Colorectal Surgery: Single Tertiary Center Experience

{"title":"Colorectal Surgery: Single Tertiary Center Experience","authors":"","doi":"10.51626/ijgld.2023.03.00013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: Laparoscopic approach is nowadays being used widely for the treatment of various surgical diseases in many centers, but it has not considered as the gold standard in colorectal surgery yet.The aim of this study was to examine and compare the postoperative clinical and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery in the light of literatüre.\n\nMethods: 526 patients who had colorectal cancer surgery in our clinic in between May 2015 and March 2023 were enrolled in this retrospective comparative study. Patients treated with open surgery were included in Group 1 (OS group) and ones treated laparoscopically includedin Group 2 (LS group). Demographics (age,sex), types of operations, ASA scores, evaluation of resected specimen, dissected lymph nodes, T\ninvasion of tumors in groups, postoperative complications, operation time and hospital stay times and short-term morbidity and mortality were noted and compared with each other.\n\nResults: Patients in LS group had less blood loss compared with those in OS group (median 80 mL (range 0-1300) vs 155 mL (0–2000),p<0•0001), although laparoscopic surgery lasted longer than did open surgery (p<0•0001). The patients who underwent the laparoscopic surgery showed faster recovery then those who underwent open surgery, regarding first passing bowel gas (p=0.045), time of first bowel motion\n(p=0.04), time to resume normal diet (p=0.041), and time to ambulate independently (p=0.037). Hospital stay time was significantly shorter in Laparoscopy group (p<0.001). Oncological satisfaction of resection as assessed by number of removed lymph nodes, distal resection margin did not differ between groups (p=0.564, p=0.698). Although wound infection was significantly higher in OS group (p<0.001), other morbidity\nparameters and mortality after colectomy did not differ between two groups.\n\nConclusion: Laparoscopic colorectal surgery gives satisfactory outcomes as compared to open surgery in many aspects such as clinical and\noncological outcomes and early recovery. Considering the short-term outcomes of the present study, laparoscopic colorectal surgery in experienced hands seems to be safe and feasible for the treatment of the colorectal cancers.","PeriodicalId":102500,"journal":{"name":"International Journal on Gastroenterology and Liver Disorders","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal on Gastroenterology and Liver Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51626/ijgld.2023.03.00013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Laparoscopic approach is nowadays being used widely for the treatment of various surgical diseases in many centers, but it has not considered as the gold standard in colorectal surgery yet.The aim of this study was to examine and compare the postoperative clinical and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery in the light of literatüre. Methods: 526 patients who had colorectal cancer surgery in our clinic in between May 2015 and March 2023 were enrolled in this retrospective comparative study. Patients treated with open surgery were included in Group 1 (OS group) and ones treated laparoscopically includedin Group 2 (LS group). Demographics (age,sex), types of operations, ASA scores, evaluation of resected specimen, dissected lymph nodes, T invasion of tumors in groups, postoperative complications, operation time and hospital stay times and short-term morbidity and mortality were noted and compared with each other. Results: Patients in LS group had less blood loss compared with those in OS group (median 80 mL (range 0-1300) vs 155 mL (0–2000),p<0•0001), although laparoscopic surgery lasted longer than did open surgery (p<0•0001). The patients who underwent the laparoscopic surgery showed faster recovery then those who underwent open surgery, regarding first passing bowel gas (p=0.045), time of first bowel motion (p=0.04), time to resume normal diet (p=0.041), and time to ambulate independently (p=0.037). Hospital stay time was significantly shorter in Laparoscopy group (p<0.001). Oncological satisfaction of resection as assessed by number of removed lymph nodes, distal resection margin did not differ between groups (p=0.564, p=0.698). Although wound infection was significantly higher in OS group (p<0.001), other morbidity parameters and mortality after colectomy did not differ between two groups. Conclusion: Laparoscopic colorectal surgery gives satisfactory outcomes as compared to open surgery in many aspects such as clinical and oncological outcomes and early recovery. Considering the short-term outcomes of the present study, laparoscopic colorectal surgery in experienced hands seems to be safe and feasible for the treatment of the colorectal cancers.
结直肠外科:单一三级中心经验
目的:腹腔镜入路目前在许多中心广泛应用于各种外科疾病的治疗,但尚未被认为是结直肠手术的金标准。本研究的目的是根据文献 re检查和比较腹腔镜和开放式结直肠手术的术后临床和肿瘤结果。方法:选取2015年5月至2023年3月在我院行结直肠癌手术的526例患者进行回顾性比较研究。开腹手术组为1组(OS组),腹腔镜组为2组(LS组)。记录人口统计学(年龄、性别)、手术类型、ASA评分、切除标本评价、淋巴结清扫情况、组内肿瘤侵入情况、术后并发症、手术时间、住院时间、短期发病率和死亡率。结果:尽管腹腔镜手术比开放手术持续时间更长(p< 0.0001),但LS组患者的失血量比OS组少(中位80 mL(范围0-1300)vs 155 mL(范围0- 2000),p< 0.0001)。在首次排便时间(p=0.045)、首次排便时间(p=0.04)、恢复正常饮食时间(p=0.041)和独立行走时间(p=0.037)方面,行腹腔镜手术的患者比行开放手术的患者恢复更快。腹腔镜组住院时间明显缩短(p<0.001)。以淋巴结切除数、远端切除缘评估的肿瘤切除术满意度在两组间无差异(p=0.564, p=0.698)。虽然OS组的伤口感染明显高于对照组(p<0.001),但两组间结肠切除术后的其他发病率参数和死亡率没有差异。结论:腹腔镜结直肠手术在临床、肿瘤预后及早期恢复等方面均优于开放手术。考虑到本研究的短期结果,在经验丰富的人手中进行腹腔镜结直肠癌手术治疗似乎是安全可行的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信