Is there a role for a strict incision length criterion for determining conversions during laparoscopic colorectal resection?

Anaeze C. Offodile, Emre Balik, Aviad Hoffman, Victor Moon, Raymond Baxter, Michael Grieco, Dovid Moradi, Ik Yong Kim, Abu Nasar, Vesna Cekic, Daniel L. Feingold, Tracey D. Arnell, Emina Huang, Richard L. Whelan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose Theres no consensus about what defines a conversion for laparoscopic-assisted colorectal resection (LACR). This studys goal was to assess the utility of a strict incision length (IL) definition of conversion (incision > 7 cm) and compare it with results obtained when the surgeon determined (SD) if a LACR had been successfully completed. Methods. The demographic and perioperative data for 580 elective LACRs were reviewed. The short-term outcomes for each conversion definition were determined and compared. Results. Conversion rates were 22% using the IL definition and 16% via the SD method. Both methods detected significant differences between completed and converted groups regarding the following: incision size, hospital stay, time to flatus, bowel movement, and regular diet as well as rate of wound infection and ileus. The IL method alone detected significant differences in the rate of pulmonary complications and BMI between the completed and converted groups. Conclusions. The 2 methods yielded similar results for most parameters. The IL method better separated the patients in regard to 2 parameters. This method is objective and easy to apply; however, it may discriminate against obese patients whose extraction incisions are often longer. A conversion definition that considers BMI and IL is needed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)120-126
Number of pages7
JournalSurgical Innovation
Volume17
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2010 Jun

Fingerprint

Flatulence
Ileus
Wound Infection
Length of Stay
Demography
Diet
Lung
Surgeons

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery

Cite this

Offodile, Anaeze C. ; Balik, Emre ; Hoffman, Aviad ; Moon, Victor ; Baxter, Raymond ; Grieco, Michael ; Moradi, Dovid ; Kim, Ik Yong ; Nasar, Abu ; Cekic, Vesna ; Feingold, Daniel L. ; Arnell, Tracey D. ; Huang, Emina ; Whelan, Richard L. / Is there a role for a strict incision length criterion for determining conversions during laparoscopic colorectal resection?. In: Surgical Innovation. 2010 ; Vol. 17, No. 2. pp. 120-126.
@article{e49320193fc04a6e8d11c7e5cddaca8f,
title = "Is there a role for a strict incision length criterion for determining conversions during laparoscopic colorectal resection?",
abstract = "Purpose Theres no consensus about what defines a conversion for laparoscopic-assisted colorectal resection (LACR). This studys goal was to assess the utility of a strict incision length (IL) definition of conversion (incision > 7 cm) and compare it with results obtained when the surgeon determined (SD) if a LACR had been successfully completed. Methods. The demographic and perioperative data for 580 elective LACRs were reviewed. The short-term outcomes for each conversion definition were determined and compared. Results. Conversion rates were 22{\%} using the IL definition and 16{\%} via the SD method. Both methods detected significant differences between completed and converted groups regarding the following: incision size, hospital stay, time to flatus, bowel movement, and regular diet as well as rate of wound infection and ileus. The IL method alone detected significant differences in the rate of pulmonary complications and BMI between the completed and converted groups. Conclusions. The 2 methods yielded similar results for most parameters. The IL method better separated the patients in regard to 2 parameters. This method is objective and easy to apply; however, it may discriminate against obese patients whose extraction incisions are often longer. A conversion definition that considers BMI and IL is needed.",
author = "Offodile, {Anaeze C.} and Emre Balik and Aviad Hoffman and Victor Moon and Raymond Baxter and Michael Grieco and Dovid Moradi and Kim, {Ik Yong} and Abu Nasar and Vesna Cekic and Feingold, {Daniel L.} and Arnell, {Tracey D.} and Emina Huang and Whelan, {Richard L.}",
year = "2010",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1177/1553350610366715",
language = "English",
volume = "17",
pages = "120--126",
journal = "Surgical Innovation",
issn = "1553-3506",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "2",

