ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To examine the change in practice from open to laparoscopic practice in our local trust and compare the benefits with those of an open surgery group. METHODS: This retrospective comprehensive review analyzed 225 patients who underwent resection of colon cancers at the Dae Jin Medical Center, including 182 who underwent laparoscopic surgery (LAC) and 43 who underwent conventional open surgery (OC), conducted by a single surgeon from August 2002 to August 2010. The LAC group was divided into two groups, 50 patients during the early period and 132 patients during the late period, and short-term and oncologic outcomes were recorded. Patients identified through clinical coding and data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences, version 18.0 (2009. SPSS Inc. USA). RESULTS: Comparisons of 43 open versus 50 early and 132 late laparoscopic colon surgeries for various indications and outcomes were made. The operative time was longer in the LAC group (early and late LAC group) than in the OC group. However, post operative recovery time (hospital stay, days to sips of water and days to soft diet) was significantly shorter in the early and late LAC group than in the OC group. There was no significant difference between the LAC groups and open group with respect to age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists, tumor-node stage, morbidity, mortality, overall survival rates, disease free survival rates and recurrence rates. CONCLUSION: In our experience, laparoscopic surgery resulted in acceptable short term outcomes and our results support those of other studies with respect to clinical outcomes of laparoscopic surgery.