Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Pediatric Surgery International 9/2010

01-09-2010 | Original Article

Comparative analysis between laparoscopic (UCL) and open (UCO) technique for the treatment of ulcerative colitis in pediatric patients

Authors: P. Flores, M. M. Bailez, E. Cuenca, C. Fraire

Published in: Pediatric Surgery International | Issue 9/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study is to compare laparoscopic with open approach in the surgical treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC)

Material and methods

Between July 1991 and August 2009, 32 consecutive unselective patients with UC received surgical treatment. The population analyzed was divided into three groups: subtotal colectomy + ileocolostomy (Group 1), proctectomy + ileoanal pouch (Group 2), one-step proctocolectomy + ileoanal pouch (Group 3). We analyzed the mean operating time, postoperative oral intake, use of opiates, the length of hospital stay and postoperative morbidity in each group. Open and laparoscopic approaches were compared in each group retrospectively.

Results

In Group 1 the mean operating time was longer for the laparoscopic group (301 vs. 197 min; p < 0.01). The length of postoperative stay was longer for the open group (8 vs. 19 days; p < 0.05) and the oral intake started earlier in the laparoscopic group (3, 5 vs. 6, 2 days; p = 0.05). No significant difference was found in the use of opiates (p = ns). A total of four major complications occurred in the laparoscopic group and another four in the open approach. In Group 2, there was no significant difference in operating time between laparoscopic and open approach. The laparoscopic group started earlier to tolerate (p < 0.05) and there were significantly differences in the use of narcotics and hospital stay (p < 0.05). General complications were related to the pouch. In Group 3 the mean operating time was longer for the laparoscopic group (470 vs. 330 min p < 0.05). Patients with a laparoscopic approach had a shorter hospital stay (5, 6 vs. 10 days; p < 0.05) and postoperative narcotic use and they started earlier to tolerate (p < 0.05). One major complication was presented in the laparoscopic procedure and two in the open approach.

