Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Predicting conversion in laparoscopic colorectal surgery

  • Original article
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: Laparoscopic colorectal surgery has clear advantages over open surgery; however, the effectiveness of the approach depends on the conversion rate. The objective of this work was to prospectively validate a model that would predict conversion in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Methods: A simple clinical model for predicting conversion in laparoscopic colorectal surgery was previously developed based on a multivariable logistic regression analysis of 367 procedures. This model was applied prospectively to a follow-up group of 248 procedures by the same team, including 54 procedures performed by one new fellowship-trained surgeon. Results: Patients in the follow-up group were more likely to have cancer (56% vs 44%, p = 0.007) and were more obese (median, 71.0 vs 66.0 kg; p < 0.001). The rate of conversion in the follow-up group was unchanged (8.9% vs 9.0%, p > 0.05). Despite expected trends toward increasing risk of conversion with weight level (<60 kg, 6.8%; 60–<90 kg, 9.0%; >90 kg, 12.1%; p > 0.05) and malignancy (10.1% vs 7.3%, p > 0.05), the model did not distinguish well between groups at risk for conversion. Contrary to the model, however, the fellowship-trained surgeon had a conversion rate that was not higher than that of the other, more experienced surgeons (7.3% vs 9.3%, p > 0.05) even though he was less experienced, and operating on patients who were more obese (median, 75.0 vs 70 kg; p = 0.02) and more likely to have cancer (59% vs 55%, p > 0.05). Recalculated conversion scores that excluded the inexperience point for the fellowship-trained surgeon showed a good fit for the model. Considering the original and follow-up experience together (615 cases), the model clearly stratifies patients into low (0 points), medium (1–2 points), and high risk (3–4 points) for conversion, with respective rates of 2.9%, 8.1%, and 20% (p = 0.001). Conclusion: This model appears to be a valid predictor of conversion to open surgery. Fellowship training may provide sufficient experience so that learning curve issues are redundant in early practice. This model now requires validation by other centers.

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. F Agachan JS Joo M Sher EG Weiss JJ Nogueras SD Wexner (1997) ArticleTitleLaparoscopic colorectal surgery: do we get faster? Surg Endosc 11 331–335 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByiB2M%2FntVc%3D Occurrence Handle9094271

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. CL Bennett SJ Stryker MR Ferreira J Adams RWJ Beart (1997) ArticleTitleThe learning curve for laparoscopic colorectal surgery: preliminary results from a prospective analysis of 1194 laparoscopic-assisted colectomies. Arch Surg 132 41–44 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByiC2MbitFQ%3D Occurrence Handle9006551

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. MJ Curet K Putrakul DE Pitcher RK Josloff KA Zucker (2000) ArticleTitleLaparoscopically assisted colon resection for colon carcinoma: perioperative results and long-term outcome. Surg Endosc 14 1062–1066 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s004640000092 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3M%2FovFeqtQ%3D%3D Occurrence Handle11116420

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. JW Milsom B Bohm KA Hammerhofer V Fazio E Steiger P Elson (1998) ArticleTitleA prospective, randomized trial comparing laparoscopic versus conventional techniques in colorectal cancer surgery: a preliminary report. J Am Coll Surg 187 46–54 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1czitFClsw%3D%3D Occurrence Handle9660024

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. AE Ortega RW Beart Jr GD Steele Jr DP Winchester FL Greene (1995) ArticleTitleLaparoscopic Bowel Surgery Registry: preliminary results. Dis Colon Rectum 38 681–685 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByqA3s7gslA%3D Occurrence Handle7607025

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. TH Schiedeck O Schwandner I Baca E Baehrlehner J Konradt F Kockerling A Kuthe C Buerk A Herold HP Bruch (2000) ArticleTitleLaparoscopic surgery for the cure of colorectal cancer: results of a German five-center study. Dis Colon Rectum 43 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  7. CM Schlachta J Mamazza PA Seshadri M Cadeddu R Gregoire EC Poulin (2001) ArticleTitleDefining a learning curve for laparoscopic colorectal resections. Dis Colon Rectum 44 217–222 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3M7ot1Sksg%3D%3D Occurrence Handle11227938

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. CM Schlachta J Mamazza PA Seshadri M Cadeddu EC Poulin (2000) ArticleTitleDeterminants of outcomes in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a multiple regression analysis of 416 resections. Surg Endosc 14 258–263

    Google Scholar 

  9. CM Schlachta J Mamazza PA Seshadri MO Cadeddu EC Poulin (2000) ArticleTitlePredicting conversions to open surgery in laparoscopic colorectal resections: a simple clinical model. Surg Endosc 14 1114–1117 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s004640000309 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3M7htFCjsA%3D%3D Occurrence Handle11148778

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. W Schwenk B Bohm O Haase T Junghans JM Muller (1998) ArticleTitleLaparoscopic versus conventional colorectal resection: a prospective randomised study of postoperative ileus and early postoperative feeding. Langenbecks Arch Surg 383 49–55 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s004230050091 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1c3ovVylsg%3D%3D Occurrence Handle9627171

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. W Schwenk B Bohm JM Muller (1998b) ArticleTitlePostoperative pain and fatigue after laparoscopic or conventional colorectal resections: a prospective randomized trial. Surg Endosc 12 1131–1136 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1czosVClsg%3D%3D

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. W Schwenk B Bohm C Witt T Junghans K Grundel JM Muller (1999) ArticleTitlePulmonary function following laparoscopic or conventional colorectal resection: a randomized controlled evaluation. Arch Surg 134 6–12 Occurrence Handle10.1001/archsurg.134.1.6 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1M7isVeisA%3D%3D Occurrence Handle9927122

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. AJ Senagore MA Luchtefeld JM Mackeigan (1995) ArticleTitleWhat is the learning curve for laparoscopic colectomy? Am Surg 61 681–685 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByqA2cvhtVI%3D Occurrence Handle7618806

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. AJ Simons GJ Anthone AE Ortega M Franklin J Fleshman WP Geis RW Jr Beart (1995) ArticleTitleLaparoscopic-assisted colectomy learning curve. Dis Colon Rectum 38 600–603 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByqB1M3ot1c%3D Occurrence Handle7774470

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. C Thibault EC Poulin (1995) ArticleTitleTotal laparoscopic proctocolectomy and laparoscopy-assisted proctocolectomy for inflammatory bowel disease: operative technique and preliminary report. Surg Laparosc Endosc 5 472–476 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BymC1cjlt1E%3D Occurrence Handle8611996

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. JC Weeks H Nelson S Gelber D Sargent G Schroeder of Surgical Therapy Study Group The Clinical Outcome (2002) ArticleTitleShort-term quality-of-life outcomes following laparoscopic-assisted colectomy vs open colectomy for colon cancer: a randomized trial. JAMA 287 321–328 Occurrence Handle11790211

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. JD Wishner JW Baker Jr GC Hoffman GW Hubbard RJ Gould SD Wohlgemuth WK Ruffin CF Melick (1995) ArticleTitleLaparoscopic-assisted colectomy: the learning curve. Surg Endosc 9 1179–1183 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BymC3s7ovFY%3D

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. KA Zucker DE Pitcher DT Martin RS Ford (1994) ArticleTitleLaparoscopic-assisted colon resection. Surg Endosc 8 12–17

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, St. Michael’s Hospital, University of Toronto, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, ON M5B 1W8, Canada

    C. M. Schlachta, J. Mamazza, S. E. Burpee, K. T. Pace & E. C. Poulin

  2. Department of Surgery, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec, 10 rue de 1’Espinay, Université Laval, QC, Québec, G1L 3L, Canada

    R. Grégoire

Authors
  1. C. M. Schlachta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Mamazza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. R. Grégoire
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S. E. Burpee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. K. T. Pace
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. E. C. Poulin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. M. Schlachta.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schlachta, C., Mamazza, J., Grégoire, R. et al. Predicting conversion in laparoscopic colorectal surgery . Surg Endosc 17, 1288–1291 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-002-8920-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-002-8920-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation