Aim: To review the outcome of laparoscopic small bowel resections as compared with open resection for small bowel tumors.
Method: Retrospective review comparing total laparoscopic to open resections for small bowel tumors from October 1998 to July 2005 in a single centre.
Results: During the study period, 9 patients underwent laparoscopic resection, whereas 11 patients underwent open small bowel resection. Majority of the patients (75%) suffered from gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Median operative time in both groups was comparable, but the median operative blood loss was significantly less in the laparoscopic group. (5 vs. 165 mL, P=0.005). The amount of oral dologesic used postoperatively was similar, whereas the use of intravenous morphine was significantly less in the laparoscopic group (7.4 vs. 21.3 mg, P=0.007). The median postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group (7 vs. 12 d, P=0.018). For patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors, 2 patients (29%) in the laparoscopic group and 3 patients (38%) in the open group had recurrence of disease during follow-up (P=0.573).
Conclusions: Laparoscopic resection resulted in favorable short-term outcome compared with open resection for small bowel tumors in selected cases. The oncologic outcome is not compromised with this approach.