Outcomes of Laparoscopic vs. Open Reversal of Hartmann's Procedure: A Single Centre Experience.

Abstract

IntroductionHartmann’s procedure is widely performed to fix colonic obstruction and perforation. It should ideally be followed by a reversal to restore bowel continuity. Reversal of Hartmann’s procedure was traditionally performed using an open technique. However, in recent days, the use of a laparoscopic approach has become increasingly popular. In our retrospective observational study, we aim to investigate the outcomes of laparoscopic versus open reversal of Hartmann’s procedure in a UK tertiary centre.MethodsAll patients who underwent reversal of their Hartmann’s procedure between January 2017 and December 2019 were included in the study. Data including demographics, days between primary operation and reversal, laparoscopic or open reversal, length of hospital stay following reversal procedure, 30-day readmission, mortality, and complication rate were collected. Statistical analysis was performed using t-test and chi-squared test.ResultsForty-nine patients underwent reversal of Hartmann’s procedure from January 2017 to December 2019. The mean age of our cohort was 59.6 ± 13.2 years. There was no significant difference in baseline demographics of both groups, apart from the number of days between the primary operation and reversal procedure. There was also no statistical difference in length of stay, 30-day readmission, and mortality between laparoscopic and open reversal techniques. However, there was a higher incidence of wound complications in patients who underwent open reversal of Hartmann’s procedure.ConclusionThe reversal of Hartmann’s procedure is a challenging operation. We found no significant difference between both open and laparoscopic approaches, but our study might be confounded by various factors including small sample size and selection bias. A larger, randomised study with greater statistical power is needed to confirm our findings.