Early repeated exploration after laparoscopic urologic surgery: comparison of clinical, radiologic, and surgical findings

Abstract

Objectives. To correlate the clinical scenarios and radiographic findings with the operative findings in patients who underwent repeated exploration to define a management strategy. Postoperative complications after laparoscopy may cause diagnostic challenges because of atypical presentation. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed the records from 1226 urologic laparoscopic procedures between July 1993 and July 2000. We compared the clinical, radiologic, and surgical findings of patients who underwent repeated exploration within the first month after laparoscopy. Results. During the study period, 9 patients (0.7%) were taken back to the operating room for repeated exploration. The median time for the appearance of symptoms was the second postoperative day. Eight patients were evaluated by computed tomography (CT) and one by both renal Doppler ultrasonography and MAG-3 renal perfusion scan. Repeated operations were laparoscopic in 4 and open in 5 patients. In all the patients evaluated by CT scan, the radiologic findings were consistent with the surgical findings. In the patients who underwent diagnostic laparoscopy because of the severity of clinical findings, despite negative CT findings, no abnormality was discovered at exploration. In 1 patient who was not evaluated by CT, duodenal perforation was detected at exploration. Conclusions. Clinical findings may not be sufficient for the decision of repeated operation for patients acutely ill after laparoscopy. CT findings correlated well with the findings at exploration. In cases in which no abnormality is detected by CT, it appears reasonable to withhold surgical exploration unless the clinical situation deteriorates.