Cargando…
Laparoscopic versus Open stoma creation: A retrospective analysis
Objectives: This study aimed to compare open stoma (OS) creation with laparoscopic stoma (LS) creation considering the operation time, blood loss, time of oral intake, and complications. We also compared multiport LS and single-incision laparoscopic stoma (SILS) creation. Methods: We reviewed the de...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Japan Society of Coloproctology
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6768675/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31583306 http://dx.doi.org/10.23922/jarc.2016-014 |
_version_ | 1783455119744958464 |
---|---|
author | Hayashi, Kengo Kotake, Masanori Hada, Masahiro Sawada, Koichiro Oshima, Masahiro Kato, Yosuke Oyama, Kaeko Hara, Takuo |
author_facet | Hayashi, Kengo Kotake, Masanori Hada, Masahiro Sawada, Koichiro Oshima, Masahiro Kato, Yosuke Oyama, Kaeko Hara, Takuo |
author_sort | Hayashi, Kengo |
collection | PubMed |
description | Objectives: This study aimed to compare open stoma (OS) creation with laparoscopic stoma (LS) creation considering the operation time, blood loss, time of oral intake, and complications. We also compared multiport LS and single-incision laparoscopic stoma (SILS) creation. Methods: We reviewed the demographic data, diagnosis, indications, operation time, blood loss, time of oral intake, operative procedure, and complications of 50 patients who underwent stoma creation between April 2014 and April 2016. Results: The mean blood loss was significantly lower in the LS group (7.85±18.4 ml) than in the OS group (38.1±73.2 ml; P=0.02). There were no statistical differences between the groups in terms of the operation time (LS, 72.1±32.7 min; OS, 61.2±31.2 min; P=0.23) or time of oral intake (LS, 1.0±0 days; OS, 1.91±2.71 days; P=0.17). Peristomal skin problems occurred in 11 patients (47.8%) in the OS group and 5 patients (18.5%) in the LS group. There were no statistically significant differences between the SILS and multiport LS groups, considering the operation time, amount of bleeding, and time of oral intake. Conclusions: LS is comparable with OS in terms of operation time and time of oral intake and may cause lesser blood loss. Considering its advantages, LS is a useful approach for patients requiring biopsies or intra-abdominal inspection. SILS is a minimally invasive technique, suitable for patients in whom the stoma site is preoperatively decided. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6768675 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | The Japan Society of Coloproctology |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67686752019-10-03 Laparoscopic versus Open stoma creation: A retrospective analysis Hayashi, Kengo Kotake, Masanori Hada, Masahiro Sawada, Koichiro Oshima, Masahiro Kato, Yosuke Oyama, Kaeko Hara, Takuo J Anus Rectum Colon Original Research Article Objectives: This study aimed to compare open stoma (OS) creation with laparoscopic stoma (LS) creation considering the operation time, blood loss, time of oral intake, and complications. We also compared multiport LS and single-incision laparoscopic stoma (SILS) creation. Methods: We reviewed the demographic data, diagnosis, indications, operation time, blood loss, time of oral intake, operative procedure, and complications of 50 patients who underwent stoma creation between April 2014 and April 2016. Results: The mean blood loss was significantly lower in the LS group (7.85±18.4 ml) than in the OS group (38.1±73.2 ml; P=0.02). There were no statistical differences between the groups in terms of the operation time (LS, 72.1±32.7 min; OS, 61.2±31.2 min; P=0.23) or time of oral intake (LS, 1.0±0 days; OS, 1.91±2.71 days; P=0.17). Peristomal skin problems occurred in 11 patients (47.8%) in the OS group and 5 patients (18.5%) in the LS group. There were no statistically significant differences between the SILS and multiport LS groups, considering the operation time, amount of bleeding, and time of oral intake. Conclusions: LS is comparable with OS in terms of operation time and time of oral intake and may cause lesser blood loss. Considering its advantages, LS is a useful approach for patients requiring biopsies or intra-abdominal inspection. SILS is a minimally invasive technique, suitable for patients in whom the stoma site is preoperatively decided. The Japan Society of Coloproctology 2018-05-25 /pmc/articles/PMC6768675/ /pubmed/31583306 http://dx.doi.org/10.23922/jarc.2016-014 Text en Copyright © 2017 by The Japan Society of Coloproctology https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Journal of the Anus, Rectum and Colon is an Open Access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. To view the details of this license, please visit (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original Research Article Hayashi, Kengo Kotake, Masanori Hada, Masahiro Sawada, Koichiro Oshima, Masahiro Kato, Yosuke Oyama, Kaeko Hara, Takuo Laparoscopic versus Open stoma creation: A retrospective analysis |
title | Laparoscopic versus Open stoma creation: A retrospective analysis |
title_full | Laparoscopic versus Open stoma creation: A retrospective analysis |
title_fullStr | Laparoscopic versus Open stoma creation: A retrospective analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Laparoscopic versus Open stoma creation: A retrospective analysis |
title_short | Laparoscopic versus Open stoma creation: A retrospective analysis |
title_sort | laparoscopic versus open stoma creation: a retrospective analysis |
topic | Original Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6768675/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31583306 http://dx.doi.org/10.23922/jarc.2016-014 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hayashikengo laparoscopicversusopenstomacreationaretrospectiveanalysis AT kotakemasanori laparoscopicversusopenstomacreationaretrospectiveanalysis AT hadamasahiro laparoscopicversusopenstomacreationaretrospectiveanalysis AT sawadakoichiro laparoscopicversusopenstomacreationaretrospectiveanalysis AT oshimamasahiro laparoscopicversusopenstomacreationaretrospectiveanalysis AT katoyosuke laparoscopicversusopenstomacreationaretrospectiveanalysis AT oyamakaeko laparoscopicversusopenstomacreationaretrospectiveanalysis AT haratakuo laparoscopicversusopenstomacreationaretrospectiveanalysis |