Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Laparoscopic versus open colectomy for patients with American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) classifications 3 and 4: the minimally invasive approach is associated with significantly quicker recovery and reduced costs

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Conceivably, the benefits of earlier recovery associated with a minimally invasive technique used in laparoscopic colectomy (LC) may be amplified for patients with comorbid disease. The dearth of evidence supporting the safety of laparoscopy for these patients led to a comparison of outcomes between LC and open colectomy (OC) for patients with American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) classifications 3 and 4.

Methods

Data for all ASA 3 and 4 patients who underwent elective LC were reviewed from a prospectively maintained laparoscopic database. The patients who underwent LC were matched with OC patients by age, gender, diagnosis, year, and type of surgery. Estimated blood loss, operation time, time to return of bowel function, length of hospital stay, readmission rate, and 30-day complication and mortality rates were compared using chi-square, Fisher’s exact, and Wilcoxon tests as appropriate. A p value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

In this study, 231 LCs were matched with 231 OCs. The median age of the patients was 68 years, and 234 (51%) of the patients were male. There were 44 (19%) conversions from LC to OC. More patients in the OC group had undergone previous major laparotomy (5 vs. 15%; p < 0.001). Estimated blood loss, return of bowel function, length of hospital stay, and total direct costs were decreased in the LC group. Wound infection was significantly greater with OC (p = 0.02). When patients with previous major laparotomy were excluded, the two groups had similar overall morbidity. The other benefits of LC, however, persisted.

Conclusion

The findings show that LC is a safe option for patients with a high ASA classification. The LC approach is associated with faster postoperative recovery, lower morbidity rates, and lower hospital costs than the OC approach.

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. Longo WE, Virgo KS, Johnson FE, Oprian CA, Vernava AM, Wade TP, Phelan MA, Henderson WG, Daley J, Khuri SF (2000) Risk factors for morbidity and mortality after colectomy for colon cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 43:83–91

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hamel MB, Henderson WG, Khuri SF, Daley J (2005) Surgical outcomes for patients aged 80 and older: morbidity and mortality from major noncardiac surgery. J Am Geriatr Soc 53:424–429

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Alves A, Panis Y, Mathieu P, Mantion G, Kwiatkowski F, Slim K (2005) Postoperative mortality and morbidity in French patients undergoing colorectal surgery: results of a prospective multicenter study. Arch Surg 140:278–283

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Isbister WH (1997) Colorectal surgery in the elderly: an audit of surgery in octogenarians. Aust N Z J Surg 67:557–561

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Plocek MD, Geisler DP, Glennon EJ, Kondylis P, Reilly JC (2005) Laparoscopic colorectal surgery in the complicated patient. Am J Surg 190:882–885

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Pikarsky AJ, Saida Y, Yamaguchi T, Martinez S, Chen W, Weiss EG, Nogueras JJ, Wexner SD (2002) Is obesity a high-risk factor for laparoscopic colorectal surgery? Surg Endosc 16:855–858

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Seshadri PA, Mamazza J, Schlachta CM, Cadeddu MO, Poulin EC (2001) Laparoscopic colorectal resection in octogenarians. Surg Endosc 15:802–805

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Senagore AJ, Delaney CP, Madboulay K, Brady KM, Fazio VW (2003) Laparoscopic colectomy in obese and nonobese patients. J Gastrointest Surg 7:558–561

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Law WL, Chu KW, Tung PH (2002) Laparoscopic colorectal resection: a safe option for elderly patients. J Am Coll Surg 195:768–773

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Delaney CP, Pokala N, Senagore AJ, Casillas S, Kiran RP, Brady KM, Fazio VW (2005) Is laparoscopic colectomy applicable to patients with body mass index >30? A case-matched comparative study with open colectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 48:975–981

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Schwandner O, Farke S, Schiedeck TH, Bruch HP (2004) Laparoscopic colorectal surgery in obese and nonobese patients: do differences in body mass indices lead to different outcomes? Surg Endosc 18:1452–1456

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Senagore AJ, Delaney CP (2006) A critical analysis of laparoscopic colectomy at a single institution: lessons learned after 1, 000 cases. Am J Surg 191:377–380

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Veldkamp R, Kuhry E, Hop WC, Jeekel J, Kazemier G, Bonjer HJ, Haglind E, Påhlman L, Cuesta MA, Msika S, Morino M, Lacy AM (2005) Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomized trial. Lancet Oncol 6:477–484

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lacy AM, García-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 randomized trial. Lancet 359:2224–2229

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Delaney CP, Kiran RP, Senagore AJ, Brady K, Fazio VW (2003) Case-matched comparison of clinical and financial outcome after laparoscopic or open colorectal surgery. Ann Surg 238:67–72

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Delaney CP, Chang E, Senagore AJ, Broder M (2008) Clinical outcomes and resource utilization associated with laparoscopic and open colectomy using a large national database. Ann Surg 247:819–824

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 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 

  18. Rosman AS, Melis M, Fichera A (2005) Meta-analysis of trials comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for Crohn’s disease. Surg Endosc 19:1549–1555

