Skip to main content
Log in

Redefining Conversion in Laparoscopic Colectomy and Its Influence on Outcomes: Analysis of 418 Cases from a Single Institution

  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The reported rates of conversion in laparoscopic colectomy are varied. The incidence of conversion is not, however, well defined. The aim of the present study is to redefine conversion and to analyze differences in outcome.

Methods

Treatment parameters of a total of 418 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic colonic resection from 2005 to 2007 were analyzed. Treatment was classified as laparoscopic colonic resection, laparoscopy-assisted colonic resection (lap-assisted), and laparoscopic conversion.

Results

There were significant differences in median operating time between laparoscopic colonic resection, lap-assisted, and laparoscopic conversion (125 min, 160 min, and 140 min; p = 0.0001); median hospital length of stay was significantly different (laparoscopic, 5.0 days, versus lap-assisted, 6.0 days, versus laparoscopic conversion, 6.5 days; p = 0.0001); and median incision length was also noted to vary significantly (laparoscopic, 5.0 cm, lap-assisted, 8.0 cm, and conversion, 12.0 cm; p = 0.00001). Multivariate analysis reveals that older age (Odds Ratio [OR] = 1.07, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] = 1.02–1.12), higher Body Mass Index ([BMI], OR = 1.15, 95% CI = 1.03–1.29), and pT stage were significant factors affecting conversion. Disease-free survival for cancers was not influenced by conversion (p = 0.653). The overall complication rate was 16.7% and was significanly increased in lap-assisted cases and in conversion cases (26% versus 13%; p = 0.003).

Conclusions

A consistent definition for conversion in laparoscopic colonic resection is required. Our proposed definitions may provide a solution. The definition of lap-assisted as a separate entity serves as a bridge between laparoscopy and full conversion. Risk factors of age, BMI, and advanced tumor stage are conversion predictors and are associated with increased hospital stay and postoperative morbidity.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lacy AM, Garcia-Valdecasas JC, Delgado S et al (2002) Laparoscopy-assisted colectomy versus open colectomy for treatment of non-metastatic colon cancer: a randomised trial. Lancet 359(9325):2224–2229

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Weeks JC, Nelson H, Gelber S et al (2002) Short-term quality of life outcomes following laparoscopic-assisted colectomy versus open colectomy for colon cancer: a randomised trial. JAMA 287:321–328

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Leung KL, Kwok SP, Lam SC et al (2004) Laparoscopic resection of rectosigmoid carcinoma: prospective randomised trial. Lancet 363(9416):1187–1192

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. The 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 

  5. 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  Google Scholar 

  6. King PM, Blazeby JM, Ewings P et al (2006) Randomised clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for colorectal cancer within an enhanced recovery programme. Br J Surg 93:300–308

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Guilou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H, the MRC CLASICC Trial Group et al (2005) Short-term end points of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 365(9472):1718–1726

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Abraham NS, Young JM, Solomon MJ (2004) Meta-analysis of short-term outcomes after laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 91:1111–1124

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kuhry E, Schwenk WF, Gaupset R et al (2008) Long-term results of laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 16:CD003432

    Google Scholar 

  10. Marusch F, Gastinger I, Schneider C et al (2001) Importance of conversion for results obtained with laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 44:207–216

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Le Moine MC, Faber JM, Vacher C et al (2003) Factors and consequences of conversion in laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for diverticular disease. Br J Surg 90:232–236

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lo CM, Fan ST, Liu CL et al (1997) Early decision for conversion of laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy for treatment of acute cholecystitis. Am J Surg 173:513–517

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, 6th edn (2002) Springer-Verlag, New York

  14. Gervaz P, Pikarsky A, Utech M et al (2001) Converted laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 15:827–832

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Agha A, Furst A, Iesalnieks I et al (2008) Conversion rate in 300 laparoscopic rectal resections and its influence on morbidity and oncological outcome. Int J Colorectal Dis 23:409–417

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Chan AC, Poon JT, Fan JK et al (2008) Impact of conversion on the long-term outcome in laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer. Surg Endosc 22:2625–2630

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gonzalez R, Smith CD, Mason E et al (2006) Consequences of conversion in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 49:97–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Tan PY, Stephens JH, Rieger NA et al (2008) Laparoscopically assisted colectomy: a study of risk factors and predictors of open conversion. Surg Endosc 22:1708–1714

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Offodile AC, Lee SW, Yoo J et al (2008) Does prior abdominal surgery influence conversion rates and outcomes of laparoscopic right colectomy in patients with neoplasia. Dis Colon Rectum 51:1669–1674

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Belizon A, Sardinha CT, Sher ME (2006) Converted laparoscopic colectomy: what are the consequences? Surg Endosc 20:947–951

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Tekkis PP, Senagore AJ, Delaney CP (2005) Conversion rates in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a predictive model with 1253 patients. Surg Endosc 19:47–54

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Christen D, Buchmann P (1996) Sources of hazards in laparoscopic colon surgery and how to avoid them. Swiss Surg 2:203–207

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Shawki S, Bashankaev B, Denoya P et al (2009) What is the definition of “conversion” in laparoscopic colorectal surgery? Surg Endosc 23:2321–2326

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Senagore AJ, Delaney CP (2006) A critical analysis of laparoscopic colectomy at a single institution: lessons learned after 1000 cases. Am J Surg 191:377–380

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Casillas S, Delaney CP, Senagore AJ et al (2004) Does conversion of a laparoscopic colectomy adversely affect patient outcome. Dis Colon Rectum 47:1680–1685

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Sklow B, Read T, Birnbaum R et al (2003) Age and type of procedure influence the choice of patients for laparoscopic colectomy. Surg Endosc 17:923–929

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Arteaga-Gonzalez IG, Malagon MA, Lopez-Tomasseti Fernandez EM et al (2006) Impact of previous abdominal surgery on colorectal laparoscopy results: a comparative clinical study. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 16:8–11

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Bouchard A, Martel G, Sabri E et al (2009) Impact of incision length on the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc 23:2314–2320

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kiran RP, Delaney CP, Senagore AJ et al (2004) Operative blood loss and use of blood products after laparoscopic and conventional open colorectal operations. Arch Surg 139:39–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Wichmann MW, Huttl TP, Winter H et al (2005) Immunological effects of laparoscopic vs open colorectal surgery: a prospective clinical study. Arch Surg 140:692–697

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Whelan RL, Franklin M, Holubar SD et al (2003) Postoperative cell mediated immune response is better preserved after laparoscopic vs open colorectal resection in humans. Surg Endosc 17:972–978

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Leung Kl, Lai PB, Ho RL et al (2000) Systemic cytokine response after laparoscopic-assisted resection of rectosigmoid carcinoma: a prospective randomized trial. Ann Surg 231:506–511

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Nishiguchi K, Okuda J, Toyoda M et al (2001) Comparative evaluation of surgical stress of laparoscopic and open surgeries for colorectal carcinoma. Dis Colon Rectum 44:223–230

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Gupta A, Watson Dl (2001) Effect of laparoscopy on immune function. Br J Surg 88:1296–1306

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the following people for their assistance in the preparation of the manuscript: Singapore Polyposis Registry coordinator: Ms Loi TT, Carol. RN Msc (Healthcare) and the rest of the contributory authors to the manuscript are Dr Jit-Fong Lim, Dr Kok-Sun Ho, and Prof Choong-Leong Tang.

Disclosures

This is to certify that the the authors did not receive any financial support in the preparation of this research paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kong-Weng Eu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chew, MH., Ng, KH., Fook-Chong, M.C.S. et al. Redefining Conversion in Laparoscopic Colectomy and Its Influence on Outcomes: Analysis of 418 Cases from a Single Institution. World J Surg 35, 178–185 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-010-0824-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-010-0824-6

Keywords

Navigation