}

Offodile, AC, Balik, E, Hoffman, A, Moon, V, Baxter, R, Grieco, M, Moradi, D, Kim, IY, Nasar, A, Cekic, V, Feingold, DL, Arnell, TD, Huang, E & Whelan, RL 2010, 'Is there a role for a strict incision length criterion for determining conversions during laparoscopic colorectal resection?', Surgical Innovation, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 120-126. https://doi.org/10.1177/1553350610366715

Is there a role for a strict incision length criterion for determining conversions during laparoscopic colorectal resection? / Offodile, Anaeze C.; Balik, Emre; Hoffman, Aviad; Moon, Victor; Baxter, Raymond; Grieco, Michael; Moradi, Dovid; Kim, Ik Yong; Nasar, Abu; Cekic, Vesna; Feingold, Daniel L.; Arnell, Tracey D.; Huang, Emina; Whelan, Richard L.

In: Surgical Innovation, Vol. 17, No. 2, 06.2010, p. 120-126.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Is there a role for a strict incision length criterion for determining conversions during laparoscopic colorectal resection?

AU - Offodile, Anaeze C.

AU - Balik, Emre

AU - Hoffman, Aviad

AU - Moon, Victor

AU - Baxter, Raymond

AU - Grieco, Michael

AU - Moradi, Dovid

AU - Kim, Ik Yong

AU - Nasar, Abu

AU - Cekic, Vesna

AU - Feingold, Daniel L.

AU - Arnell, Tracey D.

AU - Huang, Emina

AU - Whelan, Richard L.

PY - 2010/6

Y1 - 2010/6

N2 - Purpose Theres no consensus about what defines a conversion for laparoscopic-assisted colorectal resection (LACR). This studys goal was to assess the utility of a strict incision length (IL) definition of conversion (incision > 7 cm) and compare it with results obtained when the surgeon determined (SD) if a LACR had been successfully completed. Methods. The demographic and perioperative data for 580 elective LACRs were reviewed. The short-term outcomes for each conversion definition were determined and compared. Results. Conversion rates were 22% using the IL definition and 16% via the SD method. Both methods detected significant differences between completed and converted groups regarding the following: incision size, hospital stay, time to flatus, bowel movement, and regular diet as well as rate of wound infection and ileus. The IL method alone detected significant differences in the rate of pulmonary complications and BMI between the completed and converted groups. Conclusions. The 2 methods yielded similar results for most parameters. The IL method better separated the patients in regard to 2 parameters. This method is objective and easy to apply; however, it may discriminate against obese patients whose extraction incisions are often longer. A conversion definition that considers BMI and IL is needed.

AB - Purpose Theres no consensus about what defines a conversion for laparoscopic-assisted colorectal resection (LACR). This studys goal was to assess the utility of a strict incision length (IL) definition of conversion (incision > 7 cm) and compare it with results obtained when the surgeon determined (SD) if a LACR had been successfully completed. Methods. The demographic and perioperative data for 580 elective LACRs were reviewed. The short-term outcomes for each conversion definition were determined and compared. Results. Conversion rates were 22% using the IL definition and 16% via the SD method. Both methods detected significant differences between completed and converted groups regarding the following: incision size, hospital stay, time to flatus, bowel movement, and regular diet as well as rate of wound infection and ileus. The IL method alone detected significant differences in the rate of pulmonary complications and BMI between the completed and converted groups. Conclusions. The 2 methods yielded similar results for most parameters. The IL method better separated the patients in regard to 2 parameters. This method is objective and easy to apply; however, it may discriminate against obese patients whose extraction incisions are often longer. A conversion definition that considers BMI and IL is needed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77952943040&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77952943040&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1553350610366715

DO - 10.1177/1553350610366715

M3 - Article

C2 - 20504788

AN - SCOPUS:77952943040

VL - 17

SP - 120

EP - 126

JO - Surgical Innovation

JF - Surgical Innovation

SN - 1553-3506

IS - 2

ER -