COMPARATIVE STUDY
EVALUATION STUDIES
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Totally laparoscopic versus laparoscopic assisted right colectomy for cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the leading causes of cancer death all over the world and right-sided colon cancer represents approximately 15% of all cases of CRC. Laparoscopic colectomies produce advantages in short-term outcome compared to open procedures and have recently benefited by a long term oncologic validation. This study was designed to compare the short- and medium-term surgical outcomes of totally laparoscopic (TLRC) and laparoscopic-assisted right colectomy (LARC) for neoplasia, hypothesizing they may be at least similar.

METHODS: A consecutive unselected series of 72 patients undergone elective surgery for right-sided colon cancer from April 2006 to April 2011 was retrospectively evaluated. All patients were treated by laparoscopic medial-to-lateral right colectomy. In 42 patients a TLRC was performed, in 30 a LARC. Perioperative care plan, operative steps and surgical instrumentations were standardized. All the operations were performed or supervised by the same Surgeon (I.S.). Data on the patients' demographics, disease features, operative details and follow up were recorded and analyzed. Complications were classified using the Clavien-Dindo classification system. Continuous variables were expressed as mean ± standard deviation and analyzed with the Student t test. Categorical ones were expressed as percent value and analyzed with Fischer test or Chi-square test, where appropriate. P < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS: There was no significant difference in term of age, sex, body mass index and American Society of Anesthesiology score between the two groups. Comorbidities, site of tumor and stage of disease were similar too. No conversion to laparotomy was registered. Median operative time (186.3 ± 40.1 min vs 176.5 ± 40.0 min; not significant (NS)) and estimated blood loss (43.3 ± 89.8 ml vs 31.2 ± 51.3 ml; NS) were statistically comparable in both groups. Timing of first defecation (3.4 ± 0.9 dd vs 2.9 ± 0.9; P = 0.023) and length of hospital stay (7.2 ± 1.3 dd vs 6.2 ± 1.1 dd; P < 0.001) were statistically lower in TLRC cohort. A significantly longer length of skin incision characterized LARC group compared with TLRC group (71.0 ± 13.5 mm vs 48.2 ± 10.2 mm; P < 0.001). Both groups achieved an adequate number of lymph nodes harvested (22.0 ± 8.2 vs 25.9 ± 9.0; P = 0.036) and oncological resection of the tumor (proximal margin 7.6 ± 7.7 vs 6.1 ± 3.8; NS - distal margin 13.3 ± 7.7 vs 13.6 ± 5.8; NS). Post-operative complications according to Clavien-Dindo classification were statistically comparable in both cohorts. No readmission within 60 days of discharge was observed. The mean follow-up recorded was 27.7 ± 16.6 months. Late complications consisted in 1 case of incisional hernia (3.8%) in LARC group.

CONCLUSIONS: Although more appropriate indications must be set by future studies, we encourage the choice of a TLRC for the treatment of cancer of the right colon. TLRC is actually a feasible and safe technique, which has resulted in an encouraging short-term outcome, low incidence of major complications and preservation of oncologic principles, without affecting operative times.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app