Compare the clinical and postoperative outcomes: laparoscopic versus open surgery

Abstract

Background: To assess the several postoperative complications and clinical outcomes, a retrospective comparison between laparoscopic or open surgery was performed.Methods: We evaluated patients baseline characteristics clinical characteristics, perioperative, intraoperative, inflammatory stress markers and postoperative outcomes between the two groups by univariate analysis.Results: Total 73 patients’ data were included and divided into two groups. 38 patients in first group (laparoscopic surgery) and 35 patients in second group (open surgery). There were no statistically significance differences between gender, age, weight, body mass index and type of surgery of the patients (p>0.05). There was no significant difference between groups in history of infliximab, history of steroid usage, history of appendectomy and perianal disease (p>0.05). There was no significant difference between groups in total protein, albumin, hemoglobin, skeletal muscle mass and soft lean mass. Operative time, length of incision and blood loss was significantly (p<0.001) different in both groups, respectively. Total number of complications was less in the laparoscopic surgery; however, there was no statistically significant difference. Laparoscopic surgery can shorten the hospital stay by around one day. Patients had better postoperative outcomes after laparoscopic surgery than after open surgery. No significant difference was present in edema grades between groups preoperatively. More patients developed slight edema and edema in open surgery than in laparoscopic surgery on postoperative day (POD-3), but not on POD-5.Conclusions: Laparoscopic surgery has more benefits, safe and high-quality care and better postoperative clinical outcomes for all patients compared to open surgery.