Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Totally laparoscopic right colectomy versus laparoscopically assisted right colectomy: a propensity score analysis

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

The aim of this study is to compare short- and long-term outcomes of totally laparoscopic right colectomy (TLRC) and laparoscopically assisted right colectomy (LARC), using propensity score matching (PSM) analysis.

Materials and methods

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent laparoscopic right colectomy between January 2006 and July 2016 was conducted. PSM analysis was performed to overcome patient selection bias between the two surgical techniques.

Results

A total of 116 patients were reviewed. After PSM, 54 patients for the TLRC group and 54 patients for the LARC group were compared. TLRC was associated with shorter post-operative hospital stay (6.81 vs. 4.79 days; p < 0.001) with no difference in 30-day morbidity and mortality. A lower incidence of long-term incisional hernia was observed in the TLRC group (1.9 vs. 21.2%; p = 0.002). TLRC showed better oncological accuracy as demonstrated by a greater number of lymph node achieved (19.21 vs. 15.19; p = 0.001) and higher vascular pedicle length (131.81 vs. 114.76 mm; p = 0.014).

Discussion

TLRC is a safe and feasible technique with similar results of LARC in terms of short-term morbidity and mortality. Major advantages related to TLRC are represented by shorter post-operative hospital stay and lower incidence of long-term incisional hernias. Further investigations are needed to assess the oncological outcomes for this technique.

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. Carnuccio P, Jimeno J, Parés D (2014) Laparoscopic right colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies comparing two types of anastomosis. Tech Coloproctol 18:5–12

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cirocchi R, Trastulli S, Farinella E, Guarino S, Desiderio J, Boselli C, Parisi A, Noya G, Slim K (2013) Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis during laparoscopic hemicolectomy—systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Oncol 22:1–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Simorov A, Shaligram A, Shostrom V, Boilesen E, Thompson J, Oleynikov D (2012) Laparoscopic colon resection trends in utilization and rate of conversion to open procedure. Ann Surg 256:462–468

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Jamali FR, Soweid AM, Dimassi H, Bailey C, Leroy J, Marescaux J (2008) Evaluating in the degree of difficulty of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Arch Surg 143:762–767

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Tarta C, Bishawi M, Bergamaschi R (2013) Intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosic: a review. Tech Coloproctol 17:479–485

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Fabozzi M, Cirillo P, Corcione F (2016) Surgical approach to right colon cancer: from open technique to robot. State of art. World J Gastrointest Surg 27(8):564–573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 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 40:373–383

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Austin PC (2011) An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivar Behav Res 46(3):399–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Heinze G, Juni P (2011) An overview of the objectives of and the approaches to propensity score analyses. Eur Heart J 32:1704–1708

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Austin PC (2009) The relative ability of different propensity score methods to balance measure covariates between treated and untreated subjects in observational studies. Med Decis Mak 29(6):661–677

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD, de Santibañes E, Pekolj J, Slankamenac K, Bassi C, Graf R, Vonlanthen R, Padbury R, Cameron JL, Makuuchi M (2009) The Clavien–Dindo classifications of surgical complications. Five-years experiences. Ann Surg 250:187–196

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Milone M, Elmore U, Di Salvo E, Delrio P, Bucci L, Ferulano GP, Napolitano C, Angiolini MR, Bracale U, Clemente M, D’ambra M, Luglio G, Musella M, Pace U, Rosati R, Milone F (2015) Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis. Results from a multicentre comparative study on 512 right-sided colorectal cancer. Surg Endosc 29:2314–2320

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rondelli F, Trastulli S, Avenia N, Schillaci G, Cirocchi R, Gullà N, Mariani E, Bistoni G, Noya G (2012) Is laparoscopic right colectomy more effective than open resection? A meta-analysis of randomized and nonrandomized studied. Colorectal Dis 14:447–469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Senagore AJ, Delaney CP, Brady K, Fazio VW (2004) Standardized approach to laparoscopic right colectomy: outcomes in 70 consecutive cases. J Am Coll Surg 5:675–679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Bergamaschi R, Schochet E, Haughn C, Burke M, Reed JF 3rd, Arnaud JP (2008) Standardized laparoscopic intracorporeal right colectomy for cancer: short-term outcome in 111 unselected patients. Dis Colon Rectum 51:1350–1355

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Facy O, De Magistris L, Poulain V, Goergen M, Orlando G, Azagra JS (2013) Right colectomy: value of the totally laparoscopic approach. J Visc Surg 150:207–212

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Raftopoulos I, Courcoulas AP, Blumberg D (2006) Should completely intracorporeal anastomosis be considered in obese patients who undergo laparoscopic colectomy for benign or malignant disease of the colon? Surgery 140:675–683

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hellan M, Anderson C, Pigazzi A (2009) Extracorporeal versus intracorporeal anastomosis for laparoscopic right hemicolectomy. JSLS 13:312–317

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Scatizzi M, Kröning KC, Borrelli A, Andan G, Lenzi E, Feroci F (2010) Extracorporeal versus intracorporeal anastomosis after laparoscopic right colectomy for cancer: a case-control study. World J Surg 34:2902–2908

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Grams J, Tong W, Greenstein AJ, Salky B (2010) Comparison of intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic-assisted hemicolectomy. Surg Endosc 24:1886–1891

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Stein SA, Bergamaschi R (2013) Extracorporeal versus intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis. Tech Coloproctol 17:S35–S39

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Chang K, Fakhoury M, Barnajian M, Tarta C, Bergamaschi R (2013) Laparoscopic right colon resection with intracorporeal anastomosis. Surg Endosc 27:1730–1736

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Shapiro R, Keler U, Segev L, Sarna S, Hatib K, Hazzan D (2016) Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis: short- and long-term benefit in comparison with extracorporeal anastomosis. Surg Endosc 30:3823–3829

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. DeSouza A, Domajnko B, Park J, Marecik S, Prasad L, Abcarian H (2011) Incisional hernia, midline versus low transverse incision: what is the ideal incision for specimen extraction and hand-assisted laparoscopy? Surg Endosc 25:1031–1036

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Barnett RB, Clement GS, Drizin GS, Josselson AS, Prince DS (1992) Pulmonary changes after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc 2:125–127

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. General Surgery Department, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, Catholic University, L.go A. Gemelli 8, 00168, Rome, Italy

    Alberto Biondi, Pietro Santocchi, Francesco Pennestrì, Francesco Santullo, Domenico D’Ugo & Roberto Persiani

Authors
  1. Alberto Biondi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pietro Santocchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Francesco Pennestrì
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Francesco Santullo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Domenico D’Ugo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Roberto Persiani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alberto Biondi.

Ethics declarations

Disclosure

Alberto Biondi, Pietro Santocchi, Francesco Pennestrì, Francesco Santullo, Domenico D’Ugo, and Roberto Persiani have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Biondi, A., Santocchi, P., Pennestrì, F. et al. Totally laparoscopic right colectomy versus laparoscopically assisted right colectomy: a propensity score analysis. Surg Endosc 31, 5275–5282 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5601-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5601-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation