Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 May;34(5):2120-2126.
doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-06995-5. Epub 2019 Jul 19.

Safety and feasibility of repeat laparoscopic colorectal resection: a matched case-control study

Affiliations

Safety and feasibility of repeat laparoscopic colorectal resection: a matched case-control study

Alban Zarzavadjian le Bian et al. Surg Endosc. 2020 May.

Abstract

Background: Perioperative outcomes of repeat laparoscopic colorectal resection (LCRR) have not been extensively reported.

Methods: Patients who underwent LCRR from 2010 to 2018 in an expert center were retrieved from a prospectively collected database and compared to 2:1 matched sample. Matching was based on demographics, surgical indication [colorectal cancer (CRC) or benign condition], and type of resection (right-sided resection or left-sided resection or proctectomy).

Results: Twenty-three patients underwent repeat LCRR with a median time of 36 months between the primary and the repeat LCRR. They were 12 (52%) men with a mean age of 64.9 years (31-87) and a median BMI of 21.4 kg/m2 (17.7-34). Indication for repeat LCRR was CRC, dysplasia, anastomotic stricture, and inflammatory bowel disease in 11 (48%), 5 (22%), 4 (17%), and 3 (13%) patients, respectively. A right-sided resection, a left-sided resection, and proctectomy were reported in 11 (48%), 8 (35%), and 4 (17%) patients, respectively. Median blood loss reached 211 mL (range 0-2000 mL). Thirteen (57%) patients required conversion to laparotomy including 12 for intense adhesions. The median length of hospital stay was 7.5 days (5-20). Two (9%) major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3) were reported: 1 (4%) anastomotic fistula and 1 (4%) postoperative hemorrhage, without mortality. Among patients who underwent repeat LCRR for CRC, histopathological examination showed R0 resection in all patients, with at least 12 lymph nodes harvested in ten (91%) patients. After matched case-control analysis that compared to primary LCRR, conversion rate (p = 0.03), operative time (p = 0.03), and intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.0016) were significantly increased in repeat LCRR, without impact on postoperative outcomes.

Conclusions: Repeat LCRR seems to be feasible and safe in expert hands without compromising the oncologic outcomes. Intense postoperative adhesions and misidentification of blood supply might lead to conversion to laparotomy. Real benefits of laparoscopic approach for repeat LCRR should be assessed in further studies.

Keywords: Laparoscopic colectomy; Laparoscopy; Redo; Repeat laparoscopic colorectal resection.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Dis Colon Rectum. 2018 Jul;61(7):854-860 - PubMed
    1. Surg Endosc. 2016 Jul;30(7):2736-42 - PubMed
    1. Surg Endosc. 2016 Dec;30(12):5472-5480 - PubMed
    1. Ann Surg. 2010 Apr;251(4):670-4 - PubMed
    1. Dis Colon Rectum. 2013 Jun;56(6):747-55 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources