Summary:
Objective
To compare the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic resection of colorectal
diseases with open colectomy.
Methods
Two search strategies were devised to retrieve literature from the Medline,
Current Contents, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases until December 2010.
Inclusion of papers was determined using a predetermined protocol, independent
assessments by two reviewers, and a final consensus decision. English language
papers were selected. Acceptable study designs included randomized controlled
trials, controlled clinical trials, case series, or case reports. The papers
were tabulated and critically appraised in terms of methodology and design,
outcomes, and the possible influence of bias, confounding, and chance.
Results
Although laparoscopic resection of colorectal diseases was more expensive and
time-consuming, the procedure offered earlier recovery from surgery and reduced
pain. There was no significant difference between the conventional open
technique and the laparoscopic one for colon resection for cancer, concerning
the primary and secondary outcomes.
Conclusions
Laparoscopic resection for colon diseases has been prooved as a safe and
efficient method. It has statistically and clinically significant advantages
over open colectomies with respect to the length of hospital stay, earlier
recovery of bowel function , need for fewer analgesics. Morbidity and
mortality do not differ between two techniques.
Keywords:
Colectomy, Laparoscopics, Meta-analysis, Comparative evaluation, Cost trial
