Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Technique of last resort: characteristics of patients undergoing open surgery in the laparoscopic era

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The utilization rates for minimally invasive colorectal resection techniques (MICR) continue to increase. In some centers MICR methods are the preferred approach, however, open methods continue to be utilized for select patients. In this study, the profile and short-term outcomes of open colorectal resection (CR) and MICR patients are determined and compared.

Methods

A retrospective review of patients who underwent elective CR over 11 years at two institutions was performed. The MICR group contained both laparoscopic-assisted and hand-assisted cases. The past medical and surgical histories, indications, operations performed, and short-term outcomes were assessed. The Charlson co-morbidity index (CMI) was used to assess risk.

Results

During the study period 1080 patients underwent CR (Open, 141; MICR, 939). As judged by the CMI, there were more high-risk patients (score ≥2) in the Open group (34.38 %) versus MICR (22.11 %) p = 0.0029. Significantly more open patients had prior abdominal surgery and specifically CRs (Open, 15.60 % vs. MICR, 2.13 %, p < 0.001). Intraoperative transfusion (Open 25.7 %; MICR 6.8 %, p < 0.001) and diversion (25.53 vs. 11.50 %, p < 0.001) were more common in the Open group. Not surprisingly, recovery of bowel function and length of stay were longer for the Open group. The overall complication rate was also higher for the Open patients (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

When MICR is the procedure of choice, patients selected for Open CR are higher risk and more complex as judged by the CMI and past operative history. Not surprisingly, this translates into a longer length of stay, higher rates of transfusion, diversion, and complications. This disparity in patients undergoing CRs makes direct comparison of MICR and Open resection outcomes not reasonable.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fleshman J, Sargent DJ, Green E, Anvari M, Stryker SJ, Beart RW Jr, Hellinger M, Flanagan R Jr, Peters W, Nelson H, Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group (2007) Laparoscopic colectomy for cancer is not inferior to open surgery based on 5-year data from the COST Study Group trial. Ann Surg 246(4):655–662 discussion 662-64

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. The Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group (2004) A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. The clinical outcomes of surgical therapy study group. N Engl J Med 350:2050–2059

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Jayne DG, Guillou PJ, Thorpe H, Quirke P, Copeland J, Smith AM, Heath RM, Brown JM, UK MRC ClASICC Trial Group (2007) Randomized trial of laparoscopic-assisted resection of colorectal carcinoma: 3-year results of the UK MRC CLASICC trial group. J Clin Oncol 25:3061–3068

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H, Walker J, Jayne DG, Smith AM, Heath RM, Brown JM, MRC CLASICC Trial Group (2005) Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 365:1718–1726

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Colon Cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection Study Group, Buunen M, Veldkamp R, Hop WC, Kurhry E, Jeekel J, Haglind E, Pahlman L, Cuesta MA, Msika S, Morino M, Lacy A, Bonjer HJ (2009) Survival after laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: long-term outcome of a randomised clinical trial. Lancet Oncol 10:44–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Lacy AM, Garcia-Valdecasas JC, Delgado S, Castells A, Taurá P, Piqué JM, Visa J (2002) Laparoscopy-assisted colectomy versus open colectomy for treatment of non-metastatic colon cancer: a randomised trial. Lancet 359:2224–2229

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Veldkamp R, Kuhry E, Hop WC, Jeekel J, Kazemier G, Bonjer HJ, Haglind E, Pahlman L, Cuesta MA, Msika S, Morino M, Morino M, Lacy AM, Colon cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection Study Group (Color) (2005) Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 6:477–484

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Jeong SY, Park JW, Nam BH, Kim S, Kang SB, Lim SB, Choi HS, Kim DW, Chang HJ, Kim DY, Jung KH, Kim TY, Kang GH, Chie EK, Kim SY, Sohan DK, Kim DH, Kim JS, Lee HS, Kim JH, Oh JH (2010) Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid or low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): short-term outcomes of an open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 11:637–645

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Liang JT, Huang KC, Lai HS, Lee PH, Jeng YM (2007) Oncologic results of laparoscopic versus conventional open surgery for stage II or III left-sided colon cancers: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg Oncol 14:109–117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Leung KL, Kwok SP, Lam SC, Lee JF, Yiu RY, SS NG, Lai PB, Lau WY (2004) Laparoscopic resection of rectosigmoid carcinoma: prospective randomized trial. Lancet 363:1187–1192

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR (1987) A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 40(5):373–383

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Vithiananthan S, Cooper Z, Betten Z, Stapleton GS, Carter J, Huang EH, Whelan RL (2001) Hybrid laparoscopic flexure takedown and open procedure for rectal resection is associated with significantly shorter length of stay than equivalent open resection. Dis Colon Rectum 44:927–935

