Impact of conversion on the long-term outcome in laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer

Background Long-term outcome of patients with conversion following laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer has seldom been reported. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of conversion on the operative outcome and survival of patients who underwent laparoscopic resection for colorectal maligna...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Surgical endoscopy 2008-12, Vol.22 (12), p.2625-2630
Hauptverfasser: Chan, Albert C. Y., Poon, Jensen T. C., Fan, Joe K. M., Lo, Siu Hung, Law, Wai Lun
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background Long-term outcome of patients with conversion following laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer has seldom been reported. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of conversion on the operative outcome and survival of patients who underwent laparoscopic resection for colorectal malignancy. Methods An analysis of a prospectively collected database of 470 patients who underwent laparoscopic colectomy between May 2000 and December 2006 was performed. The operative results and long-term outcomes of patients with conversion were compared with those with successful laparoscopic operations. Results The overall conversion rate to open surgery was 8.7% (41 patients). There was no difference in age, comorbid illness, location of tumor, and stage of disease between the laparoscopic and conversion groups. The most common reasons for conversion include adhesions (34.1%), tumor invasion into adjacent structures (17.1%), bulky tumor (9.8%), and uncontrolled hemorrhage (9.8%). A male preponderance was observed in the conversion group. Tumor size was significantly larger in the conversion group compared with the laparoscopic group (5 versus 4 cm, P  = 0.002). Although there was no difference in the operative time between the two groups, increased perioperative blood loss (461.9 vs. 191.2 ml, P  
ISSN:0930-2794
1432-2218
DOI:10.1007/s00464-008-9813-3