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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hayashi, Kengo, Kotake, Masanori, Hada, Masahiro, Sawada, Koichiro, Oshima, Masahiro, Kato, Yosuke, Oyama, Kaeko, Hara, Takuo
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