Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a comparison of natural orifice versus transabdominal specimen extraction

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LRH) involves making an abdominal incision to remove the specimen and perform the anastomosis. Totally laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) may lead to better outcomes compared to LRH.

Study design

Forty consecutive female patients total were reviewed: 20 LRH and 20 NOSE. The two groups were matched for sex, age, race, American Society of Anesthesiologist score, benign and malignant disease, tumor stage, lymph node number, tumor size, specimen length, body mass index, previous abdominal surgeries, and comorbidities.

Results

The two groups were comparable for all categories. Follow-up was available on all patients (100 %). The mean follow-up was 38.93 months (range 15–63 months). There was no difference between postoperative pain score between the two groups on postoperative day (POD) 1, POD 2, and POD day 14 (p = 0.571), (p = 0.861), (p = 0.688), respectively. There was no difference in the postoperative in-hospital morphine equivalents (p = 0.963). The NOSE group had no postoperative hernia formation or wound infections compared to the LRH, however, the difference was not significant (p = 0.439) and (p = 0.267), respectively. There was no difference in postoperative ileus (p = 0.192), septic complications (p = 1.000), readmission rate (p = 0.394), time interval for postoperative chemotherapy (p = 0.645), SDS (p = 0.446) or QLI (p = 0.175). There was no difference in length of hospital stay with 5.3 days for the LRH group and 7.7 days for the NOSE group (p = 0.183). The NOSE group had statistically significant better cosmetic scores (p = 0.018).

Conclusion

NOSE is comparable LRH with regard to postoperative outcomes and quality of life. NOSE is safe and maintains strict oncologic standards. NOSE is associated with a better cosmetic outcome compared to LRH.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fowler DL, White SA (1991) Laparoscopy-assisted sigmoid resection. Surg Laparosc Endosc 1:183–188

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Cooperman AM, Katz V, Zimmon D, Botero G (1991) Laparoscopic colon resection: a case report. J Laparoendosc Surg 1:221–224

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Liberman MA, Phillips FH, Carroll BJ et al (1996) Laparoscopic colectomy vs traditional colectomy for diverticulitis. Surg Endosc 10:15–18

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Kohler L, Rixen D, Troidl H (1998) Laparoscopic colorectal resection for diverticulitis. Int J Colorectal Dis 13:43–47

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Senagore AJ, Duepree HJ, Delaney CP et al (2002) Cost structure of laparoscopic and open sigmoid colectomy for diverticular disease. Dis Colon Rectum 45:485–490

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Young Fadok TM, Long KH, McConnell EJ et al (2001) Advantages of laparoscopic resection for ileocolic Crohn’s disease. Surg Endosc 15:450–454

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Duepree HJ, Senagore AJ, Delaney CP et al (2002) Advantages of laparoscopic resection for ileocecal Crohn’s disease. Dis Colon Rectum 45:605–610

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bergamaschi R, Arnaud JP (1997) Immediately recognizable benefits and drawbacks after laparoscopic colon resection for benign disease. Surg Endosc 11:802–804

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Tomita H, Marcello PW, Milsom JW (1999) Laparoscopic surgery of the Colon and Rectum. World J Surg 23:397–405

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Falk PM, Beart RW, Wexner SD et al (1993) Laparoscopic colectomy: a critical appraisal. Dis Colon Rectum 36:28–34

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Philipson BM, Bokey EL, Moore JWE et al (1997) Cost of open versus laparoscopically assisted right hemicolectomy for cancer. World J Surg 21:214–217

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Lacy AM, Garcia-Valdecasas JC, Delgado S et al (2002) Laparoscopy- assisted colectomy versus open colectomy for treatment of non-metastatic colon cancer: a randomized trial. Lancet 359:2224–2229

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group (2004) A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med 350:2050–2059

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H et al (2005) Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASSIC trial): multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Lancet 365:1718–1726

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Colon Cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection Study Group (2005) Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomized trial. Lancet Oncol 6:477–484

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Transatlantic Laparoscopically Assisted vs Open Colectomy Trials Study (2007) Group. Laparoscopically assisted vs open colectomy for colon cancer: a meta-analysis. Arch Surg 142:298–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Tong DKH, Fan JKM, Law W-L (2008) Outcome of laparoscopic colorectal resection. Surgeon 6:357–360

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Colon Cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection Study Group (2009) Survival after laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: long-term outcome of a randomized clinical trial. Lancet Oncol 10:44–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kennedy GD, Heise C, Rajamanickam V et al (2009) Laparoscopy decreases postoperative complication rates after abdominal colectomy. Ann Surg 249:596–601

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Guller U, Jain N, Hervey S et al (2003) Laparoscopic versus open colectomy. Arch Surg 138:1179–1186

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Veldkamp R, Gholghesaei M, Bonjer HJ et al (2004) Laparoscopic resection of colon cancer. Surg Endosc 18:1163–1185

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Schwenk W, Haase O, Neudecker JJ et al (2005) Short term benefits for laparoscopic colorectal resection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2:CD003145. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003145.pub2.

