Biomedical subjects

R Campagnacci

Publications and source records attributed to R Campagnacci.

15 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Long-term results of laparoscopic versus open colorectal resections for cancer in 235 patients with a minimum follow-up of 5 years.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic resection for cure of colorectal cancer is controversial. More investigations on long-term results are required. This study aimed to compare the long-term outcome with a minimum follow-up of 5 years between laparoscopic or open approach for the treatment of colo-rectal cancer. METHODS: The treatment modality (laparoscopic or open) was related to the patients (pts) choice. The following parameters between the two groups (laparoscopic and open) were assessed: wound recurrences rate, local recurrences rate, incidence of distant metastases and survival probability analysis. RESULTS: We report the long term outcome of 149 pts with colon cancer of which 85 treated by Laparoscopic Surgery (LS) and 64 by Open Surgery (OS) and of 86 patients with rectal cancer of which 52 treated by LS and 34 by OS. In the pts with colonic cancer, mean follow-up was 82.8 months. No Statistically Significant Difference (SSD) was observed in the local recurrences rate (3.5% after LS and 6.2% after OS) and in the incidence of distant metastases (10.5% after LS and 10.9% after OS). Cumulative survival probability in LS was 0.882 as compared to 0.859 after OS. In the pts with rectal cancer, mean follow-up was 78.5 months. No SSD was observed in the local recurrences rate (19.2% after LS and 17.6% after OS) and in the incidence of distant metastases (15.3% after LS and 20.5% after OS). Cumulative survival probability in LS was 0.711 as compared to 0.617 after OS. We report an interesting data about the time of recurrences between LS and OS: the recurrences were delayed after LS, both after colonic (22.6 months vs 6.5) and rectal (25.7 months vs 13.0) resections, respectively. CONCLUSION: We suppose that laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of colo-rectal cancer is quite safe. However, further investigation is needed.

Aged↗

PubMed2006

Laparoscopic radiofrequency renal ablation in patients with simultaneous visceral tumors: long-term follow-up.

PURPOSE: To report our experience with in situ laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of renal tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From September 2000 to May 2002, two men, 81 and 71 years old, and one woman, 75 years old, were referred to our department for right renal clear-cell carcinoma <3.5-cm diameter. The 71- year-old patient had only one kidney. Because of the tumor location, the percutaneous route was not considered the approach of choice. Moreover, a simultaneous large right adrenal incidentaloma (myelolipoma) and a right colon cancer were known to be present in the second and third patient, respectively. The aforementioned findings suggested the laparoscopic route as a preferable technique to treat both the renal and the other morbidities. RESULTS: Under laparoscopic ultrasonography control of tine placement, a 20-minute thermoablation cycle at 100 degrees C mean temperature was performed. Including right colectomy and right adrenalectomy, the operative time was 120, 200, and 275 minutes, with postoperative hospital stays of 3, 4, and 6 days for the three patients, respectively. Abdominal CT scans after 1 and 4 weeks and then every 6 months confirmed complete treatment of the lesion at 44 months' average follow-up (range 36-56 months). CONCLUSION: When percutaneous access is not feasible or the patient should undergo another laparoscopic procedure simultaneously, laparoscopic RFA of renal tumors is feasible and effective, as shown by long-term follow-up.

Adrenal Gland Neoplasms↗

PubMed2005

Sub-mesocolic access in laparoscopic left adrenalectomy.

BACKGROUND: This article reports an alternative laparoscopic access to left adrenal gland. METHODS: From January 1994 to August 2004, 209 laparoscopic adrenalectomies were performed in our Department. Indications were Conn adenoma (55 cases), incidentaloma (64), Cushing adenoma (45), pheochromocytoma (32), adreno-genital syndrome (two), mielolipoma (two), and metastatic mass(nine). Of 209, in 12 cases the left adrenalectomy was performed through a submesocolic access (seven pheochromocytoma, two incidentaloma, two Cushing adenoma, one Conn adenoma,). The identification and closure of the adrenal vein with minimal gland manipulation resulted the main benefit of this approach. Moreover, the adrenalectomy was performed with minimal anatomical dissection. RESULTS: No mortality or major complications occurred. During the operation, the blood pressure and cardiac rhythm were significantly more stable, in the group of patients who underwent a left adrenalectomy by the submesocolic approach compared to the anterior or flank lateral transperitoneal group. CONCLUSIONS: Left adrenal lesions, as selected cases of pheochromocytoma, can be safely treated by laparoscopic submesocolic access.

Adrenal Cortex Neoplasms↗

PubMed2005

Laparoscopic colorectal resection for endometriosis.

BACKGROUND: The rectosigmoid colon is affected by deep pelvic endometriosis in 3-37% of cases. In the past, treatment of the affected gastrointestinal tract generally required conversion to conventional surgery. We describe our experience with complete laparoscopic management of deep pelvic endometriosis with bowel involvement. METHODS: From March 1995 to March 2003, 29 consecutive patients with endometriosis requiring laparoscopic intervention were evaluated. In seven patients (24%) colorectal involvement was identified prior to the operation. A low anterior resection was performed in four patients (57%) and a sigmoid resection in three (43%). In all cases, colonoscopy showed a normal mucosa. In all cases, treatment consisted of resection of the bowel involved together with the excision of all other implants. Data analysis included age, previous abdominal operations, previous history of endometriosis, operative time, conversion rate, complications, length of stay, and pain relief. RESULTS: There were seven patients with colorectal involvement whose median age was 32.8 years (range, 28-40), with a history of previous abdominal operation in two (28%). Preoperative symptoms were as follow: dysmenorrea in four patients (57%), dyspareunia in four (57%), pelvic pain in seven (100%), rectal bleeding in one (14%), and tenesmus in five (71%). Mean operative time was 190 min (range, 165-230). Length of stay was 8.3 days (range, 7-11). There were no anastomotic leak and no major postoperative complication. One patient had temporary urinary retention. At a median follow-up of 38.7 months (range, 1-84), complete relief of pelvic symptoms was achieved in five patients (71%), and there was improvement in one patient. In one patient complaining of persistent pain, a new colonic implant was diagnosed two years after the surgery requiring reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: The results show that provided that the surgeon is highly skilled in laparoscopy, laparoscopic resection of deep pelvic endometriosis with rectosigmoid involvement is feasible and effective in nearly all patients.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Long-term results of laparoscopic versus open resections for rectal cancer for 124 unselected patients.

BACKGROUND: Controversy continues to surround laparoscopic rectal resection for malignancy. A longer follow-up period is required to evaluate the long-term efficacy of the procedure and its impact on survival. Furthermore, no data from ongoing randomized controlled trials are yet available. The aims of this study were to compare long-term outcomes for unselected patients undergoing either laparoscopic or open rectal resection for cancer. METHODS: A series of 124 unselected consecutive patients with rectal cancer, who underwent surgery by the same surgical team, have been included in this study. Patients with T1N0 tumors underwent local excision, and emergency cases were excluded from the study. Written consent was submitted by each patient, and inclusion in either group (laparoscopic or open) was left to the patient's choice. The laparoscopic approach was chosen by 81 patients, and 43 patients chose open surgery. All the patients underwent preoperative radiotherapy (5,040 cGy), performed in selected cases with chemotherapy (for patients younger than 70 years). The following parameters were compared between the two groups: length of the surgical specimen, clearance of the margins of the specimen, number of lymph nodes identified, local recurrence rate, incidence of distant metastases, and survival probability analysis. The mean follow-up period for both groups was 43.8 months (range, l-9 years). RESULTS: We performed 60 laparoscopic and 27 open anterior resections, as well as 21 laparoscopic and 16 open abdomino perineal resections, respectively. No mortality occurred in either group. The mean length of the resected specimens was 24.3 cm in the laparoscopic group and 23.8 cm in the open group ( p = 0.47). The mean tumor-free margin was 3.0 cm in the laparoscopic group and 2.8 cm in the open group ( p = 0.57), and the mean number of lymph nodes identified was 10.3 in the laparoscopic group and 9.8 in the open group ( p = 0.63). Of the 124 patients, 86 (52 laparoscopic and 34 open) were included in out study. We excluded patients who underwent a palliative resection (6 laparoscopic and 6 open patients) or conversion to open surgery ( n = 10) and patients who had undergone surgery in the past year ( n = 16). One laparoscopic patient was lost to follow-up evaluation, whereas three laparoscopic patients and one open patient died of causes not related to cancer. No wound recurrence was observed. The local recurrence rate after laparoscopic resection was 20.8%, as compared with 16.6% after open resection ( p = 0.687). Distant metastases occurred in 18.2% of the patients in the laparoscopic group, as compared with 21.2% in the open group ( p = 0.528). Cumulative survival probability was 0.709 after laparoscopic resection after LR and 0.606 after open resection ( p = 0.162), whereas for Dukes' stages A, B, and C in the laparoscopic group versus the open group, it was 0.875 vs 0.889 ( p = 0.392), 0.722 vs 0.584 ( p = 0.199), and 0.500 vs 0.417 ( p = 0.320), respectively. At this writing 20 laparoscopic patients (62.5%) and 20 open patients (60.6%) are disease free ( p = 0.623). CONCLUSIONS: Oncologic surgical principles were respected. Long-term outcome after laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer was comparable with that after conventional resection. We should wait to draw conclusive scientific statements until the completion of ongoing international randomized controlled trials.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Laparoscopic versus open hemicolectomy.

