Falk P M, Beart R W, Wexner S D, Thorson A G, Jagelman D G, Lavery I C, Johansen O B, Fitzgibbons R J
Department of Surgery, Creighton University School of Medicine, Omaha, Nebraska 68131.
Dis Colon Rectum. 1993 Jan;36(1):28-34. doi: 10.1007/BF02050298.
A multicenter retrospective study was undertaken to assess the efficacy and safety of laparoscopy in colon and rectal surgery. To minimize potential bias in interpretation of the results, all data were registered with an independent observer, who did not participate in any of the surgical procedures. Sixty-six patients underwent a laparoscopic procedure. Operations performed included sigmoid colectomy (19), right hemicolectomy (15), low anterior resection (6), colectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) (5), and abdominoperineal resection (APR) (3). The conversion rate from laparoscopic colectomy to celiotomy was 41 percent. Major morbidity and mortality were 24 percent and 0 percent, respectively. Length of stay, hospital costs, and lymph node harvest were compared between the sigmoid resection and right hemicolectomy subgroups. Data from traditional sigmoid colectomies and right hemicolectomies were obtained from the same institutions for comparison. Mean postoperative stay for laparoscopically completed sigmoid and right colectomies was significantly less than that for either the converted or the traditional groups (P < 0.02). Total hospital cost for traditional right hemicolectomy was significantly less than that for the converted group (P < 0.05) but not the laparoscopic group. Laparoscopic sigmoid resection showed no significant total hospital cost difference among traditional, converted, and laparoscopic groups. Lymph node harvest in resections for carcinoma was comparable in all groups. These preliminary data suggest that laparoscopic colon and rectal surgery can be accomplished with acceptable morbidity and mortality when performed by trained surgeons. Length of stay is shorter, but there is no proven total hospital cost benefit. Appropriate registries will be necessary to adequately assess long-term outcome.
开展了一项多中心回顾性研究,以评估腹腔镜手术在结肠和直肠手术中的疗效和安全性。为尽量减少结果解读中的潜在偏倚,所有数据均由一名独立观察者记录,该观察者未参与任何手术操作。66例患者接受了腹腔镜手术。实施的手术包括乙状结肠切除术(19例)、右半结肠切除术(15例)、低位前切除术(6例)、结肠切除术加回肠储袋肛管吻合术(IPAA)(5例)和腹会阴联合切除术(APR)(3例)。腹腔镜结肠切除术转为开腹手术的转化率为41%。主要并发症发生率和死亡率分别为24%和0%。比较了乙状结肠切除术和右半结肠切除术亚组之间的住院时间、住院费用和淋巴结清扫数量。从同一机构获取传统乙状结肠切除术和右半结肠切除术的数据进行比较。腹腔镜完成的乙状结肠和右半结肠切除术的平均术后住院时间明显短于中转组或传统组(P<0.02)。传统右半结肠切除术的总住院费用明显低于中转组(P<0.05),但不低于腹腔镜组。腹腔镜乙状结肠切除术在传统组、中转组和腹腔镜组之间的总住院费用无显著差异。所有组中癌切除术中的淋巴结清扫数量相当。这些初步数据表明,由训练有素的外科医生进行腹腔镜结肠和直肠手术时,可获得可接受的并发症发生率和死亡率。住院时间较短,但未证实有总住院费用效益。需要适当的登记系统来充分评估长期结果。