Laparoscopic versus open elective right hemicolectomy with curative intent for colon adenocarcinoma (retrospective study)

Abstract

Introduction:

Even today, at a time of full development of laparoscopy, a retrospective comparison with classical open surgery is important. The aim of the study was to compare retrospectively short-term perioperative and early postoperative outcomes between laparoscopic (LRH) and open (ORH) right hemicolectomy in the colorectal cancer treatment.

Method:

The study followed 57 patients, regardless of age or gender, who underwent elective right-sided hemicolectomy due to the right colon adenocarcinoma over a period of 2 years. The laparoscopic group consists of 36 patients and the conventional group of 21 patients. Individual data were evaluated in three groups - demographic, surgical, and clinical.

Results:

In almost none of the monitored data, we found a statistically significant difference between LRH and ORH. The length of the operation was 128.3 min at ORH, 150.5 min at LRH, the percentage of converted LRH was 16.7%. A statistically significant difference was found in the blood loss amount, LRH 74.44 ± 105.76ml vs ORH 158.57 ± 95.83ml p≤0.05. The average length of postoperative hospitalization was 7.19 days for LRH, 8.14 days for ORH. The comprehensive complication index was 8.9 in laparoscopy, 17.8 in the conventional method.

Conclusion:

Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy is the gold standard in the treatment of colon malignancies. The results at our workplace suggest that laparoscopic and open right hemicolectomy were equivalent at the time in terms of the observed data. Most of the data suggest a benefit of laparoscopy over conventional method. Therefore, we agree with the dominant position of the laparoscopic method.