Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum
Published in: Diseases of the Colon & Rectum 1/2008

01-01-2008 | Original Contribution

Laparoscopic- vs. Hand-Assisted Ultralow Anterior Resection: A Prospective Study

Authors: Joe J. Tjandra, M.D., F.R.A.C.S., Miranda K. Y. Chan, M.B.B.S., F.R.A.C.S., Chung Hung Yeh, M.D.

Published in: Diseases of the Colon & Rectum | Issue 1/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

A standard laparoscopic-assisted operation can be conducted with colorectal anastomosis performed after extraction of specimen and insertion of a pursestring via a small left iliac fossa or suprapubic incision, or completed via hand-assisted laparoscopic technique with a 7-cm to 8-cm suprapubic incision. This study compares the short-term outcomes of either technique.

Methods

Sixty-three consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic-assisted ultralow anterior resection or total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer were examined. The laparoscopic-assisted group (n = 31) had standard laparoscopic-assisted resection, whereas the hand-assisted laparoscopic group (n = 32) had a 7-cm to 8-cm suprapubic incision to allow an open colorectal anastomosis. In patients who were obese or have had multiple abdominal surgeries, the hand-assisted approach was generally favored. All patients had a diverting ileostomy.

Results

There was no conversion in either group. Mean operating time was significantly longer in the laparoscopic-assisted group (188.2 vs. 169.8 minutes; P < 0.0001). Mean duration for narcotic analgesia (1.65 vs. 3.38 days, P < 0.0001), mean time to flatus (1.97 vs. 3.19 days, P < 0.0001), and mean duration of intravenous hydration (2.45 vs. 3.88 days, P < 0.0001) were longer in the hand-assisted laparoscopic group. However, the mean length of hospital stay (5.8 vs. 5.9 days, P = 0.379) was similar. There was no major surgical complication in either group; chest infection, wound infection, and thrombophlebitis were similar between the laparoscopic-assisted group and the hand-assisted laparoscopic group. Adequacy of specimen harvest (distal tumor margins, P = 0.995; circumferential resection margin, P = 0.946; number of lymph nodes, P = 0.845) was similar.

Conclusions

Although both laparoscopic-assisted and hand-assisted laparoscopic surgeries are safe and feasible for ultralow anterior resection, the hand-assisted technique significantly shortens operating time.
Literature
1.
Tjandra JJ, Chan MK. Systematic review on the short-term outcome of laparoscopic resection for colon and rectosigmoid cancer. Colorectal Dis 2006;8:247–58.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Aziz O, Constantinides V, Tekkis PP, et al. Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Surg Oncol 2006;13:413–24.CrossRef
3.
4.
Schlachta CM, Mamazza J, Seshadri PA, Cadeddu M, Gregoire R, Poulin EC. Defining a learning curve for laparoscopic colorectal resection. Dis Colon Rectum 2001;43:217–22.CrossRef
5.
Leroy J, Jamali F, Forbes L, et al. Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer surgery. Surg Endosc 2004;18:281–9.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Tsang WW, Chung CC, Kwok SY, Li MK. Laparoscopic sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision with colonic J-pouch reconstruction: five-year results. Ann Surg 2006;243:353–8.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Watanabe M, Teramoto T, Hasegawa H, Kitajima M. Laparoscopic ultralow anterior resection combined with per anum intersphincteric rectal dissection for lower rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 2000;43(Suppl):S94–7.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Palanivelu C, Sendhilkumar K, Jani K, et al. Laparoscopic anterior resection and total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a prospective nonrandomized study. Int J Colorectal Dis 2007;22:367–72.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Bergamaschi R, Tuech JJ, Cervi C, Arnaud JP. Re-establish pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic-assisted sigmoid resection? Randomized trial. Dis Colon Rectum 2000;43:771–4.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Lezoche E, Paganini AM, Feliciotti F. A new technique to facilitate laparoscopic resection of low rectal tumours. Surg Laparosc Endosc 1997;7:9–12.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Anonymous. Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery vs. standard laparoscopic surgery for colorectal disease. A prospective randomized trial. HALS Study Group. Surg Endosc 2000;14:896–901.
12.
Heald RJ, Moran BJ, Ryall RD, Sexton R, MacFarlane JK. Rectal cancer: the Basingstoke experience of total mesorectal excision 1978–1997. Arch Surg 1998;133:894–9.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Delaney CP, Kiran RP, Senagore AJ, et al. Case-matched comparison of clinical and financial outcome after laparoscopic or open colorectal surgery. Ann Surg 2003;238:67–72.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Milsom JW, Bohm B, Hammerhofer KA, et al. A prospective randomized trial comparing laparoscopic versus conventional techniques in colorectal cancer surgery: a preliminary report. J Am Coll Surg 1998;187:46–54.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Sokolovic E, Buchmann P, Schlomowitsch F, et al. Comparison of resource utilization and long-term quality-of-life outcomes between laparoscopic and conventional colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc 2004;18:1663–7.PubMed
16.
17.
Kapiteijn E, Kranenbarg EK, Steup WH, et al. Total mesorectal excision (TME) with or without preoperative radiotherapy in the treatment of primary rectal cancer: prospective randomized trial with standard operative and histopathological techniques: Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group. Eur J Surg 1999;165:410–20.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Litwin DE, Darzi A, Jakimowicz J, et al. Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) with the Handport system: initial experience with 68 patients. Ann Surg 2000;231:715–23.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Targarona EM, Gracia E, Garriga J, et al. Prospective randomized trial comparing conventional laparoscopic colectomy with hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy: applicability, immediate clinical outcome, inflammatory response and cost. Surg Endosc 2002;16:234–9.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Marescaux J, Rubino F, Leroy J, Henri M. Laparoscopic assisted surgery for colon cancer. JAMA 2002;287:1938–9.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Laparoscopic- vs. Hand-Assisted Ultralow Anterior Resection: A Prospective Study
Authors
Joe J. Tjandra, M.D., F.R.A.C.S.
Miranda K. Y. Chan, M.B.B.S., F.R.A.C.S.
Chung Hung Yeh, M.D.
Publication date
01-01-2008
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum / Issue 1/2008
Print ISSN: 0012-3706
Electronic ISSN: 1530-0358
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-007-9107-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2008

Diseases of the Colon & Rectum 1/2008 Go to the issue

Original Contribution

Prevalence of Anal Cytologic Abnormalities in a French Referral Population: A Prospective Study with Special Emphasis on HIV, HPV, and Smoking

Original Contribution

Clinical, Manometric, and Ultrasonographic Results of Pneumatic Balloon Dilatation vs. Lateral Internal Sphincterotomy for Chronic Anal Fissure: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial

Editorial

We Turn 50

Practice Parameters

Practice Parameters for Anal Squamous Neoplasms

Original Contribution

Fecal Incontinence: The Quality of Reported Randomized, Controlled Trials in the Last Ten Years

Original Contribution

The Assessment of a Rapid Noninvasive Immunochromatographic Assay Test for Fecal Lactoferrin in Patients with Suspected Inflammation of the Ileal Pouch