Cargando…
Laparoscopic wedge resection as an alternative to laparoscopic oncological colon resection for benign endoscopically unresectable colon polyps
AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate, by comparing clinical and histological outcomes, whether laparoscopic (hybrid) wedge resection (LWR) could be a less invasive and safe alternative to laparoscopic oncological colon resection (OCR) for patients with an endoscopically unresectable, suspec...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8518389/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34097812 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/codi.15769 |
Sumario: | AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate, by comparing clinical and histological outcomes, whether laparoscopic (hybrid) wedge resection (LWR) could be a less invasive and safe alternative to laparoscopic oncological colon resection (OCR) for patients with an endoscopically unresectable, suspected benign, colon polyp. METHOD: All patients with an endoscopically unresectable colon polyp who were referred for surgery between 2009 and 2018 and without biopsy‐proven colon cancer were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Patients with macroscopic features of malignancy during endoscopy were excluded. Clinical and histological results for patients who underwent OCR or LWR were reviewed. RESULTS: One hundred‐and‐twenty‐two patients were included. Ninety‐seven patients underwent OCR and 25 LWR. Major complications occurred in 16.7% (n = 16) of the OCR group compared with 4.0% (n = 1) of the LWR group (p = 0.06). In the OCR group the anastomotic leakage rate was 6.3% (n = 6) and the mortality rate 3.1% (n = 3). No anastomotic leakage or deaths occurred in the LWR group. The median length of hospital stay after OCR was 5 days [interquartile range (IQR) 5–9 days)] compared with 2 days (IQR 2–4 days) after LWR (p < 0.0001). Definite pathology showed a malignancy rate of 4.2% (n = 4) in the OCR group and 4.0% (n = 1) (without high‐risk features) in the LWR group. CONCLUSION: This study shows that LWR was associated with significantly lower complication rates and acceptable oncological risks compared with OCR. Therefore we suggest that LWR is a safe alternative treatment, next to other endoscopic options. The treatment that is most suitable for an individual patient should be discussed in a multidisciplinary meeting. |
---|