Cargando…

SILS Sigmoidectomy Versus Multiport Laparoscopic Sigmoidectomy for Diverticulitis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In this single-institution study, we aimed to compare the safety, feasibility, and outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic sigmoidectomy (SILSS) with multiport laparoscopic sigmoidectomy (MLS) for recurrent diverticulitis. METHODS: Between October 2011 and February 2013,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: D'Hondt, Mathieu, Pottel, Hans, Devriendt, Dirk, Van Rooy, Frank, Vansteenkiste, Franky, Van Ooteghem, Barbara, De Corte, Wouter
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4154429/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25392639
http://dx.doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2014.00319
_version_ 1782333418833444864
author D'Hondt, Mathieu
Pottel, Hans
Devriendt, Dirk
Van Rooy, Frank
Vansteenkiste, Franky
Van Ooteghem, Barbara
De Corte, Wouter
author_facet D'Hondt, Mathieu
Pottel, Hans
Devriendt, Dirk
Van Rooy, Frank
Vansteenkiste, Franky
Van Ooteghem, Barbara
De Corte, Wouter
author_sort D'Hondt, Mathieu
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In this single-institution study, we aimed to compare the safety, feasibility, and outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic sigmoidectomy (SILSS) with multiport laparoscopic sigmoidectomy (MLS) for recurrent diverticulitis. METHODS: Between October 2011 and February 2013, 60 sigmoidectomies were performed by the same surgeon. Forty patients had a MLS and 20 patients had a SILSS. Outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Patient characteristics were similar. There was no difference in morbidity, mortality or readmission rates. The mean operative time was longer in the SILSS group (P = .0012). In a larger proportion of patients from the SILSS group, 2 linear staplers were needed for transection at the rectum (P = .006). The total cost of disposable items was higher in the SILSS group (P < .0001). No additional ports were placed in the SILSS group. Return to bowel function or return to oral intake was faster in the SILSS group (P = .0446 and P = .0137, respectively). Maximum pain scores on postoperative days 1 and 2 were significantly less for the SILSS group (P = .0014 and P = .047, respectively). Hospital stay was borderline statistically shorter in the SILSS group (P = .0053). SILSS was also associated with better cosmesis (P < .0011). CONCLUSION: SILSS is feasible and safe and is associated with earlier recovery of bowel function, a significant reduction in postoperative pain, and better cosmesis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4154429
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41544292014-09-08 SILS Sigmoidectomy Versus Multiport Laparoscopic Sigmoidectomy for Diverticulitis D'Hondt, Mathieu Pottel, Hans Devriendt, Dirk Van Rooy, Frank Vansteenkiste, Franky Van Ooteghem, Barbara De Corte, Wouter JSLS Scientific Papers BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In this single-institution study, we aimed to compare the safety, feasibility, and outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic sigmoidectomy (SILSS) with multiport laparoscopic sigmoidectomy (MLS) for recurrent diverticulitis. METHODS: Between October 2011 and February 2013, 60 sigmoidectomies were performed by the same surgeon. Forty patients had a MLS and 20 patients had a SILSS. Outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Patient characteristics were similar. There was no difference in morbidity, mortality or readmission rates. The mean operative time was longer in the SILSS group (P = .0012). In a larger proportion of patients from the SILSS group, 2 linear staplers were needed for transection at the rectum (P = .006). The total cost of disposable items was higher in the SILSS group (P < .0001). No additional ports were placed in the SILSS group. Return to bowel function or return to oral intake was faster in the SILSS group (P = .0446 and P = .0137, respectively). Maximum pain scores on postoperative days 1 and 2 were significantly less for the SILSS group (P = .0014 and P = .047, respectively). Hospital stay was borderline statistically shorter in the SILSS group (P = .0053). SILSS was also associated with better cosmesis (P < .0011). CONCLUSION: SILSS is feasible and safe and is associated with earlier recovery of bowel function, a significant reduction in postoperative pain, and better cosmesis. Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2014 /pmc/articles/PMC4154429/ /pubmed/25392639 http://dx.doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2014.00319 Text en © 2014 by JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/), which permits for noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not altered in any way.
spellingShingle Scientific Papers
D'Hondt, Mathieu
Pottel, Hans
Devriendt, Dirk
Van Rooy, Frank
Vansteenkiste, Franky
Van Ooteghem, Barbara
De Corte, Wouter
SILS Sigmoidectomy Versus Multiport Laparoscopic Sigmoidectomy for Diverticulitis
title SILS Sigmoidectomy Versus Multiport Laparoscopic Sigmoidectomy for Diverticulitis
title_full SILS Sigmoidectomy Versus Multiport Laparoscopic Sigmoidectomy for Diverticulitis
title_fullStr SILS Sigmoidectomy Versus Multiport Laparoscopic Sigmoidectomy for Diverticulitis
title_full_unstemmed SILS Sigmoidectomy Versus Multiport Laparoscopic Sigmoidectomy for Diverticulitis
title_short SILS Sigmoidectomy Versus Multiport Laparoscopic Sigmoidectomy for Diverticulitis
title_sort sils sigmoidectomy versus multiport laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for diverticulitis
topic Scientific Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4154429/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25392639
http://dx.doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2014.00319
work_keys_str_mv AT dhondtmathieu silssigmoidectomyversusmultiportlaparoscopicsigmoidectomyfordiverticulitis
AT pottelhans silssigmoidectomyversusmultiportlaparoscopicsigmoidectomyfordiverticulitis
AT devriendtdirk silssigmoidectomyversusmultiportlaparoscopicsigmoidectomyfordiverticulitis
AT vanrooyfrank silssigmoidectomyversusmultiportlaparoscopicsigmoidectomyfordiverticulitis
AT vansteenkistefranky silssigmoidectomyversusmultiportlaparoscopicsigmoidectomyfordiverticulitis
AT vanooteghembarbara silssigmoidectomyversusmultiportlaparoscopicsigmoidectomyfordiverticulitis
AT decortewouter silssigmoidectomyversusmultiportlaparoscopicsigmoidectomyfordiverticulitis