J Minim Invasive Surg.
2023 Sep;26(3):112-120. 10.7602/jmis.2023.26.3.112.
Current status of laparoscopic emergency surgery in Korea: multicenter restrospective cohort study
- Affiliations
-
- 1Department of Surgery, Yeungnam University College of Medicine, Daegu, Korea
- 2Division of Acute Care Surgery, Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- 3Division of Acute Care Surgery, Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- 4Department of Surgery, Gangneung Asan Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Gangneung, Korea
- 5Division of Trauma and Surgical Critical Care, Department of Surgery, Seoul St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University, Seoul, Korea
- 6Division of Healthcare Technology Assessment Research, National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency, Seoul, Korea
- KMID: 2546176
- DOI: http://doi.org/10.7602/jmis.2023.26.3.112
Abstract
- Purpose
Laparoscopic surgery is a choice in several emergency settings. However, there has been no nationwide study or survey that has compared the clinical use of laparoscopic emergency surgery (LES) versus open abdominal emergency surgery (OES) in Korea. Therefore, we examined the state of LES across multiple centers in Korea and further compared this data with the global state based on published reports.
Methods
Data of 2,122 patients who received abdominal emergency surgery between 2014 and 2019 in three hospitals in Korea were collected and retrospectively analyzed. Several clinical factors were investigated and analyzed.
Results
Of the patients, 1,280 (60.3%) were in the OES group and 842 (39.7%) were in the LES group. The most commonly operated organ in OES was the small bowel (25.8%), whereas that for LES was the appendix. In appendectomy and cholecystectomy, 93.7% and 88.0% were in the LES group. In small bowel surgery, gastric surgery, and large bowel surgery, 89.4%, 92.0%, and 79.1% were in the OES group. The severity-related factors of patient status demonstrated statistically significant limiting factors of selection between LES and OES.
Conclusion
Although our study has several limitations, compared to the LES data from other countries, the general LES state was similar in appendectomies, cholecystectomies, and small bowel surgeries. However, in gastric and colorectal surgeries, the LES state was different from those of other countries. This study demonstrated the LES state and limiting factors of selection between LES and OES in various operated organs. Further studies are required to analyze these differences and the various limiting factors.
