Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

What is the definition of “conversion” in laparoscopic colorectal surgery?

Abstract

Background

A web-based survey was conducted among colorectal surgeons who represented members of both SAGES and ASCRS to find out how they define conversion for laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Methods

Questionnaires were designed based on MCQs, including three parts: surgeon information, different definitions for conversion, and four different clinical scenarios. Surgeons were asked to choose the best definition(s).

Results

325 (28.5%) of 1,140 surgeons, 28.5% responded; approximately half of them were part of private-based practices. Fifty-three percent had more than 10 years experience; 35.9% performed more than 50 laparoscopic colon cases per year, 12% performed more than 25 laparoscopic rectal cases per year, and 60% less than 10. The majority (68.4%) agreed that any incision made earlier than planned is conversion. Whereas 81.4% felt that incision >5 cm is not a conversion, only 53.4% considered incision >10 cm a conversion, and 37% did not. Neither extracorporeal vessel ligation (73.8%), bowel resection (81.2%), anastomosis (77%), or incision made for specimen retrieval (91.1%) was counted as conversion. In clinical case scenarios, 62% found an incision made to facilitate phlegmon dissection after laparoscopically mobilizing the left colon up to and around the splenic flexure to be laparoscopic-assisted. A 10-cm incision required for fistula take down after finishing laparoscopic dissection was defined as conversion (55.6%). A 10-cm incision made for the rectal dissection in rectopexy was described as conversion in 51% and laparoscopic-assisted in 48%. Increasing a 5–12-cm for specimen extraction, 49.3% was declared a laparoscopic-assisted case.

Conclusions

It was considered clear that any incision made earlier than planned a conversion, whereas extra corporeal vessel ligation, bowel resection and anastomosis were not. However, there seem to be many views of conversion regarding incision length, and some clinical situations that might influence outcome among different centers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.

    Senagore AJ, Delaney CP (2006) A critical analysis of laparoscopic colectomy at a single institution: lessons learned after 1000 cases. Am J Surg 191(3):377–380

  2. 2.

    Gendall KA et al (2007) The impact of obesity on outcome after major colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 50(12):2223–2237

  3. 3.

    Guillou PJ et al (2005) Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 365(9472):1718–1726

  4. 4.

    (2004) A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med 350(20):2050–2059

  5. 5.

    Veldkamp R et al (2005) Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 6(7):477–484

  6. 6.

    Person B, Vivas DA, Wexner SD (2006) Totally laparoscopic low anterior resection with transperineal handsewn colonic J-pouch anal anastomosis for low rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 20(4):700–702

  7. 7.

    Belizon A, Sardinha CT, Sher ME (2006) Converted laparoscopic colectomy: what are the consequences? Surg Endosc 20(6):947–951

  8. 8.

    Chan AC et al (2008) Impact of conversion on the long-term outcome in laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer. Surg Endosc 22(12):2625–2630

  9. 9.

    Franko J et al (2008) Conversion of laparoscopic colon resection does not affect survival in colon cancer. Surg Endosc 22(12):2631–2634

  10. 10.

    Gervaz P et al (2001) Converted laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc 15(8):827–832

  11. 11.

    Gonzalez R et al (2006) Consequences of conversion in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 49(2):197–204

  12. 12.

    Moloo H et al (2004) Laparoscopic resections for colorectal cancer: does conversion survival? Surg Endosc 18(5):732–735

  13. 13.

    Braga M et al (2005) Laparoscopic versus open colorectal surgery: cost-benefit analysis in a single-center randomized trial. Ann Surg 242(6):890–896

  14. 14.

    Laurent C et al (2007) Laparoscopic approach in surgical treatment of rectal cancer. Br J Surg 94(12):1555–1561

  15. 15.

    Agha A et al (2008) Conversion rate in 300 laparoscopic rectal resections and its influence on morbidity and oncological outcome. Int J Colorectal Dis 23:409–417

  16. 16.

    Schlachta CM et al (2000) Predicting conversion to open surgery in laparoscopic colorectal resections. A simple clinical model. Surg Endosc 14(12):1114–1117

  17. 17.

    Tekkis PP, Senagore AJ, Delaney CP (2005) Conversion rates in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a predictive model with, 1253 patients. Surg Endosc 19(1):47–54

  18. 18.

    Hartley JE et al (2001) Total mesorectal excision: assessment of the laparoscopic approach. Dis Colon Rectum 44(3):315–321

  19. 19.

    Tsang WW, Chung CC, Li MK (2003) Prospective evaluation of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with colonic J-pouch reconstruction for mid and low rectal cancers. Br J Surg 90(7):867–871

  20. 20.

    Gellman L, Salky B, Edye M (1996) Laparoscopic assisted colectomy. Surg Endosc 10(11):1041–1044

  21. 21.

    Franklin ME Jr et al (1996) Prospective comparison of open vs. laparoscopic colon surgery for carcinoma. Five-year results. Dis Colon Rectum 39(10 Suppl):S35–S46

  22. 22.

    Schwandner O, Schiedeck TH, Bruch H (1999) The role of conversion in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: do predictive factors exist? Surg Endosc 13(2):151–156

  23. 23.

    Wexner SD et al (1996) Laparoscopic colorectal surgery: analysis of 140 cases. Surg Endosc 10(2):133–136

  24. 24.

    Beart RW Jr (1994) Laparoscopic colectomy: status of the art. Dis Colon Rectum 37(2 Suppl):S47–S49

  25. 25.

    Agachan F et al (1996) Intraoperative laparoscopic complications. Are we getting better? Dis Colon Rectum 39(10 Suppl):S14–S19

  26. 26.

    Ramos JM et al (1995) Role of laparoscopy in colorectal surgery. A prospective evaluation of 200 cases. Dis Colon Rectum 38(5):494–501

  27. 27.

    Zmora O et al (2009) Laparoscopic colectomy is associated with decreased postoperative gastrointestinal dysfunction. Surg Endosc 23(1):87–89

  28. 28.

    Marcello PW et al (2008) Hand-assisted laparoscopic vs. laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial. Dis Colon Rectum 51(6):818–826

  29. 29.

    Garrett KA et al (2008) A single training center’s experience with 200 consecutive cases of diverticulitis: can all patients be approached laparoscopically? Surg Endosc 22(11):2503–2508

  30. 30.

    Singh R et al (2008) Can community surgeons perform laparoscopic colorectal surgery with outcomes equivalent to tertiary care centers? Surg Endosc 23(2):283–288

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank all surgeons who participated in this survey and who gave us their honest feedback.

Author information

Correspondence to Steven D. Wexner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shawki, S., Bashankaev, B., Denoya, P. et al. What is the definition of “conversion” in laparoscopic colorectal surgery?. Surg Endosc 23, 2321 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-009-0329-2

Download citation

Keywords

  • Laparoscopy
  • Colorectal surgery
  • Conversion
  • Conversion criteria