Usefulness of Hand-assisted Laparoscopic Restorative Proctocolectomy for Ulcerative Colitis in the Era of Laparoscopic Surgery - A Single-center Observational Study
- PMID: 39086870
- PMCID: PMC11286376
- DOI: 10.23922/jarc.2024-024
Usefulness of Hand-assisted Laparoscopic Restorative Proctocolectomy for Ulcerative Colitis in the Era of Laparoscopic Surgery - A Single-center Observational Study
Abstract
Objectives: Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) combines the benefits of laparoscopic surgery with the tactile feedback from open surgery. In the current era of laparoscopic surgery, the significance of HALS as a technical transition has diminished. This study clarified the usefulness of HALS in restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) for ulcerative colitis (UC) in the era of laparoscopic surgery.
Methods: The 212 patients who underwent RPC with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis between 2007 and 2023 were included in this study. The patients were divided into three groups, open surgery (OS), HALS, and conventional laparoscopic surgery (LAP), and their characteristics, surgical outcomes, surgical complications, and functional outcomes were compared.
Results: The number of surgical techniques was OS in 21 cases, HALS in 184 cases, and LAP in 7 cases. The number of surgeons was two for OS and HALS, and four for LAP, with OS and HALS having fewer surgeons than LAP. The length of the skin incision was 13, 7, and 3 cm for OS, HALS, and LAP, respectively, and the operation times was 250, 286, and 576 minutes for OS, HALS, and LAP, respectively, with LAP having the longest operation time. The postoperative complications and function did not differ markedly among the three groups.
Conclusions: In RPC for UC, HALS involved fewer surgeons and a shorter operative time than LAP. Even in the era of laparoscopic surgery, HALS remains a useful option, especially when a shorter operation time is required or when the number of available surgeons is insufficient.
Keywords: HALS; era of laparoscopic surgery; hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery; restorative proctocolectomy; ulcerative colitis.
Copyright © 2024 The Japan Society of Coloproctology.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflicts of Interest There are no conflicts of interest.
Figures


Similar articles
-
Hand-assisted laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis.J Minim Access Surg. 2017 Oct-Dec;13(4):256-260. doi: 10.4103/jmas.JMAS_230_16. J Minim Access Surg. 2017. PMID: 28695880 Free PMC article.
-
Hand-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis.Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2009 Feb;19(1):52-6. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0b013e31818a93d6. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2009. PMID: 19238068
-
Hand-assisted laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis.World J Gastrointest Surg. 2016 Aug 27;8(8):578-82. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v8.i8.578. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2016. PMID: 27648162 Free PMC article.
-
Laparoscopic total colectomy: hand-assisted vs standard technique.Surg Endosc. 2004 Apr;18(4):582-6. doi: 10.1007/s00464-003-8135-8. Epub 2004 Mar 19. Surg Endosc. 2004. PMID: 15026921 Review.
-
The Impacts of Laparoscopic Restorative Proctocolectomy for Ulcerative Colitis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Inflamm Intest Dis. 2024 Mar 5;9(1):62-70. doi: 10.1159/000535832. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec. Inflamm Intest Dis. 2024. PMID: 38544522 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Current status of fertility rates and modes of delivery after restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis.Int J Colorectal Dis. 2025 Jun 20;40(1):145. doi: 10.1007/s00384-025-04938-2. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2025. PMID: 40542270 Free PMC article.
References
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials