What influences conversion to open surgery during laparoscopic colorectal resection?

INTRODUCTION: We analyzed the risk of morbidity and mortality in laparoscopic (Lap) conversion for colorectal surgery across a group of subspecialist surgeons with expertise in minimally invasive techniques. METHODS: We reviewed prospective data patients who underwent abdominopelvic procedures from 7/1/2007 to 12/31/2016 at a tertiary care facility. We identified procedures that were converted from Lap to open (Lap converted). Lap converted procedures were matched to Lap completed and open procedures based on elective versus urgent and surgeon. We also abstracted patient demographics and outcomes at 30 days using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program defined adverse event list. We analyzed outcomes across these groups (Lap converted, Lap completed, open procedures) with x2 and t tests and used the Bonferroni Correction to account for multiple statistical testing. RESULTS: From a database of 12,454 procedures, we identified 100 Lap converted procedures and matched them to 305 open procedures and 339 Lap completed procedures. In our dataset of abdominopelvic procedures, Lap techniques were attempted in 49 ± 1%. We noted a higher risk of aggerate morbidity following open procedures (33 ± 10) as compared to Lap converted (29 ± 17%) and the matched Lap completed procedures (18 ± 8%; p < 0.001). Converted cases had the longest operative time (222 ± 102 min), compared to lap completed (177 ± 110), and open procedures (183 ± 89). There were no differences in mortality, sepsis complications, anastomotic leaks, or unplanned returns to the operating room across the three operative groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although aggregate morbidity of Lap converted procedures is higher than in Lap completed procedures, it remains less than in matched open procedures. Compared to Lap completed procedures, the additional morbidity of Lap converted procedures appears to be related to additional surgical site infection risk. Our data suggest that surgeons should not necessarily be influenced by additional complications associated with conversion when contemplating complex laparoscopic colorectal procedures.

Optimal treatment and complications of patients with the perforated upper gastrointestinal tract.

PURPOSE: The perforation of the upper gastrointestinal tract is still associated with a high risk of complications and mortality. We aimed to evaluate the optimal treatment and post-treatment complications for this condition. METHODS: This was a retrospective, single-center study conducted between 2010 and 2019. We analyzed 50 patients with intraperitoneal free air caused by peptic ulcer (44 cases) or cancer (six cases). RESULTS: All patients initially received either conservative therapy (n = 7) or surgery (n = 43). The nonsurgically cured patients were significantly younger and had mild peritonitis and also had a shorter hospital stay. Two patients were converted to surgery due to worsening symptoms, and one of them was elderly and had a long perforation-to-treatment time. Regarding postoperative complications, patients with Grade II-V (n = 21) were significantly older and had a poorer physical status, longer perforation-to-surgery time, and higher preoperative CRP and lactate than those with Grade 0-I (n = 24). Multivariable analyses identified elevated preoperative lactate as an independent risk factor for postoperative complications. The patients with noncurative surgery for perforated advanced gastric cancer all died within 1 year after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Consideration should be given to the nonsurgical indications in elderly and delayed treatment patients and the postoperative outcomes of patients with preoperatively elevated lactate levels.

Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy and the cost of conversion.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is preferred for distal pancreatectomy but is not always attempted due to the risk of conversion to open. We hypothesized that the total cost for MIS converted to open procedures would be comparable to those that started open. METHODS: A prospectively collected institutional registry (2011-2017) was reviewed for demographic, clinical, and perioperative cost data for patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy. RESULTS: There were 80 patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy: 41 open, 39 MIS (11 laparoscopic and 28 robotic). Conversion to open occurred in 14 of 39 (36%, 3 laparoscopic and 11 robotic). Length of stay was shorter for the MIS completed (6 days; range, 3-8), and MIS converted to open (7 days; range, 4-10) groups, compared with open (10 days; range, 5-36; P = .003). Laparoscopic cases were the least expensive (P = .02). Robotic converted to open procedures had the highest operating room cost. However, the total cost for robotic converted to open cohort was similar to the open cohort due to cost savings associated with a shorter length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the higher intraoperative costs of robotic surgery, there is no significant overall financial penalty for conversion to open. Financial considerations should not play a role in selecting a robotic or open approach.

Perioperative outcomes after laparoscopic cholecystectomy in elderly patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is increasingly performed in an ever ageing population; however, the risks are poorly quantified. The study aims to review the current evidence to quantify further the postoperative risk of cholecystectomy in the elderly population compared to younger patients. METHOD: A systematic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library databases were conducted including studies reporting laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the elderly population. A meta-analysis was reported in accordance with the recommendations of the Cochrane Library and PRISMA guidelines. Primary outcome was overall complications and secondary outcomes were conversion to open surgery, bile leaks, postoperative mortality and length of stay. RESULTS: This review identified 99 studies incorporating 326,517 patients. Increasing age was significantly associated with increased rates of overall complications (OR 2.37, CI95% 2.00-2.78), major complication (OR 1.79, CI95% 1.45-2.20), risk of conversion to open cholecystectomy (OR 2.17, CI95% 1.84-2.55), risk of bile leaks (OR 1.50, CI95% 1.07-2.10), risk of postoperative mortality (OR 7.20, CI95% 4.41-11.73) and was significantly associated with increased length of stay (MD 2.21 days, CI95% 1.24-3.18). CONCLUSION: Postoperative outcomes such as overall and major complications appear to be significantly higher in all age cut-offs in this meta-analysis. This study demonstrated there is a sevenfold increase in perioperative mortality which increases by tenfold in patients > 80 years old. This study appears to confirm preconceived suspicions of higher risks in elderly patients undergoing cholecystectomy and may aid treatment planning and informed consent.

Predictors and outcomes of converted minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy: a propensity score matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Data-driven patient selection guidelines are not available to optimize outcomes in minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD). We aimed to define risk factors associated with conversion from MIPD to open PD and to determine the impact of conversion on post-operative outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of MIPD using NSQIP from 2014 to 2015. Propensity score was used to match patients who underwent completed MIPD to converted MIPD. RESULTS: 467 patients were included: 375 (80.3%) MIPD and 92 (19.7%) converted. Converted patients were more often male (64% vs. 52%, p = 0.030), had higher rates of dyspnea (10% vs. 3%, p = 0.009), underwent more vascular (44% vs. 14%, p < 0.001) or multivisceral resection (19% vs. 6%, p = 0.0005), and were more likely attempted laparoscopically compared to robotically (76% vs. 51%, p < 0.001). Robotic approach was independently associated with reduced risk of conversion (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23-0.69), while male gender (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.02-2.84), history of dyspnea (OR 3.85, 95% CI 1.49-9.96), vascular resection (OR 4.32, 95% CI 2.53-7.37), and multivisceral resection (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.05-4.52) were associated with increased risk. Major complications were more common in converted patients (68% vs. 37%, p < 0.001). Converted patients had increased odds of non-home discharge (OR 3.25, 95% CI 1.06-9.97) and an associated increased length of stay of 3 days (95% CI 0.1-6.7). CONCLUSION: Patients with a history of dyspnea or tumors requiring vascular or multivisceral resection were at increased risk of conversion, and the robotic platform was associated with a lower rate of conversion. Conversion was independently associated with increased overall complications, increased length of stay, and non-home discharge.

Incidence, associated risk factors, and impact of conversion to laparotomy in elective minimally invasive sigmoidectomy for diverticular disease.

