Controlled trial of laparoscopic-assisted vs open colon resection in a porcine model.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Several series of laparoscopic colon resection have been reported in the literature with varied results; however, no controlled series of laparoscopic vs open colon resection has been reported. The purpose of this study was to determine the relative safety and adequacy of laparoscopic colon resection in a controlled trial using a porcine model. METHODS: Domestic pigs (n = 23) were randomly divided into two groups. Animals underwent either an open or laparoscopic-assisted segmental resection of the sigmoid colon. The open resections were performed through a 20-cm midline incision and the laparoscopic technique utilized five 12-mm ports. Laparoscopic resection took twice as long to complete as open resection (P < 0.001). Return of gastric function was significantly faster in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (P < 0.032). RESULTS: No significant differences were found in total length of resection, proximal or distal margins, number of lymph nodes recovered, length of mesenteric vessel resected, or time to return of bowel function. At vivisection, more adhesions to the abdominal wall were noted in the open group (P < 0.002). One death occurred in the laparoscopic group 2 h postoperatively (8.3% mortality) while all open group pigs survived. However, there was no statistically significant difference in mortality rates by chi-square analysis (P > 0.5). CONCLUSIONS: Despite longer operative time, laparoscopic intervention is technically feasible, safe, and may offer significant postoperative benefits due to fewer abdominal adhesions.