Validity of laparoscopic surgery for lower gastrointestinal perforations

Introduction

This study aimed to clarify the validity of laparoscopic surgery for lower gastrointestinal perforation by comparing the clinical outcomes of laparoscopic and open emergency surgery.

Methods

We reviewed the data of patients who underwent surgery for lower gastrointestinal perforation. Patients were categorized into two groups: the laparoscopic group who underwent laparoscopic surgery, and the open group who underwent laparotomy. Clinical and operative outcomes between the two groups were evaluated.

Results

A total of 219 patients were included in the study. There were 66 and 153 patients with small bowel and colorectal perforations, respectively. The median operative time in the laparoscopic group was shorter than that in the open group (126 min vs. 146 min, p = .049). The mean amount of intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in the laparoscopic group (50.4 mL vs. 400.1 mL, p < .001). The incidence of postoperative complication was higher in the open group (20.0% vs. 66.5%, p < .001), especially wound infection (0% vs. 26.3%, p = .002). Median hospital stays were 14 days and 24 days in the laparoscopic and open groups, respectively (p < .001). In the laparoscopic group, hospital mortality was 0%.

Conclusions

The laparoscopic approach for small bowel and colorectal perforation in an emergency setting is a safe procedure in carefully selected patients and may contribute to decreased intraoperative blood loss, shortened hospital stay, and decreased incidence of postoperative complications, especially wound infection.