BACKGROUND: Benefits of minimally invasive surgical approaches to diverticular disease are limited by conversion to open surgery. A comprehensive analysis that includes risk factors for conversion may improve patient outcomes. METHODS: The US Premier Healthcare Database was used to identify patients undergoing primary elective sigmoidectomy for diverticular disease between 2013 and September 2015. Propensity-score matching was used to compare conversion rates for laparoscopic and robotic-assisted sigmoidectomy. Patient, clinical, hospital, and surgeon characteristics associated with conversion were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression, providing odds ratios for comparative risks. Clinical and economic impacts were assessed comparing surgical outcomes in minimally invasive converted, completed, and open cases. RESULTS: The study population included 13,240 sigmoidectomy patients (8076 laparoscopic, 1301 robotic-assisted, 3863 open). Analysis of propensity-score-matched patients showed higher conversion rates in laparoscopic (13.6%) versus robotic-assisted (8.3%) surgeries (p < 0.001). Greater risk of conversion was associated with patients who were Black compared with Caucasian, were Medicaid-insured versus Commercially insured, had a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 2 versus 0, were obese, had concomitant colon resection, had peritoneal abscess or fistula, or had lysis of adhesions. Significantly lower risk of conversion was associated with robotic-assisted sigmoidectomy (versus laparoscopic, OR 0.58), hand-assisted surgery, higher surgeon volume, and surgeons who were colorectal specialties. Converted cases had longer operating room time, length of stay, and more postoperative complications compared with minimally invasive completed and open cases. Readmission and blood transfusion rates were higher in converted compared with minimally invasive completed cases, and similar to open surgeries. Differences in inflation-adjusted total ($4971), direct ($2760), and overhead ($2212) costs were significantly higher for converted compared with minimally invasive completed cases. CONCLUSIONS: Conversion from minimally invasive to open sigmoidectomy for diverticular disease results in additional morbidity and healthcare costs. Consideration of modifiable risk factors for conversion may attenuate adverse associated outcomes.

The Role of Bowel Preparation in Open, Minimally Invasive, and Converted-to-Open Colectomy.

BACKGROUND: Bowel preparation before colectomy is considered an effective strategy to decrease postoperative complications. However, data regarding the effect of bowel preparation in patients undergoing minimally invasive colectomy are limited. The aim of this study was to investigate the role of different bowel preparation strategies in patients undergoing open, minimally invasive, and converted-to-open elective colectomies. METHODS: We identified 39,355 patients who underwent elective colectomy from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program colectomy-targeted database (2012-2016). Multivariate logistic regression models were used to assess the impact of different bowel preparation strategies on postoperative complications and mortality in three subapproach groups: open (n = 12,141), minimally invasive (n = 23,057), and converted to open (n = 4157). RESULTS: Overall, a total of 10,066 (25.6%) patients received no preparation (NP), 11,646 (29.5%) mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) alone, 1664 (4.2%) antibiotic bowel preparation (ABP) alone, and 15,979 (40.6%) MBP + ABP. Compared with NP, MBP + ABP showed the strongest protective effects. MBP + ABP was associated with reduced risk of major complications (odds ratio [OR] = 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55-0.66), infectious complications (OR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.46-0.54), any complications (OR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.51-0.60), 30-d mortality (OR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.48-0.96), anastomotic leak (OR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.43-0.58), and length of stay ≥ 4 d (OR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.61-0.67) in overall population. These protective effects, except for 30-d mortality, were observed in open, minimally invasive, and converted-to-open groups. When the analysis was limited to robotic surgery only, MBP + ABP was only associated with reduced risk of major complications (OR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.38-0.97) compared with NP. The protective effects remained similar over the study time period. CONCLUSIONS: MBP + ABP is a preferred preoperative strategy in open, minimally invasive, and converted-to-open colectomy.

