Laparoscopic bowel surgery registry (original) (raw)

Abstract

Laparoscopic surgery has evolved rapidly since 1989. The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, the Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons, and the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer jointly sponsored a registry to identify as early as possible the patterns of practice and acute complications of laparoscopic colectomy. METHODS: Cases were voluntarily registered by community and academic surgeons. Information was entered in the EPI-5 database. RESULTS: One thousand fifty-six cases were contributed by 118 surgeons; 763 patients were completed laparoscopically. The most common indication for surgery was cancer in 453 patients. The right colon (n=364) and sigmoid (n=294) were most frequently resected. Respondents felt adequate cancer resections were performed. Although several unique complications were noted, intraoperative complications were similar in type and frequency to open cases. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic colorectal surgery can be performed with acceptable complications. It remains unclear if this approach is adequate for long-term management of colon and rectal cancer.

References

  1. Dubois F. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: historical perspective and personal experience. Surg Laparosc Endosc 1991;1:52–7.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  2. Meyers W and the Southern Surgeons Club. A prospective analysis of 1,518 laparoscopic cholecystectomies performed by southern U. S. surgeons. N Engl J Med 1991;324:1073–8.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  3. Ferguson CM, Rattner DW, Warshaw AL. Bile duct injury in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc 1992;2:1–7.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  4. Phillips EH, Franklin M, Carroll BJ,et al. Laparoscopic colectomy. Ann Surg 1992;216:703–7.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  5. Zucker KA, Pietcher DE, Martin DT, Ford RS. Laparoscopic-assisted colon resection. Surg Endosc 1994;8:12–18.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  6. Binderow SR, Cohen SM, Wexner SD, Nogueras JJ. Must early postoperative oral intake be limited to laparoscopy? Dis Colon Rectum 1994;37:584–9.
    PubMed Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Souther California, Health Care Consultation Center, 1510 San Pablo Street, Suite 514, 90033, Los Angeles, California
    Adrian E. Ortega M.D. & Robert W. Beart Jr. M.D.
  2. Chicago, Illinois
    Herand Abcarian M.D., F.A.C.S.
  3. The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Arlington Heights, Illinois
    Glenn D. Steele Jr. M.D., Ph.D.
  4. The American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer, Chicago, Illinois
    David P. Winchester M.D.
  5. The American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons, Los Angeles, California
    Frederick L. Greene M.D.

Authors

  1. Adrian E. Ortega M.D.
  2. Robert W. Beart Jr. M.D.
  3. Glenn D. Steele Jr. M.D., Ph.D.
  4. David P. Winchester M.D.
  5. Frederick L. Greene M.D.
  6. Herand Abcarian M.D., F.A.C.S.

Additional information

Read at the meeting of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Orlando, Florida, May 8 to 13, 1994.

About this article

Cite this article

Ortega, A.E., Beart, R.W., Steele, G.D. et al. Laparoscopic bowel surgery registry.Dis Colon Rectum 38, 681–686 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02048022

Download citation

Key words