Conversion of laparoscopic colon resection does not affect survival in colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic and open resections of colon cancer are considered oncologically equivalent treatment methods. Conversion of laparoscopic procedures, however, was associated with decreased survival in colon cancer patients in the only prior study examining this question. We conducted this study to evaluate the effect of conversion on survival. METHODS: A series of consecutive patients treated with laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer (n = 174) in the period 1998-2003 was evaluated retrospectively. Median follow-up was 51 months with a minimum of 3 years. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality between laparoscopically completed and converted groups (22/143, 15.4% versus 8/31, 25.8%; OR 1.9, p = 0.164). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis did not show any survival difference between the two groups (p = 0.266). CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study suggest there is no survival difference in patients requiring conversion of laparoscopic resection indicated for colorectal cancer. Further examination of this question is warranted to determine whether laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer should be offered to all patients, including those at high risk for conversion.

Outcomes in patients treated by laparoscopic resection of rectal carcinoma after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: We analyzed the effect of neoadjuvant chemo radiation on feasibility and outcomes in rectal cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic resection of the rectum. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of a consecutive series of laparoscopic resections for rectal cancer from 1998 to 2004 (N=60). RESULTS: Eight patients received preoperative chemoradiation therapy (neoadjuvant group) for rectal cancer and 52 patients did not (primary surgical group). The conversion rate was higher in the neoadjuvant group, but this did not reach statistical significance (3/8, 37% in the neoadjuvant group vs. 7/52, 13% in the primary surgical group, P=0.12). Operative time was longer in the neoadjuvant group (170+/-60 vs 228+/-70 min, P=0.03). Complication rates (3/52, 5.7% in the primary surgical vs. 0% in the neoadjuvant group, P=1.0), and a median number of resected lymph nodes (14.5 in the primary surgical vs. 16.0 in the neoadjuvant group, P=0.81) were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer in patients after preoperative chemoradiation treatment seems to be associated with a higher conversion rate and a longer duration of surgery. No change in mortality and morbidity was detected. We encourage further investigation of laparoscopic rectal surgery for treatment of rectal cancer.

The influence of prior abdominal operations on conversion and complication rates in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: A history of a prior abdominal operation is common among patients presenting for laparoscopic colorectal surgery, and its impact on conversion and complication rates has been insufficiently studied. This study compares the conversion rates of patients with and without a prior abdominal operation (PAO). METHODS: We analyzed 1000 consecutive laparoscopic colorectal resection cases. RESULTS: Complete data on past surgical history were available on 820 of 1000 patients. The overall conversion rate was 14.8% (122/820). A history of PAO was present in 347 patients (42.3%). These patients experienced a higher conversion rate compared with non-PAO patients (68/347, 19.6% versus 54/473, 11.4%; P < 0.001; OR 1.9). Patients with PAO had a significantly higher rate of inadvertent enterotomy (5/347, 1.4% vs. 1/473, 0.2%; P = 0.04; OR 6.9), a higher incidence of postoperative ileus (23/347, 6.6% vs 14/473% 3.0; P = 0.012; OR 2.3), and higher reoperative rates (8/347, 2.3% vs 1/473, 0.2%; P = 0.006; OR 11.1). The incidence of other complications and mortality (total 6/820, 0.7%) was similar regardless of PAO status. CONCLUSION: Having a prior abdominal operation represents a risk factor for conversion in laparoscopic colon and rectal surgery. The incidence of a successfully completed laparoscopic operation, however, remains high in previously operated on patients.

Comparing results of residents and attending surgeons to determine whether laparoscopic colectomy is safe.

BACKGROUND: This study was undertaken to compare the technical success and outcomes of laparoscopic colectomy performed by resident surgeons (RS) and attending surgeons (AS). METHODS: A review of 451 consecutive laparoscopic colectomies performed by 2 surgeons either with or without a general surgery resident. Data reviewed included demographics, diagnoses, operative data, and outcomes. Comparison was made between patients operated on by RS under attending surgeon supervision, and patients operated on by AS alone. RESULTS: Of 451 patients, 324 were operated on by RS and 127 by AS. The mean age and preoperative diagnoses were similar between groups. Operative time was significantly longer in the RS group (155 minutes vs. 128 minutes, P < .05). Blood loss was slightly higher in RS groups but was not statistically significant (191 mL vs. 174 mL, P = .31). The incidence of conversion to an open procedure, postoperative complications, and length of stay were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Supervised RS can safely perform laparoscopic colectomy with results similar to AS. RS take longer to perform the procedure than AS.