surgery is the new standard of care and a key enabler of enhanced recovery programs.

Learning curve for endoscope holder in endoscopic thyroidectomy via complete areola approach: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic thyroidectomy via complete areola approach (ETCAA) is becoming the preferred choice of some patients due to the perfect cosmetic result. Endoscope holder plays an important role in the procedures. Research on the learning curve is helpful in training of endoscope holder and improvement of the whole procedure.

METHODS

This prospective study investigated 100 consecutive patients who underwent ETCAA performed by a single experienced surgeon and a single inexperienced endoscope holder. Patients were equally divided into ten groups chronologically. One-way analysis of variance, Student-Newman-Keuls test, and Pearson Chi square test were used to analyze statistical significance for clinical data. The correlativity between the operative time and the case number, the endoscope holding score and the case number, the operative time and the interval of neighboring procedures, the endoscope holding score and the interval of neighboring procedures were analyzed with linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

The mean operative time was 96.30 ± 13.10 min, and the mean endoscope holding score was 74.65 ± 14.08. There were significant differences among the mean operative time (P < 0.0001) and the mean endoscope holding score (P < 0.0001). Multiple comparison revealed that the mean operative time of group 7, 8, 9, 10 were shorter than group 4, 5, 6, meanwhile the mean operative time of group 4, 5, 6 were shorter than group 1, 2, 3. Moreover, the mean endoscope holding score of group 7, 8, 9, 10 were higher than group 4, 5, 6, and the mean endoscope holding score of group 4, 5, 6 were higher than group 1, 2, 3. Linear regression analysis showed negative correlation between the operative time and the case number (r = -0.746, P < 0.0001), positive correlation between the endoscope holding score and the case number (r = 0.765, P < 0.0001), positive correlation between the operative time and the interval of neighboring procedures (r = 0.777, P = 0.008), and negative correlation between the endoscope holding score and the interval of neighboring procedures (r = -0.809, P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

A specific learning curve for endoscope holder in ETCAA does exist. The initial 30 cases composed the infancy of the learning curve, and the endoscope holder could expect a learning curve of approximately 60 cases in order to achieve proficiency. Increasing the operating frequency would help shorten the learning curve.

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-term Outcomes of Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery vs. Open Surgery on Right Colon Cancer: A Case-Controlled Study

Purpose

This study was designed to evaluate short-term clinical outcomes by comparing hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery with open surgery for right colon cancer.

Methods

Sixteen patients who underwent a hand-assisted laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (HAL-RHC group) and 33 patients who underwent a conventional open right hemicolectomy (open group) during the same period were enrolled in this study with a case-controlled design.

Results

The operation time was 217 minutes in the HAL-RHC group and 213 minutes in the open group (P = 0.389). The numbers of retrieved lymph nodes were similar between the two groups (31 in the HAL-RHC group and 36 in the open group, P = 0.737). Also, there were no significant difference in the incidence of immediate postoperative leukocytosis, the administration of additional pain killers, and the postoperative recovery parameters. First flatus was shown on postoperative days 3.5 in the HAL-RHC group and 3.4 in the open group (P = 0.486). Drinking water and soft diet were started on postoperative days 4.8 and 5.9, respectively, in the HAL-RHC group and similarly 4.6 and 5.6 in the open group (P = 0.402 and P = 0.551). The duration of hospital stay was shorter in the HAL-RHC group than in the open group (10.3 days vs. 13.5 days, P = 0.048). No significant difference in the complication rates was shown between the two groups, and no postoperative mortality was encountered in either group.

Conclusion

The patients with right colon cancer in the HAL-RHC group had similar pathologic and postoperative recovery parameters to those of the patients in the open group. The patients in the HAL-RHC group had shorter hospital stays than those in the open group. Therefore, hand-assisted laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for right-sided colon cancer is feasible.

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.

Feasibility of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery as compared to open surgery for sigmoid colon cancer: a case-controlled study

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate short-term clinical outcomes by comparing hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) with open surgery for sigmoid colon cancer.

METHODS

Twenty-six patients who underwent a hand-assisted laparoscopic anterior resection (HAL-AR group) and 52 patients who underwent a conventional open anterior resection during the same period were enrolled (open group) in this study with a case-controlled design.

RESULTS

Pathologic parameters were similar between the two groups. The incidences of immediate postoperative leukocytosis were 38.5% in the HAL-AR group and 69.2% in the open group (P = 0.009). There were no significant differences between the two groups as to leukocyte count, hemoglobin, and hematocrits (P = 0.758, P = 0.383, and P = 0.285, respectively). Of the postoperative recovery indicators, first flatus, sips of water and soft diet started on postoperative days 3, 5, 7 in the HALS group and on days 4, 5, 6 in the open group showed statistical significance (P = 0.021, P = 0.259, and P = 0.174, respectively). Administration of additional pain killers was needed for 1.2 days in the HAL-AR group and 2.4 days in the open group (P = 0.002). No significant differences in the durations of hospital stay and the rates of postoperative complications were noted, and no postoperative mortality was encountered in either group.

CONCLUSION

The patients with sigmoid colon cancer who underwent a HAL-AR had a lower incidence of postoperative leukocytosis, less administration of pain killers, and faster first flatus than those who underwent open surgery. Clinical outcomes for patients' recovery and pathology status were similar between the two groups. Therefore, a HAL-AR for sigmoid colon cancer is feasible and has the same benefit as minimally invasive surgery.

MRSA infections following colorectal surgery in an enhanced recovery programme

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections in a cohort of patients undergoing elective colorectal resections within an enhanced recovery programme.

METHOD

A prospective database of all patients undergoing colorectal resections by a single surgical team over a 3.5-year period was reviewed. Demographics including age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, type of surgery (abdominal or pelvic) and whether or not the procedure was laparoscopic or open were analysed. All patients were screened preoperatively and postoperatively and on discharge for MRSA. Patients found preoperatively to be MRSA positive were excluded from the study.

RESULTS

In all, 186 patients underwent colorectal resection over the time reviewed. There were 113 laparoscopic resections, 70 open resections and three laparoscopic converted to open resections. Five patients (2.7%) were found to be MRSA positive postoperatively. All of these had open rather than laparoscopic surgery (P < 0.01). Length of stay for patients that had MRSA infections was significantly longer than those remaining MRSA free (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that patients who successfully undergo laparoscopic colorectal resections within an enhanced recovery programme have a lower incidence of postoperative MRSA infections.

Laparoscopic colon resection: is it being utilized?

Since its inception, the use of laparoscopy for colon surgery has slowly increased, albeit at a slower rate than for cholecystectomy. Initial concerns about the safety and efficacy of laparoscopy have been addressed, and it is now known to have several potential short-term and long-term benefits for the patient. Early studies likely underestimated use of laparoscopy because of coding error. Currently, 40% to 50% of colectomies in the United States are performed laparoscopically, with a 10% to 20% rate of conversion to an open operation. The definitions oflaparoscopy and conversion to open remain at the discretion of the surgeons and their coders. Disparities still exist among use based on several patient, hospital, and surgeon factors. In the future, we will likely see a continuing increase in use as the new generation of surgeons enters practice, and there will be an increasing role for laparoscopy in rectal surgery. The benefit and extent of robotic surgery, natural orifice surgery, and single-incision surgery for minimally invasive colectomies are yet to be defined.

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.