Laparoscopic and open surgery methods in managing surgical intussusceptions: A randomized clinical trial of postoperative complications

Abstract

Purpose: To compare postoperative complications of laparoscopic surgery (LS) with open surgery (OS) in surgical intussusception patients.Methods: From March 2015 to February 2018, infants between 6 to 24 months old had the clinical and sono-graphical signs of intussusception enrolled in this double-blind, randomized clinical trial. We divided surgical intussusception patients into two groups. In the LS group, we evaluated patients by direct laparoscopic observation, on-table hydrostatic enema, and mechanical reduction of intussusception. In the OS group, we performed the conventional technique. These patients were followed for 2 years after procedures for comparison of postoperative complications between the two groups.Results: We had 52 patients who needed surgical exploration (26 in each group). There were four (15%) and seven (27%) patients with self-reduced intussusception in LS and OS groups, respectively. The conversion rate was 31% (eight cases). Five cases (19%) in the LS group and four cases (15%) in the OS group needed bowel resections. Operating time was longer in the LS group (P ≤ 0.006), and the postoperative complication rate was higher in the OS group (P ≤ 0.021). Discussion: Laparoscopy is a screening tool to determine the need for OS in surgical intussusception patients. Laparoscopy reduces the incidence of OS and its complications.

Single-port laparoscopic surgery for cecum cancer with intussusception: a case report

“…In terms of surgical techniques for intussusception, Jamshidi et al compared the postoperative complications of laparoscopic surgery (LS) and open surgery (OS) in patients with surgical bowel intussusception. They note that LS is customarily used a diagnostic tool to determine the need for OS, which decreases the incidence of OS and its complications [ 9 ]. In addition, Kang et al state that LS may cause adult bowel complications, and even more serious intraoperative complications than OS [ 10 ].…”