Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Diseases of the Colon & Rectum 9/2004

01-09-2004 | Original Contributions

Benefits of Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Restorative Proctocolectomy: A Comparative Study

Authors: David E. Rivadeneira, M.D., Peter W. Marcello, M.D., Patricia L. Roberts, M.D., Lawrence C. Rusin, M.D., John J. Murray, M.D., John A. Coller, M.D., David J. Schoetz Jr., M.D.

Published in: Diseases of the Colon & Rectum | Issue 9/2004

Login to get access

PURPOSE:

Hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy is thought to facilitate colonic mobilization while maintaining the benefits of laparoscopic surgery. Although previous studies of hand-assisted colectomy have focused on segmental colonic resection, the use of hand-assisted laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy has not been investigated. This study evaluated the effectiveness of hand-assisted laparoscopic approach compared with a conventional laparoscopic method in patients undergoing restorative proctocolectomy.

METHODS:

From a prospective database, a consecutive series of patients were identified undergoing conventional and hand-assisted laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy and results were compared. Twenty-three patients, comprising 10 hand-assisted and 13 conventional laparoscopic patients, were identified. Patient characteristics, perioperative parameters, and outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS:

Both groups were well matched with no differences in age, gender, body mass index, operative indication, diagnosis, comorbidity, or steroid usage. There were no differences among incision size between the hand-assisted (8 (range, 8–20) cm) and conventional laparoscopic cases (8 (range, 5–10) cm). The median operative time was significantly shorter in the hand-assisted group (247 (range, 210–390) minutes) compared with the conventional laparoscopic group (300 (range, 240–400) minutes; P < 0.01). The length of stay was similar between groups (hand-assisted: 4 (range, 3–13) days vs. conventional: 6 (range, 4–17) days). Complications occurred in four hand-assisted patients (40 percent; 2 ileus, mechanical obstruction, and dehydration) and in four patients undergoing conventional laparoscopic method (31 percent; 2 anastomotic leak, ileus, and mechanical obstruction).

CONCLUSIONS:

