Comparison of Conventional and Laparoscopic Hartmann's Procedure Reversal


    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid

Abstract

PurposeThis study compares open Hartmann's procedure reversal (OHPR) and laparoscopic Hartmann's procedure reversal (LHPR) in patients first treated for peritonitis (Henchey III or IV).MethodsFourteen patients who underwent LHPR during a 2-year period were compared with 20 patients who had previously undergone an open procedure at the same institution.ResultsConversion rate was 14.28%. Operating time was shorter for the laparoscopic group [143 (90 to 240) vs. 180 (90 to 350) min, P<0.05]. Hospital length of stay was shorter for the laparoscopic group [9.5 (4 to 18) vs. 11 (6 to 39)]. Use of patient-controlled analgesia was not significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group [3 (0 to 4) vs. 3.5 (0 to 8)]. Morbidities observed in the LHPR group include a parietal abscess and an anastomotic stenosis without surgical treatment. The OHPR group had 6 complications: 1 anastomotic leak and 5 incisional hernias.ConclusionsLHPR with a conversion rate of 14.28% seems to be a method with shorter operating time and less morbidity compared with OHPR.

    loading  Loading Related Articles