Ileal-pouch anal anastomosis in pediatric NSQIP: Does a laparoscopic approach reduce complications and length of stay?
jpedsurg.org shows its articles on its own site.
Read the article on jpedsurg.org ↗Article · Oct 2018 · 1 min read
In brief
In brief
This NSQIP analysis of 195 pediatric patients undergoing ileal pouch-anal anastomosis found that laparoscopic approach reduced minor complications and shortened hospital stay compared to open surgery, without increasing major complications. The findings support laparoscopic technique as the preferred approach for pouch procedures in children with ulcerative colitis or familial adenomatous polyposis.
Written by the GCMD Library team from the article.
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to determine if a laparoscopic approach reduces complications and length of stay (LOS) after total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (TPC-IPAA) in pediatric patients using a multicenter prospective database.
Methods
The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Pediatric database from 2012 to 2015 was used to identify patients with a diagnosis of chronic ulcerative colitis (CUC) or familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) undergoing TPC-IPAA. Major complications, minor complications, and prolonged LOS were compared based on laparoscopic versus open approach.
Results
195 (108 female) patients underwent TPC-IPAA at a median age of 14 years (IQR: 11–16) for CUC (N = 99) or FAP (N = 96). Two-thirds of cases were laparoscopic. A laparoscopic approach was not associated with major complications, but lower odds of minor complications were observed. A reduced LOS was seen in laparoscopic versus open surgery (median LOS 6 vs 8 days, p 9 days) in the FAP cohort (OR 4.0, 95% CI 1.1–14.0).
Conclusion
A laparoscopic approach was not associated with increased major complications but was associated with lower odds of minor complications and shorter LOS. The laparoscopic approach should continue to be preferred for pouch procedures in pediatric patients.
Type of study
Treatment; retrospective study.
Level of evidence
Level III.