Open or Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer

Kapritsou, Maria; Korkolis, Dimitrios; Konstantinou, Evangelos

doi:10.1097/sga.0b013e318280f867

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Laparoscopic colorectal surgery caused higher surgery expenditure (P=0.003) and total hospitalization costs (P<0.001) compared with open surgery. Kapritsou et al (28) found that the surgery costs in the laparoscopic group were significantly higher than those in the open surgery group. In addition, Steele et al (29) reported that the total hospitalization costs in the laparoscopic group were significantly higher than those in the open surgery group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the clinical outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted versus open surgery for colorectal cancer

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted surgery versus open surgery for colorectal cancer and investigate the oncological safety and potential advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic-assisted surgery for colorectal cancer. The medical records from a total of 160 patients who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer between January 2009 and January 2013 at The Second Hospital of Dalian Medical University (Dalian, China) were retrospectively analyzed. The patients who underwent laparoscopic-assisted surgery showed significant advantages due to the minimally invasive nature of the surgery compared with those who underwent open surgery, namely, less blood loss (P=0.002), shorter time to flatus (P<0.001), bowel movement (P=0.009) and liquid diet intake (P=0.015), earlier ambulation time (P=0.006), smaller length of incision (P<0.001) and a shorter post-operative hospital stay (P=0.007). However, laparoscopic-assisted surgery for colorectal cancer resulted in a longer operative time (P=0.015) and higher surgery expenditure (P=0.003) and total hospitalization costs (P<0.001) compared with open surgery. There were no statistically significant differences between the intraoperative and post-operative complications. There were no differences in the local recurrence (P=0.699) or distant metastasis (P=0.699) rates. In addition, no differences were found in overall survival (P=0.894) and disease-free survival (P=0.701). These findings indicated that laparoscopic-assisted surgery for colorectal cancer had the clear advantages of a minimally invasive surgery and relative disadvantages, including a longer surgery time and higher cost, and exhibited similar rates of recurrence and survival compared with open surgery.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the clinical outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted versus open surgery for colorectal cancer

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More frequent administration of analgesics for mild pain after laparoscopic surgery was reported in a retrospective study, suggesting that laparoscopic surgery is less painful [ 21 ]. However, retrospective reviews of medical records, with documentation of delivered analgesics, do not necessarily reflect patients' self-perception of pain intensity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Open versus Laparoscopic Surgery: Does the Surgical Technique Influence Pain Outcome? Results from an International Registry

Allvin

Rawal

Johanzon

et al. 2016

Pain Research and Treatment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Postoperative pain management relevant for specific surgical procedures is debated. The importance of evaluating pain with consideration given to type of surgery and the patient's perspective has been emphasized. In this prospective cohort study, we analysed outcome data from 607 patients in the international PAIN OUT registry for assessment and comparison of postoperative pain outcome within the 24 first hours after laparoscopic and open colonic surgery. Patients from the laparoscopic group scored minimum pain at a higher level than the open group (P = 0.012). Apart from minimum pain, no other significant differences in patient reported outcomes were observed. Maximum pain scores >3 were reported from 77% (laparoscopic) and 68% (open) patients (mean ≥ 5 in both groups). Pain interference with mobilization was reported by 87–93% of patients. Both groups scored high levels of patient satisfaction. In the open group, a higher frequency of patients received a combination of general and regional anaesthesia, which had an impact of the minimum pain score. Our results from registry data indicate that surgical technique does not influence the quality of postoperative pain management during the first postoperative day if adequate analgesia is given.

show abstract

“…Laparoscopic surgery is reported to be associated with milder immunologic and inflammatory response [15] and have decreased morbidity and mortality, faster recovery and shorter hospital stay [16,17]. Decreased postoperative hospital stay duration always reflects faster postoperative recovery of intake of oral food, bowel function and physical activity [18][19][20][21][22][23]. As to CRC, similar resulted were found [24][25][26].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer in Elderly Patients

Chen

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the increase of life expectancy, surgical intervention for rectal cancer is more and more frequently performed in the elderly. It is well accepted that laparoscopic surgery is of advantage, but not widely recognized in old patients with rectal cancer. In order to assess laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer in elderly patients, we performed this study. This retrospective study was designed to compare short-term outcomes between laparoscopic surgery and open surgery in elderly patients with rectal cancer, which may give some useful guidance in the clinical practice. Thirty-seven patients with rectal cancer aged 75 and older undergoing laparoscopic surgery were matched with 37 counterparts undergoing open surgery. Criteria of matching included general information and preoperative status. Patients in the laparoscopic surgery and open surgery groups were comparable for the matching criteria. Compared with the open surgery group, estimated blood loss (P=0.048) and intraoperative transfusion (P=0.042) were less in the laparoscopic surgery group. As to short-term postoperative outcomes, duration of postoperative hospital stay was shorter (P = 0.039) and overall complication (P = 0.032) and wound complication (P = 0.038) was less in the laparoscopic surgery group than in the open surgery group. In conclusion, considering the operative variables and short-term outcomes, laparoscopic surgery is safe and seems superior to open surgery in elderly patients with rectal cancer. However, further studies with more patients are needed to confirm the results and assess long-term results.

show abstract

Open or Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer

Cited by 12 publications

References 7 publications

Comparison of the clinical outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted versus open surgery for colorectal cancer

Comparison of the clinical outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted versus open surgery for colorectal cancer

Open versus Laparoscopic Surgery: Does the Surgical Technique Influence Pain Outcome? Results from an International Registry

Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer in Elderly Patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About