The laparoscopic approach in abdominal emergencies: a single-center 10-year experience.

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopy has rapidly emerged as the preferred surgical approach to a number of different diseases because it allows for a correct diagnosis and proper treatment. In abdominal emergencies, both components of treatment--exploration and surgery--can be accomplished via laparoscopy. The aim of the present work is to illustrate retrospectively the results of a case-control experience with laparoscopic versus open surgery for abdominal emergencies performed at our institution.

METHODS

From January 1992 to January 2002, 935 patients (mean age, 42.3+/-17.2 years) underwent emergent or urgent surgery, or both. Of these, 602 (64.3%) were operated on laparoscopically (small bowel obstruction, 28; gastroduodenal ulcer disease, 25; biliary disease, 165; pelvic disease, 370 cases; colonic perforations, 14) based on the availability of a surgical team trained in laparoscopy. Patients with a history of malignancy, more than 2 previous major abdominal surgeries, or massive bowel distension were not treated laparoscopically. Peritonitis was not deemed a contraindication to laparoscopy.

RESULTS

The conversion rate was 5.8% and was mainly due to the presence of dense intraabdominal adhesions. Major complications ranged as high as 2.1% with a postoperative mortality of 0.6%. A definitive diagnosis was accomplished in 96.3% of cases, and 94.1% of these patients were treated successfully with laparoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Even if limited by its retrospective nature, the present experience shows that the laparoscopic approach to abdominal emergencies is as safe and effective as conventional surgery, has a higher diagnostic yield, and results in less trauma and a more rapid postoperative recovery. Such features make laparoscopy an attractive alternative to open surgery in the management algorithm for abdominal emergencies.