AIM: In the last decade, laparoscopic procedures are applied to the treatment of almost all colonic diseases, including both benign and malignant lesions. Focusing our attention to the laparoscopic operative technique, we compare the perioperative results and the oncological outcomes of laparoscopic hemicolectomy with those after open conventional hemicolectomy. METHODS: This prospective non randomized study is based on a series of 469 consecutive patients (73.6% with malignant lesions) operated on by the same surgical team following the same type of surgical technique, for laparoscopic and open approach, to perform right (RH) and left (LH) hemicolectomy, respectively, excluding segmental resections, emergency operations as well as transverse colon, splenic flexure and recurrent carcinomas. The treatment modality was selected by the patients after reading the informed consent form. Conversion rate to open surgery (for the laparoscopic group) and causes were assessed. Statistical significance (p) for operative time, resumption of gastrointestinal functions, length of stay, complications, perioperative mortality, as well as length of specimen, number of lymph-nodes harvest, incidence of local recurrences and distant metastases, and survival probability analysis in malignant cases, was assessed between the 2 groups (laparoscopic and open). RESULTS: From March 1992 to February 2003, 166 patients underwent RH and 303 LH. In the RH group, 108 patients underwent laparoscopic approach and 58 underwent open surgery (26 vs 13 for benign lesions and 82 vs 45 for adenocarcinomas, respectively). LH was performed by laparoscopy in 202 patients and by laparotomy in 101 (55 vs 30 for benign lesions and 147 vs 71 for adenocarcinomas, respectively). There were no conversions to open surgery in laparoscopic RH, while 10 patients (4.9%) in the laparoscopic LH group required conversion: 3 of 34 performed for diverticular disease and 7 of 147 performed for malignancy. Mean operative time for laparoscopic surgery was longer than for open surgery (182 vs 140 min for RH and 222 vs 190 min for LH, respectively), but with increasing experience this decreased significantly. Mean hospital stay in patients who underwent laparoscopic procedures was significantly shorter both in RH and LH groups (9.2 vs 13.2 days and 9.9 vs 13.2 days, respectively). Similar major complication rates were observed between the 2 laparoscopic and open groups (1.8% vs 1.7% for RH and 4.1% vs 4.9% for LH, respectively). Follow-up time ranged between 12 and 109 months (mean, 57.3 months) in RH groups and between 12 and 111 months (mean, 57.5 months) in LH groups. The follow-up dropout was of only 3 patients after RH (in the laparoscopic group) and 5 after LH (3 in the laparoscopic group and 2 in the open group). The local recurrence rate was lower after laparoscopic surgery in both arms (7% vs 8.8% for RH and 3.3% vs 7% for LH, respectively), but the differences were not statistically significant. Two port site recurrences were observed in the laparoscopic groups, 1 after a Dukes D palliative RH and 1 after a Dukes C LH converted to open surgery (1.7% and 0.9%, respectively). Metachronous metastases rates were similar between the laparoscopic and open groups (20.9% vs 17.6% for RH and 4.4% vs 5.3% for LH, respectively). Cumulative survival probability (CSP) at 72 months after laparoscopic RH was 0.791 as compared to 0.765 after open surgery (p=0.326) and 0.956 after laparoscopic LH as compared to 0.877 after open surgery (p=0.115). CSP for Dukes stage A, B and C in the laparoscopic RH group was 0.875, 0.846, and 0.727 as compared to 0.9 (p=0.815), 0.889 (p=0.87), and 0.6 (p=0.183) after open surgery, respectively. CSP for Dukes stage A, B and C in the laparoscopic LH group was 0.1, 0.966, and 0.885 as compared to 0.1 (p=0.936), 0.944 (p=0.466), and 0.7 (p=0.072) after open surgery, respectively. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that laparoscopic hemicolectomy for both benign and malignant lesions can be performed safely. Oncological outcomes were comparable with those of open surgery.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2002