Conclusions

Of the 165 patients with UC in our hospital, 32 underwent surgery. The laparoscopic approach seems feasible and safe. A single staged approach (Group 1 + Group 2) remains the most reasonable choice for most patients. One-step approach was done only in selected cases (Group 3). The advantages of laparoscopy, such as improved cosmetic aspects, shorter postoperative ileus and hospital stay, were observed in the laparoscopic colectomy, proctectomy and ileoanal pouch in our study.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Proctor ML, Langer JC, Gerstle JT (2002) Is laparoscopic subtotal colectomy better than open subtotal colectomy in children. Pediatr Surg 37:706–708CrossRef Proctor ML, Langer JC, Gerstle JT (2002) Is laparoscopic subtotal colectomy better than open subtotal colectomy in children. Pediatr Surg 37:706–708CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Sardinha TC, Wexner SD (1998) Laparoscopy for inflammatory bowel disease: pros and cons. World J Surg 22:370–374CrossRefPubMed Sardinha TC, Wexner SD (1998) Laparoscopy for inflammatory bowel disease: pros and cons. World J Surg 22:370–374CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Dunker MS, Bemelman WA, Slors JS et al (2000) Laparoscopic assisted vs. open colectomy in severe acute colitis in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Surg Endosc 14:911–914CrossRefPubMed Dunker MS, Bemelman WA, Slors JS et al (2000) Laparoscopic assisted vs. open colectomy in severe acute colitis in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Surg Endosc 14:911–914CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Meijerink W, Eijsbouts Q, Cuesta M et al (1999) Laparoscopically assisted bowel surgery for inflammatory bowel disease. The combined experiences of two academic centers. Surg Endosc 13:882–886CrossRefPubMed Meijerink W, Eijsbouts Q, Cuesta M et al (1999) Laparoscopically assisted bowel surgery for inflammatory bowel disease. The combined experiences of two academic centers. Surg Endosc 13:882–886CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Alves A, Panis Y, Bouhnik Y (2003) Subtotal colectomy for severe acute colitis: a 20-year experience of a tertiary care center with an aggressive and early surgical policy. J Am Coll Surg 197:379–385CrossRefPubMed Alves A, Panis Y, Bouhnik Y (2003) Subtotal colectomy for severe acute colitis: a 20-year experience of a tertiary care center with an aggressive and early surgical policy. J Am Coll Surg 197:379–385CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Ouaïssi M, Alves A, Bouhnik Y (2006) Three-step ileal pouch-anal anastomosis under total laparoscopic approach for acute or severe colitis complicating inflammatory bowel disease. J Am Coll Surg 202:637–642CrossRefPubMed Ouaïssi M, Alves A, Bouhnik Y (2006) Three-step ileal pouch-anal anastomosis under total laparoscopic approach for acute or severe colitis complicating inflammatory bowel disease. J Am Coll Surg 202:637–642CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Larson DW, Pemberton JH (2004) Current concepts and controversies in surgery for IBD. Gastroentrology 126(6):1611–1619CrossRef Larson DW, Pemberton JH (2004) Current concepts and controversies in surgery for IBD. Gastroentrology 126(6):1611–1619CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Marcello PW, Milsom JW, Wong SK (2000) Laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy case-matched comparative study with open restorative proctocolectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 43:604–608CrossRefPubMed Marcello PW, Milsom JW, Wong SK (2000) Laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy case-matched comparative study with open restorative proctocolectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 43:604–608CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Seshadri PA, Poulin EC, Schlachta CM (2001) Does a laparoscopic approach to total abdominal colectomy and proctocolectomy offer advantages. Surg Endosc 15:837–842CrossRefPubMed Seshadri PA, Poulin EC, Schlachta CM (2001) Does a laparoscopic approach to total abdominal colectomy and proctocolectomy offer advantages. Surg Endosc 15:837–842CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Marcello P, Milsom JW, Wong SK (2001) Laparoscopic total colectomy for acute colitis: a case–control study. Dis Colon Rectum 44:1441–1445CrossRefPubMed Marcello P, Milsom JW, Wong SK (2001) Laparoscopic total colectomy for acute colitis: a case–control study. Dis Colon Rectum 44:1441–1445CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Dunker MS, Bemelman WA, Slors JFM (2001) Functional outcome, quality of life, body image, and cosmesis in patients after laparoscopic-assisted and conventional restorative proctocolectomy: a comparative study. Dis Colon Rectum 44:1800–1807CrossRefPubMed Dunker MS, Bemelman WA, Slors JFM (2001) Functional outcome, quality of life, body image, and cosmesis in patients after laparoscopic-assisted and conventional restorative proctocolectomy: a comparative study. Dis Colon Rectum 44:1800–1807CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Kienlel P, Z’graggenl K, Schmidtl J (2005) Laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy. Br J Surg 92:88–93CrossRef Kienlel P, Z’graggenl K, Schmidtl J (2005) Laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy. Br J Surg 92:88–93CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Ky AJ, Sonoda T, Milsom JW (2002) One-stage laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy: an alternative to the conventional approach. Dis Colon Rectum 45:207–211CrossRefPubMed Ky AJ, Sonoda T, Milsom JW (2002) One-stage laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy: an alternative to the conventional approach. Dis Colon Rectum 45:207–211CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Bell RL, Seymour NE (2002) Laparoscopic treatment of fulminant ulcerative colitis. Surg Endosc 16:1778–1782CrossRefPubMed Bell RL, Seymour NE (2002) Laparoscopic treatment of fulminant ulcerative colitis. Surg Endosc 16:1778–1782CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Comparative analysis between laparoscopic (UCL) and open (UCO) technique for the treatment of ulcerative colitis in pediatric patients
Authors
P. Flores
M. M. Bailez
E. Cuenca
C. Fraire
Publication date
01-09-2010
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Pediatric Surgery International / Issue 9/2010
Print ISSN: 0179-0358
Electronic ISSN: 1437-9813
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-010-2669-3

Other articles of this Issue 9/2010

Pediatric Surgery International 9/2010 Go to the issue