BACKGROUND:The objective of this study was to determine if intravenous ketorolac can reduce ileus following laparoscopic colorectal surgery, thus shortening hospital stay. METHODS:This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial of patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resection and receiving morphine patient controlled analgesia (PCA) and either intravenous ketorolac (group A) or placebo (group B), for 48 h after surgery. Daily assessments were made by a blinded assistant for level of pain control. Diet advancement and discharge were decided according to strictly defined criteria. RESULTS:From October 2002 to March 2005, 190 patients underwent laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Of this total, 84 patients were eligible for this study and 70 consented. Another 26 patients were excluded, leaving 22 patients in each group. Two patients who suffered anastomotic leaks in the early postoperative period were excluded from further analysis. Median length of stay for the entire study was 4.0 days, with significant correlation between milligrams of morphine consumed and time to first flatus (r = 0.422, p = 0.005), full diet (r = 0.522, p < 0.001), and discharge (r = 0.437, p = 0.004). There we no differences between groups in age, body mass index, or operating time. Patients in group A consumed less morphine (33 +/- 31 mg versus 63 +/- 41 mg, p = 0.011), and had less time to first flatus (median 2.0 days versus 3.0 days, p < 0.001) and full diet (median 2.5 days versus 3.0 days, p = 0.033). The reduction in length of stay was not significant (mean 3.6 days versus 4.5 days, median 4.0 days versus 4.0 days, p = 0.142). Pain control was superior in group A. Three patients required readmission for treatment of five anastomotic leaks (4 in group A versus 1 in group B, p = 0.15). Two of them underwent reoperation. CONCLUSIONS:Intravenous ketorolac was efficacious in improving pain control and reducing postoperative ileus when anastomotic leaks were excluded. This simple intervention shows promise in reducing hospital stay, although the outcome was not statistically significant. The high number of leaks is inconsistent with this group's experience and is of concern.

The objective of this study was to determine if intravenous ketorolac can reduce ileus following laparoscopic colorectal surgery, thus shortening hospital stay.

BACKGROUND:This purpose of this study was to examine whether survival is affected when laparoscopic resections for colorectal cancer are converted to open surgery.METHODS:A prospective database of 377 consecutive laparoscopic resections for colorectal cancer performed between November 1991 and June 2002 was reviewed. The TNM classification for colorectal cancer and the Kaplan-Meier method were used to determine survival curves for each group.RESULTS:Conversion to an open procedure was required in 46 cases (12.8%). Converted and laparoscopic groups were similar in age, sex, comorbidities, and location and size of tumor. The converted group had a significantly higher weight (75 kg vs 69 kg, p = 0.013) and conversion score (2.18 vs. 1.87, p = 0.005). Patients with stage IV disease were significantly more likely to be converted than those with stage I-III disease (23.0% vs 11.2%, p = 0.04). There was no difference in the conversion rate between patients with stage I (14%), II (8%), or III (13%) colorectal cancers. Median follow-up was 30.5 months for stage I-III and 10.8 months for stage IV cancers. There were 190 patients followed at least 2 years and 73 patients followed at least 5 years. Survival curves demonstrate significantly lower 2-year survival after converted procedures as compared to laparoscopic (75.7% vs 87.2%, p = 0.02), with a trend toward lower 5-year survival (61.9% vs 69.7%, p = 0.077).CONCLUSIONS:Survival rates at 2 and 5 years are lower for patients in the converted group compared to patients with LR. This finding could have serious impact on the treatment of patients with colorectal cancer. Further confirmation is required.

BACKGROUND:Controversy exists over the necessity of performing a concurrent antireflux procedure with a Heller myotomy. We therefore sought to objectively analyze gastroesophageal reflux following laparoscopic Heller myotomy where an antireflux procedure was not performed.METHODS:A prospective database of 66 cases of laparoscopic Heller myotomy performed between November 1996 and June 2002 was reviewed. Previous, concurrent, or subsequent fundoplication was performed in 12 patients; therefore 54 patients without antireflux procedures were available for analysis. Follow-up included symptomatic assessment in 50 patients (93%). Heartburn was assessed on a four-point scale with clinical significance defined as >2 episodes/week. Objective testing, including endoscopy, esophagogram, manometry, and 24-h pH monitoring, was offered to all patients. Objective evidence of reflux was defined as the composite endpoint of positive 24-h pH monitoring or esophagitis on endoscopy.RESULTS:Significant heartburn was reported in 15 of 50 patients (30%). Positive 24-h pH recordings were seen in 11 of 22 patients tested while esophagitis was seen in 13 of 21 patients tested, resulting in objective evidence of reflux in 18 of 30 patients tested (60%). Of these 18 patients, seven did not have significant heartburn. All 12 patients without objective reflux did not have significant heartburn. Therefore, of the 30 patients with objective testing, seven (23%) had objective reflux without subjective heartburn (silent reflux).CONCLUSION:Objective analysis reveals an unacceptable rate of gastroesophageal reflux in laparoscopic Heller myotomy without an antireflux procedure. We therefore recommend performing a concurrent antireflux procedure.

Background: Laparoscopic colorectal surgery has clear advantages over open surgery; however, the effectiveness of the approach depends on the conversion rate. The objective of this work was to prospectively validate a model that would predict conversion in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Methods: A simple clinical model for predicting conversion in laparoscopic colorectal surgery was previously developed based on a multivariable logistic regression analysis of 367 procedures. This model was applied prospectively to a follow-up group of 248 procedures by the same team, including 54 procedures performed by one new fellowship-trained surgeon. Results: Patients in the follow-up group were more likely to have cancer (56% vs 44%, p = 0.007) and were more obese (median, 71.0 vs 66.0 kg; p < 0.001). The rate of conversion in the follow-up group was unchanged (8.9% vs 9.0%, p > 0.05). Despite expected trends toward increasing risk of conversion with weight level (<60 kg, 6.8%; 60–<90 kg, 9.0%; >90 kg, 12.1%; p > 0.05) and malignancy (10.1% vs 7.3%, p > 0.05), the model did not distinguish well between groups at risk for conversion. Contrary to the model, however, the fellowship-trained surgeon had a conversion rate that was not higher than that of the other, more experienced surgeons (7.3% vs 9.3%, p > 0.05) even though he was less experienced, and operating on patients who were more obese (median, 75.0 vs 70 kg; p = 0.02) and more likely to have cancer (59% vs 55%, p > 0.05). Recalculated conversion scores that excluded the inexperience point for the fellowship-trained surgeon showed a good fit for the model. Considering the original and follow-up experience together (615 cases), the model clearly stratifies patients into low (0 points), medium (1–2 points), and high risk (3–4 points) for conversion, with respective rates of 2.9%, 8.1%, and 20% (p = 0.001). Conclusion: This model appears to be a valid predictor of conversion to open surgery. Fellowship training may provide sufficient experience so that learning curve issues are redundant in early practice. This model now requires validation by other centers.