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy and common bile duct exploration are safe for older patients.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration is a well-established treatment option in dedicated centers. However, few data are available on the results in elderly patients. METHODS: The outcome after laparoscopic CBD exploration in elderly patients (age <70 years) was compared with that in a concurrent control group of younger patients (age, <70 years). RESULTS: There were 77 elderly patients in group A and 207 younger patients in group B. American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) III and IV patients and prior abdominal operations were more frequent in group A (p <0.001). Two patients from each group underwent conversion to open surgery. There was no significant difference frequency of use between the transcystic and choledochotomy approaches, although the latter tended to be more frequent in the group A because of larger stones, (group A 53.4%; group B, 37.6%). Minor and major morbidity (group A, 12%; group B, 13.6%), rate of recurrent stones (group A, 1.3%; group B, 1.9%), and mortality (group A, 1.3%; group B, 0%) were not significantly different between the two groups. The single death in group A involved a patient with acute toxic cholangitis who underwent emergency surgery after multiple failed attempts at endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography/endoscopic sphincterotomy performed elsewhere. No CBD stenosis was observed at follow-up assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Elective laparoscopic CBD exploration is safe and effective. It may become the standard of care in both elderly and younger patients.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2002

Results of laparoscopic vs open resections for colon cancer in patients with a minimum follow-up of 3 years.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic resection for colon cancer is still a controversial procedure, the major cause of concern being the lack of long-term results. The aims of this study was to compare long-term outcome in unselected patients undergoing either laparoscopic (LH) or open hemicolectomy (OH) for colonic cancer. METHODS: From March 1992 to August 1997, 197 elective patients were included in this prospective nonrandomized study. The patients were operated on by the same surgical team following the same type of surgical technique for both right and left hemicolectomy, excluding segmental resections; the only difference was the type of access, which was either laparoscopic or open. Each patient gave a written consent, and the allocation to each group (laparoscopic or open) was done on the basis of the patient's choice. The long-term outcomes of the two groups were compared. Follow-up for both groups ranged from 36 to 96 months (mean, 48.9). RESULTS: In all, 149 (74 LH, 75 OH) of 197 patients were studied, excluding palliative resections, conversions to open surgery, perioperative deaths, and deaths not related to cancer. Only two patients in the laparoscopic group were lost to follow-up. The local recurrence after LH was 1.3% vs 2.7% after OH (p = 0.105). Metachronous metastases rates were similar for the two groups (10.8% for LH and 10.7% for OH). Cumulative survival probability (CSP) in the LH group vs the OH group was 0.892 vs 0.867 (p = 0.513), respectively. CSP for Duke's stage B and C in the LH group vs the OH group was 0.910 vs 0.895 (p = 0.506) and 0.800 vs 0.734 (p = 0.544) respectively. Sixty-four LH patients (86.5%) and 65 OH patients (86.7%) are disease-free. CONCLUSION: In our series of patients, no statistically significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of long-term survival rate.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Laparoscopic vs open hemicolectomy for colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: The role of laparoscopic resection in the management of colon cancer is still a subject of debate. In this clinical study, we compared the perioperative results and long-term outcome for two unselected groups of patients undergoing either laparoscopic or open hemicolectomy for colon cancer. METHODS: This prospective nonrandomized study was based on a series of 248 consecutive patients operated on by the same surgical team using the same type of surgical technique for right (RHC) and left (LHC) hemicolectomy, excluding segmental resections; the only difference was the type of access, which was either laparoscopic or open. The choice of type of access was left up to the patient after he or she had read the informed consent form. Operative time, length of stay, complications, and long-term outcome for the two groups were compared. Follow-up time ranged between 12 and 92 months (mean, 42). RESULTS: Between March 1992 and January 2000, 140 patients underwent a laparoscopic hemicolectomy (55 RHC and 86 LHC); at the same time, 107 patients (44 RHC and 63 LHC) were treated via an open approach. There were no conversions to open surgery in the laparoscopic RHC group, but six patients (7%) in the laparoscopic LHC group were converted. The mean operative time for laparoscopic surgery was significantly longer than the time for open surgery (190 vs 140 min for RHC, 240 vs 190 min for LHC,); however, with increasing experience, this time decreased significantly. The mean hospital stay for the patients who underwent laparoscopic procedures was significantly shorter in both the RHC and the LHC groups (9.2 vs 13.2 days for RHC, 10.0 vs 13.2 days for LHC). No statistically significant difference between the two laparoscopic and open groups was observed for the major complication rate (1.9% vs 2.3% for RHC, 7.5% vs 6.3% for LHC). The patient in the laparoscopic RHC group were lost to follow-up. The local recurrence rate was lower after laparoscopic surgery in both arms (5.4% vs 9% for RHC, 1.5% vs 7.5% for LHC), but the differences were not statistically significant. Two port site recurrences were observed in the laparoscopic groups, one after RHC (2.7%) and one after LHC (1.5%). Metachronous metastases rates were similar for the two groups (16.2% vs 15.1% for RHC, 4.4% vs 5.7% for LHC). Cumulative survival probability at 48 months after laparoscopic RHC was 0.865, as compared to 0.818 after open surgery, and 0.971 after laparoscopic LHC, as compared to 0.887 after open surgery. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that laparoscopic hemicolectomy for colonic cancer can be performed safely, with morbidity, mortality, and long-term results comparable to those of open surgery.

Aged↗

PubMed2001

Laparoscopic resection of a juxtaglomerular cell tumor of the right kidney.

Juxtaglomerular cell tumor is an extremely rare neoplasm of the kidney that causes blood hypertension. A 45-year-old man with persistent hypertension was referred to our department because of a solid mass of unclear origin (kidney? colon?) located in the right mesorenal region that had been detected by Computed tomography (CT) scan, ultrasonography, and colonoscopy. Serum levels of renin, plasma renin activity (PRA), and aldosterone were all normal. Operatively, four 10/12-mm ports were placed, ultrasonography confirmed a well-encapsulated lesion of the kidney. Ultrasonic shears and cautery were used to resect the lesion, including 5 mm of free renal tissue. Postoperatively, a prompt normalization of blood pressure was observed. The pathological findings showed a juxtaglomerular cell tumor. The definitive diagnosis of juxtaglomerular cell tumor is made on the basis of laboratory findings, and imaging studies, Its definitive treatment is surgical excision which can be accomplished successfully with minimally invasive surgery.

Adenocarcinoma↗

PubMed2001

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration is gaining favor in the treatment of patients with gallstones and CBD stones. Our aim is to report our results with this procedure, focusing on the technical aspects. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients with proven CBD stones undergo laparoscopic transcystic CBD exploration, preferably, or a choledochotomy if the former is not feasible. According to CBD stone load and diameter, a biliary drainage tube is positioned for postoperative biliary decompression. RESULTS: Among 284 patients who underwent laparoscopic CBD exploration, 4 (1.4%) were converted to open surgery. Transcystic CBD exploration was feasible in 163 cases (58.2%), but a choledochotomy was required in 117 (41.8%). Biliary drains were positioned in 204 patients (72.8%). Minor complications included hyperamylasemia (11; 3.9%) and minor subhepatic bile collection (7; 2.5%). Major complications were bile leakage (5; 1.8%), hemoperitoneum from cystic artery bleeding (2; 0.7%), subhepatic abscess (2; 0.7%), acute pancreatitis (1; 0.3%), and jejunal perforation (1; 0.3%). Retained CBD stones in 15 patients (5.3%) were removed through the biliary drainage sinus tract (8) or after endoscopy and sphincterotomy (6). In one patient, a small stone passed spontaneously (overall success rate 94.6%). Death from a cardiovascular complication was observed in one elderly high-risk patient (0.3%). Recurrent ductal stones in 5 patients (1.8%) were treated with ERCP and endoscopic sphincterotomy. One patient with re-recurrent ductal stones underwent hepaticojejunostomy. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic CBD exploration during LC in unselected patients solves two problems during the same anesthesia with high success rates (94.6%), low minor (6.4%) and major (3.8%) morbidity rates, and a low mortality rate (0.3%). Standardization of the technique is mandatory to achieve high success rates.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2001

Laparoscopic colonic resection.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In the last decade, laparoscopy has dramatically changed colonic surgery. Laparoscopic procedures are applied to the treatment of almost all colonic diseases, including both benign and malignant lesions. Focusing our attention on the laparoscopic oncologic operative technique, we compared the perioperative results and the long-term outcome of laparoscopic surgery (LS) with those of conventional open surgery (OS) in a series of 360 unselected consecutive patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1992 and 2001, excluding 102 patients with rectal tumors, 207 patients underwent laparoscopic colonic resection (72.5% for malignant lesions), whereas 153 (71.9% with malignant lesions) were treated by OS. The treatment modality was selected by the patients after reading the informed consent form. The statistical significance of differences in the morbidity and mortality rates, local recurrence rate, and incidence of distant metastases in the two groups was assessed by chi2 test. The survival probability analysis was performed by the Kaplan-Meier method. Significant differences in survival probability between groups were assessed by the log-rank test. A level of 5% was used as the criterion of statistical significance. RESULTS: Laparoscopic surgery was technically feasible in 95.7% of the patients. No statistically significant difference was observed in the major complication rate (3.5% after LS and 3.3% after OS; P = 0.870) or in perioperative mortality (1.5% v 1.3%; P = 0.769). The mean follow-up in the patients with malignant disease was 42.2 months, during which time, we observed 2 cases of abdominal wall metastases (1.9%) in patients with advanced disease. The local recurrence rate was lower after LS than OS: 2.8% v 8.1%; P = 0.223). Distant metastases occurred in 8.6% of patients after LS and 9.3% after OS (P = 0.926). At 48 months of follow-up, the cumulative survival probability in the LS-completed malignant group was 0.934 compared with 0.860 after OS (P = 0.781). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic colonic resection for both benign and malignant lesions is technically feasible, without additional risks for the patients. However, oncologic outcomes have not been determined because no data from the ongoing randomized controlled trials are yet available.

Adenocarcinoma↗

PubMed1996

Laparoscopic intra-arterial catheter implantation for regional chemotherapy of liver metastasis.

In patients with unresectable metastatic disease confined to the liver, intra-arterial regional chemotherapy with implantable systems in an attractive option. Since April 1992, laparoscopic colorectal resections have been performed in our institution. Within this series of patients, three cases with bilateral liver metastasis from colon cancer were observed and underwent laparoscopic intra-arterial catheter implantation in the gastroduodenal artery for regional chemotherapy. In two patients the metastases were synchronous, and in both cases a laparoscopic colon resection was also performed, for tumors located in the cecum and in the sigmoid colon, respectively. The laparoscopic surgical technique for intra-arterial catheter implantation is described in detail. In this limited experience the procedure, from a purely technical point of view, was not considered difficult and was completed in 70 min on average. No complications were observed and the patient with metachronous liver metastasis was discharged on 3rd postoperative day.

