Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Mar;197(3):296-301.
doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2008.09.010.

Emergency laparoscopic colectomy: does it measure up to open?

Jonah J Stulberg  1 , Brad J Champagne, Zhen Fan, Mike Horan, Vincent Obias, Eric Marderstein, Harry Reynolds, Conor P Delaney
Affiliations

Emergency laparoscopic colectomy: does it measure up to open?

Jonah J Stulberg et al. Am J Surg. 2009 Mar.

Abstract

Background: Laparoscopic colectomy has become the standard of care for elective resections; however, there are few data regarding laparoscopy in the emergency setting.

Methods: By using a database with prospectively collected data, we identified 94 patients who underwent an emergency colectomy between August 2005 and July 2008. Laparoscopic surgeries were performed in 42 patients and were compared with 25 patients who were suitable for laparoscopy but received open colectomy.

Results: The groups had similar demographics with no differences in age, sex, or surgical indications. Blood loss was lower (118 vs 205 mL; P < 0.01) and the postoperative stay was shorter (8 vs 11 d; P = 0.02) in the laparoscopic patients, and perioperative mortality rates were similar between the 2 groups (1 vs 3; P = 0.29).

Conclusions: With increasing experience, laparoscopic colectomy is a feasible option in certain emergency situations and is associated with shorter hospital stay, less morbidity, and similar mortality to that of open surgery.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Lacy AM, Garcia-Valdecasas JC, Delgado S, et al. Laparoscopy-assisted colectomy versus open colectomy for treatment of non-metastatic colon cancer: a randomised trial. Lancet. 2002;359(9325):2224–9. - PubMed
    1. A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;350(20):2050–9. - PubMed
    1. Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H, et al. Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;365(9472):1718–26. - PubMed
    1. Garrett KA, Champagne BJ, Valerian BT, Peterson D, Lee EC. A single training center’s experience with 200 consecutive cases of diverticulitis: Can all patients be approached laparoscopically? Surg Endosc. 2008 - PubMed
    1. Lee SW, Yoo J, Dujovny N, Sonoda T, Milsom JW. Laparoscopic vs. hand-assisted laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for diverticulitis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2006;49(4):464–9. - PubMed

Publication types