Laparoscopic versus conventional colorectal resection: a prospective randomised study of postoperative ileus and early postoperative feeding

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Background: A shorter duration of postoperative ileus and earlier oral alimentation of patients may be a clinically relevant benefit of laparoscopic compared with conventional colorectal resection. Patients/Methods: A total of 60 patients were randomised to either laparoscopic (n=30) or conventional (n=30) resection of colorectal tumours. Major endpoints were the postoperative time to the first bowel movement and the time until oral feeding without parenteral alimentation was tolerated. Minor endpoints were the postoperative interval to the first peristalsis and first passage of flatus, the distribution of radio-opaque markers in abdominal radiographs on day 3 and day 5 and the incidence of postoperative vomiting. Results: Age, gender, ASA-classification and type of resection were comparable in thetwo groups. Peristalsis was first noticed 26±9 h after laparoscopic and 38±17 h after conventional colorectal resection (PPPPPPPConclusion: The shorter duration of postoperative ileus allows earlier restoration of oral feeding after laparoscopic compared with conventional colorectal resection and therefore increases quality of life immediately after resection of colorectal tumours.

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: