Postoperative colonic motility in patients following laparoscopic-assisted and open sigmoid colectomy

Effects of Gum Chewing on Recovery From Postoperative Ileus: A Randomized Clinical Trail

BACKGROUND

Sham feeding with products such as chewing gum has been theorized to decrease the incidence and time to resolution of postoperative ileus. The conflicting findings in the literature on this subject are because in part of the use of mixed study populations, which has led to difficulties in assessing the value of sham feeding in ameliorating this condition.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of postsurgical gum chewing in restoring normal bowel movement in patients with colorectal cancer who had undergone abdominal surgery for colon resection.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was used to examine the time to first postoperative flatus and defecation. The intervention group ( n = 30) received xylitol chewing gum on the first day after colon resection, one piece of gum for 15 minutes, 3 times daily, until the time to first flatus and defecation. Both the intervention and control groups ( n = 30) received standard postoperative care and were encouraged to walk as soon as possible after surgery. The time to first flatus was reported by patients.

RESULTS

The time to first flatus and defecation in the intervention group was significantly shorter than that in the control group (39.13 ± 15.66 vs. 52.92 ± 21.97 hours and 54.55 ± 18.90 vs. 77.98 ± 34.59 hours, respectively). However, after controlling for age and surgical duration, only time to first flatus was significantly shorter in the intervention group. Significantly positive correlations were found between time to first flatus and time to first defecation in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

In this study, gum chewing was shown to have a positive effect on the time to first postoperative flatus and defecation. This inexpensive and noninvasive intervention may be recommended to decrease the time to resolution of postsurgical ileus in middle-aged and older patients who have undergone open abdominal surgery for colorectal resection.

Environmental sustainability in robotic and laparoscopic surgery: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgical (MIS) techniques are considered the gold standard of surgical interventions, but they have a high environmental cost. With global temperatures rising and unmet surgical needs persisting, this review investigates the carbon and material footprint of MIS and summarizes strategies to make MIS greener.

METHODS

The MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science databases were interrogated between 1974 and July 2021. The search strategy encompassed surgical setting, waste, carbon footprint, environmental sustainability, and MIS. Two investigators independently performed abstract/full-text reviews. An analysis of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted per ton of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) or waste produced was generated.

RESULTS

From the 2456 abstracts identified, 16 studies were selected reporting on 5203 MIS procedures. Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions ranged from 6 kg to 814 kg CO2e per case. Carbon footprint hotspots included production of disposables and anaesthetics. The material footprint of MIS ranged from 0.25 kg to 14.3 kg per case. Waste-reduction strategies included repackaging disposables, limiting open and unused instruments, and educational interventions. Robotic procedures result in 43.5 per cent higher GHG emissions, 24 per cent higher waste production, fewer DALYs averted per ton of CO2, and less waste than laparoscopic alternatives.

CONCLUSION

The increased environmental impact of robotic surgery may not sufficiently offset the clinical benefit. Utilizing alternative surgical approaches, reusable equipment, repackaging, surgeon preference cards, and increasing staff awareness on open and unused equipment and desflurane avoidance can reduce GHG emissions and waste.

Laparoscopy for Benign Diseases of the Colon

Laparoscopic surgery has revolutionized the delivery of care to the surgical patient undergoing colorectal resection. Since the first laparoscopic-assisted colectomy in 1991, significant advances have been made in minimally invasive colorectal surgery. For many benign conditions, laparoscopic colectomy has been proven to be safe and effective, and in some instances superior when compared with open surgery. Complex laparoscopic resections such as those for diverticulitis and inflammatory bowel disease have also been shown to have equivalent outcomes when compared with open surgery. Short-term benefits of a minimally invasive approach include less pain, decreased rates of wound infection and postoperative morbidity, faster return of bowel function, and shorter length of stay. Improvements in long-term complications have also been noted with lower incidence of incisional hernias and small bowel obstructions secondary to adhesions. As surgeons become more facile with laparoscopic resection, more complex cases such as those for complicated diverticulitis and reoperative surgery for inflammatory bowel disease can be completed with shorter operative times and decreased cost.

Clinical endpoint, early detection, and differential diagnosis of postoperative ileus: a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

This systematic review summarizes evidence regarding clinical endpoints, early detection, and differential diagnosis of postoperative ileus (POI).

