Background: The short and long-term results of a laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer have been reported in several studies, but reports on the results of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer are limited. Aim of the study: This study aimed to assess the short term outcomes of laparoscopic assisted colorectal resections in comparison with conventional open resections. Methods: 20 patients assigned to undergo elective laparoscopic assisted resection of primary colon and rectal cancer matched with 20 cases of colorectal cancer patients with the same epidemiological data (age, site, stage and histological grade) to whom conventional open resections was done in the period from March 2010 to September 2013.The following data were collected and analyzed: preoperative data (individual patient data, indication for surgery), intraoperative data (conversion to open surgery, operative time, complication rate), postoperative data (oncological parameters: length of removed specimen; safety margin; retrieved lymph nodes, post-operative pain, recovery of gastrointestinal tract functions, morbidity, mortality and length of hospital stay) Results: There were significant decrease in postoperative pain, rapid recovery of pulmonary and GIT functions, decreased hospital stay in the laparoscopic group compared to the conventional group. Conclusion: Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is a good alternative for open surgery with favorable short term outcomes of surgery and reasonable oncologic results

Background: The short and long-term results of a laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer have been reported in several studies, but reports on the results of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer are limited. Aim of the study: This study aimed to assess the short term outcomes of laparoscopic assisted colorectal resections in comparison with conventional open resections. Methods: 20 patients assigned to undergo elective laparoscopic assisted resection of primary colon and rectal cancer matched with 20 cases of colorectal cancer patients with the same epidemiological data (age, site, stage and histological grade) to whom conventional open resections was done in the period from March 2010 to September 2013.The following data were collected and analyzed: preoperative data (individual patient data, indication for surgery), intraoperative data (conversion to open surgery, operative time, complication rate), postoperative data (oncological parameters: length of removed specimen; safety margin; retrieved lymph nodes, post-operative pain, recovery of gastrointestinal tract functions, morbidity, mortality and length of hospital stay) Results: There were significant decrease in postoperative pain, rapid recovery of pulmonary and GIT functions, decreased hospital stay in the laparoscopic group compared to the conventional group. Conclusion: Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is a good alternative for open surgery with favorable short term outcomes of surgery and reasonable oncologic results

Background: The short and long-term results of a laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer have been reported in several studies, but reports on the results of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer are limited. Aim of the study: This study aimed to assess the short term outcomes of laparoscopic assisted colorectal resections in comparison with conventional open resections. Methods: 20 patients assigned to undergo elective laparoscopic assisted resection of primary colon and rectal cancer matched with 20 cases of colorectal cancer patients with the same epidemiological data (age, site, stage and histological grade) to whom conventional open resections was done in the period from March 2010 to September 2013.The following data were collected and analyzed: preoperative data (individual patient data, indication for surgery), intraoperative data (conversion to open surgery, operative time, complication rate), postoperative data (oncological parameters: length of removed specimen; safety margin; retrieved lymph nodes, post-operative pain, recovery of gastrointestinal tract functions, morbidity, mortality and length of hospital stay) Results: There were significant decrease in postoperative pain, rapid recovery of pulmonary and GIT functions, decreased hospital stay in the laparoscopic group compared to the conventional group. Conclusion: Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is a good alternative for open surgery with favorable short term outcomes of surgery and reasonable oncologic results

Background: The short and long-term results of a laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer have been reported in several studies, but reports on the results of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer are limited. Aim of the study: This study aimed to assess the short term outcomes of laparoscopic assisted colorectal resections in comparison with conventional open resections. Methods: 20 patients assigned to undergo elective laparoscopic assisted resection of primary colon and rectal cancer matched with 20 cases of colorectal cancer patients with the same epidemiological data (age, site, stage and histological grade) to whom conventional open resections was done in the period from March 2010 to September 2013.The following data were collected and analyzed: preoperative data (individual patient data, indication for surgery), intraoperative data (conversion to open surgery, operative time, complication rate), postoperative data (oncological parameters: length of removed specimen; safety margin; retrieved lymph nodes, post-operative pain, recovery of gastrointestinal tract functions, morbidity, mortality and length of hospital stay) Results: There were significant decrease in postoperative pain, rapid recovery of pulmonary and GIT functions, decreased hospital stay in the laparoscopic group compared to the conventional group. Conclusion: Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is a good alternative for open surgery with favorable short term outcomes of surgery and reasonable oncologic results

NULL

NULL

Abstract. Mechanical stapling for colorectal anastomosis is popular, but the safety of its use for anastomosis in peritonitis is unclear. We evaluated the safety and effectiveness of mechanically stapled vs. hand-sutured anastomosis by comparing wound healing in an animal model of bacterial peritonitis. Male Sprague-Dawley (n=48) rats underwent cecal ligation and puncture. After 24 h, rats were divided into two groups: the stapler group (cecal resection with mechanical stapler, n=24) and the hand-sutured group (cecal resection and stump closure with surgical absorbable suture, n=24). Anastomotic segments were excised and as indicators of wound healing, anastomotic bursting pressure (ABP) and tissue hydroxyproline concentration were determined over time. After harvesting, anastomotic segments were analyzed by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to determine relative expression of trans- forming growth factor-β1 (TGF-β1) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) normalized to that of a constitutive gene. The operative time was significantly shorter in the stapler vs. the hand-sutured group. Both groups showed progressive increases in ABP over the postoperative period. ABP was significantly higher in the stapler vs. the hand-sutured group on postoperative days (PODs) 0 and 3. Tissue hydroxyl-proline concentration increased from POD 7 in both groups, but between-group difference was not significant. Both groups showed progressive increases in TGF-β1 and VEGF expression during the 7-day postoperative period. On POD 5, TGF-β1 gene expression was higher in the stapler vs. the hand-sutured group. VEGF gene expression was identical in both groups. In conclusion, anastomosis by stapler is safer and more effective than that by hand suturing in bacterial peritonitis, since it requires less operating time and creates stronger anastomoses in the early postoperative period

Background: Few long-term results of laparoscopic resection for gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) of the stomach have been established to evaluate technical safety and oncologic feasibility. Methods: Between April, 1998 and October, 2008, data of 18 patients who underwent laparoscopic resection of GISTs of 5cm in diameter were reviewed. Results: There were 10 men and 8 women with average age of 66.5 years. Estimated blood loss was minimal, and average operation time was 99.2±30.5 minutes. There were no major intraoperative complications or conversions to open approach. Oral feeding started 2 to 4 days after operation, and the mean hospital stay was 10.1±5.5 days. There were no major postoperative complications except for 1 patient who suffered from aspiration pneumonia. Tumor size was 3.7±1.1cm (range, 1.5 to 7.0cm), and all patients had free surgical margins. During long-term follow-up (average 54.6mo), no complications occurred except for liver metastasis in only 1 patient who was responding well to imatinib therapy. Conclusions: Laparoscopic wedge resection of GISTs of 5cm in diameter is a safe and oncologically feasible technique offering good long-term outcomes.

NULL

NULL