Abstract:Purpose: Re-anastomosis after a Hartmann procedure is associated with a higher morbidity and mortality than other elective colorectal operations. The goal of this comparative study was to evaluate whether laparoscopic reversal is a justified operative approach, although the initial operation is most often an emergency laparotomy. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on data collected on all 70 patients who underwent laparoscopic and open reversal of a Hartmann procedure at the Department of Surgery, University of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, between January 1999 and December 2011. Together with general demographic data, the analysis included the indication for the initial Hartmann procedure, time to reversal, intraoperative findings, the choice of operative method, operating time, postoperative pain control, return of normal bowel function, length of hospital stay, and peri- and postoperative morbidity and mortality. Results: In most patients, the Hartmann procedure was performed after a perforated sigmoid diverticulitis. We were not able to find any statistically significant differences with respect to gender, body mass index (BMI) and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification between the laparoscopic group (LG) (N = 24 patients) and the open group (OG) (N = 46). In the LG, patients were significantly younger (p = 0.019). The median operating time was 210 min (75-245) in the LG, which was significantly longer than in the OG (166 min; 66-230). The statistical analysis of the duration of postoperative analgesic therapy (LG 7 days; OG 12 days), return to normal diet (LG 3 days; OG 4 days), return of normal bowel function (LG 3 days; OG 4 days) and length of hospital stay (LOS) (LG 10 days; OG 15 days) detected significant differences in advantage for the LG. Unplanned return to theatre during index admission was only necessary in the OG (N = 7, 15.2 %). With a median follow-up of 8 months (range 1-20), we observed a comparable number of minor complications in both groups but a significantly higher number of major complications in the OG (N = 27, 58.7%) (p = 0.001). Conversion occurred in three cases (12.5%). There was no mortality in either of the two groups. Conclusions: This study was able to demonstrate the feasibility of the laparoscopic approach. In terms of postoperative results it should be seen as equivalent to the open procedure. However, the laparoscopic approach requires profound surgical expertise. The indication should be made after a careful risk/benefit analysis for each individual patient.

Postoperative morbidity following Hartmann's procedure in comparison to anterior resection and abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer—a population‐based study

Oncological outcome following Hartmann's procedure compared with anterior resection and abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer—The type of procedure does not influence local recurrence or distant metastasis: A population‐based study

Hartmann's procedure in rectal cancer surgery is often an intraoperative decision: a retrospective multicenter study

Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery Versus The Open Approach In Curative Resection Of Rectal Cancer

Low Hartmann's procedure versus abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer, a propensity score matching cohort study

Comparison of the risk of postoperative wound infection in patients with rectal cancer by laparoscopic versus open Hartmann's surgery

[Comparative study of clinical efficacy between abdominoperineal resection and anterior resection procedure in patients with rectal cancer].

Reversal of Hartmann's procedure: experience in an Asian population

Utilization and outcomes of Hartmann's procedure in emergency left colon surgery: evaluating postoperative complications and stoma reversal rates

Comparison of outcomes of abdominoperineal resection vs low anterior resection in very-low rectal cancer

Robot-assisted Vs Laparoscopic Vs Open Abdominoperineal Resections for Low Rectal Cancer: Short-term Outcomes of a Single-Center Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Oncological superiority of extralevator abdominoperineal resection over conventional abdominoperineal resection: a meta-analysis

Incidence And Mortality Of Anastomotic Dehiscence Requiring Reoperation After Rectal Carcinoma Resection

Lymphadenectomy Around Inferior Mesenteric Artery In Low-Tie Vs High-Tie Laparoscopic Anterior Resection: Short- And Long-Term Outcome Of A Cohort Of 614 Rectal Cancers

Laparoscopic versus open reversal of a Hartmann procedure: a single-center study

Surgical and oncological results after rectal resections with or without previous treatment for prostate cancer

Risk Factors Associated With Sphincter-Preserving Resection In Patients With Low Rectal Cancer

Comparison of clinical outcomes after total transanal and laparoscopic assisted endorectal pull-through in patients with rectosigmoid Hirschsprung disease

Clinical Comparison of Laparoscopic and Open Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer with Anal Sphincter Preservation

[Meta-analysis comparing long-term outcomes of intersphincteric resection versus abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer]

The influence of preoperative e intraoperative factors in predicting postoperative morbidity and mortality in perforated diverticulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis