Comparison of short-term postoperative outcomes between hand-assisted laparoscopic and conventional sigmoidectomy.
- Author:
Hui ZHANG
1
;
Ming LI
;
Tian-cheng ZHAN
;
Yun-feng YAO
;
Yi-fan PENG
;
Jin GU
Author Information
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH: Colectomy; methods; Female; Humans; Laparoscopy; methods; Laparotomy; Male; Middle Aged; Retrospective Studies; Sigmoid Neoplasms; surgery; Treatment Outcome
- From: Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 2011;14(6):462-464
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVETo compare the safety and efficacy perioperatively between hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) and conventional open sigmoidectomy.
METHODSProspectively collected data on 115 patients with sigmoid colon cancer between January 2009 to June 2010 were analyzed. There were 62 patients in the HALS group and 53 in the conventional sigmoidectomy group (CS). Patient characteristics, operative parameters, and perioperative outcomes were compared.
RESULTSHALS patients were similar to CS patients in age(60.2 yrs vs. 63.4 yrs, P=0.163), gender (53.2% vs. 60.4% male, P=0.441), tumor size (4.7 cm vs. 5.3 cm, P=0.114) and tumor stage. The two groups were comparable in operative time [(122.4±32.0) min vs.(126.7±37.4) min, P=0.510], lymph node harvest (15.1±4.6 vs. 16.8±6.4, P=0.163), free margin length [(4.1±1.8) cm vs.(4.3±1.7) cm, P=0.601], and postoperative complications. However, HALS group had less intraoperative bleeding [(62.6±35.4) ml vs. (168.9±137.1) ml, P=0.000], shorter time to flatus [(2.3±0.8) d vs. (3.3±1.1) d, P=0.000], and shorter hospital stay [(8.8±2.7) d vs.(12.6±8.0) d, P=0.001].
CONCLUSIONSHALS results in similar short-term outcomes compared to conventional surgery. HALS is safe and minimally invasive.
