Open AccessLaparoscopic versus open right hemicolectomy in colon carcinoma: A propensity score analysis of the DGAV StuDoQ|ColonCancer registry
Author(s) -
Christian Jurowich,
Sven Lichthardt,
Carolin Kastner,
Imme Haubitz,
Andre Prock,
Jörg Filser,
ChristophThomas Germer,
Armin Wiegering
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0218829
Subject(s) - medicine , laparoscopy , ileus , surgery , colorectal cancer , clinical endpoint , propensity score matching , lymph node , laparoscopic surgery , hemicolectomy , colectomy , general surgery , cancer , randomized controlled trial
Objective To assess whether laparoscopy has any advantages over open resection for right-sided colon cancer. Summary background data Right hemicolectomy can be performed using either a conventional open or a minimally invasive laparoscopic technique. It is not clear whether these different access routes differ with regard to short-term postoperative outcomes. Methods Patients documented in the German Society for General and Visceral Surgery StuDoQ|ColonCancer registry who underwent right hemicolectomy were analyzed regarding early postoperative complications according to Clavien-Dindo (primary endpoint), operation (OP) time, length of postoperative hospital stay (LOS), MTL30 and number of lymph nodes retrieved (secondary endpoints). Results A total of 4.997 patients were identified as undergoing oncological right hemicolectomy without additional interventions. Of these, 4.062 (81.3%) underwent open, 935 (18.7%) laparoscopic surgery. Propensity score analysis showed a significantly shorter LOS (OR: 0.55 CI 95%0.47-.64) and a significantly longer OP time (OR2.32 CI 1.98–2.71) for the laparoscopic route. Risk factors for postoperative complications, anastomotic insufficiency, ileus, reoperation and positive MTL30 were higher ASA status, higher age and increasing BMI. The surgical access route (open / lap) had no influence on these factors, but the laparoscopic group did have markedly fewer lymph nodes retrieved. Conclusion The present registry-based analysis could detect no relevant advantages for the minimally invasive laparoscopic access route. Further oncological analyses are needed to clarify the extent to which the smaller lymph node harvest in the laparoscopic group is accompanied by a poorer oncological outcome.