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Offodile AC 2nd, Balike E, Hoffman A, Moon V, Baxter R, Grieco M, Moradi D, Kim IY, Nasar A, Cekic V, Feingold DL, Arnell TD, Huang E, Whelan RL (2010) Is there a role for a strict incision length criterion for determining conversions during laparoscopic colorectal resection? Surg Innov 17(2):120–126

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Robinson CN, Chen GJ, Balentine CJ, Sansgiry S, Marshall CL, Anaya DA, Artinyan A, Albo D, Berger DH (2011) Minimally invasive surgery is underutilized for colon cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 18(5):1412–1418

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. De Groot V, Beckerman H, Lankhorst GJ, Bouter LM (2003) How to measure comorbidity: a critical review of available methods. J Clin Epidemiol 56(3):221–229

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Safran DB, Orlando R 3rd (1994) Physiologic effects of pneumoperitoneum. Am J Surg 167(2):281–286

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. O’Malley C, Cunningham AJ (2001) Physiologic effects during laparoscopy. Anesthesiol Clin N Am 19(1):1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Park IJ, Kim SH, Yoh YG, Hahn KY (2006) Laparoscopic colorectal surgery using low-pressure pneumoperitoneum combined with abdominal wall lift by placement of anchoring sutures around the camera port. Surg Endosc 20(6):956–959

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mokino T, Shukla PJ, Rubino F, Milsom JW (2012) The impact of obesity on perioperative outcomes after laparoscopic colorectal resection. Ann Surg 255(2):228–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Makino T, Trencheva K, Shukla PJ, Rubino F, Zhuo C, Pavoor RS, Milsom JW (2014) The influence of obesity on short- and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer: A case matched study of 152 patients. Surgery. doi:10.1016/j.surg.2014.03.023

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kamoun S, Alves A, Bretagnol F, Lefebre JH, Valleur P, Panis Y (2009) Outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgery in obese and nonobese patients: A case-matched study of 180 patients. Am J Surg 198(3):450–455

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Hardiman K, Chang ET, Diggs BS, Lu KC (2013) Laparoscopic colectomy reduces morbidity and mortality in obese patients. Surg Endosc 27(8):2907–2910

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Reza MM, Blasco JA, Andradas E, Cantero R, Mayol J (2006) Systemic review of laparoscopic versus open surgery for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 93(8):921–928

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Amri R, den Boon HC, Bordeianou LG, Sylla P, Berger DL (2013) The impact of adhesions on operations and postoperative recovery in colon cancer surgery. Am J Surg 206(2):166–171

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gastinger I, Marusch F, Steinert R, Wolff S, Koeckerling F, Lippert H, Working Group ‘Colon/Rectum Carcinoma’ (2005) Protective defunctioning stoma in low anterior resection for rectal carcinoma. Br J Surg 92(12):1565–1566

    Google Scholar 

  26. Schlachta CM, Mamazza J, Grégoire R, Burpee SE, Pace KT, Poulin EC (2003) Predicting conversion in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Fellowship training may be an advantage. Surg Endosc 17(8):1288–1291

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Chung RS, Ahmed N (2010) The impact of minimally invasive surgery on residents’ open operative experience: analysis of two decades of national data. Ann Surg 251(2):205–212

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Eckert M, Cuadrado D, Steele S, Brown T, Beekley A, Martin M (2010) The changing face of the general surgeon: national and local trends in resident operative experience. Am J Surg 199(5):652–656

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Carson JS, Smith L, Are M, Edney J, Azarow K, Mercer DW, Thompson JS, Are C (2011) National trends in minimally invasive and open experience of graduating general surgery residents: implications for surgical skills curricula development? Am J Surg 202(6):720–726

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Alkhoury F, Martin JT, Contessa J, Zuckerman R, Nadzam G (2010) The impact of laparoscopy on the volume of open cases in general surgery training. J Surg Educ 67(5):316–319

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosures

Drs Guend, Lee, Myers, Gandhi and Ms Cekic have no relevant conflict of interests of financial ties to disclose. Dr Whelan is a consultant for Atrium, Olympus, and Ethicone Endosurgery. No funding sources or relevant financial relationships to report.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mt Sinai St Luke’s/Mt Sinai Roosevelt Hospital Center, 1000 10th Ave, Suite 2B, New York, NY, 10019, USA

    Hamza Guend, David Y. Lee, Elizabeth A. Myers, Nipa D. Gandhi, Vesna Cekic & Richard L. Whelan

  2. Icahn School of Medicine at Mt Sinai, New York, NY, USA

    Nipa D. Gandhi & Richard L. Whelan

Authors
  1. Hamza Guend
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Y. Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Elizabeth A. Myers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nipa D. Gandhi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Vesna Cekic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Richard L. Whelan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hamza Guend.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Guend, H., Lee, D.Y., Myers, E.A. et al. Technique of last resort: characteristics of patients undergoing open surgery in the laparoscopic era. Surg Endosc 29, 2763–2769 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-4007-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-4007-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation