Published online Aug 27, 2013. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v5.i8.245
Revised: July 12, 2013
Accepted: July 17, 2013
Published online: August 27, 2013
Processing time: 94 Days and 14.5 Hours
AIM: To compare the open and laparoscopic Hartmann’s reversal in patients first treated for complicated diverticulitis.
METHODS: Forty-six consecutive patients with diverticular disease were included in this retrospective, single-center study of a prospectively maintained colorectal surgery database. All patients underwent conventional Hartmann’s procedures for acute complicated diverticulitis. Other indications for Hartmann’s procedures were excluded. Patients underwent open (OHR) or laparoscopic Hartmann’s reversal (LHR) between 2000 and 2010, and received the same pre- and post-operative protocols of cares. Operative variables, length of stay, short- (at 1 mo) and long-term (at 1 and 3 years) post-operative complications, and surgery-related costs were compared between groups.
RESULTS: The OHR group consisted of 18 patients (13 males, mean age ± SD, 61.4 ± 12.8 years), and the LHR group comprised 28 patients (16 males, mean age 54.9 ± 14.4 years). The mean operative time and the estimated blood loss were higher in the OHR group (235.8 ± 43.6 min vs 171.1 ± 27.4 min; and 301.1 ± 54.6 mL vs 225 ± 38.6 mL respectively, P = 0.001). Bowel function returned in an average of 4.3 ± 1.7 d in the OHR group, and 3 ± 1.3 d in the LHR group (P = 0.01). The length of hospital stay was significantly longer in the OHR group (11.2 ± 5.3 d vs 6.7 ± 1.9 d, P < 0.001). The 1 mo complication rate was 33.3% in the OHR (6 wound infections) and 3.6% in the LHR group (1 hemorrhage) (P = 0.004). At 12 mo, the complication rate remained significantly higher in the OHR group (27.8% vs 10.7%, P = 0.03). The anastomotic leak and mortality rates were nil. At 3 years, no patient required re-intervention for surgical complications. The OHR procedure had significantly higher costs (+56%) compared to the LHR procedure, when combining the surgery-related costs and the length of hospital stay.
CONCLUSION: LHR appears to be a safe and feasible procedure that is associated with reduced hospitality stays, complication rates, and costs compared to OHR.
Core tip: The present study examined the intra-operative and post-operative clinical outcomes of open vs laparoscopic Hartmann’s reversal in patients first treated for diverticulitis, one of the most common gastrointestinal diseases. By selecting a homogeneous sample of patients, we are able to describe the advantages of laparoscopy in this specific population. The laparoscopic reversal of Hartmann’s procedure appeared to be safe and feasible, with advantages in reduced hospitality stays, complication rates, and heath-related costs compared to the open approach.