Laparoscopic versus open colectomy for colon cancer in an older population: a cohort study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer has been compared with open colectomy in randomized controlled trials, but these studies may not be generalizable because of strict enrollment and exclusion criteria which may explicitly or inadvertently exclude older individuals due to associated comorbidities. Previous studies of older patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy have generally focused on short-term outcomes. The goals of this cohort study were to identify predictors of laparoscopic colectomy in an older population in the United States and to compare short-term and long-term outcomes.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patients aged 65 years or older with incident colorectal cancer diagnosed 1996-2002 who underwent colectomy within 6 months of cancer diagnosis were identified from the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database. Laparoscopic and open colectomy patients were compared with respect to length of stay, blood transfusion requirements, intensive care unit monitoring, complications, 30-day mortality, and long-term survival. We adjusted for potential selection bias in surgical approach with propensity score matching.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Laparoscopic colectomy cases were associated with left-sided tumors; areas with higher population density, income, and education level; areas in the western United States; and National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers. Laparoscopic colectomy cases had shorter length of stay and less intensive care unit monitoring. Although laparoscopic colectomy patients (n = 424) had fewer complications (21.5% versus 26.3%), lower 30-day mortality (3.3% versus 5.8%), and longer median survival (6.6 versus 4.8 years) compared with open colectomy patients (n = 27,012), after propensity score matching these differences disappeared.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In this older population, laparoscopic colectomy practice patterns were associated with factors which likely correlate with tertiary referral centers. Although short-term and long-term survival are comparable, laparoscopic colectomy offers shorter hospitalizations and less intensive care.</p

Enhanced recovery program in laparoscopic colectomy for cancer

Introduction: Both laparoscopic colectomy and application of enhanced recovery program (ERP) in open colectomy have been demonstrated to enable early recovery and to shorten hospital stay. This study evaluated the impact of ERP on results of laparoscopic colectomy and comparison was made with the outcomes of patients prior to the application of ERP. Methods: An ERP was implemented in the authors' center in December 2006. Short-term outcomes of consecutive 84 patients who underwent laparoscopic colonic cancer resection 23 months before (control group) and 96 patients who were operated within 13 months; after application of ERP (ERP group) were compared. Results: Between the ERP and control groups, there was no statistical difference in patient characteristics, pathology, operating time, blood loss, conversion rate or complications. Compared to the control group, patients in the ERP group had earlier passage of flatus [2 (range: 1-5) versus 2 (range: 1-4) days after operation respectively; p∈=∈0.03)] and a lower incidence of prolonged post-operative ileus (6% versus 0 respectively; p∈=∈0.02). There was no difference in the hospital stay between the two groups [4 (range: 2-34) days in control group and 4 (range: 2-23) days in ERP group; p∈=∈0.4)]. The re-admission rate was also similar (7% in control group and 5% in ERP group; p∈=∈0.59). Conclusions: In laparoscopic colectomy for cancer, application of ERP was associated with no increase in complication rate but significant improvement of gastrointestinal function. ERP further hastened patient recovery but resulted in no difference in hospital stay. © 2010 The Author(s).published_or_final_versionSpringer Open Choice, 31 May 201

Randomized clinical trial comparing the cost and effectiveness of bipolar vessel sealers versus clips and vascular staplers for laparoscopic colorectal resection

The widespread use of laparoscopy has resulted in a variety of instruments being used routinely for vascular control. This randomized controlled trial evaluated the cost-effectiveness of bipolar vessel sealer (BVS) compared with clips and vascular stapler (CVS) in straight laparoscopic colorectal resection