A comparison of laparoscopic and conventional surgery for colorectal cancers: Evaluation of initial experience

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to analyze initial experience with laparoscopic colorectal resection at 1 center and compare it with conventional open surgery.
METHODS: In this retrospective, case-controlled study, prospective data of colorectal cancer patients was analyzed retrospectively. Fifteen laparoscopic (3 right, 6 left, and 6 rectal) and 15 open (3 right, 6 left, and 6 rectal) colorectal resections were analyzed with respect to patient demographics, pathological characteristics, and early postoperative complications.
RESULTS: Mean operating time was longer in laparoscopic group (227±83.9 min vs. 174.6±54.7 min; p=0.077). Mean estimated blood loss was lower in laparoscopic group compared with open group (215.3±97 mL vs. 223.3±56 mL; p=0.500). In the laparoscopic group, number of lymph nodes and metastatic lymph nodes retrieved was higher than in open group (18±8.3 and 14.7±3.3, 1.1±2.1 and 0.8±1.3, respectively; p=0.243 and p=0.692). Overall early postoperative complication rate was 23.3%. Surgical site infection was seen in 6 patients (20%): 4 in the open surgery group, and 2 in the laparoscopic group. In 1 patient, after laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer, anastomotic leakage was seen and managed successfully with conservative methods.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Early results in laparoscopic colorectal surgery were comparable to open approach. Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is a feasible option, even in the surgeon’s learning period.