To review the outcome of laparoscopic small bowel resections as compared with open resection for small bowel tumors.Method
Retrospective review comparing total laparoscopic to open resections for small bowel tumors from October 1998 to July 2005 in a single centre.Results
During the study period, 9 patients underwent laparoscopic resection, whereas 11 patients underwent open small bowel resection. Majority of the patients (75%) suffered from gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Median operative time in both groups was comparable, but the median operative blood loss was significantly less in the laparoscopic group. (5 vs. 165 mL, P=0.005). The amount of oral dologesic used postoperatively was similar, whereas the use of intravenous morphine was significantly less in the laparoscopic group (7.4 vs. 21.3 mg, P=0.007). The median postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group (7 vs. 12 d, P=0.018). For patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors, 2 patients (29%) in the laparoscopic group and 3 patients (38%) in the open group had recurrence of disease during follow-up (P=0.573).Conclusions
Laparoscopic resection resulted in favorable short-term outcome compared with open resection for small bowel tumors in selected cases. The oncologic outcome is not compromised with this approach.