Laparoscopic appendicectomy is superior to open surgery for complicated appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: Over the last three decades, laparoscopic appendicectomy (LA) has become the routine treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis. The role of laparoscopic surgery for complicated appendicitis (gangrenous and/or perforated) remains controversial due to concerns of an increased incidence of post-operative intra-abdominal abscesses (IAA) in LA compared to open appendicectomy (OA). The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of LA versus OA for complicated appendicitis. METHODS: A systematic literature search following PRISMA guidelines was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane Database for randomised controlled trials (RCT) and case-control studies (CCS) that compared LA with OA for complicated appendicitis. RESULTS: Data from three RCT and 30 CCS on 6428 patients (OA 3,254, LA 3,174) were analysed. There was no significant difference in the rate of IAA (LA = 6.1% vs. OA = 4.6%; OR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.71-1.47, p = 0.91). LA for complicated appendicitis has decreased overall post-operative morbidity (LA = 15.5% vs. OA = 22.7%; OR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.31-0.59, p < 0.0001), wound infection, (LA = 4.7% vs. OA = 12.8%; OR = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.19-0.36, p < 0.001), respiratory complications (LA = 1.8% vs. OA = 6.4%; OR = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.13-0.49, p < 0.001), post-operative ileus/small bowel obstruction (LA = 3.1% vs. OA = 3.6%; OR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.42-1.0, p = 0.048) and mortality rate (LA = 0% vs. OA = 0.4%; OR = 0.15, 95% CI: 0.04-0.61, p = 0.008). LA has a significantly shorter hospital stay (6.4 days vs. 8.9 days, p = 0.02) and earlier resumption of solid food (2.7 days vs. 3.7 days, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: These results clearly demonstrate that LA for complicated appendicitis has the same incidence of IAA but a significantly reduced morbidity, mortality and length of hospital stay compared with OA. The finding of complicated appendicitis at laparoscopy is not an indication for conversion to open surgery. LA should be the preferred treatment for patients with complicated appendicitis.

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic repeat liver resection after open liver resection: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic repeat liver resection (LRLR) still represents a challenge for surgeons especially in case with previous open liver surgery. The aim of the study is to perform a systematic review of the current literature to investigate the feasibility of LRLR after open liver resection (OLR) for liver diseases. METHODS: A computerized search was performed for all English language studies evaluating LRLR. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the short-term outcomes in comparative studies between LRLR with previous laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and OLR. RESULTS: From the initial 55 manuscripts, 8 studies including 3 comparative studies between LRLR after OLR and LLR were investigated. There was a total of 108 patients. Considering initial surgery, the extent of initial liver resection was major liver resection in 20% of patients in whom it was reported. In all the patients, the most frequent primary histology was hepatocellular carcinoma, followed by colorectal liver metastasis. A half of reported patients had severe adhesions at the time of LRLR. The median operative time for LRLR was ranged from 120 to 413 min and the median blood loss ranged from 100 to 400 mL. There were 11% of the patients conversions to open surgery, hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery, or tumor ablation. The overall postoperative morbidity was 15% of all the patients, and there was no postoperative mortality. The median postoperative hospital stay was ranged from 3.5 to 10 days. The meta-analysis shows that LRLR after OLR is associated with a longer operative time and a more important blood loss compared to LRLR after LLR. However, no difference between LRLR after OLR and LLR was shown as far as hospital stay and morbidity rate are concerned. CONCLUSIONS: LRLR after OLR has been described in eight articles with favorable short-term outcomes in highly selected patients.

Retroperitoneoscopic partial nephrectomy in children: a multicentric international comparative study between lateral versus prone approach.

