Clinical outcomes of 103 hand-assisted laparoscopic surgeries for left-sided colon and rectal cancer: Single institutional review

16Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Purpose: The laparoscopic colectomy is avoided principally because of its technical difficulty, steep learning curve, and increased operative time. Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) is an alternative technique that addresses these problems while preserving the short-term benefits of a laparoscopic colectomy. Our study was aimed to describe the characteristics of patients admitted due to left-sided colon and rectal cancer for HALS. Methods: A prospectively maintained database was used to identify patients who underwent HALS at the Institute of Oncology, Vilnius University, from July 1, 2009, to October 1, 2012. Results: One hundred-three HALS colorectal resections were performed. The patients' mean age was 64 ± 13.4 years. There were 46 male and 57 female patients. The body mass index was 27.3 ± 5.8 kg/m 2. Forty-three patients (41.8%) had experienced prior abdominal surgery. The mean HALS time was 105 minutes (range, 55-185 minutes). The conversion rate was 2.7% (3/103). The median of return of gastrointestinal function was 2.5 days (range, 2.2-4.5 days). The median length of hospital stay was 9 days. The postoperative complication and mortality rates were 10.7% and 0.97%, respectively. Four incisional hernias (3.9%) were seen at a mean follow-up of 7.0 ± 3.4 months. None of the patients had a trocar or a hand-port site recurrence. Conclusion: A HALS colorectal resection is a safe and effective technique, and it provides all the benefits of minimally invasive surgery. © 2013 The Korean Society of Coloproctology.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Samalavicius, N. E., Gupta, R. K., Dulskas, A., Kazanavicius, D., Petrulis, K., & Lunevicius, R. (2013). Clinical outcomes of 103 hand-assisted laparoscopic surgeries for left-sided colon and rectal cancer: Single institutional review. Annals of Coloproctology, 29(6), 225–230. https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2013.29.6.225

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free