Case controlled study of the hospital stay and return to full activity following laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery before and after the introduction of an enhanced recovery programme.

AIM: The short-term benefits of laparoscopic surgery are well established and in particular within an enhanced recovery programme. Early return to activity is to be expected but has not been quantified widely. The aim of this study was to measure the hospital stay and return to full activity following laparoscopic colorectal surgery and compare this with a matched group of patients undergoing open colorectal resections before and after the introduction of an enhanced recovery programme. METHOD: Retrospective analysis of all laparoscopic colorectal operations performed between January 2003 and June 2007 on an intention to treat basis compared with a matched group of patients undergoing elective open colorectal surgery at the same institution. RESULTS: The median hospital stay following 179 laparoscopic colorectal resections was 6 days whilst following 144 conventional open operations it was 8 days. Following the introduction of an enhanced recovery programme the hospital stay fell from 7 to 5 days and from 9 to 7 days for laparoscopic and open groups respectively. The median return to full activity from surgery for laparoscopic patients was 13 days in comparison to 56 days for patients undergoing open colorectal surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Following laparoscopic colorectal resection, patients can be expected to have a hospital stay of under a week and return to their usual activities as early as a week after discharge from hospital and < 2 weeks from surgery in comparison to patients undergoing open surgery who take 8 weeks or more to recover.

Comparison of short-and long-term outcomes following either insertion of self-expanding metallic stents or emergency surgery in malignant large bowel obstruction.

BACKGROUND: Self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) are now regarded as a safe and effective treatment for an acute obstructing colorectal cancer. SEMS insertion is an invasive procedure that could potentially worsen prognosis. This study assessed the short-and long-term outcomes in patients stented for acute large bowel obstruction and in patients who underwent primary emergency surgery. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 19 patients who underwent SEMS insertion and 23 patients who had primary emergency surgery for left-sided large bowel obstruction as the first presentation of colorectal cancer. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the 19 patients in the SEMS group and the 23 patients in the primary emergency surgery group in terms of demographics and tumour location and stage. Stent insertion was successful in 16 patients (84%). One patient died from a stent-related perforation and another had a stoma fashioned for stent migration. Stents were a definitive procedure in 2 patients with advanced disease and acted as a "bridge to surgery" in the remaining 12 patients. Compared to the primary surgery group, there was a trend towards a higher primary anastomosis rate in the SEMS group (p=0.08); there were no significant differences in length of hospital stay, 30-day mortality or complication rates between the groups. Long-term prognosis (estimated 3-year survival) did not differ significantly between the groups (p=0.54); this persisted when only curative resections were considered (p=0.80). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative stent insertion is a safe and effective treatment for large bowel obstruction, and may result in a higher primary anastomosis rate. Stent insertion does not seem to have a deleterious effect on prognosis.