BACKGROUND: Very limited informations are currently available about the best approach to perform retroperitoneoscopic surgery. This multicentric international study aimed to compare the outcome of lateral versus prone approach for retroperitoneoscopic partial nephrectomy (RPN) in children. METHODS: The records of 164 patients underwent RPN in 7 international centers of pediatric surgery over the last 5 years were retrospectively reviewed. Sixty-one patients (42 girls and 19 boys, average age 3.8 years) were operated using lateral approach (G1), whereas 103 patients (66 girls and 37 boys, average age 3.0 years) underwent prone RPN (G2). The two groups were compared in regard to operative time, postoperative outcome, postoperative complications, and re-operations. RESULTS: The average operative time was significantly shorter in G2 (99 min) compared to G1 (160 min) (p = 0.001). Only 2 lateral RPN required conversion to open surgery. There was no significant difference between the two groups as for intraoperative complications (G1:2/61, 3.3%; G2:6/103, 5.8%; p = 0.48), postoperative complications (G1:9/61, 14.7%; G2:17/103, 16.5%; p = 0.80), and re-operations (G1:2/61, 3.3%; G2:4/103, 3.8%; p = 0.85). Regarding postoperative complications, the incidence of symptomatic residual distal ureteric stumps (RDUS) was significantly higher in G2 (7/103, 6.8%) compared to G1 (1/61, 1.6%) (p = 0.001). Most re-operations (4/6, 66.6%) were performed to remove a RDUS . CONCLUSIONS: Both lateral and prone approach are feasible and reasonably safe to perform RPN in children but the superiority of one approach over another is not still confirmed. Although prone technique resulted faster compared to lateral approach, the choice of the technique remains dependent on the surgeon's personal preference and experience. Our results would suggest that the lateral approach should be preferred to the prone technique when a longer ureterectomy is required, for example in cases of vesico-ureteral reflux into the affected kidney moiety, in order to avoid to leave a long ureteric stump that could become symptomatic and require a re-intervention.

Factors associated with prolonged length of stay following robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy.

INTRODUCTION: To prospectively analyze the association of clinical and operative variables on patient length of hospital stay (LOS) following robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and develop an accurate clinical-based scoring system to predict prolonged LOS following RAPN. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed 304 consecutive RAPNs performed by a single surgeon. Prolonged LOS was defined as greater than 3 days of hospitalization postoperatively. Preoperative clinical factors and operative variables were analyzed for association with LOS. After adjusting for multiple testing, p ≤ 0.004 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: LOS was 1 day in 17 (5.6%) patients, 2 days in 136 (44.7%) patients, 3 days in 89 (29.3%) patients, and more than 3 days in 62 (20.4%) patients. Lower preoperative hemoglobin (p = 0.004), total operative time (p < 0.001), estimated blood loss (EBL) (p < 0.001), intraoperative complications or conversion (p < 0.001), and renal mass size (p < 0.001) were associated with prolonged LOS. EBL and total operative time were most predictive of prolonged LOS and were used to create the BLOT (blood loss and operative time) predictive scoring system. Blot scores ranged from 0 to 5, to predict prolonged LOS. We observed prolonged LOS in 4.3%, 9.6%, 25.6%, 47.1%, 50.0%, and 100% of patients with scores of 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Operative time and estimated blood loss are most predictive of prolonged LOS following RAPN. Using these variables, the BLOT score accurately predicts prolonged LOS following RAPN.

The requirement of extracorporeal circulation system for transluminal aortic valve replacement: Do we really need it in the catheterization laboratory?

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is the mainstay for treating high-risk patients with aortic stenosis. As the TAVR procedures worldwide keep increasing, it is inevitable that more issues and complications will arise. Such a complication that merits attention is the conversion of TAVR into open-heart surgery and the necessity this complication creates to have an extracorporeal circulation system in the catheterization laboratory. This review contains an analysis of all major randomized trials and registries on the number and cause of TAVR procedures that ended up in open-heart surgery and presents data to challenge the prerequisite of extracorporeal circulation system in the cath laboratory. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The impact of conversion on the risk of major complication following laparoscopic colonic surgery: an international, multicentre prospective audit.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopy has now been implemented as a standard of care for elective colonic resection around the world. During the adoption period, studies showed that conversion may be detrimental to patients, with poorer outcomes than both laparoscopic completed or planned open surgery. The primary aim of this study was to determine whether laparoscopic conversion was associated with a higher major complication rate than planned open surgery in contemporary, international practice. METHODS: Combined analysis of the European Society of Coloproctology 2017 and 2015 audits. Patients were included if they underwent elective resection of a colonic segment from the caecum to the rectosigmoid junction with primary anastomosis. The primary outcome measure was the 30-day major complication rate, defined as Clavien-Dindo grade III-V. RESULTS: Of 3980 patients, 64% (2561/3980) underwent laparoscopic surgery and a laparoscopic conversion rate of 14% (359/2561). The major complication rate was highest after open surgery (laparoscopic 7.4%, converted 9.7%, open 11.6%, P < 0.001). After case mix adjustment in a multilevel model, only planned open (and not laparoscopic converted) surgery was associated with increased major complications in comparison to laparoscopic surgery (OR 1.64, 1.27-2.11, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Appropriate laparoscopic conversion should not be considered a treatment failure in modern practice. Conversion does not appear to place patients at increased risk of complications vs planned open surgery, supporting broadening of selection criteria for attempted laparoscopy in elective colonic resection.

