Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Comparative analysis between laparoscopic (UCL) and open (UCO) technique for the treatment of ulcerative colitis in pediatric patients

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Pediatric Surgery International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study is to compare laparoscopic with open approach in the surgical treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC)

Material and methods

Between July 1991 and August 2009, 32 consecutive unselective patients with UC received surgical treatment. The population analyzed was divided into three groups: subtotal colectomy + ileocolostomy (Group 1), proctectomy + ileoanal pouch (Group 2), one-step proctocolectomy + ileoanal pouch (Group 3). We analyzed the mean operating time, postoperative oral intake, use of opiates, the length of hospital stay and postoperative morbidity in each group. Open and laparoscopic approaches were compared in each group retrospectively.

Results

In Group 1 the mean operating time was longer for the laparoscopic group (301 vs. 197 min; p < 0.01). The length of postoperative stay was longer for the open group (8 vs. 19 days; p < 0.05) and the oral intake started earlier in the laparoscopic group (3, 5 vs. 6, 2 days; p = 0.05). No significant difference was found in the use of opiates (p = ns). A total of four major complications occurred in the laparoscopic group and another four in the open approach. In Group 2, there was no significant difference in operating time between laparoscopic and open approach. The laparoscopic group started earlier to tolerate (p < 0.05) and there were significantly differences in the use of narcotics and hospital stay (p < 0.05). General complications were related to the pouch. In Group 3 the mean operating time was longer for the laparoscopic group (470 vs. 330 min p < 0.05). Patients with a laparoscopic approach had a shorter hospital stay (5, 6 vs. 10 days; p < 0.05) and postoperative narcotic use and they started earlier to tolerate (p < 0.05). One major complication was presented in the laparoscopic procedure and two in the open approach.

Conclusions

Of the 165 patients with UC in our hospital, 32 underwent surgery. The laparoscopic approach seems feasible and safe. A single staged approach (Group 1 + Group 2) remains the most reasonable choice for most patients. One-step approach was done only in selected cases (Group 3). The advantages of laparoscopy, such as improved cosmetic aspects, shorter postoperative ileus and hospital stay, were observed in the laparoscopic colectomy, proctectomy and ileoanal pouch in our study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Proctor ML, Langer JC, Gerstle JT (2002) Is laparoscopic subtotal colectomy better than open subtotal colectomy in children. Pediatr Surg 37:706–708

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Sardinha TC, Wexner SD (1998) Laparoscopy for inflammatory bowel disease: pros and cons. World J Surg 22:370–374

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Dunker MS, Bemelman WA, Slors JS et al (2000) Laparoscopic assisted vs. open colectomy in severe acute colitis in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Surg Endosc 14:911–914

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Meijerink W, Eijsbouts Q, Cuesta M et al (1999) Laparoscopically assisted bowel surgery for inflammatory bowel disease. The combined experiences of two academic centers. Surg Endosc 13:882–886

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Alves A, Panis Y, Bouhnik Y (2003) Subtotal colectomy for severe acute colitis: a 20-year experience of a tertiary care center with an aggressive and early surgical policy. J Am Coll Surg 197:379–385

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ouaïssi M, Alves A, Bouhnik Y (2006) Three-step ileal pouch-anal anastomosis under total laparoscopic approach for acute or severe colitis complicating inflammatory bowel disease. J Am Coll Surg 202:637–642

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Larson DW, Pemberton JH (2004) Current concepts and controversies in surgery for IBD. Gastroentrology 126(6):1611–1619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Marcello PW, Milsom JW, Wong SK (2000) Laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy case-matched comparative study with open restorative proctocolectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 43:604–608

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Seshadri PA, Poulin EC, Schlachta CM (2001) Does a laparoscopic approach to total abdominal colectomy and proctocolectomy offer advantages. Surg Endosc 15:837–842

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Marcello P, Milsom JW, Wong SK (2001) Laparoscopic total colectomy for acute colitis: a case–control study. Dis Colon Rectum 44:1441–1445

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Dunker MS, Bemelman WA, Slors JFM (2001) Functional outcome, quality of life, body image, and cosmesis in patients after laparoscopic-assisted and conventional restorative proctocolectomy: a comparative study. Dis Colon Rectum 44:1800–1807

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kienlel P, Z’graggenl K, Schmidtl J (2005) Laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy. Br J Surg 92:88–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ky AJ, Sonoda T, Milsom JW (2002) One-stage laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy: an alternative to the conventional approach. Dis Colon Rectum 45:207–211

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bell RL, Seymour NE (2002) Laparoscopic treatment of fulminant ulcerative colitis. Surg Endosc 16:1778–1782

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. J.P.Garrahan Children’s Hospital, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    P. Flores, M. M. Bailez, E. Cuenca & C. Fraire

Authors
  1. P. Flores
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. M. Bailez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. E. Cuenca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. C. Fraire
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Flores.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Flores, P., Bailez, M.M., Cuenca, E. et al. Comparative analysis between laparoscopic (UCL) and open (UCO) technique for the treatment of ulcerative colitis in pediatric patients. Pediatr Surg Int 26, 907–911 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-010-2669-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-010-2669-3

Keywords