Antineoplastic Agents↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Laparoscopic colonic resections versus open surgery: a prospective non-randomized study on 310 unselected cases.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Laparoscopic colorectal surgery, particularly for malignancy, is still debated. The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the postoperative outcome as well as the short- and medium-term results of laparoscopic surgery compared with those after open conventional surgery. METHODOLOGY: A series of 310 consecutive patients, operated on by the same surgical team, have been included in this study; 150 patients (75% with malignant lesions) underwent laparoscopic surgery, whereas 160 patients (73% with malignant lesions) were treated by open surgery. The treatment modality was selected by the patients after reading the informed consent form. RESULTS: Laparoscopic surgery was technically feasible in 91.4% of cases. Mean operative time for laparoscopic surgery was longer than for open surgery (251 vs. 175 min) (P < 0.001). Mean postoperative hospital stay after laparoscopic surgery was 10.5 days, as compared to 13.3 days after open surgery (P < 0.05). In the laparoscopic surgery group minor complications' rate was 3.6% and compared favorably to the 7.5% observed after open surgery (P = 0.261). No statistically significant difference was observed in the major complications rate (9.4% after laparoscopic surgery and 6.8% after open surgery) and in operative mortality (1.4% for laparoscopic surgery and 0.6% for open surgery). The local recurrence rate was lower after laparoscopic surgery as compared to open surgery: 3% versus 9.2% (P = 0.152), respectively. Mean follow-up was 34.2 months during which time we observed 2 cases of port site recurrence. After implementing adequate prophylactic measures, no parietal implants were observed in the last 80 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery for malignancy. Distant site metastases occurred in 11% in both groups. At 36 months cumulative survival probability in laparoscopic surgery completed malignant cases was 0.74% as compared to 0.66% after open surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Morbidity and mortality were similar in the 2 groups. Laparoscopic patients experienced less pain. A slightly higher incidence of local recurrence was observed in the open surgery group, whereas the percentage of distant site metastases and the cumulative survival probability in the 2 groups were similar. Port site recurrences are a cause of concern but they can be prevented with adequate prophylactic measures. The short- and medium-term results of laparoscopic surgery compared favorably with those of open surgery in this prospective non-randomized study. Long-term oncological result are not known yet. In patients with malignancy prospective randomized trials on larger patient numbers are required.

Colectomy↗

PubMedDate not supplied

[Single-stage laparoscopic surgery of cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis in 268 unselected consecutive patients].

AIMS: The introduction of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has modified the treatment of gallstones and common bile duct (CBD) stones. Aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the results of single stage laparoscopic management of gallstones and CBD stones. PATIENT AND METHODS: From January 1991 to October 1999, CBD stones were present at intraoperative cholangiography in 268 patients (pts) (169 females, 99 males, mean age 55.6 years, range 12-94 years) out of 2693 undergoing LC (10%) for gallstones. CBD stones were unsuspected in 123 (45.9%) and suspected in 145 (54.1%). RESULTS: CBD exploration was successful in 264 cases (98.5%) (transcystic 164, choledochotomy 100). Four pts were converted to open surgery (1.5%). Retained stones in 15 patients (5.7%), were treated by ERCP/ES (6 pts) and by percutaneous endoscopic/fluoroscopic stone removal (6 pts). Spontaneous stones passage occurred in 2 pts, one patient is waiting for treatment. Major morbidities were hemoperitoneum (4 cases) and cystic duct bile leakage (3 cases). One high risk patient died postoperatively. Recurrent stones were observed in 5 pts (1.9%), at 1, 4, 8, 18, 26 months respectively after T-tube removal, and were treated by ERCP/ES in 4 cases. Spontaneous stone passage occurred in 1 case. CONCLUSIONS: LC and CBD exploration has shown to be safe and feasible with low morbidity and mortality. The rationale of this approach is to solve two problems during the same procedure, limiting the role of endoscopic sphincterotomy to the treatment of residual ductal stones.

Adolescent↗