METHODS

Using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Web-of-Science, we identified 2,084 articles. Risk of bias and level of evidence (LOE) of the included articles were determined, and relevant results were summarized.

RESULTS

Eleven articles were included, most of which with substantial risks of bias. Bowel motility studies revealed that defecation together with solid food tolerance is the most representative clinical endpoint of POI (LOE: 2b); other clinical signs (e.g. bowel sounds, passage of flatus) did not correlate with a full recovery of bowel motility. Inflammatory parameters including interleukin (IL)-6, IL-1, and TNF-α might assist in an early detection of prolonged POI (LOE: 4). Clinical manifestations (e.g. nausea, vomiting, abdominal distension, bowel sounds, flatus) and X-ray examinations provided limited aid to the differential diagnosis of POI, while CT with Gastrografin had the best specificity and sensitivity (both 100%; LOE: 1c).

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative defecation together with tolerance of solid food intake seems to be the best clinical endpoint of POI. CT has the best differential diagnostic value between POI and other complications. Prospective studies with a high LOE are in great need.

Objective assessment of postoperative gastrointestinal motility in elective colonic resection using a radiopaque marker provides an evidence for the abandonment of preoperative mechanical bowel preparation

BACKGROUND

It has been suggested that mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) has no benefit in terms of anastomotic healing, infection rate, or improvement in the postoperative course in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery, and that it should be abandoned. However, the effect of MBP on postoperative gastrointestinal motility has been assessed subjectively. In this randomized trial, we objectively assessed the effect of MBP on postoperative gastrointestinal motility and mobility in elective colonic resection.

METHOD

In total, 79 patients scheduled to undergo elective colonic resection for cancer were randomized to MBP or no-MBP groups prior to surgery. All patients ingested radiopaque markers before surgery to evaluate postoperative gastrointestinal motility, objectively evaluated by the transition of the markers at postoperative days (PODs) 1, 3, 5 and 7. The groups were then further subdivided into open and laparoscopic-assisted colectomy (LAC) groups and evaluated in terms of gastrointestinal motility and postoperative mobility.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the no-MBP and MBP groups in terms of perioperative and postoperative course. In the LAC subgroup, there was no significant difference between the no-MBP and MBP groups in terms of marker transition. However, in the open subgroup, there was a significant difference between the groups in terms of the residual ratio of markers in the small intestine at POD 3 (no-MBP 35.3% vs. MBP 69.2%; p=0.041), excretion rate of markers at POD 5 (no-MBP 49.7% vs. MBP 8.8%; p=0.005), and residual ratio in the small intestine at POD 7 (no-MBP 3.1% vs. MBP 28.8%; p=0.028). Additionally, the excretion rate in the no-MBP group was significantly higher than in the MBP group at POD 7 (74.1% vs. 33.8%; p=0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data provide additional evidence to support the abandonment of MBP in elective open colonic surgery.

Laparoscopic management of diverticular disease

Despite its potential advantages, laparoscopic management of diverticular disease is currently performed by a minority of surgeons on a small group of patients. However, the role for laparoscopy in diverticular disease continues to develop. At present, adequate evidence exists for the routine use of laparoscopy for uncomplicated diverticular disease. Complicated disease, including fistulizing disease and free perforation requires additional expertise and study. As the experience grows among individual surgeons and institutions, it can be expected that the complication and conversion rates will continue to decline allowing even further evolution of laparoscopy for the treatment of this challenging disease process.

Laparoscopic versus open sigmoid resection for diverticulitis: long-term results of a prospective, randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Elective laparoscopic sigmoid resection for diverticulitis has proven short-term benefits, but little data are available from prospective randomized trials regarding long-term outcome, quality of life, and functional results.

METHODS

Of 113 patients randomized to undergo laparoscopic (LAP) versus open (OP) sigmoid resection for diverticulitis, 105 (93%, LAP = 54, OP = 51) patients were examined and answered the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI) questionnaire, with a median follow-up of 30 (range, 9-63) months after surgery.

