A comparative analysis between laparoscopic and open adhesiolysis at a tertiary care center

American Surgeon

Volumn 80, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 261-269

  Davies, Stephen W ^a   Gillen, Jake R ^a   Guidry, Christopher A ^a   Newhook, Timothy E ^a   Pope, Nicolas H ^a   Hranjec, Tjasa ^a   Sawyer, Robert G ^a   Hallowell, Peter T ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL DISEASE; ADULT; ARTICLE; CONSERVATIVE TREATMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FISHER EXACT TEST; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; INTENSIVE CARE UNIT; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTRA ABDOMINAL ADHESION; LAPAROSCOPIC ADHESIOLYSIS; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LENGTH OF STAY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY; OPEN ADHESIOLYSIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PERIOPERATIVE PERIOD; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; RANK SUM TEST; STUDENT T TEST; SURGEON; SURGICAL APPROACH; SURGICAL MORTALITY; SURGICAL PATIENT; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TERTIARY CARE CENTER; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EVALUATION STUDY; FACTUAL DATABASE; FOLLOW UP; INTESTINE OBSTRUCTION; LAPAROSCOPY; LAPAROTOMY; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; OPERATION DURATION; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PATIENT SAFETY; POSTOPERATIVE PAIN; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SMALL INTESTINE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; COHORT STUDIES; DATABASES, FACTUAL; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; INTESTINAL OBSTRUCTION; INTESTINE, SMALL; LAPAROSCOPY; LAPAROTOMY; LENGTH OF STAY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OPERATIVE TIME; PAIN, POSTOPERATIVE; PATIENT SAFETY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, MINIMALLY INVASIVE; TERTIARY CARE CENTERS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84900817154     PISSN: 00031348     EISSN: 15559823     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Diamond MP, Freeman ML. Clinical implications of postsurgical adhesions. Hum Reprod Update 2001;7:567-76.
2. Alkhoury F, Helton W. Intestinal Obstruction. In: Fink M, Jurkovich G, Kaiser L, et al. ACS Surgery: Principles and Practice. 6th ed. New York, NY: WebMD Professional Publishing; 2007:514-33.
3. Cirocchi R, Abraha I, Farinella E, et al. Laparoscopic versus open surgery in small bowel obstruction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;2:CD007511.
4. Tavakkolizadeh A, Whang E, Ashley S, et al. Small Bowel Obstruction. In: Brunicardi F, Anderson D, Billiar T, et al. Schwartz's Principles of Surgery. 9th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2009:988-93.
5. Clotteau JE, Premont M. [Occlusion by adhesions treated by celioscopic section] [in French]. Presse Med 1990;19:1196.
6. Szomstein S, Lo Menzo E, Simpfendorfer C, et al. Laparoscopic lysis of adhesions. World J Surg 2006;30:535-40.
7. Campbell K. Small Bowel Obstruction. In: Scheidt S, Voit F, eds. Current Surgical Therapy. 9th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Mosby Elsevier; 2008:117-20.
8. Strickland P, Lourie DJ, Suddleson EA, et al. Is laparoscopy safe and effective for treatment of acute small-bowel obstruction? Surg Endosc 1999;13:695-8.
9. Qureshi I, Awad ZT. Predictors of failure of the laparoscopic approach for the management of small bowel obstruction. Am Surg 2010;76:947-50.
10. Wullstein C, Gross E. Laparoscopic compared with conventional treatment of acute adhesive small bowel obstruction. Br J Surg 2003;90:1147-51.
11. Neumayer L, Hosokawa P, Itani K, et al. Multivariable predictors of postoperative surgical site infection after general and vascular surgery: results from the patient safety in surgery study. J Am Coll Surg 2007;204:1178-87.
12. Silva AC, Pimenta M, Guimaraes LS. Small bowel obstruction: what to look for. Radiographics 2009;29:423-39.
13. Liakakos T, Thomakos N, Fine PM, et al. Peritoneal adhesions: etiology, pathophysiology, and clinical significance. Recent advances in prevention and management. Dig Surg 2001;18:260-73.
14. Menzies D, Ellis H. Intestinal obstruction from adhesions- how big is the problem? Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1990;72:60-3.
15. van Goor H. Consequences and complications of peritoneal adhesions. Colorectal Dis 2007;9(suppl 2):25-34.
16. Weibel MA,Majno G. Peritoneal adhesions and their relation to abdominal surgery. A postmortem study. Am J Surg 1973;126:345-53.
17. Joseph SP, Simonson M, Edwards C. 'Let's just wait one more day': impact of timing on surgical outcome in the treatment of adhesion-related small bowel obstruction. Am Surg 2013;79:175-9.
18. Margenthaler JA, Longo WE, Virgo KS, et al. Risk factors for adverse outcomes following surgery for small bowel obstruction. Ann Surg 2006;243:456-64.
19. O'Connor DB, Winter DC. The role of laparoscopy in the management of acute small-bowel obstruction: A review of over 2,000 cases. Surg Endosc 2012;26:12-7.
20. Hallowell PT, Dahman MI, Stokes JB, et al. Minimally invasive surgery fellowship does not adversely affect general surgery resident case volume: A decade of experience. Am J Surg 2013;205: 307-11; discussion 311.
21. Unawane A, Kamyab A, Patel M, et al. Changing paradigms in minimally invasive surgery training. Am J Surg 2013;205:284-8; discussion 288.