Early laparoscopic adhesiolysis for small bowel obstruction: retrospective study of main advantages

Conversion to open surgery in laparoscopic approach of adhesive small bowel obstruction: Predictive factors and its impact on short-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Small bowel obstruction is a common surgical emergency. Laparoscopy has been increasingly used for the treatment of adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO), but its indications remain unclear. In this study, we aimed to identify the risk factors for conversion to open surgery after laparoscopic ASBO treatment and evaluate the impact of conversion on short-term outcomes.

METHODS

All patients diagnosed with ASBO who initially underwent laparoscopic approach after the failure of conservative treatment between December 2020 and May 2024 were reviewed. Patients were categorized into two groups based on the surgical approach: the totally laparoscopic group (group 1) and the conversion to open surgery group (group 2). The demographic, clinical, and radiological features were compared, and risk factors were identified via univariate and multivariate analyses. The intraoperative findings and postoperative outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 102 patients (43 in group 1 and 59 in group 2) were included. The time between home and admission (P ​= ​0.014) and the abdominal wall ratio (P ​< ​0.001) were significantly higher in group 2 than in group 1, whereas the number of prior abdominal surgeries (P ​= ​0.010) and the rate of beak signs were significantly lower in group 2 than in group 1. The operative time (P ​< ​0.001), blood lost (P ​< ​0.001), medical expenses (P ​< ​0.001), total hospital length of stay (P ​< ​0.001), and postoperative hospital length of stay (P ​< ​0.001) were significantly higher in group 2 than in group 1. Multivariate analysis revealed that a large abdominal wall ratio (odds ratio [OR]: 4538.7; 95 ​% confidence interval [CI]: 8.5-2426334.8; P ​= ​0.009) was a risk factor for conversion, whereas the presence of beak signs (OR: 0.186; 95 ​% CI: 0.05-0.64, P ​= ​0.008) was a significant protective factor.

CONCLUSIONS

A large abdominal wall ratio is an independent risk factor for conversion, whereas the presence of beak signs is a protective factor. The conversion from laparoscopic surgery to open surgery is safe with proper management of conversion indications.

Keys to successful laparoscopic adhesiolysis for adhesive small bowel obstruction: A scoping review

Background

Adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO) is a common acute abdominal complication. Although non-surgical treatment is the primary treatment approach, more and more studies show that surgical treatment can reduce the incidence rate. Laparoscopic adhesiolysis (LA) has many advantages of minimally invasive surgery.But not all patients with ASBO are suitable for LA.

Objective

The aim of this scoping review was to summarize the keys to successful LA by analyzing the extensive literature.

Methods

A literature search was conducted in PubMed for articles on laparoscopic treatment of ASBO published between January 2000 and February 2024. This scoping review followed the framework suggested by Arksey and O'Malley for a scoping review.

Results

By analyzing the included studies we found that LA does have many advantages and can be performed safely. However, the prerequisite is to select patients with simple adhesions whenever possible and to focus on reasonable intraoperative measures. To improve the success rate of LA, we summarized the following characteristics of patients: no contraindications related to pneumoperitoneum, few previous abdominal operations (≤2), no pregnancy, bowel dilatation < 4 cm in diameter, simple adhesions, no diffuse peritonitis, no history of abdominal radiotherapy, <24 h of ASBO, limited previous abdominal surgery (appendix, cholecystectomy), no bowel strangulation ischemia, and bowel necrosis or bowel resection required for other reasons. In addition, we also summarized reasonable intraoperative measures.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic adhesiolysis has many advantages.Specific patients can benefit from LA. This scoping review Summarized the conditions for patient screening and reasonable intraoperative measures with the aim of providing a reference for surgeons, thereby ensuring that more patients benefit from LA.

A systematic review of participant descriptors reported in studies of adhesive small bowel obstruction

AIM

Reporting of participant descriptors in studies of adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO) can help identify characteristics associated with favourable outcomes and allow comparison with other studies and real-world clinical populations. The aim was to identify the pattern of participant descriptors reported in studies assessing interventions for ASBO.

METHOD

This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021281031) and reported in line with the PRISMA checklist. Systematic searches of Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were undertaken to identify studies assessing operative and non-operative interventions for adults with ASBO. Studies were dual screened for inclusion. Descriptors were categorised into conceptual domains by the research team.

RESULTS

Searches identified 2648 studies, of which 73 were included. A total of 156 unique descriptors were identified. On average, studies reported 12 descriptors. The most frequently reported descriptors were sex, age, SBO aetiology, history of abdominal surgery, BMI and ASA classification. The highest number of descriptors in a single study was 34, compared to the lowest number of descriptors which was one. Pathway factors were the least frequently described domain. Overall, 37 descriptors were reported in just one study.

CONCLUSION

There is a lack of consistency in participant descriptors reported in studies of SBO. Furthermore, a significant proportion of the descriptors were used infrequently. This makes it challenging to assess whether study participants are representative of the wider population. Further work is required to develop a Core Descriptor Set to standardise the reporting of patient characteristics and reduce heterogeneity between studies.

Assessing outcomes in laparoscopic vs open surgical management of adhesive small bowel obstruction

BACKGROUND

Small bowel obstruction is typically managed nonoperatively; however, refractory small bowel obstructions or closed loop obstructions necessitate operative intervention. Traditionally, laparotomy has long been the standard operative intervention for lysis of adhesions of small bowel obstructions. But as surgeons become more comfortable with minimally invasive techniques, laparoscopy has become a widely accepted intervention for small bowel obstructions. The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of laparoscopy to open surgery in the operative management of small bowel obstruction.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of operative small bowel obstruction cases at a single academic medical center from June 2016 to December 2019. Data were obtained from billing data and electronic medical record for patients with primary diagnosis of small bowel obstruction. Postoperative outcomes between the laparoscopic and open intervention groups were compared. The primary outcome was time to return of bowel function. Secondary outcomes included length of stay, 30-day mortality, 30-day readmission, VTE, and reoperation rate.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of a total of 279 patients with 170 (61%) and 109 (39%) patients in the open and laparoscopic groups, respectively. Patients undergoing laparoscopic intervention had overall shorter median return of bowel function (4 vs 6 days, p = 0.001) and median length of stay (8 vs 13 days, p = 0.001). When stratifying for bowel resection, patients in the laparoscopic group had shorter return of bowel function (5.5 vs 7 days, p = 0.06) and shorter overall length of stay (10 vs 16 days, p < 0.002). Patients in the laparoscopic group who did not undergo bowel resection had an overall shorter median return of bowel function (3 vs 5 days, p < 0.0009) and length of stay (7 vs 10 days, p < 0.006). When comparing surgeons who performed greater than 40% cases laparoscopically to those with fewer than 40%, there was no difference in patient characteristics. There was no significant difference in return of bowel function, length of stay, post-operative mortality, or re-admission laparoscopic preferred or open preferred surgeons.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic intervention for the operative management of small bowel obstruction may provide superior clinical outcomes, shorter return of bowel function and length of stay compared to open operation, but patient selection for laparoscopic intervention is based on surgeon preference rather than patient characteristics.

Surgical management of adhesive small bowel obstruction: Is it still mandatory to wait? - An update

Small bowel obstruction syndromes (SBO) represent one of the main causes of emergency admission for surgical abdominal pain. The 2018 Bologna Guidelines (Ten Broek et al. 2018) recommend non-operative management at the outset if there are no signs of severity; surgery is proposed after 72h for the 20-30% of patients who fail medical management. However, these recommendations were based on old studies published at a time when laparoscopic surgery was not commonplace and when diagnostic capabilities (particularly for establishing etiology) were less developed than they are today. Additionally, the advent and development of laparoscopy and enhanced rehabilitation after surgery have led to a decrease in surgical morbidity. These guidelines are therefore now debated and several recent publications have encouraged urgent or semi-urgent surgical management for patients presenting for SBO in order to reduce morbidity, mortality, duration of hospitalization and costs, and to improve the feasibility of therapeutic laparoscopy. Prompt surgical management could also reduce the risk of recurrent small bowel obstructions. This model for early surgical management probably cannot be applied to all patients. It therefore seems important to select those patients at risk for failure of medical treatment and to identify those in whom the probability of successful laparoscopy is high. New radiological tools should allow better selection in the future. At the present time, the indications for early surgery "within 24h" should be emphasized.

Does Laparoscopic Adhesiolysis Reduce the Risk of Small Bowel Obstruction Related Readmissions and Reoperations Compared to Open Adhesiolysis?

Purpose

The present study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic adhesiolysis in decreasing recurrent episodes of small bowel obstruction (SBO) compared to that of the conventional open procedure.

Methods

Among 373 patients who visited our emergency department from January 2000 to July 2018 due to small bowel obstruction, 67 patients who underwent adhesiolysis were included in this study. Eighteen and 49 patients comprised the open adhesiolysis (OA) and laparoscopic adhesiolysis (LA) groups, respectively. Clinical demographics, computed tomography (CT) findings, laboratory results, and perioperative outcomes were compared. Further, the long-term follow-ups of SBO related re-admissions and re-operations were also compared.

Results

Preoperative baseline data, pain characteristics, laboratory findings, and ileus-related CT findings showed no significant difference between the two groups. LA was related to less blood loss and complications, along with early bowel movement recovery. Similarly, fewer SBO-related re-admissions [OA vs. LA=8 (44.4%) vs. 3 (6.1%), p=0.001] and re-operations [OA vs. LA=3 (16.7%) vs. 1 (2.0%), p=0.025] were observed in LA compared to OA.

Conclusion

LA is a safer and more feasible procedure for SBO treatment compared to OA. This procedure showed a reduction in SBO-related re-admission and re-operation rates.

Acute pelvic inflammatory disease as a rare cause of acute small bowel obstruction

Introduction: Small bowel obstruction (SBO) is a common presentation to emergency abdominal surgery. The most frequent causes of SBO are congenital, postoperative adhesions, abdominal wall hernia, internal hernia and malignancy. Patients: A 27-year-old woman was hospitalized because of acute abdominal pain, blockage of gases and stools associated with vomiting. Abdominal computed tomography showed an acute small bowel obstruction without any obvious etiology. In view of important abdominal pain and the lack of clear diagnosis, an explorative laparoscopy was performed. Diagnostic of pelvic inflammatory disease was established and was comforted by positive PCR for Chlamydia Trachomatis. Results: Acute small bowel obstruction resulting from acute pelvic inflammatory disease, emerging early after infection, without any clinical or X-ray obvious signs was not described in the literature yet. This infrequent acute SBO etiology but must be searched especially when there is no other evident cause of obstruction in female patients. Early laparoscopy is mostly advised when there are some worrying clinical or CT scan signs.

Inherited genetic predispositions in F13A1 and F13B genes predict abdominal adhesion formation: identification of gender prognostic indicators

Abdominal adhesions (AA) account for the most common complication of peritoneal surgery with bowel obstruction being the severest problem in the absence of effective predicting biomarkers. Anti-AA-barriers or adhesiolysis did not completely prevent bowel obstruction, although there is evidence they might reduce related complications requiring reoperation. In addition, gender-related predispositions have not been adequately investigated. We explored the role of coagulation Factor XIII (F13A1 and F13B subunit-genes) in patients following laparotomy, mostly median/lower median incision line. Globally, 426 patients (54%,♀), were PCR-SNP-genotyped for FXIIIA V34L (rs5985), FXIIIA P564L (rs5982), FXIIIA Y204F (rs3024477) and FXIIIB H95R (rs6003). Patients' clinical phenotypes were: Group-A (n = 212), those who developed AA, and 55.2% of them developed bowel obstruction (subgroup-A1), the remaining were subgroup-A2; Group B (n = 214) were those who did not develop AA (subgroup-B1; 53.3%) or symptoms/complications (subgroup-B2). Among different laparotomy, colon surgery associated with AA at a major extent (OR = 5.1; 3.24-7.8; P < 0.0001) with different gender scores (♀OR = 5.33; 2.32-12.23; P < 0.0001 and ♂OR = 3.44; 1.58-7.49; P < 0.0001). Among SNPs, P564L (OR = 4.42; 1.45-13.4; P = 0.008) and Y204F (OR = 7.78; 1.62-37.3; P = 0.01) significantly predicted bowel obstruction and survival-analyses yielded interesting gender distinctions (♀HR = 5.28; 2.36-11.8; P = 0.00005; ♂HR = 2.22; 1.31-3.85; P = 0.0034). Active compounds preventing AA belong to the anticoagulant/fibrinolysis areas, suggesting them candidate investigation targets. We identified novel prognostic markers to predict AA/bowel obstruction giving insights to design novel therapeutic and gender prevention programs.