World Journal of Surgery

, Volume 36, Issue 10, pp 2488–2496

Comparable Postoperative Morbidity and Mortality After Laparoscopic and Open Emergent Restorative Colectomy: Outcomes From the ACS NSQIP

  • Nikiforos Ballian
  • Natalie Weisensel
  • Victoria Rajamanickam
  • Eugene F. Foley
  • Charles P. Heise
  • Bruce A. Harms
  • Gregory D. Kennedy



Laparoscopic surgery is safe and effective in the management of common abdominal emergencies. However, there is currently a lack of data about its use for emergency colorectal surgery. We hypothesized that laparoscopy can improve the postoperative outcomes of emergency restorative colon resection.


Adult patients undergoing emergent open and laparoscopic colon resection with primary anastomosis were retrieved from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database for the years 2005 to 2008 inclusive. Demographic and operative characteristics, laboratory values, and postoperative outcomes were compared between patients undergoing laparoscopic and open colon resection using univariate analyses, multivariate logistic regression, and propensity score analyses.


A total of 341 laparoscopic (9.6 %) and 3211 (90.4 %) open colon resections were included. Patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery had a significantly lower prevalence of co-morbidities and better postoperative outcomes. On multivariate analysis, laparoscopic surgery was an independent predictor of a longer operating time (p < 0.001) and shorter total (p = 0.013) and postoperative (p = 0.004) hospital stays, but it did not affect the need for intraoperative blood transfusion (p = 0.488), the 30-day reoperation rates (p = 0.969), or mortality (p = 0.417). After adjusted propensity score analysis, postoperative morbidity (p = 0.833) and mortality (p = 0.568) were comparable in patients undergoing laparoscopic and open surgery.


On a national scale, laparoscopic emergent colon resections are being performed in a small number of patients, who have favorable co-morbidity characteristics and improved postoperative outcomes. Laparoscopic emergent colon resection with primary anastomosis has postoperative morbidity and mortality rates comparable to those seen with the open approach, and it reduces the total and postoperative length of hospital stay.


  1. 1.
    Long KH, Bannon MP, Zietlow SP et al (2001) A prospective randomized comparison of laparoscopic appendectomy with open appendectomy: clinical and economic analyses. Surgery 129:390–400PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Milewczyk M, Michalik M, Ciesielski M (2003) A prospective, randomized, unicenter study comparing laparoscopic and open treatments of acute appendicitis. Surg Endosc 17:1023–1028PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kiviluoto T, Sirén J, Luukkonen P et al (1998) Randomised trial of laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy for acute and gangrenous cholecystitis. Lancet 351:321–325PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kennedy GD, Heise C, Rajamanickam V et al (2009) Laparoscopy decreases postoperative complication rates after abdominal colectomy: results from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Ann Surg 249:596–601PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bilimoria KY, Bentrem DJ, Merkow RP et al (2008) Laparoscopic-assisted vs. open colectomy for cancer: comparison of short-term outcomes from 121 hospitals. J Gastrointest Surg 12:2001–2009PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Seshadri PA, Poulin EC, Schlachta CM et al (2001) Does a laparoscopic approach to total abdominal colectomy and proctocolectomy offer advantages? Surg Endosc 15:837–842PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dunker MS, Bemelman WA, Slors JF et al (2000) Laparoscopic-assisted vs open colectomy for severe acute colitis in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD): a retrospective study in 42 patients. Surg Endosc 14:911–914PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fowkes L, Krishna K, Menon A et al (2008) Laparoscopic emergency and elective surgery for ulcerative colitis. Colorectal Dis 10:373–378PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Li JC, Ng SS, Lee JF et al (2009) Emergency laparoscopic-assisted versus open right hemicolectomy for complicated cecal diverticulitis: a comparative study. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 19:479–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chouillard E, Maggiori L, Ata T et al (2007) Laparoscopic two-stage left colonic resection for patients with peritonitis caused by acute diverticulitis. Dis Colon Rectum 50:1157–1163PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Khuri SF (2005) The NSQIP: a new frontier in surgery. Surgery 138:837–843PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Anonymous (2009) American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP). User Guide for the 2008 Participant Use Data File. Available at: Accessed August 12, 2009
  13. 13.
    Greenblatt DY, Rajamanickam V, Pugely AJ et al (2011) Short-term outcomes after laparoscopic-assisted proctectomy for rectal cancer: results from the ACS NSQIP. J Am Coll Surg 212:844–854PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    D’Agostino RB Jr (1998) Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Stat Med 17:2265–2281PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Agresta F, De Simone P, Bedin N (2004) The laparoscopic approach in abdominal emergencies: a single-center 10-year experience. JSLS 8:25–30PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Marcello PW, Milsom JW, Wong SK et al (2001) Laparoscopic total colectomy for acute colitis: a case-control study. Dis Colon Rectum 44:1441–1445PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ng SS, Lee JF, Yiu RY et al (2008) Emergency laparoscopic-assisted versus open right hemicolectomy for obstructing right-sided colonic carcinoma: a comparative study of short-term clinical outcomes. World J Surg 32:454–458. doi:10.1007/s00268-007-9400-0 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Guller U, Jain N, Hervey S et al (2003) Laparoscopic vs open colectomy: outcomes comparison based on large nationwide databases. Arch Surg 138:1179–1186PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Scheer A, Martel G, Moloo H et al (2009) Laparoscopic colon surgery: does operative time matter? Dis Colon Rectum 52:1746–1752PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chen W, Sailhamer E, Berger DL et al (2007) Operative time is a poor surrogate for the learning curve in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc 21:238–243PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Akiyoshi T, Kuroyanagi H, Oya M et al (2009) Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic rectal surgery for primary rectal cancer in elderly patients: is it safe and beneficial? J Gastrointest Surg 13:1614–1618PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Watanabe K, Funayama Y, Fukushima K et al (2009) Hand-assisted laparoscopic vs. open subtotal colectomy for severe ulcerative colitis. Dis Colon Rectum 52:640–645PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Boyle E, Ridgway PF, Keane FB et al (2008) Laparoscopic colonic resection in inflammatory bowel disease: minimal surgery, minimal access and minimal hospital stay. Colorectal Dis 10:911–915PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hewett PJ, Allardyce RA, Bagshaw PF et al (2008) Short-term outcomes of the Australasian randomized clinical study comparing laparoscopic and conventional open surgical treatments for colon cancer: the ALCCaS trial. Ann Surg 248:728–738PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Braga M, Frasson M, Vignali A, et al (2007) Open right colectomy is still effective compared to laparoscopy: results of a randomized trial. Ann Surg 246:1010–1014Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nikiforos Ballian
    • 1
  • Natalie Weisensel
    • 1
  • Victoria Rajamanickam
    • 1
  • Eugene F. Foley
    • 1
  • Charles P. Heise
    • 1
  • Bruce A. Harms
    • 1
  • Gregory D. Kennedy
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryG4/701 Clinical Science Center, University of WisconsinMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations