Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Safety Between Open and Laparoscopic Surgery for Adhesive Small Bowel Obstruction: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of a National Inpatient Database.

Background: The effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery for adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO) remains unclear. We aimed to compare the outcomes and safety of open and laparoscopic surgeries for ASBO. Methods: In this retrospective study, we analyzed an inpatient database of 42 national university hospitals in Japan. Patients who underwent surgery for the first episode of ASBO between April 2013 and March 2018 were identified. Using the propensity score method, patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery were matched one-to-one with those who underwent open surgery. We investigated postoperative clinical outcomes, including morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stay (LOS), and recurrence. Results: Overall, 306 and 96 patients underwent open and laparoscopic surgery, respectively (96 propensity score-matched pairs). The incidence rates of postoperative morbidity, mortality, and recurrence were comparable between the two groups. Cox regression analysis revealed a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.020 (P = .959) for readmission due to ASBO in the laparoscopic surgery group relative to the open surgery group. Postoperative hospital stay was longer for open surgery than for laparoscopic surgery (13.0 days versus 10.0 days, P < .001). Cox regression analysis revealed that laparoscopic surgery was associated with earlier postoperative discharge compared with open surgery (HR 1.641, P = .002). Conclusions: The postoperative LOS was shorter with laparoscopic surgery than with open surgery for ASBO, but there were no differences between the procedures in other clinical outcomes. Laparoscopic surgery is suitable to treat patients with ASBO.