Laparoscopic versus open adhesiolysis for small bowel obstruction-A multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial

Abstract

Background: Laparoscopic adhesiolysis is emerging as an alternative for open surgery in adhesive small bowel obstruction. Retrospective studies suggest that laparoscopic approach shortens hospital stay and reduces complications in these patients. However, no prospective, randomized, controlled trials comparing laparoscopy to open surgery have been published. Methods/Design: This is a multicenter, prospective, open label, randomized, controlled trial comparing laparoscopic adhesiolysis to open surgery in patients with computed-Tomography diagnosed adhesive small bowel obstruction that is not resolving with conservative management. The primary study endpoint is the length of postoperative hospital stay in days. Sample size was estimated based on preliminary retrospective cohort, which suggested that 102 patients would provide 80% power to detect a difference of 2.5 days in the length of postoperative hospital stay with significance level of 0.05. Secondary endpoints include passage of stool, commencement of enteral nutrition, 30-day mortality, complications, postoperative pain, and the length of sick leave. Tertiary endpoints consist of the rate of ventral hernia and the recurrence of small bowel obstruction during long-Term follow-up. Long-Term follow-up by letter or telephone interview will take place at 1, 5, and 10 years. Discussion: To the best of our knowledge, this trial is the first one aiming to provide level Ib evidence to assess the use of laparoscopy in the treatment of adhesive small bowel obstruction.