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Fazio VW, Tekkis PP, Remzi F, Lavery IC (2004) Assessment of operative risk in colorectal cancer surgery: the Cleveland Clinic Foundation colorectal cancer model. Dis Colon Rectum 47:2015–2024

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ondrula DP, Nelson RL, Prasad ML, Coyle BW, Abcarian H (1992) Multifactorial index of preoperative risk factors in colon resections. Dis Colon Rectum 35:117–122

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Scheidbach H, Schneider C, Hugel O, Yildirim C, Lippert H, Kockerling F (2005) Laparoscopic surgery in the old patient: do indications and outcomes differ? Langenbecks Arch Surg 390:328–332

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Milsom JW, Hammerhofer KA, Bohm B, Marcello P, Elson P, Fazio VW (2001) Prospective, randomized trial comparing laparoscopic vs conventional surgery for refractory ileocolic Crohn’s disease. Dis Colon Rectum 44:1–9

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Köckerling F, Schneider C, Reymond MA, Scheidbach H, Scheuerlein H, Konradt J, Bruch HP, Zornig C, Köhler L, Bärlehner E, Kuthe A, Szinicz G, Richter HA, Hohenberger W (1999) Laparoscopic resection of sigmoid diverticulitis: results of a multicenter study. Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery Study Group. Surg Endosc 13:567–571

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Hassan I, Cima RR, Larson DW, Dozois EJ, O’Byrne MM, Larson DR, Pemberton JH (2007) The impact of uncomplicated and complicated diverticulitis on laparoscopic surgery conversion rates and patient outcomes. Surg Endosc 21:1690–1694

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Casillas S, Delaney CP, Senagore AJ, Brady K, Fazio VW (2004) Does conversion of a laparoscopic colectomy adversely affect patient outcome? Dis Colon Rectum 47:1680–1685

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Arteaga Gonzalez I, Martin Malagon A, Lopez-Tomassetti Fernandez EM, Arranz Duran J, Diaz Luis H, Carrillo Pallares A (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. Vignali A, Di Palo S, De Nardi P, Radaelli G, Orsenigo E, Staudacher C (2007) Impact of previous abdominal surgery on the outcome of laparoscopic colectomy: a case-matched control study. Tech Coloproctol 11:241–246

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Szomstein S, Lo Menzo E, Simpfendorfer C, Zundel N, Rosenthal RJ (2006) Laparoscopic lysis of adhesions. World J Surg 30:535–540

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Menzies D, Ellis H (1990) Intestinal obstruction from adhesions: how big is the problem? Ann R Coll Surg Engl 72:60–63

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Parker MC, Ellis H, Moran BJ, Thompson JN, Wilson MS, Menzies D, McGuire A, Lower AM, Hawthorn RJ, O’Briena F, Buchan S, Crowe AM (2001) Postoperative adhesions: ten-year follow-up of 12, 584 patients undergoing lower abdominal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 44:822–830

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Pokala N, Delaney CP, Senagore AJ, Brady KM, Fazio VW (2005) Laparoscopic vs open total colectomy: a case-matched comparative study. Surg Endosc 19:531–535

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Kuhry E, Bonjer HJ, Haglind E, Hop WC, Veldkamp R, Cuesta MA, Jeekel J, Påhlman L, Morino M, Lacy A, Delgado S (2005) Impact of hospital case volume on short-term outcome after laparoscopic operation for colonic cancer. Surg Endosc 19:687–692

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Azimuddin K, Rosen L, Reed JF III, Stasik JJ, Riether RD, Khubchandani IT (2001) Readmissions after colorectal surgery cannot be predicted. Dis Colon Rectum 44:942–946

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Kiran RP, Delaney CP, Senagore AJ, Steel M, Garofalo T, Fazio VW (2004) Outcomes and prediction of hospital readmission after intestinal surgery. J Am Coll Surg 198:877–883

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosures

Andre da Luz Moreira, Ravi P. Kiran, Hasan T. Kirat, Feza H. Remzi, Daniel P. Geisler, James M. Church, Thomas Garofalo, Victor W. Fazio have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose. Daniel P. Geisler receives an honorarium as a consultant or speaker for U.S. Surgical (Covidien).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Digestive Disease Institute, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA

    Andre da Luz Moreira, Ravi P. Kiran, Hasan T. Kirat, Feza H. Remzi, Daniel P. Geisler, James M. Church, Thomas Garofalo & Victor W. Fazio

Authors
  1. Andre da Luz Moreira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ravi P. Kiran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hasan T. Kirat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Feza H. Remzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Daniel P. Geisler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. James M. Church
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Thomas Garofalo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Victor W. Fazio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ravi P. Kiran.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

da Luz Moreira, A., Kiran, R.P., Kirat, H.T. et al. Laparoscopic versus open colectomy for patients with American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) classifications 3 and 4: the minimally invasive approach is associated with significantly quicker recovery and reduced costs. Surg Endosc 24, 1280–1286 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-009-0761-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-009-0761-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation