Abstract
BackgroundLaparoscopic procedure has inherent merits of smaller incisions, better cosmesis, less postoperative pain, and earlier recovery. In the current study, we presented our method of purely laparoscopic feeding jejunostomy and compared its results with that of conventional open approach.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed our patients from 2012 to 2019 who had received either laparoscopic jejunostomy (LJ, n = 29) or open ones (OJ, n = 94) in Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou. Peri-operative data and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.ResultsIn the current study, we employed 3-0 Vicryl, instead of V-loc barbed sutures, for laparoscopic jejunostomy. The mean operative duration of LJ group was about 30 min longer than the OJ group (159 ± 57.2 mins vs 128 ± 34.6 mins; P = 0.001). There were no intraoperative complications reported in both groups. The patients in the LJ group suffered significantly less postoperative pain than in the OJ group (mean NRS 2.03 ± 0.9 vs. 2.79 ± 1.2; P = 0.002). The majority of patients in both groups received early enteral nutrition (< 48 h) after the operation (86.2% vs. 74.5%; P = 0.143).ConclusionsOur study demonstrated that purely laparoscopic feeding jejunostomy is a safe and feasible procedure with less postoperative pain and excellent postoperative outcome. It also provides surgeons opportunities to enhance intracorporeal suture techniques.
Highlights
Laparoscopic procedure has inherent merits of smaller incisions, better cosmesis, less postoperative pain, and earlier recovery
We described our method of purely laparoscopic feeding jejunostomy and compared its outcome with that of conventional open approach
As shown in the table, there were no significant differences in terms of patient gender, history of previous abdominal operations, preoperative albumin, preoperative hemoglobin level, body mass index (BMI), and performance status (ECOG) between the two groups
Summary
Laparoscopic procedure has inherent merits of smaller incisions, better cosmesis, less postoperative pain, and earlier recovery. Compared to the parenteral route, oral or enteral nutrition is deemed more favorable due to its lower cost, fewer complications, and preservation of gut function [1,2,3]. Clinicians extreme their efforts to apply enteral nutrition in as many patients as possible. Compared to the conventional open procedure, laparoscopic approach has inherent merits of smaller incisions, better cosmesis, less postoperative pain, and earlier recovery.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