RESULTS

Incisional hernias were detected in five (9.8%) patients in the OP group versus seven (12.9%) in the LAP group, P = 0.84). Overall satisfaction with the operation on a scale of 0 (very poor) to 10 (excellent) was 9 (range, 2-10) in the OP group versus 9 (range, 2-10) in the LAP group (P = 0.78). Median GIQLI score was 115 (range, 57-144) in the OP group versus 110 (range, 61-134) in the LAP group (P = 0.17). Overall satisfaction with the cosmetic aspect of the scar on a scale of 0 (very poor) to 10 (excellent) was 8 (range, 1-10) in the OP group versus 9 (range, 0-10) in the LAP group (P = 0.01). Finally, median hospital cost (including reoperations for hernias) was 11,606 (5,230-147,982) CHF in the LAP group versus 12,138 (6,098-39,786) CHF in the OP group (P = 0.47).

CONCLUSIONS

Both open and laparoscopic approaches for sigmoid resection achieve good long-term results in terms of gastrointestinal function, quality of life, and patients' satisfaction. Significant long-term benefits of laparoscopic surgery are restricted to cosmetic (ClinicalTrials.gov protocol #NCT00453830).

Lower limb compartment syndrome following laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a review

AIM

  In spite of recent advances in technology and technique, laparoscopic colorectal surgery is associated with increased operating times when compared with open surgery. This increases the risk of acute lower limb compartment syndrome. The aim of this review was to gain a better understanding of postoperative lower limb compartment syndrome following laparoscopic colorectal surgery and to suggest strategies to avoid its occurrence.

METHOD

A MEDLINE search was performed using the keywords 'compartment syndrome', 'laparoscopic surgery' and 'Lloyd-Davies position' between 1970 and 2008. All relevant articles were retrieved and reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 54 articles were retrieved. Of the 30 articles in English, five were reviews, six were original articles and 19 were case reports, of which only one was following laparoscopic colorectal surgery. The remaining 24 were non-English articles. Of these, two were reviews and 22 were case reports, of which only one was following laparoscopic colorectal surgery. The incidence of acute compartment syndrome following laparoscopic colorectal surgery is unknown. The following are believed to be risk factors for acute lower limb compartment syndrome: the Lloyd-Davies operating position with exaggerated Trendelenburg tilt, prolonged operative times and improper patient positioning. Simple strategies are suggested to reduce its occurrence.

CONCLUSION

Simple preventative measures have been identified which may help to reduce the incidence of acute lower limb compartment syndrome. However, if suspected, timely surgical intervention with four-compartment fasciotomy remains the standard of care.

Case controlled study of the hospital stay and return to full activity following laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery before and after the introduction of an enhanced recovery programme

AIM

The short-term benefits of laparoscopic surgery are well established and in particular within an enhanced recovery programme. Early return to activity is to be expected but has not been quantified widely. The aim of this study was to measure the hospital stay and return to full activity following laparoscopic colorectal surgery and compare this with a matched group of patients undergoing open colorectal resections before and after the introduction of an enhanced recovery programme.

METHOD

Retrospective analysis of all laparoscopic colorectal operations performed between January 2003 and June 2007 on an intention to treat basis compared with a matched group of patients undergoing elective open colorectal surgery at the same institution.

RESULTS

The median hospital stay following 179 laparoscopic colorectal resections was 6 days whilst following 144 conventional open operations it was 8 days. Following the introduction of an enhanced recovery programme the hospital stay fell from 7 to 5 days and from 9 to 7 days for laparoscopic and open groups respectively. The median return to full activity from surgery for laparoscopic patients was 13 days in comparison to 56 days for patients undergoing open colorectal surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Following laparoscopic colorectal resection, patients can be expected to have a hospital stay of under a week and return to their usual activities as early as a week after discharge from hospital and < 2 weeks from surgery in comparison to patients undergoing open surgery who take 8 weeks or more to recover.

Long-term quality-of-life after open and laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy (LSC) is frequently performed for sigmoid diseases with excellent prognosis. We aimed to determine the long-term quality-of-life after open sigmoid colectomy (OSC) compared with LSC.

METHODS

Thirty-nine patients were investigated 40.5+/-2.8 months (mean+/-SEM) after LSC. Each LSC patient was matched to a patient after OSC. Patients were interviewed by telephone and the Eypasch quality-of-life questionnaire was answered by mail.

RESULTS

LSC entailed fewer minor complications (P=0.0003) and 97% of the patients were satisfied with the cosmetic result, which was more compared with 63% after OSC (P=0.001). Patients suffering from recurrent diverticulitis had a similar quality-of-life index after LSC and OSC (P=0.945). A minor trend was observed in patients with early-staged colorectal neoplasia in favor of LSC (113.6+/-3.3 vs. 106.0+/-4.2; P=0.21, mean+/-SEM).