The effect of increasing body mass index on laparoscopic surgery for colon and rectal cancer.

AIM: Obesity is common in Western countries and its prevalence is increasing. Colorectal cancer is common, and surgery for colorectal cancer is technically more challenging in obese patients. Laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer has been shown to be oncologically equivalent, with improved short- term outcomes. Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer has proven technically challenging, and recent results have raised concerns about oncological equivalence. Our aim was to evaluate the effect of body mass index (BMI) on the clinical and oncological outcomes of surgery for colorectal cancer, including the rate at which laparoscopic surgery is attempted and the rate at which laparoscopic surgery is converted to open surgery. METHOD: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from two tertiary institutions was performed. Data were obtained from the Cabrini Monash University colorectal neoplasia database for patients having surgical resection for colon and rectal cancers between 1 January 2010 and 30 June 2015. Surgical and medical complications, tumour recurrence and overall survival and laparoscopic surgery and conversion rates were investigated. RESULTS: This large case series of 1464 patients undergoing elective surgery for colorectal cancer has demonstrated that an elevated BMI is associated with a lower likelihood of attempting laparoscopic surgery and a higher conversion rate to open surgery when laparoscopy is attempted. Conversion was 1.9 times more likely in obese patients with colon cancer and 4.1 times more likely in obese patients with rectal cancer. The critical BMI for colon cancer patients was > 35 kg/m2 , and for rectal cancer patients > 30 kg/m2 . Obesity is also associated with increased rates of surgical complications, including anastomotic leakage and wound complications. Pathological parameters, tumour recurrence and survival were not affected by elevated BMI. CONCLUSION: In the surgical management of colorectal cancer, obesity is associated with a lower likelihood of laparoscopic surgery being attempted, a higher likelihood of conversion to open surgery when laparoscopic surgery is attempted, and a higher rate of surgical complications.

Transition from laparoscopic to retroperitoneoscopic approach for live donor nephrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy has become the standard of care due to multiple benefits. Currently, there are various techniques employed with two different approaches: transperitoneal (TLDN) or retroperitoneoscopic (RLDN) approach. There is a lack of data to determine which technique is superior, although the RLDN offers an anatomical advantage by avoidance of manipulation of the intraperitoneal organs. The aims of this study were to explore the merits of RLDN to TLDN and assess the learning curve of transition from TLDN to RLDN. METHODS: From January 2010 to February 2017, 106 live donor nephrectomies were performed: 56 by TLDN and 50 by RLDN. Data on patient demographics, perioperative parameters, analgesic consumption, pain scores, and kidney graft function were collected and analysed. Data were compared with a Student's t test or Mann-Whitney test. A CUSUM analysis was performed to investigate the learning curve. RESULTS: All live donor nephrectomies were successful with no conversion to open surgery. There was no blood transfusion, readmission, or mortality. No postoperative complications were graded over Clavien II. Kidney function was comparable in both groups. The follow-up period ranged from 3 to 78 months. CONCLUSION: Retroperitoneoscopic live donor nephrectomy is a safe approach with comparable results to TLDN. RLDN has an anatomical advantage as it avoids manipulating the intraperitoneal organs and retains a virgin abdomen and hence translates to a lower perioperative complication risk.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: which factors are related to open conversion? Lessons learned from 68 consecutive procedures in a high-volume pancreatic center.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy represents a difficult surgical procedure with an high conversion rate to open procedure. The factors related to its difficulty and conversion to open distal pancreatectomy were rarely reported. The aim of the present study was to identify which factors are related to conversion from laparoscopic to open distal pancreatectomy. METHODS: A retrospective study of a prospective database of 68 patients who underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was conducted at a high-volume center by pancreatic surgeons experienced with laparoscopic surgery. Pre-intra and postoperative data were collected. Patients who completed a laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy were compared with those who needed a conversion to the open approach as regard demographic, clinical, radiological, and surgical data. Univariate and multivariate analyses were carried out. RESULTS: Univariate analysis suggested that the site of the lesion, the extension of pancreatic resection, and the requirement for an extended procedure to adjacent organs were significantly associated with the risk of conversion to the open approach. Multivariate analysis showed that only the extension of the pancreatic resection (subtotal pancreatectomy) was significantly related to the odds of conversion [odds ratio (OR) 19.5; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1-32.3; P = 0.038]. Preoperative suspicion of malignancy differed between the two groups; however, this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.078). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the limitations of the study, only the extension of pancreatic resection seemed to be the main factor related to conversion during laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.

Impact of laparoscopy in patients aged over 70 years requiring distal pancreatectomy: a French multicentric comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Few data are available concerning short-term results of minimally invasive surgery in patients > 70 years old requiring distal pancreatectomy. The aim of this study was to compare short-term results after laparoscopic (LDP) versus open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) in this subgroup of patients. METHODS: All patients > 70 years who underwent distal pancreatectomy in 3 expert centers between 1995 and 2017 were included and data were retrospectively analyzed. Demographic, intraoperative data and postoperative outcomes in LDP and ODP groups were compared. RESULTS: A distal pancreatectomy was performed in 109 elderly patients; LDP group included 53 patients while ODP group included 56. There were 55 (50.5%) males and 54 (49.5%) women with a median age of 75 years (range 70-87). Fifty (45.9%) patients were 70-74, 40 (36.7%) patients were 75-79, and 19 (17.4%) patients were over 80 years. Nine (8.2%) patients required conversion to open surgery. The median operative time was not different between LDP and ODP (204 vs. 220 min, p = 0.62). The intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in the LDP group (238 ± 312 vs. 425 ± 582 ml, p = 0.009) with no difference regarding the intraoperative transfusion rate. 90-day mortality (0 vs. 5%, p = 0.42), overall complication (45.4 vs. 51.8%, p = 0.53), major complication (18.2 vs. 12.5%, p = 0.43), grade B/C pancreatic fistula (6.8 vs. 7.1%, p = 0.71), were comparable in the 2 groups. Only postoperative confusion rate was significantly lower in the LDP group (4.5 vs. 25%, p = 0.01). Median length of stay was significantly lower in the LDP group (14 ± 10 vs. 16 ± 11 days, p = 0.04). R0 resection was performed in 94% of LDP patients and 89% in ODP patients without significant difference (p = 0.73). CONCLUSIONS: The laparoscopic approach seems to reduce blood loss, postoperative confusion, and length of stay in elderly patients requiring distal pancreatectomy.

Does the number of operating specialists influence the conversion rate and outcomes after laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery?

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic techniques in colorectal surgery have been widely utilised due to short-term patient benefits but conversion to open surgery is associated with adverse short- and long-term patient outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of dual specialist operating on the conversion rate and patient outcomes following laparoscopic colorectal surgery. METHODS: A prospectively populated colorectal cancer surgery database was reviewed. Cases were grouped into single or dual consultant procedures. Cluster analysis and odds ratio (OR) were used to identify risk factors for conversion. Primary outcome measures were conversion to open and five year overall survival (OS) calculated using the Kaplan-Meier log-rank method. RESULTS: 750 patients underwent laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection between 2002 and 2015 (median age 73, 319 (42.5%) female, 282 (37.6%) rectal malignancies, 135 patients (18%) had two consultants). The single surgeon conversion rate was 20.4% compared to 5.5% for dual operating (OR 4.4, 95% CI 1.87-10.2, p < 0.001). There were no demographic or tumour differences between the laparoscopic/converted and number of surgeon groups. Two-step cluster analysis identified cluster I (lower risk) 406 patients, 8% converted and cluster II (higher risk) 261 patients, conversion rate 30%. Median follow-up was 48 months (range 0-168). Five-year OS was significantly inferior for both converted and single surgeon cases (63% vs. 77%, p < 0.001 and 61% vs. 70%, p = 0.033, respectively). CONCLUSION: In selected colorectal cancer patients operated by fully trained laparoscopic surgeons, we observed a reduction in conversion with associated long-term survival benefit from dual operating specialists.

Intraoperative conversion does not affect the oncological outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy for treatment of esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to summarize the causes and implications of intraoperative conversion from minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) to open thoracotomy, and to evaluate the effect on long-term survival. METHODS: There were 293 thoracoscopic esophagectomies for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) of the thoracic esophagus performed by the authors from September 2009 to August 2015. Totally, 257 patients were enrolled in this study. These patients were divided into two groups (those underwent complete MIE and those converted to open thoracotomy) and then compared. A standardized preoperative evaluation, as well as a postoperative method of following at a regular frequency were adopted for all of these patients. The clinicopathologic characteristics and the perioperative variables were retrospectively analyzed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors. And the Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare survival differences. RESULTS: There were 231 patients (89.9%) underwent successful thoracoscopic esophagectomy (Group 1), and 26 cases (10.1%) required conversion to open procedure (Group 2). The majority of conversion (73.1%, 19/26) occurred in the initial 100 cases. No significant difference in background or clinicopathologic factors between the two groups was observed, but patients in Group 2 had significantly longer operative time and more operative blood loss. Among the 26 patients of Group 2, there were nine cases that need emergent conversion for various reasons. And the most common cause for emergent conversion was intraoperative bleeding. Univariate and multivariate analyses all demonstrated that intraoperative conversion did not significantly influence the overall or recurrence-free survival of these patients. CONCLUSIONS: Univariate analysis and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression analysis indicated that intraoperative conversion did not significantly influence the OS and RFS rate of these patients. Our results demonstrated that the intraoperative conversion did not affect the long-term survival of patients underwent MIE for ESCC.

Risk factors and consequences of conversion to open surgery in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration.

BACKGROUND: Although laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has shown many obvious advantages compared with open surgery in the treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stones, it remains unclear regarding risk factors of conversion from LCBDE to open surgery and whether conversion will counteract the advantages of LCBDE. The purpose of this study was to explore risk factors and consequences of conversion from LCBDE to open surgery. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted, using a database of 644 patients with LCBDE between 2011 and 2017. Risk factors for conversion to open surgery were determined based on univariable and multivariable analysis. The consequences of conversion to open surgery in LCBDE were analyzed. RESULTS: Conversion was required in 27 (4.2%) of 644 patients undergoing LCBDE. Independent risk factors for conversion were as follows: the max diameter of stones in CBD (odds ratio (OR) 2.234, 95%CI 1.031-4.842; p = 0.042), edema of CBD (OR 12.530, 95%CI 4.633-33.887; p < 0.001), and multiple stones in CBD (OR 3.438, 95%CI: 1.133-10.428; p = 0.029). These risk factors and their combined were good predictors for conversion in LCBDE. More blood loss, longer operative time, longer postoperative hospital stay, and higher incision infection were identified in patients with conversion than those without conversion. However, no significant differences were observed regarding mortality, readmission within 30 days, reoperation, bile leakage, and intra-abdominal fluid collection. CONCLUSION: Conversion to open surgery in LCBDE was associated with acute edematous CBD with large and multiple stones. Conversion can offset the advantages of LCBDE.