Clinical outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for repairing colonoscopic perforation: a multicenter study

Jae Seok Lee,Jeong Yeon Kim,Byung Mo Kang,Sang Nam Yoon,Jun Ho Park,Bo Young Oh,Jong Wan Kim
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-020-02116-1
Abstract:Purpose: We conducted this study to compare the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic surgery (LS) vs. open surgery (OS) for repairing colonoscopic perforation, and to evaluate the possible predictors of complications. Method: We reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent surgical repair of colonoscopic perforation by LS or OS between January 2005 and June 2019 at six Hallym University-affiliated hospitals. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify the predictors of postoperative complications. Results: Of the total 99 patients, 40 underwent OS and 59 underwent LS. The postoperative hospital stay and the time to resuming a soft diet were shorter in the LS group than in the OS group (P = 0.017 and 0.026, respectively). The complication rate and Clavien-Dindo classification were not significantly different between the two groups. Multivariable analysis revealed that an American Society of Anesthesiologists score (ASA) ≥ 3 and switching from non-operative management to surgical treatment were independently associated with complications (P = 0.025 and 0.010, respectively). Conclusion: LS may be a safe alternative to OS for repairing colonoscopic perforation with a shorter postoperative hospital stay and time to resuming a soft diet. Patients with an ASA score ≥ 3 and those with changes to their planned treatment should be monitored carefully to minimize their risk of complications.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?