Laparoscopic Versus Open Sigmoid Loop Colostomy: A Comparative Study from a Cohort of 62 Patients Requiring Temporary Faecal Diversion at a Tertiary Care Center in North India.

BACKGROUND: Over decades, colostomies have been done through open method, but laparoscopic creation of an intestinal stoma is safe, feasible and has distinct advantages over conventional techniques in specific procedures. The aim of this study compares operative and short-term outcomes of laparoscopic and open sigmoid loop colostomy formation for temporary fecal diversion.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A single institution, comparative study conducted in the department of surgery for patients who underwent either laparoscopic or open sigmoid loop colostomy. The 2 years' study was from December 1, 2013, to November 30, 2015. Subjects were prospectively enrolled in the study after informed consent, both genders of >12 years of age. Data analysis was done using Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 21.0. Variables were tested by Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, compared using unpaired t -test/Mann-Whitney Test, Chi-square test/Fisher's exact test. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were enrolled; laparoscopy group - 29 patients (46.77%) versus open group - 33 patients (53.22%). Laparoscopic group/open surgery group showed less blood loss (20.69 + 17.71 ml / 121.97 + 35.29ml, P -value 0.0005), lower requirement of analgesics (4.28 ± 1.76 days/6.88 ± 2.75 days), shorter hospital stay (8.79 ± 5.57 days and 11.73 ± 6.61 days, P = 0.001), early return of the bowel function and tolerance to diet. Complications and readmission requirement for any complication was lower in the laparoscopic group.

CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic sigmoid loop colostomy is a simple alternative to open sigmoid loop colostomy with respect to postoperative pain, earlier return of bowel function, lower analgesic requirement, and lesser hospital stay.