Compared with conventional laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy, the hand-assisted method resulted in a significant reduction in operative time without detriment to bowel function, length of stay, or patient outcome. The hand-assisted approach to restorative proctocolectomy is likely to replace conventional laparoscopic methods as the preferred laparoscopic approach for this technically challenging procedure.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Milsom, JW, Hammerhofer, KA, Bohm, B, Marcello, P, Elson, P, Fazio, VW 2001Prospective, randomized trial comparing laparoscopic vs. conventional surgery for refractory ileocolic Crohn’s diseaseDis Colon Rectum4418PubMed Milsom, JW, Hammerhofer, KA, Bohm, B, Marcello, P, Elson, P, Fazio, VW 2001Prospective, randomized trial comparing laparoscopic vs. conventional surgery for refractory ileocolic Crohn’s diseaseDis Colon Rectum4418PubMed
2.
go back to reference Schwenk, W, Jacobi, C, Mansmann, U, Bohm, B, Muller, JM 2000Inflammatory response after laparoscopic and conventional colorectal resections - results of a prospective randomized trialLangenbecks Arch Surg38529CrossRefPubMed Schwenk, W, Jacobi, C, Mansmann, U, Bohm, B, Muller, JM 2000Inflammatory response after laparoscopic and conventional colorectal resections - results of a prospective randomized trialLangenbecks Arch Surg38529CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Milsom, JW, Bohm, B, Hammerhofer, KA, Fazio, V, Steiger, E, Elson, P 1998A prospective, randomized trial comparing laparoscopic versus conventional techniques in colorectal cancer surgery: a preliminary reportJ Am Coll Surg1874654CrossRefPubMed Milsom, JW, Bohm, B, Hammerhofer, KA, Fazio, V, Steiger, E, Elson, P 1998A prospective, randomized trial comparing laparoscopic versus conventional techniques in colorectal cancer surgery: a preliminary reportJ Am Coll Surg1874654CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Lacy, AM, Garcia-Valdecasas, JC, et al. 2002Laparoscopy-assisted colectomy versus open colectomy for treatment of non-metastatic colon cancer: a randomised trialLancet35922249CrossRefPubMed Lacy, AM, Garcia-Valdecasas, JC,  et al. 2002Laparoscopy-assisted colectomy versus open colectomy for treatment of non-metastatic colon cancer: a randomised trialLancet35922249CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Weeks, JC, Nelson, H, Gelber, S, Sargent, D, Schroeder, G 2002Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy (COST) Study Group. Short-term quality-of-life outcomes following laparoscopic-assisted colectomy vs open colectomy for colon cancer: a randomized trialJAMA2873218CrossRefPubMed Weeks, JC, Nelson, H, Gelber, S, Sargent, D, Schroeder, G 2002Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy (COST) Study Group. Short-term quality-of-life outcomes following laparoscopic-assisted colectomy vs open colectomy for colon cancer: a randomized trialJAMA2873218CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Marcello, PW, Wong, SK 1999Measuring outcomes of laparoscopic colectomy: is there an advantage?Semin Colon Rectal Surg101109 Marcello, PW, Wong, SK 1999Measuring outcomes of laparoscopic colectomy: is there an advantage?Semin Colon Rectal Surg101109
7.
go back to reference Marcello, PW, Milsom, JW, Wong, SK, et al. 2000Laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy: case-matched comparative study with open restorative proctocolectomyDis Colon Rectum436048PubMed Marcello, PW, Milsom, JW, Wong, SK,  et al. 2000Laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy: case-matched comparative study with open restorative proctocolectomyDis Colon Rectum436048PubMed
8.
go back to reference Hashimoto, A, Funayama, Y, Naito, H, et al. 2001Laparoscope-assisted versus conventional restorative proctocolectomy with rectal mucosectomySurg Today312104PubMed Hashimoto, A, Funayama, Y, Naito, H,  et al. 2001Laparoscope-assisted versus conventional restorative proctocolectomy with rectal mucosectomySurg Today312104PubMed
9.
go back to reference Ky, AJ, Sonoda, T, Milsom, JW 2002One-stage laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy: an alternative to the conventional approach?Dis Colon Rectum4520710PubMed Ky, AJ, Sonoda, T, Milsom, JW 2002One-stage laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy: an alternative to the conventional approach?Dis Colon Rectum4520710PubMed
10.
go back to reference Hasegawa, H, Watanabe, M, Baba, H, Nishibori, H, Kitajima, M 2002Laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy for patients with ulcerative colitisJ Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A124036PubMed Hasegawa, H, Watanabe, M, Baba, H, Nishibori, H, Kitajima, M 2002Laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy for patients with ulcerative colitisJ Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A124036PubMed
11.
go back to reference Kienle, P, Weitz, J, Benner, A, Herfarth, C, Schmidt, J 2003Laparoscopically assisted colectomy and ileoanal pouch procedure with and without protective ileostomySurg Endosc1771620PubMed Kienle, P, Weitz, J, Benner, A, Herfarth, C, Schmidt, J 2003Laparoscopically assisted colectomy and ileoanal pouch procedure with and without protective ileostomySurg Endosc1771620PubMed
12.
go back to reference Eijsbouts, QA, Haan, J, Berends, F, Sietses, C, Cuesta, MA 2000Laparoscopic elective treatment of diverticular disease. A comparison between laparoscopic-assisted and resection-facilitated techniquesSurg Endosc1472630PubMed Eijsbouts, QA, Haan, J, Berends, F, Sietses, C, Cuesta, MA 2000Laparoscopic elective treatment of diverticular disease. A comparison between laparoscopic-assisted and resection-facilitated techniquesSurg Endosc1472630PubMed
13.
go back to reference Anonymous.1999Handoscopic surgery: a prospective multicenter trial of a minimally invasive technique for complex abdominal surgerySouthern Surgeons’ Club Study Group. Arch Surg13447785 Anonymous.1999Handoscopic surgery: a prospective multicenter trial of a minimally invasive technique for complex abdominal surgerySouthern Surgeons’ Club Study Group. Arch Surg13447785
14.
go back to reference Anonymous.2000Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery vs standard laparoscopic surgery for colorectal disease: a prospective randomized trial. HALS Study Group.Surg Endosc14896901 Anonymous.2000Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery vs standard laparoscopic surgery for colorectal disease: a prospective randomized trial. HALS Study Group.Surg Endosc14896901
15.
go back to reference Pietrabissa, A, Moretto, C, Carobbi, A, Boggi, U, Ghilli, M, Mosca, F 2002Hand-assisted laparoscopic low anterior resection: initial experience with a new procedure.Surg Endosc164315PubMed Pietrabissa, A, Moretto, C, Carobbi, A, Boggi, U, Ghilli, M, Mosca, F 2002Hand-assisted laparoscopic low anterior resection: initial experience with a new procedure.Surg Endosc164315PubMed
16.
go back to reference Wexner, SD, Johansen, OB, Nogueras, JJ, Jagelman, DG 1992Laparoscopic total abdominal colectomy. A prospective trialDis Colon Rectum356515PubMed Wexner, SD, Johansen, OB, Nogueras, JJ, Jagelman, DG 1992Laparoscopic total abdominal colectomy. A prospective trialDis Colon Rectum356515PubMed
17.
go back to reference Schmitt, SL, Cohen, SM, Wexner, SD, Nogueras, JJ, Jagelman, DG 1994Does laparoscopic-assisted ileal pouch anal anastomosis reduce the length of hospitalization?Int J Colorectal Dis91347PubMed Schmitt, SL, Cohen, SM, Wexner, SD, Nogueras, JJ, Jagelman, DG 1994Does laparoscopic-assisted ileal pouch anal anastomosis reduce the length of hospitalization?Int J Colorectal Dis91347PubMed
18.
go back to reference Targarona, EM, Gracia, E, Garriga, J, et al. 2002Prospective randomized trial comparing conventional laparoscopic colectomy with hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy: applicability, immediate clinical outcome, inflammatory response, and costSurg Endosc162349PubMed Targarona, EM, Gracia, E, Garriga, J,  et al. 2002Prospective randomized trial comparing conventional laparoscopic colectomy with hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy: applicability, immediate clinical outcome, inflammatory response, and costSurg Endosc162349PubMed
Metadata
Title
Benefits of Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Restorative Proctocolectomy: A Comparative Study
Authors
David E. Rivadeneira, M.D.
Peter W. Marcello, M.D.
Patricia L. Roberts, M.D.
Lawrence C. Rusin, M.D.
John J. Murray, M.D.
John A. Coller, M.D.
David J. Schoetz Jr., M.D.
Publication date
01-09-2004
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum / Issue 9/2004
Print ISSN: 0012-3706
Electronic ISSN: 1530-0358
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-004-0587-y

Other articles of this Issue 9/2004

Diseases of the Colon & Rectum 9/2004 Go to the issue