CONCLUSIONS

LSC is superior concerning minor complications and cosmesis, whereas quality-of-life is similar in the long term.

Laparoscopic colon surgery: past, present and future

Since its first described case in 1991, laparoscopic colon surgery has lagged behind minimally invasive surgical methods for solid intra-abdominal organs in terms of acceptability, dissemination, and ease of learning. In colon cancer, initial concerns over port site metastases and adequacy of oncologic resection have considerably dampened early enthusiasm for this procedure. Only recently, with the publication of several large, randomized controlled trials, has the incidence of port site metastases been shown to be equivalent to that of open resection. Laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer has also been demonstrated to be at least equivalent to traditional laparotomy in terms of adequacy of oncologic resection, disease recurrence, and long-term survival. In addition, numerous reports have validated short-term benefits following laparoscopic resection for cancer, including shorter hospital stay, shorter time to recovery of bowel function, and decreased analgesic requirements, as well as other postoperative variables. In benign colonic disease, much less high-quality literature exists supporting the use of laparoscopic methods. Two recent randomized controlled trials have demonstrated some short-term benefits to laparoscopic ileocolic resection for CD, in addition to evident cosmetic advantages. On the other hand, the current evidence on laparoscopic surgery for UC does not support its routine use among nonexpert surgeons outside of specialized centers. Laparoscopic colonic resection for diverticular disease appears to provide several short-term benefits, although these advantages may not translate to cases of complicated diverticulitis. Despite the increasing acceptability of minimally invasive methods for the management of benign and malignant colonic pathologies, laparoscopic colon resection remains a prohibitively difficult technique to master. Numerous technological innovations have been introduced onto the market in an effort to decrease the steep learning curve associated with laparoscopic colon surgery. Good evidence exists supporting the use of second-generation, sleeveless, hand-assist devices in this context. Similarly, new hemostatic devices such as the ultrasonic scalpel and the electrothermal bipolar vessel sealer may be particularly helpful for extensive colonic mobilizations, in which several vascular pedicles must be taken. The precise role of these hemostatic technologies has yet to be established, particularly in comparison with stapling devices and significantly cheaper laparoscopic clips. Finally, recent advances in camera systems are promising to improve the ease with which difficult colonic dissections can be performed.

Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trial

BACKGROUND

The safety and short-term benefits of laparoscopic colectomy for cancer remain debatable. The multicentre COLOR (COlon cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection) trial was done to assess the safety and benefit of laparoscopic resection compared with open resection for curative treatment of patients with cancer of the right or left colon.

METHODS

627 patients were randomly assigned to laparoscopic surgery and 621 patients to open surgery. The primary endpoint was cancer-free survival 3 years after surgery. Secondary outcomes were short-term morbidity and mortality, number of positive resection margins, local recurrence, port-site or wound-site recurrence, metastasis, overall survival, and blood loss during surgery. Analysis was by intention to treat. Here, clinical characteristics, operative findings, and postoperative outcome are reported.

FINDINGS

Patients assigned laparoscopic resection had less blood loss compared with those assigned open resection (median 100 mL [range 0-2700] vs 175 mL [0-2000], p<0.0001), although laparoscopic surgery lasted 30 min longer than did open surgery (p<0.0001). Conversion to open surgery was needed for 91 (17%) patients undergoing the laparoscopic procedure. Radicality of resection as assessed by number of removed lymph nodes and length of resected oral and aboral bowel did not differ between groups. Laparoscopic colectomy was associated with earlier recovery of bowel function (p<0.0001), need for fewer analgesics, and with a shorter hospital stay (p<0.0001) compared with open colectomy. Morbidity and mortality 28 days after colectomy did not differ between groups.

INTERPRETATION

Laparoscopic surgery can be used for safe and radical resection of cancer in the right, left, and sigmoid colon.

Laparoscopic surgery for the prevention, palliation, and cure of gastrointestinal malignancies

The development of surgical laparoscopic techniques has revolutionized the way surgeons approach many diseases, including cancer. This article briefly discusses the historical development of surgical laparoscopy; describes laparoscopic surgical techniques, with a focus on techniques for common intra-abdominal malignancies; and reviews laparoscopic management of common gastrointestinal malignancies.