  23. Noel JK, Fahrback K, Estok R et al (2007) Minimally invasive colorectal resection outcomes: short-term comparison with open procedures. J Am Coll Surg 204:291–305

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Poon JT, Law W-L, Wong IW et al (2009) Impact of laparoscopic colorectal resection on surgical site infection. Ann Surg 249:77–81

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Winslow ER, Fleshman JW, Birnbaum EH et al (2002) Wound complications of laparoscopic vs open colectomy. Surg Endosc 16:1420–1425

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Ihedioha U, Mackay G, Leung E et al (2008) Laparoscopic colorectal resection does not reduce incisional hernia rates when compared with open colorectal resection. Surg Endosc 22:689–692

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Singh R, Omiccioli A, Hegge S et al (2008) Does the extraction-site location in laparoscopic colorectal surgery have an impact on incisional hernia rates? Surg Endosc 22:596–600

    Google Scholar 

  28. McKenzie S, Baek JH, Wakabayashi M et al (2010) Totally laparoscopic right colectomy with transvaginal specimen extraction: the authors’ initial institutional experience. Surg Endosc 24:2048–2052

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Park JS, Choi GS, Lim KH et al (2010) Clinical outcome oflaparoscopic right hemicolectomy with transvaginal resection, anastomosis, and retrieval of specimen. Dis Colon Rectum 53:1473–1479

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Awad Z, Qureshi I, Seibel B et al (2011) Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with transvaginal colon extraction using a laparoscopic posterior colpotomy: a 2-year series from a single institution. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 21:403–408

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Leroy J, Costantino F, Cahill RA, D’Agostino J, Morales A, Mutter D, Marescaux J (2011) Laparoscopic resection with transanal specimen extraction for sigmoid diverticulitis. Br J Surg 98:1327–1334

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Nishimura A et al (2011) Totally laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy with transanal specimen. Extract Surg Endosc 25:3459–3463

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. McCorkle R, Quint-Benoliel J (1983) Symptom distress, current concerns and mood disturbance after diagnosis of life-threatening disease. Soc Sci Med 17:431–438

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Spitzer WO, Dobson AJ, Hall J et al (1981) Measuring the quality of life of cancer patients. J Chronic Dis 34:585–597

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Park JS, Choi GS, Kim HJ et al (2011) Natural orifice specimen extraction versus conventional laparoscopically assisted right hemicolectomy. Br J Surg 98:710–715

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Franklin ME Jr, Liang S, Russek K (2013) Natural orifice specimen extraction in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: transanal and transvaginal approaches. Tech Coloproctol 17(Suppl 1):S63–S67

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Kaiser AM, Kang JC, Chan LS, Vukasin P, Beart RW Jr (2004) Laparoscopic-assisted versus open colectomy for colon cancer: a prospective randomized trial. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 14:329–334

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Reza MM, Blasco JA, Andradas E, Cantero R, Mayol J (2006) Systematic review of laparoscopic versus open surgery for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 93:921–928

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Bonjer HJ, Hop WC, Nelson H et al (2007) Laparoscopically assisted vs open colectomy for colon cancer: a meta-analysis. Arch Surg 142:298–303

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Wilson JI, Dogiparthi KK, Hebblethwaite N, Clarke MD (2007) Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with posterior colpotomy for transvaginal specimen retrieval. Colorectal Dis 9(7):662

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Lakshman N, Chang R, Ho Y (2006) Laparoscopic combined rectal anterior resection and total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Tech Coloproctol 10(4):350–352

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Torres RA, Orban RD, Tocaimaza L, Vallejos Pereira G, Arévalo JR (2012) Transvaginal specimen extraction after laparoscopic colectomy. World J Surg 36(7):1699–1702

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Hwang JH, Lee JK, Lee NW, Lee KW (2011) Vaginal cuff closure: a comparison between the vaginal route and laparoscopic suture in patients undergoing total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Gynecol Obstet Invest 71(3):163–169

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Shen CC, Hsu TY, Huang FJ, Roan CJ, Weng HH, Chang HW, Chang SY (2002) Comparison of one- and two-layer vaginal cuff closure and open vaginal cuff during laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 9(4):474–480

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosures

Ziad T. Awad and Reginald Griffin have no conflict of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine Jacksonville, 633 W 8th Street, Jacksonville, FL, 32209, USA

    Ziad T. Awad & Reginald Griffin

Authors
  1. Ziad T. Awad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Reginald Griffin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Reginald Griffin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Awad, Z.T., Griffin, R. Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a comparison of natural orifice versus transabdominal specimen extraction. Surg Endosc 28, 2871–2876 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3540-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3540-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation