Laparoscopic compared with conventional treatment of acute adhesive small bowel obstruction

BACKGROUND: Although laparoscopy may be associated with fewer intra-abdominal adhesions and quicker recovery of bowel function, it remains unclear whether patients with acute small bowel obstruction (SBO) might benefit from laparoscopic techniques. METHOD: The results of patients with acute SBO treated laparoscopically (LAP; n = 52) and conventionally (CONV; n = 52) were compared in a retrospective matched-pair analysis. Conversions were included in the laparoscopic group. RESULTS: Complete laparoscopic treatment was performed in 25 patients (48.1 per cent). Major intraoperative complications occurred in 15 patients in the LAP group and eight in the CONV group (P = 0.156). Intraoperative perforations were more frequent in patients who had undergone more than one previous laparotomy (P = 0.066). Postoperative complications occurred in ten patients (19.2 per cent) in the LAP group and in 21 patients (40.4 per cent) who had conventional surgery (P = 0.032). Bowel movements started 3.5 days after operation in the LAP group and 4.4 days after conventional operation (P = 0.001). The length of hospital stay was 11.3 and 18.1 days respectively (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic treatment of acute SBO was feasible in about half of these patients. Postoperative recovery was improved after laparoscopic procedures but the risk of intraoperative complications increased. A laparoscopic approach seems justified in a subset of patients.